1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: \newcommand{\che} {\log\ ({\rm C/He})}
4: \newcommand{\ch} {\log\ ({\rm C/H})}
5: \newcommand{\mv} {M_V}
6: \newcommand{\msun} {$M_{\odot}$}
7: \newcommand{\rsun} {$R_{\odot}$}
8: \newcommand{\lsun} {$L_{\odot}$}
9: \newcommand{\halpha} {H$\alpha$}
10: \newcommand{\hbeta} {H$\beta$}
11: \newcommand{\hgamma} {H$\gamma$}
12: \newcommand{\hdelta} {H$\delta$}
13: \newcommand{\Te} {T_{\rm eff}}
14: \newcommand{\logg} {\log g}
15: \newcommand{\nh} {\log\ ({\rm H/He})}
16:
17: \begin{document}
18:
19: \title{Hot DQ White Dwarfs: Something Different}
20:
21: \author{P. Dufour\altaffilmark{1},
22: G. Fontaine\altaffilmark{2},
23: James Liebert\altaffilmark{1},
24: G. D. Schmidt\altaffilmark{1},
25: N. Behara\altaffilmark{3}}
26:
27: \altaffiltext{1}{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933 North Cherry Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85721; dufourpa@as.arizona.edu, liebert@as.arizona.edu, schmidt@as.arizona.edu}
28: \altaffiltext{2}{D\'{e}partement de Physique, Universit\'{e}
29: de Montr\'{e}al, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montr\'{e}al, Qu\'{e}bec,
30: Canada H3C 3J7; fontaine@astro.umontreal.ca}
31: \altaffiltext{3}{CIFIST, GEPI, Observatoire Paris-Meudon, 92195, France; natalie.behara@obspm.fr}
32:
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35:
36: We present a detailed analysis of all the known Hot DQ white dwarfs in
37: the Fourth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)
38: recently found to have carbon dominated atmospheres. Our spectroscopic
39: and photometric analysis reveals that these objects all have effective
40: temperatures between $\sim$ 18,000 and 24,000 K. The surface
41: composition is found to be completely dominated by carbon, as revealed
42: by the absence of H$\beta$ and He~\textsc{i} $\lambda$4471 lines (or
43: determination of trace amount in a few cases). We find that the
44: surface gravity of all objects but one seems to be ''normal'' and
45: around $\logg$ = 8.0 while one is likely near $\logg$ = 9.0. The
46: presence of a weak magnetic field is directly detected by
47: spectropolarimetry in one object and is suspected in two others. We
48: propose that these strange stars could be cooled down versions of the
49: weird PG1159 star H1504+65 and form a new family of hydrogen and
50: helium deficient objects following the post-AGB phase. Finally, we
51: present the results of full nonadiabatic calculations dedicated
52: specifically to each of the Hot DQ that show that only SDSS
53: J142625.70+575218.4 is expected to exhibit luminosity variations. This
54: result is in excellent agreement with recent observations by
55: Montgomery et al. who find that J142625.70+575218.4 is the only
56: pulsator among 6 Hot DQ white dwarfs surveyed in February 2008.
57:
58:
59: \end{abstract}
60:
61: \keywords{stars: abundances -- stars: atmospheres -- stars: evolution
62: -- white dwarfs}
63:
64: \section{INTRODUCTION}
65:
66: White dwarfs represent the final stage of stellar evolution for the
67: vast majority of stars that have exhausted the nuclear fuel available
68: in their core (this is the fate of $\sim 97 \%$ of stars in our
69: Galaxy). Standard stellar evolution theory predicts that a typical
70: white dwarf is composed of a core that encompasses more than 99 $\%$ of
71: the mass of the star, surrounded by a thin envelope of helium (and
72: hydrogen) that has survived the nuclear burning and mass loss
73: phase. The core, which is essentially the result of the fusion of
74: light elements, has a composition that depends on the initial mass of
75: the star. For very low mass stars that could not ignite helium, it
76: is composed of helium. Stars at intermediate masses end up with
77: cores composed of carbon and oxygen while the most massive stars
78: produce oxygen-neon-magnesium (ONeMg) cores. The initial mass function
79: and star formation history of the Galaxy are such that the majority of
80: white dwarfs we observe in the solar neighborhood today have a core
81: made of carbon and oxygen \cite[the most massive white dwarfs are
82: intrinsically rare while low mass stars producing helium core white
83: dwarfs have nuclear lifetimes greater than the age of the disk of our
84: Galaxy and are thus possible only from binary evolution or if the mass
85: loss in the red giant phase is extremely large,][]{kalirai07}.
86:
87: Direct observation of the core is unfortunately not possible since it
88: is surrounded by a thin and opaque layer of helium \citep[and hydrogen
89: for $\sim$ 80 $\%$, see][]{iben84,koester86,dantona87} that was left over
90: in the the previous stage of stellar evolution. White dwarfs have thus
91: traditionally been separated into two distinct families: those with a
92: hydrogen rich surface composition, and those with a helium rich
93: surface composition. The former are represented by the very well known
94: DA white dwarfs while the latter family show more diversity in their
95: spectral type. Indeed, although they all have a helium rich surface
96: composition, they have been subdivided into several spectral types
97: which reflect essentially their effective temperatures. The hottest ones
98: ($\Te > \sim$ 40,000 K) that show He~\textsc{ii} lines are classified
99: DO. At intermediate temperature ($\sim 12,000 - 40,000$ K), those
100: showing exclusively He~\textsc{i} lines are classified as DB. Stars too
101: cool for the He~I atoms to be sufficiently excited and show no
102: features in their optical spectra are labeled DC. Finally, the cool
103: helium dominated stars with traces of carbon (either molecular or
104: atomic) in their optical spectra that are found between $\sim$ 4000 K
105: and 13,000 K are classified as DQ white dwarfs.
106:
107: Carbon is also observed in the spectra of the hot PG1159 stars,
108: objects just entering or about to enter the white dwarf cooling
109: phase. Their atmospheres show a mixture of helium, carbon and oxygen
110: and little or no hydrogen \citep[see][and references
111: therein]{werner06}. The most likely explanation for this unusual
112: composition is that these stars have experienced the so-called ''born
113: again'' scenario, i.e. a very late thermal pulse that has brought back
114: the white dwarf onto the post-AGB phase for a second time early in its
115: cooling phase \citep[see][and references therein]{herwig99}. As a
116: result of this rather violent event, the star re-enters the white
117: dwarf cooling phase but this time with a surface composition that is
118: devoid of hydrogen. This process also mixes the remaining helium with
119: elements from the envelope (mostly carbon and oxygen), producing the
120: curious surface composition observed in PG1159. Gravitational
121: diffusion will eventually separate the helium from the heavier
122: elements and PG1159 stars will thus turn into helium rich DO, then DB and
123: finally DQ white dwarfs as the cooling continues.
124:
125: The presence of carbon in cool DQ white dwarfs is now well explained
126: by a model in which carbon diffusing upward from the core is brought
127: to the photosphere by the deep helium convection zone
128: \citep{pelletier86}. Detailed analysis of a large sample of 56 DQ
129: stars by \citet{dufour05} showed that $\che$ varies from about $-$7 at
130: $\Te \sim 6000$ K to $-$3 at $\Te \sim 11,000$ K. The maximum
131: contamination by carbon is predicted to be at $\Te \sim$
132: 12,000 K, i.e when the convection zone reaches its maximum. The only
133: two stars close to this maximum that have been analyzed, G35-26
134: \citep{thejll90} and G227-5 \citep{wegner85}, have respectively $\Te$
135: of 12,500 $\pm$ 1,500 K and 12,500 $\pm$ 500 K and $\che$= $-$2 and
136: $-$2.5. Parallax measurements (Dahn, private communication) have since
137: shown that these two stars are massive white dwarfs ($\sim 1.1$
138: \msun). At these temperatures and abundances, the spectra show
139: primarily C~\textsc{i} lines and a hint of the He~\textsc{i}
140: $\lambda4471$ line that is about to fade below visibility as the stars
141: become too cool. While the cool range of the DQ distribution has been
142: extensively analyzed thanks to the large sample from the SDSS
143: \citep{dufour05,koester06}, our knowledge of carbon abundances for
144: hotter stars relies only on the two stars mentioned above and a few
145: analyses of DB stars that show carbon only in the ultraviolet
146: \citep{provencal00,dufour02,petitclerc05,desharnais08}.
147:
148: The situation can now be improved dramatically thanks again to the
149: discovery of several new hot DQ white dwarfs in SDSS
150: \citep{liebert03}. Most of these stars have spectra similar to those
151: of G35-26 and G227-5 and show essentially only C~\textsc{i} lines (as
152: opposed to molecular bands of C$_2$ for cooler stars). Surprisingly,
153: some stars showed spectra that were dominated by C~\textsc{ii} lines. No
154: detailed analysis could be performed at the time due to the lack of
155: proper models for this type of stars. Estimates of effective
156: temperatures based on pure helium models placed these stars well into the
157: DB temperature range, although the exact atmospheric parameters were
158: uncertain since analysis with pure helium models tends to overestimate
159: the effective temperature \citep{provencal02, dufour05}. It was presumed
160: that they were simply hotter versions of DQ stars like G35-26 and
161: G227-5. \citet{liebert03} hypothesized that the dredge up of carbon for
162: these special stars had happened earlier than usual because they were
163: more massive and had a thinner outer helium layer, as the theoretical
164: calculation of \citet{kawai88} show. It was believed that the increased
165: continuum opacity resulting from the presence of the carbon was keeping
166: us from detecting the strong helium lines that we usually see in DB
167: spectra. According to the \citet{liebert03} scenario, the most massive
168: DB stars simply dredged up carbon at hotter effective temperature, which
169: made them to appear as hot DQ stars. The \citet{beauchamp95} and
170: \citet{voss07} analyses of large samples of DB white dwarfs show that
171: the DB mass distribution lacks the high mass component that is observed
172: for DA white dwarfs. The scenario above was thus proposed as a natural
173: explanation to the fact that the DB mass distribution morphology is
174: fundamentally different from that of DA white dwarfs.
