2021
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141080
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

One size does not fit all: Evidence for a range of mixing efficiencies in stellar evolution calculations

Abstract: Context. Internal chemical mixing in intermediate- and high-mass stars represents an immense uncertainty in stellar evolution models. In addition to extending the main sequence lifetime, chemical mixing also appreciably increases the mass of the stellar core. Several studies have made attempts to calibrate the efficiency of different convective boundary mixing mechanisms, with sometimes seemingly conflicting results. Aims. We aim to demonstrate that stellar models regularly under-predict the masses of convecti… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
26
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 92 publications
4
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In line with these results, Johnston (2021) recently compiled a list of known main-sequence convective core masses for 110 stars in the mass range 1.14-24 M e derived from asteroseismology or the modeling of eclipsing binaries, showing that the standard stellar evolution models without chemical mixing frequently underestimate the core masses of the stars. The results presented here are in full agreement with Johnston (2021), who considered a much broader range in mass.…”
Section: Estimating Final Helium Core Massessupporting
confidence: 90%
“…In line with these results, Johnston (2021) recently compiled a list of known main-sequence convective core masses for 110 stars in the mass range 1.14-24 M e derived from asteroseismology or the modeling of eclipsing binaries, showing that the standard stellar evolution models without chemical mixing frequently underestimate the core masses of the stars. The results presented here are in full agreement with Johnston (2021), who considered a much broader range in mass.…”
Section: Estimating Final Helium Core Massessupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Andersen et al 1990;Ribas et al 2000;Torres et al 2010). A prominent recent trend is the finding that the properties of high-mass EBs need stronger internal mixing processes than predicted by standard evolutionary models (Tkachenko et al 2020;Johnston 2021). Subsequent evolution of high-mass short-period binaries leads to a wide variety of exotic objects that are important for many areas of stellar astrophysics, such as X-ray binaries, supernovae and gammaray bursts (Podsiadlowski et al 2002(Podsiadlowski et al , 2004Belczynski et al 2020;Chrimes et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Martins & Palacios 2013 for a comparison of different evolution codes). For massive stars, the lack of direct observational constraints produce fractional uncertainties for main-sequence lifetimes and helium core masses as much as 50% (Bowman 2020;Johnston 2021), which influences the nature of the compact object left behind (Langer 2012;Farrell et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%