1994
DOI: 10.1086/173803
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The horizontal-branch stars in globular clusters. 2: The second parameter phenomenon

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

11
548
5
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 414 publications
(566 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
11
548
5
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The overall metallicity is generally recognized as the most important parameter, but age, He abundance, stellar rotation, and any parameter affecting the mass loss along the red giant branch (RGB), may have a substantial role (Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Catelan 2009). The realization that metallicity alone was not sufficient to account for the complex behavior of HB morphologies in Galactic GCs led to the so called second parameter problem, that dominated the scientific debate in the field of Galactic astronomy for a couple of decades (see, e.g., Sandage & Wildey 1967;Zinn 1980;Preston et al 1991;Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Lee et al 1994;Catelan & de Freitas Pacheco 1994Fusi Pecci & Bellazzini 1997;Recío-Blanco et al 2006;Dotter et al 2010;Gratton et al 2010, and references therein). The most recent and thorough analyses concluded that no less than three parameters are needed to account for the HB morphology of Galactic GCs (an idea already proposed in the past, see Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Recío-Blanco et al 2006), namely metallicity, age, and He abundance .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The overall metallicity is generally recognized as the most important parameter, but age, He abundance, stellar rotation, and any parameter affecting the mass loss along the red giant branch (RGB), may have a substantial role (Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Catelan 2009). The realization that metallicity alone was not sufficient to account for the complex behavior of HB morphologies in Galactic GCs led to the so called second parameter problem, that dominated the scientific debate in the field of Galactic astronomy for a couple of decades (see, e.g., Sandage & Wildey 1967;Zinn 1980;Preston et al 1991;Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Lee et al 1994;Catelan & de Freitas Pacheco 1994Fusi Pecci & Bellazzini 1997;Recío-Blanco et al 2006;Dotter et al 2010;Gratton et al 2010, and references therein). The most recent and thorough analyses concluded that no less than three parameters are needed to account for the HB morphology of Galactic GCs (an idea already proposed in the past, see Fusi Pecci et al 1993;Recío-Blanco et al 2006), namely metallicity, age, and He abundance .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent contributions to our knowledge of the Galactic halo suggest that the origins of the halo and the disk are more complex than the elegant picture envisioned in Eggen et al (1962) of formation in the wake of a rapid (%10 8 yr) gravitational collapse. Some examples of these findings include (1) an excess of stars with extreme retrograde orbits (Sandage & Fouts 1987;Norris & Ryan 1989;Carney et al 1994, hereafter C94;Carney et al 1996); (2) the existence of metal-poor, intermediate-age stars that could not have formed in the rarefied gas of the halo (Preston, Beers, & Schectman 1994); and (3) a large dispersion in the ages of halo globular clusters of $10 9 yr (Searle & Zinn 1978;Zinn 1993;Lee, Demarque, & Zinn 1994) and in the ages of halo field stars (Marquez & Schuster 1994).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the reasons that complicates the identification of the mechanisms -other than metallicity -at work in shaping the observed luminosity and effective temperature distribution of stars along the HB is that there are many possible culprits (mass-loss, age, helium abundance ...; see Rood 1973 for example) and some of them are not well constrained from theory. Age has been identified as the natural global second parameter by many authors in the past years (Lee et al 1988(Lee et al , 1990Lee, Demarque & Zinn 1994;Sarajedini & King 1989;Dotter et al 2010;Gratton et al 2010). According to this interpretation older clusters tend to have bluer HBs, while younger ones should have on average redder HB morphologies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%