175:
176: However, when we proceeded with the calculation of the appropriate
177: models, we found that if helium was the dominant atmospheric
178: constituent, it remained spectroscopically observable even when
179: opacity due to a large quantity of carbon was accounted for. As a
180: consequence, it seems that these stars have an atmosphere that is
181: dominated by carbon with little or no trace of other elements. We
182: could thus be directly witnessing the bare stellar CO core,
183: or a carbon envelope around an ONeMg core, giving us a unique
184: opportunity to test theories of stellar evolution. Note that standard
185: dredge-up theory cannot explain this phenomenon since at the effective
186: temperatures where these stars are found, the helium convection zone
187: doesn't reach deep enough to bring a significant amount of carbon to
188: the surface. Another explanation is thus required. According to the
189: standard spectral classification defined in \citet{mccooksion99},
190: white dwarfs that show carbon features, either atomic or molecular in
191: any part of the electromagnetic spectrum are referred to as DQ. In order
192: to avoid confusion with the cooler DQs, we will thus simply refer to
193: stars that show mainly ionized carbon features as ''Hot DQs'',
194: even though they are truly something different. The surprising
195: discovery of these objects has been published recently in the form of
196: a short letter \citep{dufourNat}. We now wish to present in
197: more detail an up to date analysis of all the carbon dominated
198: atmosphere white dwarfs that we have uncovered thus far as well as an in
199: depth discussion of the possible origin and and evolution of such
200: objects.
201:
202: In \S~\ref{observation}, we describe the observations. Our theoretical
203: framework including our model atmosphere and synthetic spectrum
204: calculations are presented in \S~\ref{theoretical}. The detailed
205: analysis follows in \S~\ref{analysis}, and the results are
206: interpreted and discussed in \S~\ref{results}. Our conclusions are
207: summarized in \S~\ref{conclusion}.
208:
209: \section{OBSERVATIONS}\label{observation}
210:
211: Our sample consists of white dwarf stars spectroscopically identified as
212: ''Hot DQ'' in the SDSS Fourth Data Release white dwarf catalog of
213: \citet{eisenstein06}. Note that a fraction of the Hot DQs in this catalog
214: are actually DQ white dwarfs in the 12,000-15,000 K temperature range
215: that have helium-rich surface compositions ($\che \sim -2$ to $-3$),
216: and we do not include them in the present analysis (they will be
217: analyzed in detail in Dufour et al., in preparation). Details concerning
218: the observations can be found in \citet{eisenstein06} and reference
219: therein. Our final sample consists of 9 Hot DQ stars with SDSS spectra
220: covering the 3800-9200 \AA\ region at a resolution of $\sim$ 3 \AA\
221: FWHM. Also available are SDSS photometric observations on the $ugriz$
222: system \citep{fukugita96, hogg01,smith02,ivezic04}. The spectra of a few
223: of these stars have been previously shown in \citet{liebert03}.
224:
225: \section{MODEL ATMOSPHERE AND SYNTHETIC SPECTRUM CALCULATIONS}\label{theoretical}
226:
227: The LTE model atmosphere code used for this analysis is similar to
228: that described in \citet{dufour05,dufour07} and references therein for
229: the study of cool DQ and DZ white dwarfs. It is based on a modified
230: version of the code described at length in \citet{BSW95}, which is
231: appropriate for pure hydrogen and pure helium atmospheric
232: compositions, as well as mixed hydrogen and helium compositions, while
233: energy transport by convection is treated within the mixing-length
234: theory. One important modification is that metals and molecules are
235: now included in the equation-of-state and opacity calculations
236: \citep[see][for details]{dufourphd}. The principal modification in the
237: version used in this paper concerns the treatment of the continuum
238: opacity of heavy elements. In our earlier version of the code, the
239: bound-free and free-free opacities were taken from the \citet{peach70}
240: opacity tables. In the case of cool helium-rich white dwarf
241: atmospheres (DQ, DZ and DC spectral type), the exact treatment of the
242: metallic continuum opacity is not really important since the dominant
243: source of opacity is the He$^-$ free-free absorption. However, for
244: hotter carbon-rich stars where the far-ultraviolet flux is far from
245: negligible, it becomes important to include the best possible sources
246: of opacity. Small variation in the absorption at short wavelengths can
247: significantly modify the flux redistribution in these atmospheres as
248: was shown by \citet{behara05}. Our models now include the latest
249: photoionization cross-sections from the \citet{OP95,OP97} for
250: C\textsc{i}-\textsc{iv} and O\textsc{i}-\textsc{iv} as well as the
251: corresponding free-free absorption as described in detail in
252: \citet{behara06}. Also, our earlier version of the code was dedicated
253: to the analysis of cool white dwarfs in a regime where helium was
254: spectroscopically invisible, and as a consequence, no effort was made
255: to keep it up to date with the best He~\textsc{i} line opacities
256: \citep[those of][]{beauchamp97}. The present version has thus been
257: updated to include these He~\textsc{i} line profiles. Since the
258: charged carbon particles impose an electric micro-field at the
259: location of the radiating atom, we also include a correction to the
260: critical field strength and the plasma correlation parameter in the
261: occupation probability formalism \citep{HM88} as described in
262: \citet{werner99}.
263:
264: The strongest C and O lines are included explicitly in both the model
265: and synthetic spectrum calculations. These lines are selected by
266: taking all lines contributing more than one tenth of the continuum
267: opacity at each optical depth. A test model calculated by
268: including all the lines from our list was not found to yield any
269: detectable difference on the emergent spectrum. The line absorption
270: coefficient is calculated using a Voigt profile for every line at
271: every depth point. Central wavelengths of the transitions, $gf$
272: values, energy levels, and damping constants are extracted from the
273: GFALL line list of R.~L.~Kurucz\footnote{see
274: http://kurucz.harvard.edu/LINELISTS.html}.
275:
276: Two grids with different C/He and C/H abundance have been calculated.
277: Our first grid covers a range from $\Te$ = 16,000 to 30,000 K in steps
278: of 2000 K, from $\logg$ = 7.5 to 9.0 in steps of 0.5 dex, and from
279: $\che$ = +3.0 to 0.0 in steps of 1.0 dex. Our second grid covers the
280: same parameter space except that it is $\ch$ varying from +3.0 to
281: 0.0 in steps of 1.0 dex. Finally, additional models with various
282: abundances of oxygen have been calculated to explore the sensitivity of
283: our results to this unknown parameter. Illustrative spectra from our
284: grid are displayed in Figure \ref{fg:f1} for various values of the effective
285: temperature, gravity, hydrogen and helium abundances.
286:
287: \section{DETAILED ANALYSIS}\label{analysis}
288:
289: \subsection{Fitting Technique}
290:
291: The effective temperatures of the stars can be determined from either the
292: photometric energy distributions or from fits to the carbon lines. In
293: both cases, the fitting procedure relies on the nonlinear
294: least-squares method of Levenberg-Marquardt \citep{pressetal92}.
295:
296: In the first case, we fit the $ugriz$ colors with both $\Te$ and the
297: solid angle $\pi(R/D)^2$, which relates the flux at the surface of
298: the star to that received at Earth (R is the radius of the star and D
299: its distance from Earth), as free parameters. This is done for a fixed
300: value of $\logg$ and $\che$ or $\ch$ (we will explore the effect of
301: the former below while the latter are constrained/determined from the
302: absence/presence of spectroscopic features). Corrections of the
303: photometric measurements to account for the extinction from the
304: interstellar medium are obtained from the reddening maps of
305: \citet{schlegel98}. We experimented with various fractions of the
306: absorption in the line of sight to assess the effect of this unknown
307: parameter on our atmospheric parameter determinations (see
308: below). Finally, we compare the observed spectra with the
309: synthetic spectra interpolated at the solution
310: obtained from the photometric fit.
311:
312: In the second case, we do the inverse. That is we first fit the carbon
313: lines from the spectroscopic data to obtain the effective temperature
314: (with the solid angle and the slope, to account for the unknown amounts
315: of reddening and spectrophotometric errors, left as free parameters)
316: and then fit the photometric data with $\Te$ fixed to that value to
317: obtain the solid angle (this gives the photometric distance, see
318: Table~1) and assess the quality of the solution. Again, this is done
319: for various fixed values of $\logg$ and $\che$ or $\ch$.
