2022
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142985
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Westerlund 1 under the light of Gaia EDR3: Distance, isolation, extent, and a hidden population

Abstract: Context. The young massive cluster Westerlund 1 offers the promise of a grand laboratory for the study of high-mass star evolution, but its basic parameters are still poorly known. Aims. In this paper, we aim at a better characterisation of the cluster by determining some basic kinematic properties and analysing the area surrounding the cluster and the population in its foreground. Methods. We have used Gaia early data release 3 (EDR3) data, together with spectra of a large sample of luminous stars in the fiel… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, data from the Gaia spacecraft were used to obtain new distance estimates. While most of them are compatible with the old estimates (Davies & Beasor 2019;Rate et al 2020;Beasor et al 2021;Negueruela et al 2022), closer distances of ∼2.7 kpc have also been obtained (Aghakhanloo et al 2020(Aghakhanloo et al , 2021. Clark et al (2019) have questioned the reliability of Gaia (DR2) data in the Westerlund 1 field altogether, rendering the new estimates somewhat uncertain.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Recently, data from the Gaia spacecraft were used to obtain new distance estimates. While most of them are compatible with the old estimates (Davies & Beasor 2019;Rate et al 2020;Beasor et al 2021;Negueruela et al 2022), closer distances of ∼2.7 kpc have also been obtained (Aghakhanloo et al 2020(Aghakhanloo et al , 2021. Clark et al (2019) have questioned the reliability of Gaia (DR2) data in the Westerlund 1 field altogether, rendering the new estimates somewhat uncertain.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…and reported in Aharonian et al (2022) (henceforth HC22). Westerlund 1 is a young (4-5 Myr, Beasor et al 2021), massive (3-5 × 10 4 M , Brandner et al 2008, see also Portegies Zwart et al 2010 andLim et al 2013), compact (half-mass radius ∼1 pc) star cluster, located at a distance of ∼4 kpc from Earth and ∼4.6 kpc from the Galactic Center (GC) (Kothes & Dougherty 2007;Davies & Beasor 2019;Negueruela et al 2022). The cluster contains a large collection of young massive stars, including 24 Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars 1 , one Luminous Blue Variable (LBV), 10 Yellow Hypergiants (YHGs) and Red Supergiants (RSGs), and several bright OB supergiants (Clark et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As some examples of such studies, Figer (2005) determined the upper mass limit of the initial mass function (IMF) in the Arches Cluster, a result that was later challenged by studies in R136 (Crowther et al 2010). Other examples are the determination of the chemical composition of stars in Orion (Simón-Díaz 2010); the membership, chemical and stellar parameter determination studies in Cygnus OB2 (Berlanas et al 2018a(Berlanas et al ,b, 2020; the characterization of very massive obscured clusters in the Milky Way such as Westerlund 1 (Clark et al 2005;Negueruela et al 2010Negueruela et al , 2022; and the analysis of the multiplicity of massive stars in clusters (De Becker et al 2004Becker et al , 2006Mahy et al 2009Mahy et al , 2013Sana & Evans 2011;Banyard et al 2023) and in the whole northern hemisphere (Maíz Apellániz et al 2019b;Trigueros Páez et al 2021;Mahy et al 2022). Outside the Milky Way, the most thorough spectroscopic analysis is that of the many papers 1 published by the VLT-FLAMES Tarantula Survey collaboration (VFTS, Evans et al 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%