320:
321: \subsection{Hydrogen and Helium Abundances}
322:
323: With the possible exception of one star, none of the Hot DQ stars
324: analyzed in this paper show the presence of helium (He~\textsc{i}$
325: \lambda$4471). Therefore, only upper limits can be set from the
326: spectroscopic observations. These limits depend sensitively on the
327: range of effective temperature considered. We roughly estimate these
328: limits by inspecting our grid of synthetic spectra. We estimate,
329: for the typical signal-to-noise ratio of the SDSS observations, that at
330: $\logg$ = 8, the threshold for the detection of helium as a function
331: of effective temperature is at $\che \sim$ 0.7 for $\Te$ = 18,000 K,
332: $\sim$ 1.6 for $\Te$ = 22,000 K and $\sim$ 1.8 for $\Te$ = 26,000
333: K. At higher gravity, the $\lambda$4471 line becomes very broad and
334: much more helium can be present without being observable. For example,
335: at $\logg$ = 9, the limits are $\che \sim$ 0.0 for $\Te$ = 18,000 K
336: while at $\Te$ = 22,000 K the limit is $\sim$ 1.0.
337:
338: The limits on the amount of hydrogen are more difficult to assess,
339: since the H$\alpha$ line is contaminated by strong carbon
340: features. The H$\beta$ line is thus used to set the limit of
341: visibility of hydrogen since it is free of contamination for most of
342: the range of effective temperature we are exploring. We find that
343: H$\beta$ is spectroscopically observable for $\ch \sim$ 2.7 for $\Te$
344: below $\sim$ 23,000 K. At higher effective temperature, a carbon line
345: starts to become strong at the position of H$\beta$ and no limit can
346: be obtained with complete certainty.
347:
348: We note that the influence of small, spectroscopically invisible
349: amounts of hydrogen or helium do not affect significantly the
350: effective temperature determination (except for the coolest star,
351: see below) and that fits without hydrogen or helium are practically
352: identical to those with H and He set at the limits of visibility.
353:
354: \subsection{Atmospheric Parameter Determinations}
355:
356: \noindent {\it SDSS J000555.90$-$100213.3 :} The spectrum of this star
357: shows an obvious sign of magnetic line splitting. The $\sim$4270 \AA\
358: line seems to be split into three components approximatively 25 \AA\
359: apart, corresponding to a mean surface field strength of
360: $B_S\approx1.47$~MG \citep[see eq. 3 in][where an effective Land\'e
361: factor equal to unity is assumed]{dufour06}. Circular
362: spectropolarimetry obtained with the spectropolarimeter SPOL
363: \citep{schmidt92} on the 2.3 m Bok reflector at Kitt Peak confirms the
364: presence of a magnetic field on {\it SDSS J000555.90$-$100213.3}.
365: These data were acquired on 2007 Oct. 17 and Dec. 14 using a single
366: order of a low resolution grating ($\Delta\lambda\sim17$~\AA) to cover
367: the region 4000$-$8000~\AA. Polarimetric sequences each totaling
368: 4800~s were obtained both nights, and because the results were
369: indistinguishable within the statistical noise, the average is
370: displayed in Figure \ref{fg:f2}. Clear polarization reversals are
371: seen around the prominent C~\textsc{ii} lines at
372: $\lambda\lambda$4267,4370, near $\lambda$4860, and, with somewhat less
373: significance, at the broad, shallow $\lambda$6578,6583 C~\textsc{ii}
374: feature. The $\lambda$4860 polarimetric feature is real, as it is
375: present in both data sets, despite the fact that a strong absorption
376: line is not observed here. However, inspection of the flux spectra
377: from the SDSS as well as from our data reveal that the region is
378: clearly affected by a number of weaker lines. The longitudinal
379: magnetic field is difficult to estimate from the data because the
380: Zeeman splitting is actually somewhat less than the separation between
381: the two components that comprise the $\lambda$4300 feature, and the
382: $\lambda$6580 line is both shallow and noisy. However, simulations of
383: the blue feature using reasonable intrinsic line profiles suggest that
384: a mean longitudinal value $B_e\sim400-800$~kG is appropriate for the
385: data. This is consistent with the estimate of mean surface field
386: $B_S\approx1.47$~MG based on the observed splitting of the line core
387: into three Zeeman components. The presence of the magnetic field seems
388: to have destroyed all the carbon features that are strongly seen in
389: most other objects of our sample. As a consequence, we cannot estimate
390: the effective temperature by fitting the lines and thus use the
391: photometric data. For the same reason, we cannot constrain or estimate
392: the surface gravity for this star. We thus assume $\logg$ = 8.0. Our
393: fit of the energy distribution yields $\Te$ = 17,400 K if no reddening
394: correction is applied and $\Te$ = 19,420 K if we assume the full
395: correction from the \citet{schlegel98} maps. The corresponding fit to
396: the solid angle places this star at a distance of $\sim$ 250 pc. A
397: fair fraction of the extinction on that line of sight should thus be
398: applied so we believe that the hottest solution is probably more
399: realistic. This is this solution that we show in Figure \ref{fg:f3}
400: and Table~1.
401:
402: \noindent {\it SDSS J010647.92+151327.8 :} The extinction in the line of
403: sight to this star is particularly high and as a result, the
404: photometric fits with and without correction for the extinction are very
405: different ($\Te$ of respectively 17,900 and 22,900 K). The synthetic
406: spectra interpolated to the photometric solution without correction for
407: the extinction is clearly at odds with the observed spectra while the
408: hotter solution looks better even though it suffers from obvious
409: flaws. First, the 4270 line is predicted to be too strong and the
410: features near 4100$-$4200 \AA\ are also poorly reproduced. There might
411: also be a small amount of hydrogen as suggested by the feature near
412: H$\beta$. If we believe the small absorption near $\lambda$4471, this
413: object might be the only one in our sample showing a trace of
414: helium. We can approximately reproduce the $\lambda$4471 feature if we
415: allow $\che \sim$ 1.0. Fits with this abundance yield $\Te$ = 23,430 K,
416: making this star the hottest of our sample. It is possible that the
417: lines are also affected by the presence of a weak magnetic field, but
418: polarization measurements are needed to confirm this hypothesis. We thus
419: do not attempt to fit the lines individually and only give our $\logg$ =
420: 8.0, $\che$ = 1.0 photometric fit with full correction for extinction in Figure
421: \ref{fg:f3} and Table~1.
422:
423: \noindent {\it SDSS J023637.42$-$073429.5 :} Our $\logg$ = 8.0
424: photometric fits with and without correction for the extinction give
425: respectively $\Te$ = 22,960 and 20,780 K. Both synthetic spectra
426: interpolated at these solutions compare reasonably well with the
427: observations considering the signal-to-noise ratio of the spectrum. It
428: is reassuring that if we use only the spectra in our minimization
429: technique, we get an effective temperature that is intermediate at
430: $\Te$ = 21,100 K. As for the surface gravity, a value as high as
431: $\logg$ = 9.0 is clearly ruled out, since the resulting line profiles
432: would be far too broad to be compatible with the observation. However,
433: a value of $\logg$ = 8.5 cannot by dismissed but a higher
434: signal-to-noise ratio observation will be needed to better constrain
435: this parameter.
436:
437: \noindent {\it SDSS J115305.54+005646.2 :} Our $\logg$ = 8.0
438: photometric fits with and without correction for the extinction give
439: respectively $\Te$ = 21,400 and 20,160 K. Inspecting the resulting
440: synthetic spectra, we find that the hotter solution looks is a
441: slightly better match. The solution by fitting the lines confirms
442: that result, since it yields $\Te$ = 21,650 K. Although the overall
443: appearance of the fit looks very good (see Figure \ref{fg:f3}),
444: several discrepancies catch our attention. In particular, we notice
445: that the strengths of the four weaker lines that follow the strong
446: $\lambda$4270 are not well reproduced by our model. The first is
447: barely seen in our synthetic spectra, while the second is too strong.
448: The third and fourth have about the right strength, although the fit
449: is far from perfect. We note also that the strong feature near $\sim$
450: 5130 \AA\ is poorly reproduced. Finally, the line near $\sim$ 4960
451: \AA\ is not predicted at all by our models for this effective
452: temperature (it starts to appear only at about 26,000 K, see Figure
453: \ref{fg:f1}). In fact, if we look carefully at Figure \ref{fg:f1}, we
454: notice that all the above mentioned lines have the right strength only
455: at a much higher effective temperature than what we have determined
456: here. It seems as if that these few lines, and only these few ones,
457: required a higher effective temperature. We will discuss in more
458: detail in the next section possible explanations for these
459: discrepancies. As for surface gravity, as it is the case for all the
460: objects in our sample, the quality of the data at hand (as well as the
461: problem with the strengths of some lines noted above) does not allow
462: us to precisely determine this parameter. However, the value of
463: $\logg$ is probably not too far from 8.0 since for fits with $\logg$
464: fixed at 8.5, we already find that the lines are broader than
465: observed.
466:
467: \noindent {\it SDSS J133710.19$-$002643.7 :} This star is very
468: similar to {\it SDSS J023637.42$-$073429.5}, except for the clear
469: presence of hydrogen as revealed by the H$\beta$ line. Our $\logg$ =
470: 8.0 photometric fits with and without correction for the extinction
471: give respectively $\Te$ = 22,550 and 20,770 K. Both synthetic spectra
472: interpolated at these solutions compare reasonably well with the
473: observation, considering the signal-to-noise ratio of the
474: spectrum. Again, it is reassuring that if we use only the spectra in
475: our minimization technique, we get an effective temperature that is
476: intermediate at $\Te$ = 21,670 K. The value $\ch$ we get for that
477: temperature is 1.67. The surface gravity seems to be near $\logg$ =
478: 8.0 and perhaps even less. A surface gravity as high as $\logg$ = 8.5
479: is completely ruled out, since that would produce lines that are too
480: broad to be compatible with the observation. We note that again, we
481: observe some discrepancies in the line strength of the four lines
482: long-ward of the $\sim$ 4270 line and the line near $\sim$ 4960.
483:
484: \noindent {\it SDSS J142625.70+575218.4 :} The spectrum of this star
485: doesn't show as many carbon lines as we see in most other
486: objects. There is a strong feature near $\sim$ 4270 \AA\ and hints of
487: absorption for a few more lines. Our $\logg$ = 8 fit indicates that
488: this star is one of the coolest of the sample with an effective
489: temperature of about 17,000-17,500 K. However, optical synthetic
490: spectra with such parameters are predicted to show many strong carbon
491: features, in particular the group of lines long-ward of $\sim$ 4270
492: \AA\, that are not observed in the SDSS spectrum. Inspection of Figure
493: \ref{fg:f1} indicates that synthetic spectra having similar
494: characteristics to {\it SDSS J142625.70+575218.4} exist for a higher
495: $\Te$ and $\logg$. We believe we can thus reject a low surface gravity
496: solution and that $\logg$ near 9.0 is more likely. If we fix $\logg$
497: at 9.0, we get a good fit of the energy distribution at $\Te$ = 17,800
498: K but the lines long-ward of $\sim$ 4270 \AA\ still remain too
499: strong. If we use only the spectrum in our minimization procedure, we
500: achieve a much better fit at $\Te$ = 20,500 but then the u, r and z
501: band fluxes are poorly reproduced. At high gravity and low effective
502: temperature, much more helium can be hidden without being
503: spectroscopically observable. In this particular case, the presence of
504: helium does affect slightly our atmospheric parameter
505: determination. If we assume $\logg$ = 9.0 and $\che$ = 0.0, we obtain
506: a very acceptable fit for the spectrum at $\Te$ = 19,830 K and only
507: the u band is slightly over predicted. This solution (this is the one
508: we present in Figure \ref{fg:f3} and Table~1) also predicts a tiny
509: depression from the He~\textsc{i} $\lambda$4471 line that is
510: compatible with the observations (the spectrum seems to show a
511: possible glitch at the right position but better signal-to-noise ratio
512: observations are required to confirm the presence of helium). It is
513: also possible that the surface gravity exceeds 9.0 and that a better
514: solution exists outside the parameter space of our grid. Finally, we
515: notice that our solution does not predict correctly the strength of
516: the $\sim$4620 \AA\ line, suggesting perhaps that the effective
517: temperature might actually be a little higher.
518:
519: \noindent {\it SDSS J161531.71+454322.4 :} This star is one of the few
520: that shows the presence of a H$\beta$ line. Our photometric fits with and
521: without correction for extinction give an effective temperature of,
522: respectively, 18,300 and 17,600 K. However, these solutions predict an
523: optical spectrum that is clearly at odds with the observation. The
524: strengths of the observed lines seem to indicate that the effective
525: temperature is much higher. If we use only the spectrum in our
526: minimization procedure, we get a much better fit with $\Te$ = 20,940 K
527: and $\ch$ = 1.74. The price to pay with this solution is that the u band
528: flux is predicted to be much stronger than observed. Higher surface
529: gravity solutions are ruled out as even for $\logg$ = 8.5, the predicted
530: line profiles are too broad.
531:
532: \noindent {\it SDSS J220029.09$-$074121.5 :} Our $\logg$ = 8.0
533: photometric fits with and without correction for the extinction give
534: respectively $\Te$ = 21,200 and 18,500 K. From the inspection of the
535: predicted optical spectra at these solutions, we can easily reject the
536: coolest of the two, as the line strengths are then poorly
537: reproduced. If we fit only the lines, we get 21,240 K and this is
538: thus the solution that we present in Figure \ref{fg:f3} and
539: Table~1. We note that the observed $\sim$ 4270 \AA\ line is much
540: broader than predicted, indicating perhaps that the surface gravity is
541: higher than $\logg$ = 8.0. However, if we try to fit this star with a
542: higher gravity, we get a better fit to the $\sim$ 4270 \AA\ line but
543: then all the other lines are too broad. One attractive possibility is
544: that the line profiles for this star are affected by the presence of a
545: weak magnetic field but the lines are not separated enough to be
546: individually identified. Polarimetric measurement should easily
547: confirm the validity of this hypothesis.
548:
549: \noindent {\it SDSS J234843.30$-$094245.2 :} The $\logg$ = 8.0
550: photometric solutions with and without correction for extinction give
551: respectively $\Te$ = 17,600 and 16,000 K. At these temperatures, the
552: predicted optical spectra are clearly at odds with the observations. A
553: much better fit at $\Te$ = 21,550 K can be obtained by using only the
554: line profiles in our minimization procedure. However, the corresponding
555: energy distribution with this solution is poorly reproduced. We have no
556: explanation for such a discrepancy. A higher surface gravity is again
557: ruled out, as the predicted line profiles would be too broad. We note
558: again that we observe some discrepancies in the line strength of the
559: four lines long-ward of the $\sim$ 4270 line, the line near $\sim$ 4960
560: and another near $\sim$ 5260 \AA\ .
561:
562: \subsection{Source of Uncertainties}
563:
564: \subsubsection{Flux in the ultraviolet}
565:
566: At the effective temperatures where the carbon dominated atmosphere
567: white dwarfs are found, a large fraction of the light is emitted in
568: the UV portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Figure \ref{fg:f4}
569: shows two synthetic spectra at $\Te$ = 22,000 K for pure helium (red)
570: and a pure carbon atmosphere (blue). The most striking characteristic
571: is the strength and number of all the carbon features in the UV part of
572: the spectra in the pure carbon model while the DB model is practically
573: featureless in the same region. These absorptions in the UV have a
574: huge impact on the energy distribution. This can easily be appreciated
575: by remembering that the total energy emitted, $\int H_{\nu} d\nu$, is
576: by definition, for a given $\Te$, the same for both models (= $\sigma
577: \Te ^4/4\pi $). All the flux below $\sim$ 1500 \AA\ that is absorbed
578: in the pure carbon model, compared to the DB model, is redistributed
579: at longer wavelengths. It is thus important to include as accurately
580: as possible all sources of opacity in the model calculation, as errors
581: in our treatment of the absorption in the UV might have significant
582: impact on the thermodynamic stratification and the overall energy
583: distribution. These errors can be of multiple origins. The line list we
584: use can be incomplete, values of log gf for some lines might be wrong
585: by unknown factors, unexpected absorption from other elements might be
586: present, or the broadening theory we use might be incorrect (see below
587: for more on that issue). It is thus quite possible that the above
588: mentioned discrepancies observed for many lines in the optical might
589: be related to such errors (alternatively, the few lines that have log gf
590: errors in our list might just stand out).
591:
592: Therefore, until UV observations are obtained to assess the quality of
593: our modeling of that part of the spectrum, our atmospheric parameter
594: determinations remain uncertain. It is probable that, as we learn
595: more on these various aspects, future generation of models will have
596: different thermodynamic stratification which could yield slightly
597: different atmospheric parameters. It is difficult to quantify this for
598: the moment, since no UV observations are yet available, but given the
599: inconsistencies enumerated above (i.e. the few lines that are poorly
600: reproduced), it is possible that our effective temperature
601: determinations could perhaps be wrong by as much as 2000 K, a larger
602: value than what is reflected in the formal statistical uncertainties
603: presented in Table~1.
604:
605: On the other hand, due to the richness of the UV part of the spectra,
606: these stars give us a unique opportunity to test the accuracy of the
607: theoretical atomic data, opacity sources and broadening theory for the
608: carbon atom since we are observing carbon in physical conditions and
609: abundances never seen previously. Detailed comparison of state of the
610: art models with future UV observations should allow us to better
611: assess the quality of our modeling and reduce significantly the
612: uncertainties on our derived atmospheric parameters.
613:
614: \subsubsection{Influence of Oxygen}
615:
616: Since oxygen is also expected to be present in large proportion, along
617: with carbon, in the cores of white dwarf stars, we discuss in this
618: section how it could influence our results if present in the
619: atmosphere. In figure \ref{fg:f5}, we show synthetic spectra of $\logg$
620: = 8, $\Te$ = 22,000 K atmosphere models with a pure surface composition
621: of hydrogen, helium, carbon and oxygen. We first notice that for a pure
622: oxygen model, the optical spectrum is not as rich in spectral features
623: as those made with lighter elements. With the exception of a few strong
624: lines, most of these features would not even be identifiable in a
625: spectrum as noisy as our SDSS Hot DQ stars. Inspection the 9 Hot DQ
626: spectra did not reveal any evidence of an oxygen feature at the position
627: of the strong oxygen lines seen in Figure \ref{fg:f5}. Models assuming a
628: surface composition of 50\% C and 50\% O are also very similar to those
629: of 100\% C, except that the strongest oxygen lines can be noticed and
630: that the carbon lines appear a little bit broader. However, since we do
631: not observe these oxygen lines in any of our spectra, the oxygen
632: abundance has to be at least close to an order of magnitude inferior to
633: that of carbon. A more precise limit will require the analysis of higher
634: signal-to-noise ratio observations, but since the C/O ratios are certainly
635: much higher than one, this practically guarantees that the atmospheric
636: parameters derived in this study should not significantly be altered by
637: the presence of an unknown but small amount of oxygen.
638:
639:
640: \subsubsection{Stark Broadening}
641:
642: The dominant source of broadening in the conditions encountered in
643: these type of stars is Stark broadening. In this first generation
644: of carbon atmosphere models, we made use of the so-called ''scaled
645: classical approximation'' \citep{kurucz81,hubeny88}. This
646: approximation assumes $\Gamma_S/N_e$ to be a constant. How realistic
647: this approximation is under the atmospheric conditions met here
648: remains to be tested. Uncertainties associated with the precision of
649: the treatment of the line broadening of C~\textsc{ii} could thus prove
650: to be a large source of error in our model calculations and surface
651: gravity estimations. As discussed above, errors in the absorption
652: coefficient can have a particularly strong effect in the UV part of
653: the spectrum, not to mention the line profiles in the optical. We thus
654: believe we should remain very cautious in our interpretation of the
655: limits/determinations of the surface gravity as derived from the line
656: profiles. We are currently working on incorporating the best Stark
657: broadening theory available for C~\textsc{ii} lines in our model
658: calculations and the results will be presented in due time.
659:
660: \section{DISCUSSION}\label{results}
661:
662: \subsection{Spectral Evolution Scenario}
663:
664: In this section, we present what we believe is a most likely scenario
665: for the formation and evolution of carbon atmosphere white dwarfs. The
666: main line of our argument has been briefly discussed in
667: \citet{dufourNat} and \citet{dufourhydef}.
668:
669: The origin of hydrogen deficient stars is generally believed to be
670: explained by a late helium-shell flash where a post-AGB star (or white
671: dwarf) re-ignites helium-shell burning. This brings the star back onto the
672: AGB phase (the ''born again'' scenario) and the associated envelope
673: mixing and mass loss eliminate the remaining hydrogen. As a result, the
674: surface composition of these objects will be a mix of helium, carbon and
675: oxygen. PG1159 and non-DA (helium-rich) stars are probably
676: descendants of objects that have experienced this late flash. It is thus
677: certainly not too far-fetched to imagine that a particularly violent
678: late thermal pulse could also explain the origin of stars that are both
679: hydrogen {\it and} helium deficient. The hottest PG1159 star H1504+65
680: ($\Te \sim$ 175,000 K) might actually owe its origin to such a
681: scenario. Its surface composition is nothing short of amazing with a
682: mass fraction of C$\sim 48\%$, O $\sim 48\%$, Mg $\sim 2\%$ and Ne $\sim
683: 2\%$ and until the recent discovery of the Hot DQ white dwarfs, H1504+65
684: was the only known object to not show traces of either hydrogen or
685: helium \citep{werner91,werner99,werner04}. It is thus very tempting to
686: draw an evolutionary link between H1504+65 and the cooler carbon
687: dominated atmosphere white dwarfs.
688:
689: As a star like H1504+65 cools, it is expected that
690: gravitational diffusion will separate carbon from oxygen so that the
691: atmosphere should rapidly appear carbon dominated. One flaw to this
692: simple scenario is that we would expect to find carbon dominated
693: atmospheres all along the cooling sequence, not only in a narrow strip
694: centered around $\sim$ 20,000 K. However, a careful search through the
695: SDSS archive didn't reveal any new carbon dominated white dwarfs with
696: an effective temperature higher than those presented in this paper (we
697: looked at all the DR6 spectra with $u-g < -0.2$ and $g-r <
698: -0.3$). Thus, even though our sample is small, it is certainly
699: significant that {\it all} objects are found in a narrow effective
700: temperature strip and {\it none} at higher or lower temperature. Any
701: proposed scenario must be able to explain this extraordinary fact.
702:
703: On the other hand, we do not believe that this necessarily mean that
704: there is no possible relationship between stars like H1504+65 and the
705: Hot DQs. Even though helium is not detected in the atmosphere of
706: H1504+65, it doesn't mean that none is present since this star is so hot
707: that a small amount of helium could be present but completely ionized,
708: preventing its detection from spectral analysis \citep{nousek86}. Hence,
709: the small residual amount of helium possibly existing in the envelope of
710: H1504+65 should eventually diffuse upward to form a thin layer above a
711: carbon-enriched and oxygen-depleted mantle. Since the total mass of an
712: atmosphere is tiny ($ \sim10^{-14}-10^{-15}$ \msun), there should
713: ultimately be enough accumulated helium to form a full atmosphere and
714: the descendant of H1504+65-like stars should then ''disguise''
715: themselves as He-atmosphere white dwarfs following the PG1159
716: evolutionary phase. We believe that these helium-rich stars could then
717: cool normally as DO/DB stars until a convection zone develops in the
718: carbon-enriched mantle due to the recombination of that element. At that
719: point in time, the subphotospheric carbon convection zone becomes active
720: enough to be able to dilute from below the very thin overlying radiative
721: He layer and the star undergoes a dramatic spectral change, transforming
722: itself from a He-dominated atmosphere white dwarf to a carbon-dominated
723: atmosphere star. Since the mass in the carbon convection zone is orders
724: of magnitude larger than the mass of the He layer, helium would become
725: spectroscopically invisible. The exact value at which this dilution take
726: place is not known due to a current lack of proper modelling, but it is
727: conjectured that it should be around 24,000 K. SDSS
728: J010647.92+151327.8, the hottest and the only star clearly showing
729: helium in our sample could perhaps be a rare star caught in the act of
730: converting from a DB to a Hot DQ.
731:
732: In addition, the carbon dominated atmosphere phase in the evolution of
733: such a star must be short-lived as no carbon dominated cases are found for
734: effective temperatures lower than $\sim$ 18,000 K. Such stars, if they
735: existed, would not only be easily recognizable from their spectra (the
736: atomic or molecular features would be extremely strong, see
737: Fig. \ref{fg:f6}), but should also be more numerous since the cooling
738: times are much longer as we approach the low end of the cooling sequence
739: (in other word, stars tend to accumulate at low effective temperature
740: while they pass rapidly through the hotter phase). The fact that we
741: haven't uncovered them probably means that helium must ultimately
742: reappear at the surface in enough quantity to form again a helium-rich
743: atmosphere (high signal-to-noise ratio observation revealing the
744: presence of helium in one of the coolest stars in our sample, SDSS
745: J142625.70+575218.4, would certainly strengthen this scenario). Since
746: the total amount of helium present in such stars is probably much
747: smaller than what is expected from ''normal'' stellar evolution, they
748: would have thin helium layers.
749:
750: In fact, we do know a group of stars that just may have such a
751: characteristic: the DQ white dwarfs belonging to the ''second
752: sequence'' \citep{dufour05, koester06}. Indeed, while the majority of
753: DQ stars form a clear sequence in a $\che$ vs. $\Te$ diagram \citep[see
754: Fig. 12 of][]{dufour05}, several stars were found to have carbon
755: abundances that lie about 1 dex above the more populated ''main''
756: sequence \citep[this was also confirmed with an even larger sample
757: by][]{koester06}. The sequence where the bulk of the DQ stars are
758: found is naturally explained by the standard dredge-up model and it is
759: in agreement with the expectation that the envelopes of post-AGB stars
760: should have $\log q({\rm He})\equiv \log M_{\rm He}/M_{\star}$ around
761: -2 or -3. Only one star located on the second sequence has a mass
762: determination as estimated from the parallax measurement. Since it was
763: much more massive than all the others (1.05 \msun~vs $\langle M
764: \rangle$ = 0.59 \msun~for the others), it was hypothesized that maybe
765: stars on the second sequence were just more massive as a group and
766: that this could explain the higher than usual carbon
767: abundance. However, detailed evolutionary calculations by \citet[][see
768: their Figure 1]{brassard07} showed that massive white dwarf evolution
769: cannot account for the high abundances in the coolest DQ white dwarfs
770: and that thin helium envelope model could be a better
771: explanation. Could these special DQ white dwarfs be cooled down
772: versions of the hot DQs~? We believe this is a very plausible
773: possibility that deserves more scrutiny.
774:
775: To summarize, we propose that the Hot DQs represent a short phase in
776: what appears to be a new channel in stellar evolution. Hence, in
777: addition to the general evolutionary sequence PG1159-DO-DB-DQ, there
778: could be another one involving H1504+65-like stars and the hot DQ
779: white dwarfs. This is schematically shown in Figure
780: \ref{fg:f7}. Star like H1504+65, showing initially a mixed C
781: and O atmosphere, would show a carbon dominated atmosphere after an
782: intermediate phase in which it would have been observed as a DO or DB
783: white dwarf. With further cooling, the small amount of helium
784: believed to be diluted in the massive carbon envelope would rises again to
785: the surface and the star then would appear as a highly polluted DQ white
786: dwarf. Evolutionary calculations are awaited to quantitatively test
787: the various aspect of this scenario.
788:
789: \subsection{Other scenarios}
790:
791: Are there other scenarios that could also explain the existence of
792: hydrogen and helium deficient objects~? One could argue that the
793: merging of two CO white dwarfs with a total mass less than 1.4
794: \msun~could produce such a thing. Or perhaps the presence of a close
795: companion may help to strip away the superficial layers of a white
796: dwarf, exposing the core. Imaginative theorists may also succeed in
797: finding several other ways to explain the weird surface composition of
798: the Hot DQ. However, there is one factor that we find very difficult
799: to reconcile with the above mentioned hypotheses (or any other kind of
800: scenario for that matter): why do they all have effective temperatures
801: between 18,000 and 23,000 K~? For all alternative scenarios we could
802: conceive of, the probability of finding a star outside this temperature
803: range is always greater than finding one inside. Unless future surveys
804: actually succeed in finding several new carbon-dominated atmosphere
805: white dwarfs outside this temperature range, our proposed scenario
806: involving episodes of diffusion and convective mixing along the
807: cooling sequence remains, in our view, the most likely.
808:
809: The exact evolutionary history of the Hot DQs and H1504+65, related or
810: not, is still unknown. As was perhaps the case with H1504+65, it may
811: also be possible for the mass loss phases of white dwarfs of ordinary
812: mass reaching C-O cores to lose most or all of their helium layers,
813: exposing the naked core of a former AGB star. Alternatively, a
814: series of five papers
815: \citep{garciaberro94,ritossa96,garciaberro97,iben97,ritossa99}
816: calculated the evolution of 9, 10, 10.5 and 11 solar masses
817: stars. Only the last case made it to the Fe peak and would explode as a
818: supernova. The models in the 9-10.5 \msun~range produce massive cores
819: at the end of the helium-burning phase, and rise in temperature enough
820: to ignite carbon in a series of weak flashes, burning the carbon
821: core stably, and producing ONeMg cores of $> 1.2$ \msun. During the
822: second asymptotic giant branch phase, there are good chances that
823: almost all of the helium (as well as all of the hydrogen) would be
824: lost. This would leave a carbon-oxygen envelope/atmosphere that could
825: explain the origin of carbon-dominated atmospheres white dwarfs, if the
826: white dwarfs are massive. The following spectral and chemical
827: evolution of the surface could then have followed a similar path as
828: described above in order to be found only between 18,000 and 23,000 K.
829:
830: At face value, our $\logg$ estimations generally favor a
831: stronger-than-usual mass loss from a C-O core star, as for only one star
832: (SDSS J142625.70+575218.4) is there a good case for $\logg$ around
833: 9. For the others, $\logg$ near 8 gives the best fits, while $\logg$
834: as high as 8.5 can be ruled out for most. It is possible that both
835: mechanisms work, and that SDSS J142625.70+575218.4 indeed came from a
836: progenitor higher than 8 \msun~while the others have a different
837: origin. It is thus important to firmly establish whether stars
838: initially as massive as 9-10.5 \msun~can produce white dwarfs with the
839: properties that we observe. However, given the many uncertainties
840: cited above, in particular the Stark broadening of C~\textsc{ii} lines
841: and the UV flux level, our surface gravity determinations are only
842: preliminary and we will refrain from drawing any definitive
843: conclusions at this point.
844:
845: \subsection{Pulsation Survey}
846:
847: One additional interesting aspect of Hot DQ white dwarfs that has not
848: escaped our attention is that past models of carbon-atmosphere white
849: dwarfs in the range of effective temperature where the real ones are
850: found \citep[see][]{fontaine76} are characterized by an important
851: outer superficial convection zone, very similar to that found in the
852: pulsating DB (centered around $\Te \simeq$ 25,000 K) or in the
853: pulsating DA stars (found around $\Te \simeq$ 12,000
854: K). Hence, it follows that carbon-atmosphere white dwarfs could also
855: excite pulsation modes through the same partial ionization/convective
856: driving phenomenon that is at work in these two distinct families of
857: pulsating white dwarfs.
858:
859: With this background in mind, \citet{fontaine08} recently investigated
860: the asteroseismological potential of Hot DQ's with the help of full
861: nonadiabatic calculations. They searched for possible instability
862: regions in parameter space defined by the effective temperature, the
863: surface gravity, the C/He ratio, and the convective efficiency. Given
864: the right location in parameter space, they found that some Hot DQ
865: stars should show pulsational instabilities against gravity modes. In
866: some cases, dipole ($\ell$ = 1) $g$-modes with periods in the range
867: 100$-$700 s can be excited. The blue edge of the predicted instability
868: strip is hotter for higher gravity objects, while increasing the C/He
869: ratio in the atmosphere/envelope tends to extinguish pulsational
870: driving.
871:
872: In parallel to this effort, an independent observational search for
873: luminosity variations in the current sample of Hot DQ white dwarfs was
874: initiated by \citet{montgomery08} at the McDonald Observatory.
875: In February 2008, they monitored the six accessible stars in the current
876: sample (SDSS J010647.92+151327.8 through SDSS J161531.71+454322.4 in
877: Table 1) and found overwhelming evidence for variations in the light
878: curve of SDSS J142625.70+575218.4 (see their Fig. 2), thus uncovering
879: the prototype of a new class of pulsating star. At the same type, no
880: variations with amplitudes above the detection threshold were observed in
881: the five other targets. The discovery that SDSS J142625.70+575218.4 is a
882: pulsating star is an extremely significant finding as it opens the door
883: to the application of the tools of asteroseismology to the further study
884: of Hot DQ white dwarfs. In essence, a new chapter in asteroseismology
885: has started with that discovery.
886:
887: We take advantage here of our preliminary determinations of the
888: atmospheric properties of Hot DQ stars summarized in Table 1 to follow
889: up on the exciting discovery of \citet{montgomery08}. We compute,
890: for each of the nine objects, a dedicated full stellar model using our
891: estimates of $\Te$, $\logg$, and the C/He ratio. We assume a
892: structure with an envelope specified by a uniform chemical composition
893: defined by that C/He ratio, on top of a C/O core in equal proportions by
894: mass. For the purposes of the driving/damping process, only the chemical
895: composition of the envelope is of relevance \citep[see][]{fontaine08}.
896: We finally vary, for each target, the assumed convective efficiency in
897: the model from the so-called ML2 version of the mixing-length theory, to
898: the more efficient ML3 flavor. Hence, for each star in Table 1, we
899: constructed two stellar models specified by the given values of
900: $\Te$, $\logg$, and C/He, one with ML2 convection and the other
901: with ML3 convection. For those objects with no tabulated value of C/He,
902: we used the visibility limits quoted in Subsection 4.2; this maximizes
903: the possible He content and therefore the possibility of pulsational
904: driving.
905:
906: We analyzed each equilibrium model using a full nonadiabatic approach.
907: We find that eight stars out of nine -- those with values of
908: $\logg$ = 8.0 in Table 1 -- are not expected to pulsate. This is mostly due
909: to the fact that their atmospheres/envelopes appear too carbon-rich to be
910: able to drive pulsations at their estimated values of $\Te$.
911: Their effective temperatures are indeed significantly higher, even
912: taking into account the uncertainties given in Table 1, than the
913: expected theoretical blue edges for a surface gravity $\logg$ = 8.0 and
914: the various C/He ratios involved. On the other hand, we find that a
915: model of SDSS J142625.70+575218.4 with $\Te$ = 19,830 K, $\logg$
916: = 9.0, C/He = 1, and ML3 convection is able to excite dipole $g$-modes in
917: the interval 163.9$-$293.8 s. While this falls somewhat short of the
918: period of 417.7 s found for the dominant periodicity in SDSS
919: J142625.70+575218.4 \citep{montgomery08}, this should not be cause
920: for concern at this stage because our estimations of the atmospheric
921: parameters of that faint pulsator need to be improved as indicated
922: above. We plan to actively pursue that endeavor with the MMT. For the
923: time being, we conclude that the expectations that we can infer from
924: nonadiabatic pulsation theory fall nicely in line with our
925: determinations of the atmospheric parameters of Hot DQ white dwarfs in
926: conjunction with the interesting results of \citet{montgomery08}.
927:
928: \section{SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS}\label{conclusion}
929:
930: We presented a detailed spectroscopic and photometric analysis of the 9
931: Hot DQ white dwarfs with carbon dominated atmospheres that have been
932: discovered in SDSS DR4. Strong upper limits on the abundance of hydrogen
933: and helium are obtained from the absence of H$\beta$ and He~\textsc{i}$
934: \lambda$4471, while in a few cases, small amounts of hydrogen or helium
935: are found in a carbon dominated atmosphere. The presence of a magnetic
936: field is detected in one star, while the spectra from two others suggest
937: the possibility of the presence of a weak field as well. Our analysis
938: also reveals that these stars are all situated in a narrow range of
939: effective temperature ($\sim$18,000-24,000 K) and that all, except
940: one, seem to have normal surface gravity (around $\logg$ = 8.0).
941: Admittedly, the precision of that result is very uncertain due in part
942: to the low signal-to-noise ratio of the data. Additionally, this first
943: generation of carbon atmosphere models must be considered preliminary,
944: as many factors might influence our results (opacity sources in the UV,
945: broadening theory etc.). We retain two main hypothesis for the origin of
946: these stars i) They might be the results of C-O core white dwarfs that
947: have experienced an unusually high mass loss at the end of the AGB phase
948: or ii) be the progeny of massive stars that had carbon burning and
949: produced O-Mg-Ne cores white dwarfs. If the latter is the case, the hot DQ
950: stars may ultimately help to better define the limiting mass at which
951: massive stars explode as a type II supernova as well as the birth rate
952: of neutron stars.
953:
954: Future work on these objects will be dedicated to the analysis of higher
955: signal-to-noise ratio observations. Follow up spectroscopic observations
956: with the Mount Hopkins 6.5m MMT telescope and the Mount Fowlkes Hobby
957: Eberly Telescope are underway and will be present in due time. Our next
958: generation of model atmospheres for carbon dominated compositions should
959: include the latest Stark broadening theory of C~\textsc{ii} lines as
960: well as any updates on sources of opacity that are judged necessary. We
961: also hope to obtain time for near-UV and far-UV observations with the
962: Hubble Space Telescope (HST) using the Cosmic Origin Spectrograph (COS),
963: after the scheduled repair mission, to assess the quality of our
964: modeling of the UV part of the spectrum. Finally, now that we know how
965: to easily recognize these stars, we are paying special attention to SDSS
966: data releases so that the number of objects in this new interesting
967: spectral class is expected to increase in a near future.
968:
969: \acknowledgements
970:
971: We wish to thank D. Eisenstein for very useful discussions concerning
972: the SDSS data and the DR4 white dwarfs catalog and P. Smith for help
973: with the spectropolarimetric observations. P.D. acknowledges the
974: financial suport of NSERC. This work was also supported by the NSF
975: through grant AST 03-07321. Support from the Reardon Foundation is
976: also gratefully acknowledged.
977:
978:
979:
980: \begin{thebibliography}{}
981:
982:
983:
984: \bibitem[Beauchamp(1995)]{beauchamp95} Beauchamp, A.\ 1995, Ph.D.~Thesis, Universit\'e de Montr\'eal
985:
986: \bibitem[Beauchamp et al.(1997)]{beauchamp97} Beauchamp, A.,
987: Wesemael, F., \& Bergeron, P.\ 1997, \apjs, 108, 559
988:
989: \bibitem[Bergeron et al.(1995)]{BSW95} Bergeron, P., Saumon, D., \& Wesemael, F.\ 1995, \apj, 443, 764
990:
991: \bibitem[Behara \& Jeffery(2005)]{behara05} Behara, N., \&
992: Jeffery, C.~S.\ 2005, in ASP Conf. Ser. 334, 14th European Workshop on White Dwarfs, ed. D. Koester \& S. Moehler (San Francisco: ASP), 253
993:
994: \bibitem[Behara \& Jeffery(2006)]{behara06} Behara, N.~T., \&
995: Jeffery, C.~S.\ 2006, \aap, 451, 643
996:
997: \bibitem[Brassard et al.(2007)]{brassard07} Brassard, P.,
998: Fontaine, G., Dufour, P., \& Bergeron, P.\ 2007, in ASP Conf. Ser. 372, 15th European Workshop on White Dwarfs, ed. R. Napiwotzki \& M. R. Burleigh (San Francisco: ASP), 19
999:
1000: \bibitem[D'Antona \& Mazzitelli(1987)]{dantona87} D'Antona, F.,
1001: \& Mazzitelli, I.\ 1987, IAU Colloq.~95: Second Conference on Faint Blue
1002: Stars, 635
1003:
1004: \bibitem[Desharnais et al.(2008)]{desharnais08} Desharnais, S.,
1005: Wesemael, F., Chayer, P., Kruk, J.~W.,
1006: \& Saffer, R.~A.\ 2008, \apj, 672, 540
1007:
1008: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2002)]{dufour02} Dufour, P., Wesemael,
1009: F., \& Bergeron, P.\ 2002, \apj, 575, 1025
1010:
1011: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2005)]{dufour05} Dufour, P., Bergeron, P., \& Fontaine, G.\ 2005, \apj, 627, 404
1012:
1013: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2006)]{dufour06} Dufour, P., Bergeron, P., Schmidt, G. D., Liebert, J., Harris, H. C., Knapp, G. R., Anderson, S. F., \& Schneider, D. P. 2006, \apj, 651, 1112
1014:
1015: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2007a)]{dufourNat} Dufour, P., Liebert, J.,
1016: Fontaine, G., \& Behara, N.\ 2007a, \nat, 450, 522
1017:
1018: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2007b)]{dufour07} Dufour, P., et al.\
1019: 2007b, \apj, 663, 1291
1020:
1021: \bibitem[Dufour(2007c)]{dufourphd} Dufour, P.\ 2007c, Ph.D.~Thesis, Universit\'e de Montr\'eal
1022:
1023: \bibitem[Dufour et al.(2007d)]{dufourhydef} Dufour, P., Liebert, J.,
1024: Fontaine, G., \& Behara, N.\ 2007d, ArXiv e-prints, 711
1025:
1026: \bibitem[Eisenstein et al.(2006)]{eisenstein06} Eisenstein, D.~J.,
1027: et al.\ 2006, \apjs, 167, 40
1028:
1029: \bibitem[Fontaine \& van Horn(1976)]{fontaine76} Fontaine, G., \& van Horn, H.~M.\ 1976, \apjs, 31, 467
1030:
1031: \bibitem[Fontaine \& Brassard(2005)]{fontaine05} Fontaine, G., \&
1032: Brassard, P.\ 2005, in ASP Conf. Ser. 334, 14th European Workshop on White Dwarfs, ed. D. Koester \& S. Moehler (San Francisco: ASP), 49
1033:
1034: \bibitem[Fontaine et al.(2008)]{fontaine08} Fontaine, G.,
1035: Brassard, P., \& Dufour, P.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints, 803
1036:
1037: \bibitem[Fukugita et al.(1996)]{fukugita96} Fukugita, M., Ichikawa, T., Gunn, J. E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K., \& Schneider, D. P. 1996, \aj, 111, 1748
1038:
1039: \bibitem[Garc\'ia-Berro \& Iben(1994)]{garciaberro94} Garc\'ia-Berro, E., \& Iben, I., Jr.\ 1994, \apj, 434, 306
1040:
1041: \bibitem[Garc\'ia-Berro et al.(1997)]{garciaberro97} Garc\'ia-Berro, E.,
1042: Ritossa, C., \& Iben, I., Jr.\ 1997, \apj, 485, 765
1043:
1044: \bibitem[Herwig et al.(1999)]{herwig99} Herwig, F., Bl{\"o}cker,
1045: T., Langer, N., \& Driebe, T.\ 1999, \aap, 349, L5
1046:
1047: \bibitem[Hogg et al.(2001)]{hogg01} Hogg, D. W., Finkbeiner, D. P., Schlegel, D.J., \& Gunn, J. E., 2001, \aj, 122, 2129
1048:
1049:
1050: \bibitem[Hubeny(1988)]{hubeny88} Hubeny, I.\ 1988, Computer
1051: Physics Communications, 52, 103
1052:
1053: \bibitem[Hummer \& Mihalas(1988)]{HM88} Hummer, D.~G., \& Mihalas, D. 1988, \apj, 331, 794
1054:
1055: \bibitem[Iben(1984)]{iben84} Iben, I., Jr.\ 1984, \apj, 277,
1056: 333
1057:
1058: \bibitem[Iben et al.(1997)]{iben97} Iben, I., Jr., Ritossa, C.,
1059: \& Garc\'ia-Berro, E.\ 1997, \apj, 489, 772
1060:
1061: \bibitem[Ivezi\'c et al.(2004)]{ivezic04} Ivezi\'c, Z., et al. 2004, Astron. Nachr., 325, 583
1062:
1063: \bibitem[Kalirai et al.(2007)]{kalirai07} Kalirai, J.~S.,
1064: Bergeron, P., Hansen, B.~M.~S., Kelson, D.~D., Reitzel, D.~B., Rich, R.~M.,
1065: \& Richer, H.~B.\ 2007, \apj, 671, 748
1066:
1067: \bibitem[Kawai et al.(1988)]{kawai88} Kawai, Y., Saio, H.,
1068: \& Nomoto, K.\ 1988, \apj, 328, 207
1069:
1070: \bibitem[Koester \& Sch\"oenberner(1986)]{koester86} Koester, D.,
1071: \& Sch\"oenberner, D.\ 1986, \aap, 154, 125
1072:
1073: \bibitem[Koester \& Knist(2006)]{koester06} Koester, D., \& Knist, S.\ 2006, \aap, 454, 951
1074:
1075: \bibitem[Kurucz \& Avrett(1981)]{kurucz81} Kurucz, R.~L., \& Avrett, E.~H.\ 1981, SAO Special Report, 391, 1
1076:
1077: \bibitem[Liebert et al.(2003)]{liebert03} Liebert, J., et al.\
1078: 2003, \aj, 126, 2521
1079:
1080: \bibitem[McCook \& Sion(1999)]{mccooksion99} McCook, G.~P., \& Sion, E.~M.\ 1999, \apjs, 121, 1
1081:
1082: \bibitem[Montgomery et al.(2008)]{montgomery08} Montgomery, M.~H.,
1083: Williams, K.~A., Winget, D.~E., Dufour, P., DeGennaro, S.,
1084: \& Liebert, J.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints, 803
1085:
1086: \bibitem[Nousek et al.(1986)]{nousek86} Nousek, J.~A., Shipman,
1087: H.~L., Holberg, J.~B., Liebert, J., Pravdo, S.~H., White, N.~E., \& Giommi,
1088: P.\ 1986, \apj, 309, 230
1089:
1090: \bibitem[Peach(1970)]{peach70} Peach, G.\ 1970, \memras, 73, 1
1091:
1092: \bibitem[Pelletier et al.(1986)]{pelletier86} Pelletier, C.,
1093: Fontaine, G., Wesemael, F., Michaud, G., \& Wegner, G.\ 1986, \apj, 307,
1094: 242
1095:
1096: \bibitem[Petitclerc et al.(2005)]{petitclerc05} Petitclerc, N.,
1097: Wesemael, F., Kruk, J.~W., Chayer, P.,
1098: \& Bill{\`e}res, M.\ 2005, \apj, 624, 317
1099:
1100: \bibitem[Press et al.(1992)]{pressetal92} Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., \& Flannery, B. P. 1992, Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN, 2nd edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 644
1101:
1102: \bibitem[Provencal et al.(2000)]{provencal00} Provencal, J.~L.,
1103: Shipman, H.~L., Thejll, P., \& Vennes, S.\ 2000, \apj, 542, 1041
1104:
1105: \bibitem[Provencal et al.(2002)]{provencal02} Provencal, J.~L.,
1106: Shipman, H.~L., Koester, D., Wesemael, F.,
1107: \& Bergeron, P.\ 2002, \apj, 568, 324
1108:
1109: \bibitem[Ritossa et al.(1996)]{ritossa96} Ritossa, C.,
1110: Garc\'ia-Berro, E., \& Iben, I., Jr.\ 1996, \apj, 460, 489
1111:
1112: \bibitem[Ritossa et al.(1999)]{ritossa99} Ritossa, C.,
1113: Garc{\'{\i}}a-Berro, E., \& Iben, I., Jr.\ 1999, \apj, 515, 381
1114:
1115: \bibitem[Schlegel et al.(1998)]{schlegel98} Schlegel, D.~J.,
1116: Finkbeiner, D.~P., \& Davis, M.\ 1998, \apj, 500, 525
1117:
1118: \bibitem[Schmidt et al.(1992)]{schmidt92} Schmidt, G.~D.,
1119: Stockman, H.~S., \& Smith, P.~S.\ 1992, \apjl, 398, L57
1120:
1121: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2002)]{smith02} Smith, J. A., et al. 2002, \aj, 123, 2121
1122:
1123: \bibitem[Thejll et al.(1990)]{thejll90} Thejll, P., Shipman,
1124: H.~L., MacDonald, J., \& Macfarland, W.~M.\ 1990, \apj, 361, 197
1125:
1126: \bibitem[Opacity Project (1995)]{OP95} The Opacity Project Team 1995, The Opacity Project, Vol. 1, Institute of Physics, Bristol
1127:
1128: \bibitem[Opacity Project (1997)]{OP97} The Opacity Project Team 1997, The Opacity Project, Vol. 2, Institute of Physics, Bristol
1129:
1130: \bibitem[Voss et al.(2007)]{voss07} Voss, B., Koester, D., Napiwotzki, R., Christlieb, N., \& Reimers, D.\ 2007, \aap, 470, 1079
1131:
1132: \bibitem[Wegner \& Koester(1985)]{wegner85} Wegner, G., \&
1133: Koester, D.\ 1985, \apj, 288, 746
1134:
1135: \bibitem[Werner(1991)]{werner91} Werner, K.\ 1991, \aap, 251,
1136: 147
1137:
1138: \bibitem[Werner \& Wolff(1999)]{werner99} Werner, K., \& Wolff,
1139: B.\ 1999, \aap, 347, L9
1140:
1141: \bibitem[Werner et al.(2004)]{werner04} Werner, K., Rauch, T.,
1142: Barstow, M.~A., \& Kruk, J.~W.\ 2004, \aap, 421, 1169
1143:
1144: \bibitem[Werner \& Herwig(2006)]{werner06} Werner, K., \&
1145: Herwig, F.\ 2006, \pasp, 118, 183
1146:
1147:
1148: \end{thebibliography}
1149:
1150: \clearpage
1151:
1152: \input{tab1}
1153:
1154: \clearpage
1155:
1156: \figcaption[f1.eps] {Representative synthetic spectra of Hot DQ white
1157: dwarfs taken from our model grid for various effective temperatures,
1158: gravities, helium and hydrogen abundances. The spectra are normalized to
1159: unity at 4200 \AA\ and offset by an arbitrary factor for clarity. The
1160: labels indicate the effective temperature, while the color of each
1161: spectrum corresponds to a different gravity, as indicated in the lower
1162: left corner. The bottom two examples show the influence of trace
1163: helium ($\che$ = 2, 1 and 0) and trace hydrogen ($\ch$ = 2, 1 and
1164: 0) while in blue, we show the log g = 8 synthetic spectra for pure
1165: helium atmosphere (DB) and pure hydrogen atmosphere (DA).
1166: \label{fg:f1}}
1167:
1168: \figcaption[f2.eps] {Observed circular polarization (top panel) and
1169: the corresponding spectrum obtained with a spectral resolution
1170: ($\Delta\lambda\sim17$~\AA). The thick marks indicate the position of the
1171: strongest C~\textsc{ii} features.
1172: \label{fg:f2}}
1173:
1174: \figcaption[f3.eps] {Fits to the energy distribution (right panel) and
1175: carbon lines (left panel) for all carbon dominated DQ white dwarfs in
1176: our SDSS sample. The $ugriz$ photometric observations are represented
1177: by error bars, while the average model fluxes are shown by filled
1178: circles. The derived atmospheric parameters are indicated in each
1179: panel. We have applied for clarity a three-point average window
1180: smoothing in the display of the spectroscopic data.
1181: \label{fg:f3}}
1182:
1183:
1184:
1185: \figcaption[f4.eps] {Comparison of a pure helium DB model (red line)
1186: with a pure carbon model (blue line) for $\logg$ = 8.0 and $\Te$ =
1187: 22,000 K. Note that $\int H_{\nu} d\nu$ is the same for both models (=
1188: $\sigma \Te ^4/4\pi $).
1189: \label{fg:f4}}
1190:
1191:
1192: \figcaption[f5.eps] {Comparison of the optical spectra of pure
1193: composition atmospheres composed of hydrogen, helium, carbon and oxygen
1194: for $\logg$ = 8.0 and $\Te$ = 22,000 K.
1195: \label{fg:f5}}
1196:
1197: \figcaption[f6.eps] {Comparison of synthetic spectra of a pure carbon
1198: atmosphere models (blue) with a $\che$ = -3.0 model (red) for $\Te$ =
1199: 10,000 K and $\logg = 8.0$. Spectra with extremely strong carbon bands
1200: similar to that predicted in the pure carbon model should have been
1201: easily noticed in SDSS if they existed.
1202: \label{fg:f6}}
1203:
1204: \figcaption[f7.eps] {Schematic representation of our proposed evolutionary
1205: scenario to explain the existence of carbon dominated atmosphere white dwarfs.
1206: \label{fg:f7}}
1207:
1208: \clearpage
1209: \begin{figure}[p]
1210: \plotone{f1.eps}
1211: \begin{flushright}
1212: Figure \ref{fg:f1}
1213: \end{flushright}
1214: \end{figure}
1215:
1216: \clearpage
1217: \begin{figure}[p]
1218: \plotone{f2.eps}
1219: \begin{flushright}
1220: Figure \ref{fg:f2}
1221: \end{flushright}
1222: \end{figure}
1223:
1224: \clearpage
1225: \begin{figure}[p]
1226: \plotone{f3a.eps}
1227: \begin{flushright}
1228: Figure \ref{fg:f3}
1229: \end{flushright}
1230: \end{figure}
1231:
1232: \clearpage
1233: \begin{figure}[p]
1234: \plotone{f3b.eps}
1235: \begin{flushright}
1236: Figure \ref{fg:f3}
1237: \end{flushright}
1238: \end{figure}
1239:
1240: \clearpage
1241: \begin{figure}[p]
1242: \rotate{90}
1243: \plotone{f4.eps}
1244: \begin{flushright}
1245: Figure \ref{fg:f4}
1246: \end{flushright}
1247: \end{figure}
1248:
1249: \clearpage
1250: \begin{figure}[p]
1251: \plotone{f5.eps}
1252: \begin{flushright}
1253: Figure \ref{fg:f5}
1254: \end{flushright}
1255: \end{figure}
1256:
1257: \clearpage
1258: \begin{figure}[p]
1259: \plotone{f6.eps}
1260: \begin{flushright}
1261: Figure \ref{fg:f6}
1262: \end{flushright}
1263: \end{figure}
1264:
1265: \clearpage
1266: \begin{figure}[p]
1267: \plotone{f7.eps}
1268: \begin{flushright}
1269: Figure \ref{fg:f7}
1270: \end{flushright}
1271: \end{figure}
1272:
1273: \end{document}
1274:
1275: