1: %\documentclass[referee]{aa}
2: \documentclass{aa}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{txfonts}
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6: \usepackage{url}
7: \usepackage{natbib}
8: \bibpunct{(}{)}{;}{a}{}{,}
9:
10: %%%% begin new commands
11: \newcommand{\cf}{{\it cf.}~}
12: \newcommand{\ie}{{\it i.e.}~}
13: \newcommand{\eg}{{\it e.g.}~}
14: \newcommand{\Ms}{\ensuremath{M_\odot}}
15: \newcommand{\Zs}{$Z_\odot$}
16: \newcommand{\el}[2]{$\rm{}^{#2}\kern-0.6pt#1$}
17: \newcommand{\kms}{km\,s$^{-1}$}
18: %%%% temporary command
19: %\usepackage{color}
20: %\newcommand{\NB}[2][Note]{\textbf{\color{red}{[#1: #2]}}}
21: %\newcommand{\MOD}[1]{\textbf{\textit{#1}}}
22: %\newcommand{\MOD}[1]{#1}
23: %%%% end new commands
24:
25: \begin{document}
26:
27: \title{The evolution of two stellar populations in globular clusters}
28: \subtitle{I. The dynamical mixing timescale}
29:
30: %\subtitle{Sous-titre}
31:
32: \author{T. Decressin\inst{1} \and H. Baumgardt\inst{1} \and P. Kroupa\inst{1}}
33:
34: \offprints{T. Decressin,\\ email: decressin@astro.uni-bonn.de}
35:
36: \institute{$^1$ Argelander Institute for Astronomy (AIfA), Auf dem H\"ugel 71, D-53121 Bonn, Germany}
37:
38: \date{Received / Accepted}
39:
40: \authorrunning{} \titlerunning{}
41:
42: \abstract{}%
43: {We investigate the long-term dynamical evolution of two distinct stellar
44: populations of low-mass stars in globular clusters in order to study
45: whether the energy equipartition process can explain the high number of
46: stars harbouring abundance anomalies seen in globular clusters.}%
47: {We analyse N-body models by artificially dividing the low-mass stars
48: ($m\le0.9$~\Ms{}) into two populations: a small number of stars (second
49: generation) consistent with an invariant IMF and with low specific
50: energies initially concentrated towards the cluster-centre mimic stars
51: with abundance anomalies. These stars form from the slow winds of
52: fast-rotating massive stars. The main part of low-mass (first generation)
53: stars has the pristine composition of the cluster. We study in detail how
54: the two populations evolve under the influence of two-body relaxation and
55: the tidal forces due to the host galaxy.}%
56: {Stars with low specific energy initially concentrated toward the cluster
57: centre need about two relaxation times to achieve a complete
58: homogenisation throughout the cluster. For realistic globular clusters,
59: the number ratio between the two populations increases only by a factor
60: 2.5 due to the preferential evaporation of the population of outlying
61: first generation stars. We also find that the loss of information on the
62: stellar orbital angular momentum occurs on the same timescale as spatial
63: homogenisation.}%
64: {To reproduce the high number of chemically anomalous stars in globular
65: clusters by preserving an invariant IMF, more efficient mechanisms such
66: as primordial gas expulsion are needed to expel the stars in the outer
67: cluster parts on a short timescale.}
68:
69: \keywords{globular clusters: general - stellar dynamics - Methods: N-body
70: simulations}
71:
72: \maketitle
73:
74: \section{Introduction}
75:
76: In a given globular cluster (GC), low-mass stars are known to display
77: a homogeneous composition in Fe and other heavy elements (with the
78: noticeable exception of $\omega$~Cen). However, in each individual GC some
79: pronounced star-to-star variations in light element abundances (Li to Al)
80: are found, leading to the well-known C-N, O-Na, Li-Na and Mg-Al
81: anticorrelations \citep[for a review
82: see][]{GrattonSneden2004,Charbonnel2005}. They are the direct results of
83: H-burning nucleosynthesis at high temperatures
84: \citep{DenisenkovDenisenkova1989,DenisenkovDenisenkova1990,LangerHoffman1995,PrantzosCharbonnel2007}.
85: In addition, since such abundance patterns are not detected in population
86: II halo fields stars, they are expected to be related to the evolution of
87: the GCs. Since the low-mass stars still on the main sequence
88: or on the red giant branch display such abundance variations and since
89: these stars do not produce in their interior the high temperatures needed
90: to create the abundance anomalies, it is expected that low-mass stars have
91: inherited this chemical pattern at birth.
92:
93: Massive stars as possible sources to contaminate the metal abundances in
94: the GCs have first been proposed by
95: \citet{PilachowskiLeep1982} and \citet{WallersteinLeep1987} and then
96: studied by \citet{PrantzosCharbonnel2006} and \citet{Smith2006}. Recently
97: \citet{DecressinMeynet2007} explore the role of a high initial rotation in
98: such stars, finding that abundance anomalies in GCs can
99: result from an early pollution by fast-rotating massive stars. Indeed
100: during main sequence evolution, angular momentum is transported from the
101: centre to the stellar surface, and for stars heavier than 20~\Ms{} with a
102: high initial rotational velocity, their surface can reach the break-up
103: velocity limit at the equator (\ie{} the centrifugal equatorial force
104: balances gravity). In such a situation, a slow mechanical wind develops at
105: the equator and forms a disc around the stars similar to what happens to Be
106: stars \citep{TownsendOwocki2004,EkstromMeynet2008}. The second effect of
107: rotation is to transport elements from the convective H-burning core to the
108: stellar surface, which enriches the disc with H-burning material. While
109: matter in discs has a slow outward velocity and hence will stay in the
110: potential well of the cluster, matter released during the main part of the
111: He-burning phase and during SN explosions has a very high radial velocity
112: and will be lost from the cluster. Therefore, new stars can only form from
113: the matter available in discs and can become the stars with abundance
114: anomalies we observe today. Thus GCs can contain two distinct
115: populations of low-mass stars: a first generation that has the chemical
116: composition of the material out of which the cluster formed (similar to
117: field stars with a similar metallicity); and a second generation of stars
118: harbouring the abundance anomalies born from the ejecta of fast-rotating
119: massive stars.
120:
121: Based on the determination of the composition of giant stars in NGC~6752
122: by \citet{CarrettaBragaglia2007}, \citet{DecressinCharbnnel2007} determined
123: that around 85\% of stars (of the sample of 120 stars) display abundance
124: anomalies. \citet{PrantzosCharbonnel2006} find similar results for NGC~2808
125: with their analysis of the data of \citet{CarrettaBragaglia2006}: 70\% of
126: the cluster stars present abundance anomalies.
127:
128: A main problem is that by assuming a \citet{Salpeter1955} IMF, the accumulated
129: mass of the slow winds ejected by the fast-rotating massive stars would
130: only represent 2.5\% of the mass of the whole population of first
131: generation stars (see Fig.~5 in \citealp{DecressinCharbnnel2007}). This
132: number is only a lower limit since some mixing between the slow wind and
133: the gas of the interstellar medium left after the formation of first
134: generation stars needs to be taken into account so that more matter will be
135: available to form second generation stars. Taking this dilution process
136: into account, \citet{DecressinCharbnnel2007} found that the initial mass of
137: the second generation stars is 5\% of the cluster mass. As the whole
138: population of low-mass stars represents half of the cluster stellar mass,
139: this leads to a number ratio of about 0.1 between the second and the first
140: generation of low-mass stars. This dilution process of the slow wind in the
141: ISM is also mandatory to explain the Li detected in stars with abundance
142: anomalies. Indeed in NGC~6752, \citet{PasquiniBonifacio2005} found that
143: turn-off stars with abundance anomalies display a noticeable abundance
144: variation in Li. Similar results are found for 47~Tuc
145: \citep{BonifacioPasquini2007}. However in the hot interior of massive
146: stars, all the Li initially present is consumed and no Li is ejected into
147: the disc. Thus the Li in stars with abundance anomalies can only come from
148: the ISM.
149:
150: To reconcile the high fraction of second generation stars with the
151: observations \citet{DecressinCharbnnel2007} suggest that we need either (a)
152: a flat IMF for the massive stars, or (b) that 96\% of the low-mass stars of
153: the first generation have escaped the cluster. The second case could be
154: achieved if the following scheme happens: we assume that the fast-rotating
155: massive stars are born near the cluster centre or migrate rapidly toward
156: the centre (\ie, that the cluster is initially mass segregated). In such a
157: case, the slow winds ejected by these massive stars are also concentrated
158: near the centre. As the second generation stars need to be formed on a
159: short timescale to avoid the ensuring supernovae pushing the slow wind
160: material, from which second generation stars are to form, out of the
161: cluster, we can expect that second generation stars will form with the same
162: radial distribution as the massive stars.
163:
164: Primordial mass segregation is observed in young star clusters in the Milky
165: Way and the Magellanic Clouds
166: \citep{BonnellDavies1998,GouliermisKeller2004,ChendeGrijs2007}. Thus we
167: could reasonably expect that GCs were also mass segregated at
168: birth. It should be noted that the recent correlation between the slope of
169: the mass function and the concentration parameter ($c = \log (r_t/r_c)$,
170: where $r_t$ and $r_c$ are the tidal and core radius respectively)
171: discovered by \citet{DeMarchiParesce2007}, can be explained naturally if
172: the GCs started mass segregated
173: \citep{MarksKroupa2008,BaumgardtDeMarchi2008}.
174:
175: Empirical evidence for the presence of gas in the cluster centre at the
176: same time as massive stars are still evolving is provided by
177: \citet{GallianoAlloin2008}. They investigated extremely massive young
178: clusters, which are believed to be nascent GCs (around 6-8
179: Myr old), in the spiral Galaxy NGC 1365, and found an optically thick
180: component in addition to a thin one. These authors argue that this thick
181: component could be related to a subsequent or on-going episode of star
182: formation.
183:
184: We expect that the slow winds of fast-rotating massive stars dilute the ISM
185: locally around each massive star, so second generation stars will be born
186: only in the central part of the cluster while the outer regions are
187: populated exclusively by first generation stars. If some dynamical process
188: unbinds the external parts most of the first generation stars may be lost
189: while the second generation stars are retained in the cluster. In the
190: present paper we investigate if the tidal interactions with the host Galaxy
191: can produce such an effect.
192:
193:
194: The time needed for the second generation of stars to spread throughout the
195: cluster is expected to scale with the two-body relaxation time
196: at the half-mass radius, $t_\text{rh}$, of the cluster given by
197: \citet{Spitzer1987},
198: \begin{equation}
199: \label{eq:trel}
200: \frac{t_\text{rh}}{1\ \text{Myr}} = \frac{664}{\ln\left(0.02 N\right)}
201: \sqrt{\frac{M_\text{Cl}}{10^5\ \Ms}} \left(\frac{\langle m\rangle}{1\
202: \Ms}\right) \left(\frac{r_\text{h}}{1\ \text{pc}}\right)^{1.5},
203: \end{equation}
204: where $N$, and $\langle m\rangle$ are the number of stars and their mean
205: mass while $M_\text{Cl}$, and $r_\text{h}$ represent the total mass and the
206: half-mass radius of the cluster respectively. The two-body relaxation time
207: is an estimate of the timescale over which the cluster rearranges itself
208: significantly due to its evolution towards energy equipartition as driven
209: by the many encounters between two stars within the cluster potential. At
210: the same time, the tidal forces of the host galaxy remove stars from the
211: outer cluster parts. Current observations of GCs suggest that
212: most of them are several relaxation times old, so that we would expect that
213: stars in these clusters are thoroughly mixed and therefore
214: homogeneous at the present time.
215:
216: In this paper, we study more quantitatively the interplay between
217: the effect of internal dynamics and the external potential of the host
218: galaxy on the evolution of two stellar populations in GCs. In
219: \S~2, we describe the dynamical models we used. Then our analysis is
220: presented in \S~3. Finally, our results are discussed and our conclusions
221: are drawn in \S~4.
222:
223: \section{Dynamical models}
224:
225: \subsection{Used models}
226:
227: The analysis presented here is based on the calculations of
228: \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003}, which consist of a set of models containing
229: 8k to 128k stars\footnote{In this paper we
230: use the computer unit 1k = 1024.} initially, carried out with the collisional
231: Aarseth N-body code \textsc{nbody4} \citep{Aarseth1999}. It uses a
232: Hermite scheme with individual time-steps for the integration and treats
233: close encounters between stars by KS \citep{KustaanheimoStiefel1965} and
234: chain regularization \citep{MikkolaAarseth1990,MikkolaAarseth1993}.
235:
236: Here we restrain the analysis to clusters moving on circular orbits (with
237: orbits 8500~pc away from the Galactic centre) through a host galaxy
238: modelled as a logarithmic potential. The clusters follow King profiles
239: initially with central concentrations $W_0=5.0$. The cluster initial radii
240: are adjusted such that the tidal radius of the King model was equal to the
241: tidal radius given by the host Galactic tidal field. The clusters are
242: computed until complete dissolution. The initial mass function of stars in
243: the cluster is given by a canonical two-part power-law mass function
244: \citep{Kroupa2001} with upper and lower mass limits of 15 and 0.1~\Ms{}
245: respectively. This leads to an initial mean mass of $\langle m \rangle =
246: 0.547$~\Ms{}. Stellar evolution is modelled by the fitting formulae of
247: \citet{HurleyPols2000} with an assumed metallicity of $Z=0.001$
248: ($\text{[Fe/H]}\simeq -1.2$, the mean value of GC
249: metallicities) for the cluster stars. Mass lost from the stars in the
250: course of their evolution is assumed to be immediately lost by the
251: cluster. The clusters contained no initial binaries.
252:
253: \subsection{Selection by specific energy}
254:
255: Although the models of \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} have been computed for a
256: single stellar population, we apply a process which could mimic the
257: formation of a cluster with two dynamically distinct
258: populations. \citet{DecressinCharbnnel2007} have shown that the slow
259: equatorial winds of fast-rotating massive stars create slowly expanding
260: discs which stay in the potential well of the GCs. If we assume a
261: radial velocity for these winds between 1 and 10~\kms, and that the gas
262: travels for about $10^5$~yr before starting to form new stars, it will
263: travel for a distance of about 0.1 to 1~pc. As the initial tidal radius of
264: the cluster is a few 10~pc, we expect that second-generation stars have the
265: same initial spatial distribution as their massive progenitors. Since we
266: assume here that the massive stars are born in the centre of the cluster,
267: the second generation stars will also be located near its centre.
268:
269: In order to select stars in the cluster centre we sort all the low-mass
270: stars ($M\le 0.9$~\Ms) according to their specific energy defined as the
271: energy per unit mass. We define the second stellar generation as the stars
272: with smallest specific energies, (\ie{} those stars which are most tightly
273: bound to the cluster due to their small central distance and low
274: velocity). The number of second generation stars is given by having their
275: total mass represent 5\% of the initial mass of the cluster. For the models
276: with initially 128k stars, we have 104691 first generation stars and 10327
277: second generation stars; the remaining stars are more massive than
278: 0.9~\Ms{}.
279:
280: \subsection{Possible issues}
281:
282: \begin{figure}
283: \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{fig1}
284: \caption{Position of low-mass stars ($M_\text{ini}\le0.9$~\Ms) in the
285: Z-X (left) and Z-Y (right) plane at different times: 0~Gyr (top),
286: 5.06~Gyr (middle) and 11.85~Gyr (bottom) for the N-body integration with
287: initially 128k stars. For sake of clarity, the upper and bottom parts
288: of each panel display only the second and first generation of stars
289: respectively.}
290: \label{fig:posi}
291: \end{figure}
292:
293: \begin{figure}
294: \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{fig2}
295: \caption{Radial distribution of the first (dashed lines) and second
296: (full lines) generation of low-mass
297: stars at the same times as in Fig.~\ref{fig:posi}. Each histogram is
298: normalised to the total number of stars in each population.}
299: \label{fig:distrr}
300: \end{figure}
301:
302: It should be noted that the upper-limit for the IMF in the models of
303: \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} is 15~\Ms{}. However the pollution by massive
304: stars would involve stars more massive than 20~\Ms{}
305: \citep[see][]{DecressinMeynet2007}. The evolution of such high mass stars
306: takes a few million years. So if the delay for the formation of the second
307: generation stars is short, the two populations will be nearly
308: coeval. However the direct dynamical effects of the fast-rotating massive
309: stars (more massive than 20~\Ms{}), like the lowering of the cluster
310: potential well by the ejection of their fast polar winds and SN, or the
311: creation of a second generation of stars with the matter released in their
312: slow winds, are not taken into account in this paper.
313:
314: With the scheme presented in \S~2.2, we implicitly assume that the lifetime
315: of the first and second generation of low-mass stars are identical. In real
316: clusters this would not be valid if a noticeable fraction of second
317: generation stars shows a large overabundance in He. Indeed as He is the
318: main product of H-burning in stars, abundance anomalies are also expected
319: to come with He overabundance. Although He abundance cannot be directly
320: determined, several indirect observations push toward this finding. First,
321: the GCs $\omega$~Cen and NGC~2808 display multiple main
322: sequences \citep{PiottoVillanova2005,PiottoBedin2007}; a double sub-giant
323: branch is also found in NGC~1851 \citep{MiloneBedin2008}. Such features can
324: only be understood if the stars present various He contents. He enrichment
325: is also a possible explanation for the appearance of extreme horizontal
326: branches seen for several GCs
327: \citep{CaloiD'Antona2005,CaloiD'Antona2006}.
328:
329: For our paper, the different initial He content between the two populations
330: needs to be properly taken into account as stars with higher initial He
331: content have a shorter lifetime due to faster stellar evolution. Therefore
332: to be consistent with the evolution of the second generation of stars
333: requires custom-made models. However the value of $Y=0.4$ (instead of 0.25)
334: is often cited as needed to properly explain the observations
335: \citep{Norris2004,PiottoVillanova2005} while \citet{DecressinCharbnnel2007}
336: find that fast-rotating massive stars could even create low-mass stars with
337: a He mass fraction up to $Y = 0.7$. For 12~Gyr old clusters,
338: \citet{DAntonaVentura2007} show that the turn-off mass decreases from 0.8
339: to 0.64~\Ms{} when the initial He content raises from 0.24 to 0.4. It could
340: even be as low as 0.35~\Ms{} if the initial He content is 0.7 (Decressin et
341: al., in prep.). Unfortunately the N-body computations of
342: \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} use only standard He abundance for the stellar
343: evolution models, so this effect cannot be investigated in the present
344: paper. However we expect that the global findings of this paper on the
345: dynamical timescales will not be changed by this He-rich
346: population. Nevertheless a forthcoming paper will address this issue.
347:
348: \section{Analysis}
349:
350: \begin{figure}
351: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3}
352: \caption{Evolution of the half-mass radius for first (dashed lines) and
353: second (full lines) generation of low-mass stars present in the
354: clusters as a function of time for the models with initially 16k (top
355: left), 32k (top right), 64k (bottom left) and 128k (bottom right)
356: stars. At the top of each panel the number of passed two-body relaxation times is
357: shown (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Nrel})), and crosses indicate the time of core
358: collapse and of cluster
359: dissolution.}
360: \label{fig:rmean}
361: \end{figure}
362:
363:
364: \subsection{Dynamical evolution: radial distribution}
365:
366: Fig.~\ref{fig:posi} illustrates the evolution of two selected stellar
367: populations in a cluster with initially 128k particles in a circular orbit
368: around the Galaxy at three different times. In Fig.~\ref{fig:distrr} one
369: can see the radial distribution of the two populations at the same
370: epochs. Initially, the second generation stars with low specific energy are
371: concentrated within 6~pc around the centre of the cluster while stars of
372: the first generation show a more extended distribution up to
373: 40~pc.
374:
375: Progressively the second generation stars spread out due to dynamical
376: encounters so their radial distribution extends. The middle panels in
377: Fig.~\ref{fig:posi} and \ref{fig:distrr} show that even after 5~Gyr of
378: evolution the two populations still retain different distributions. At this
379: time, which corresponds roughly to one initial relaxation time for the whole
380: cluster, the extent of the second generation stars reaches 35~pc, but
381: they are still more strongly concentrated to the central part.
382:
383: The bottom panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:posi} and \ref{fig:distrr} show that after
384: nearly 12~Gyr of evolution (slightly more than 2 initial relaxation times) the
385: two populations have similar radial distributions and can no longer be
386: distinguished on the basis of their dynamical properties.
387:
388: \subsection{Number of escaping stars}
389:
390:
391: As already stated in the introduction, two competitive processes act in
392: the clusters: the loss of stars from the outer cluster parts will first
393: reduce the number of bound first generation stars; and the dynamical spread
394: of the initially more concentrated second generation stars will stop this
395: differential loss when the two populations are dynamically mixed. We now
396: describe the operation of this interplay.
397:
398:
399: The time evolution of the half-mass radii of the two populations is
400: displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmean} for clusters with different initial
401: numbers of particles. Stars which have already been lost by the clusters
402: are not taken into account, so this radius reflects only bound
403: stars. Initially, stars of the first generation have a larger half-mass
404: radius as expected by our selection scheme (\eg{} 5 and 12~pc respectively
405: for the case with $N = 128$k stars). The fast initial increase of the
406: half-mass radius is due to the evolution of the massive stars which lose a
407: large part of their mass (Fig.~1 in \citealp{BaumgardtMakino2003}). Winds
408: from these stars are not retained so the potential well of the cluster is
409: lowered and the outer regions expand. Later the tidal forces of the host
410: galaxy remove outer stars and the half-mass radius decreases until the
411: final disruption of the cluster. The strong variation at the end of the
412: evolution is due to the small number of low-mass stars still remaining in
413: the cluster. They are also more pronounced in the smaller clusters.
414:
415: On the other hand, the second generation stars have initially a smaller
416: half-mass radius as a result of their lower specific energy. The initial
417: expansion due to the evolution of massive stars has a smaller effect on the
418: half-mass radius of the second generation stars compared to first
419: generation stars as second generation stars populate the centre and hence
420: the deeper and less perturbed parts of the potential well. Later the
421: half-mass radius increases continuously with time following the spread of
422: the radial distribution as the cluster tries to achieve energy
423: equipartition. After some time the two radii are similar and the further
424: evolution of the two populations is identical.
425:
426:
427: Fig.~\ref{fig:rmean} also shows the number of passed two-body relaxation times,
428: $N_\text{rel}$, defined as:
429: \begin{equation}
430: \label{eq:Nrel}
431: N_\text{rel}(t) = \int_0^t\frac{d\tilde t}{t_\text{rh}(\tilde t\,)},
432: \end{equation}
433: where $t_\text{rh}(\tilde t)$ is the current relaxation time given by
434: Eq.~(\ref{eq:trel}) and $\tilde t$ is the integration variable. The
435: relaxation time, $t_\text{rh}$, decreases with time as both $r_\text{hm}$
436: and N decrease (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:trel})). For each cluster we also
437: indicate the time at which core-collapse occurs and the time at which
438: dissolution of the cluster happens (\ie{} when 95\% of the initial mass has
439: been lost by the cluster) as computed by \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003}. These
440: two times are labelled by ``cc'' and ``dis'', respectively. Cluster
441: homogenisation needs around 2 relaxation times nearly independently of the
442: initial number of stars. However there is still a weak dependence with the
443: initial number of stars since the effect of mass loss does not scale with N
444: in the same way as the relaxation time \citep{Baumgardt2001}. Other radial
445: properties, like the mean radius and the radial distribution of stars, are
446: also similar in both populations when $N_\text{rel} \gtrsim 2$. Since
447: GCs are several relaxation times old, they have lost all
448: information on their initial radial distribution. The case of $\omega$~Cen,
449: which is dynamically younger, will be discussed in \S~3.4
450:
451:
452: \begin{figure}
453: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig4}
454: \caption{Evolution with time of the ratio of first generation (dashed
455: lines) and second generation (solid lines) low-mass stars to their
456: initial content for the models with 8k (top left), 32k (top right), 64k
457: (bottom left) and 128k particles (bottom right). At the top of each
458: panel the number of passed two-body relaxation times is shown
459: (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Nrel})), and crosses indicate the time of core collapse and of
460: cluster dissolution.}
461: \label{fig:mloss}
462: \end{figure}
463:
464: \begin{figure}
465: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig5}
466: \caption{Number ratio between the second (with low initial specific
467: energy) and first (with high initial specific energy) population of
468: low-mass stars in a cluster as a function of time for the same
469: models as in Fig.~\ref{fig:mloss}. At the top of each panel the
470: number of passed two-body relaxation times is shown (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Nrel})),
471: and crosses indicate the time of core collapse and of
472: cluster dissolution.}
473: \label{fig:mratio}
474: \end{figure}
475:
476: As previously seen, the effect of the external potential of the Galaxy on
477: the cluster is to strip away stars with high specific
478: energy. Fig.~\ref{fig:mloss} shows the evolution of the fraction of stars
479: in each population that still remains in the cluster as a function of time
480: for different initial numbers of stars. Initially, only stars of the first
481: generation populate the outer part of the cluster owing to their high
482: specific energy. Therefore only first generation stars are lost in the
483: beginning. This lasts until the second generation stars migrate into the
484: outer part of the cluster. Depending on the cluster mass, it takes between
485: 1 to 4~Gyr to start a loss of second generation stars. This timescale
486: scales roughly with the relaxation time (see also \S~3.3 for more details).
487: Indeed, as shown before, more massive clusters have a more extended initial
488: radial distribution so the migration of the second generation stars lasts
489: longer. Besides, these clusters also have a deeper potential well and the
490: erosion by the tidal forces of the Galaxy is reduced.
491:
492: Due to the time-delay to lose second generation stars, their remaining
493: fraction in the cluster is always higher than that of the first
494: generation stars except during the final stage of cluster dissolution.
495: Fig.~\ref{fig:mratio} quantifies this point by showing the time evolution
496: of the number ratio of second to first generation stars. As a direct
497: consequence of our selection procedure, the initial ratio is about 0.1; and
498: it then increases gradually with time. It tends to stay nearly constant as
499: soon as the two distributions are similar. Finally, at the time of cluster
500: dissolution, large variations occur due to the low number of low-mass stars
501: present in the cluster.
502:
503:
504: Over the cluster history, the fraction of second generation stars relative
505: to first generation ones increases by a factor of 2.5. Therefore, when the
506: two populations have the same radial distribution, these stars represent
507: 25\% of the low-mass stars present in the clusters. Presently, observed
508: ratios have been derived only spectroscopically for NGC~2808 (70\%) and
509: NGC~6752 (85\%), since a large number of stars needs to be analysed. Thus,
510: the internal dynamical evolution and the dissolution due to the tidal
511: forces of the host Galaxy are not efficient enough to produce the high
512: observed value. An additional mechanism is thus needed to expel the first
513: generation stars more effectively.
514:
515: \subsection{Influence of the Initial number ratio}
516:
517: \begin{figure}[t]
518: \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{fig6}
519: \caption{Increase of the ratio of second to first generation stars as a
520: function of time for different numbers of initially selected stars
521: for the model with $N = 128$k stars. 1, 5, 10, 25\% refers to
522: fraction of the cluster mass populated with second generation stars.}
523: \label{fig:varinit}
524: \end{figure}
525:
526: The next point we want to investigate is how our results depend on the
527: number of stars selected to be first or second generation
528: stars. Fig.~\ref{fig:varinit} addresses this issue: for the computation
529: with initially 128k stars, we select different number of second-generation
530: stars which represent 1, 5, 10, and 25\% of the initial mass of the cluster
531: and follow how the ratio of second to first generation of stars evolves
532: with time. For the 5\% case, we retrieve our previous results: the ratio
533: increases by a factor of 2.5 and then flattens until cluster
534: dissolution. The more numerous the second generation stars are, the
535: stronger the increase is. In the case of 25\% of stars selected, the ratio
536: increases by a factor of 5. This trend can be understood as a result of the
537: selection process which selects mainly those stars which remain bound to
538: the cluster until the end. However this case can only be achieved if the
539: IMF slope for the massive stars is around 1.7 (when Salpeter value is
540: 2.35).
541:
542: For a standard IMF we expect only a limited number of low-mass stars to be
543: second generation stars. Thus the models above with a low fraction of
544: second generation stars are more realistic to what
545: happens in real GCs and all of them predict only a modest
546: increase of the fraction of the second generation stars.
547:
548: \subsection{Angular-momentum-selected sub-populations}
549:
550: \begin{figure}[ht]
551: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig7}
552: \caption{Ratio of stars with negative
553: to positive orbital angular momentum in the cluster as a function of
554: time. At
555: the bottom, the currently passed relaxation time is shown
556: (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Nrel})), and crosses indicate the time of core collapse and of
557: cluster dissolution.}
558: \label{fig:Lzpop}
559: \end{figure}
560:
561: \begin{figure}[ht]
562: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig8}
563: \caption{Fraction of stars which have kept their initial orbital
564: angular momentum for negative (top) and positive (bottom) cases as a
565: function of time. At
566: the bottom, the currently passed relaxation time is shown
567: (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Nrel})), and crosses indicate the time of core collapse and of
568: cluster dissolution.}
569: \label{fig:Lzpopin}
570: \end{figure}
571:
572: In the previous sections we have only considered the case of two
573: populations which initially differ by their spatial distribution as we
574: expect such differences if a second generation of stars are born from the
575: ejecta of massive stars. In this context, the GC $\omega$~Cen
576: is an exceptional case as it not only shows variations in light elements
577: but also a wide spread in metallicity from $\text{[Fe/H]} = -2$ to $-0.5$
578: \citep{NorrisDaCosta1995}. Additionally, a close inspection of the
579: color-magnitude diagram of $\omega$~Cen shows that several populations
580: exist at all the evolutionary stages, from the RGB
581: \citep{LeeJoo1999,PancinoFerraro2000,SollimaFerraro2005a} to the sub-giant
582: \citep{FerraroSollima2004,SollimaPancino2005b,VillanovaPiotto2007} branches
583: and main sequences \citep{BedinPiotto2004,PiottoVillanova2005}.
584: Interestingly, \citet{NorrisFreeman1996} found the more metal-rich stars to
585: be more spatially concentrated. Evidence for significant differences in the
586: kinematics and the spatial distribution between the metal-rich and other
587: stars have been collected \citep{NorrisFreeman1997,Jurcsik1998}. However
588: these findings have been challenged by \citet{PancinoGalfo2007} on the
589: basis of an analysis of a larger sample.
590:
591: Therefore in this section we want to determine if the time needed for a
592: cluster to lose its initial kinematic properties is the same as for the
593: initial radial distribution. In particular we want to test how quickly the
594: kinematic differences are erased since differences are observed in
595: $\omega$~Cen whereas other GCs do not show such strong
596: observational evidences. To assert this timescale for achieving kinematic
597: homogenisation, we setup the initial conditions for the analysis in another
598: way: we divide the low-mass stars according to their angular momentum about
599: the cluster centre along the z-axis (the cluster orbital motion occurs in
600: the x-y plane with positive angular momentum).
601:
602:
603: First, Fig.~\ref{fig:Lzpop} shows the evolution of the number ratio
604: between stars having negative and positive orbital angular
605: momentum. Initially half of the low-mass stars populate the groups with
606: prograde ($L_z > 0$) and retrograde ($L_z < 0$) motion. A rapid drop of the
607: ratio of the number of stars with retrograde motion (from 1 to 0.95) occurs
608: due to the preferential loss of stars with negative $L_z$ during the
609: evolution of the massive stars, followed by a very slow decline during the
610: cluster evolution. At the time of core collapse, this ratio is around 0.9.
611: This fast initial change can be explained by the mass-loss of massive stars
612: which lowers the potential well of the cluster leading to the expulsion of
613: the stars in the outer parts as we have seen before. This ejection is more
614: pronounced for the stars with retrograde motion ($L_z < 0$) relative to the
615: cluster orbit than those with prograde motion ($L_z > 0$). This finding
616: seems to contradict previous works which found that retrograde orbits are
617: more stable than prograde ones if the cluster is on a prograde orbit in a
618: steady external potential \citep[see e.g.][]{FukushigeHeggie2000}. The
619: difference can be explained by the different coordinate systems used in
620: these studies: \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} applied an accelerated and
621: non-rotating coordinate system (the Galaxy rotates about the cluster) while
622: an accelerated and rotating one is used by the computations of \citet[in
623: the cluster centric frame the Galaxy is fixed; the cluster-centric frame is
624: therefore non-inertial]{FukushigeHeggie2000}. Retrograde orbits in a
625: rotating frame \citep{FukushigeHeggie2000} are found to be the stable ones,
626: and a few of them shift to prograde orbits if we consider them in a
627: non-rotating frame. This effect leads to the inversion of the dominant
628: population and explains the discrepancy of \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} with
629: the older study. We conclude that stars on retrograde orbits with respect
630: to their cluster centre are preferably lost from the cluster, where
631: prograde orbits are in the same sense as the cluster orbit about the
632: Galaxy. So an initially non-rotating cluster begins to rotate in a prograde
633: manner after the massive stars have evolved. But the effect remains small
634: (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Lzpop}). Similar results have been obtained by
635: \citet{YimLee2002} who state that clusters with no initial rotation can
636: gain a slight positive angular momentum (\ie{} that the cluster rotates
637: in the same direction that the orbital motion.).
638:
639: To measure the time needed to lose the initial angular momentum
640: distribution, we need to look more carefully at each population, as due to
641: stellar encounters stars can change their orbital parameters and hence
642: invert their orbital angular momentum. Initially only two populations
643: exist: stars with $L_z(t=0)<0$ and $L_z(t=0)\ge0$. As time proceeds,
644: stellar interactions induce changes to the orbits of stars and some stars
645: show an inversion in $L_z$. Hence the cluster splits into four populations
646: depending on their initial and current angular momentum.
647: Fig.~\ref{fig:Lzpopin} shows the evolution of the fraction of stars which
648: have kept their initial orbital angular momentum for the population of
649: stars with negative and positive $L_z$. Here homogenisation will be
650: obtained when 50\% of the stars have inverted their orbital angular
651: momentum. Fig.~\ref{fig:Lzpopin} displays the fraction of stars keeping
652: their initial AM sign rapidly decreases to 70-80\%, thus 20 to 30\%
653: of stars suffer such an inversion during the early radial expansion
654: following the evolution of the massive stars. Then the inversion rate
655: decreases slowly and homogenisation fully occurs after around 2-3
656: relaxation times. Thus the loss of information about orbital angular
657: momentum follows the same timescale as the radial distribution.
658:
659: Therefore if there is any dynamical (radial or kinematic) property which
660: differs initially between different cluster sub-populations, most clusters
661: would have erased them during their evolution as they are several
662: relaxation times old. $\omega$~Cen has the longest relaxation time which
663: spans a range from several $10^9$~yr at the centre to $10^{10}$~yr at the
664: half-mass radius \citep{vandeVenvandenBosch2006}. Thus it has evolved only
665: for about one relaxation time and we should indeed see differences, at
666: least at a low level, if the cluster was born with dynamically distinct
667: populations. Thus if the results of \citet{PancinoGalfo2007} are confirmed
668: we would have to conclude that the different populations observed in the
669: CMD were born with the same radial and kinematic properties.
670:
671: \subsection{Timescale for early processes}
672:
673: \begin{figure}
674: \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{fig9}
675: \caption{(Top) Time needed for 1\% of the first generation (crosses) and
676: second generation (full squares) of low-mass stars to be lost by the
677: cluster as a function of the initial mass of the cluster. (Bottom)
678: Ratio of these timescales to the initial relaxation time.}
679: \label{fig:time}
680: \end{figure}
681:
682:
683: Fig.~\ref{fig:time} gives the timescales for a cluster to lose 1\% of both
684: generations of low-mass stars as a function of the mass of the
685: cluster. This time corresponds to the end of the initial plateau seen in
686: Fig.~\ref{fig:mloss} for the second generation. Since
687: \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} computed several N-body models with 8k and 16k
688: stars, we have included all the data points.
689:
690: In these models, the first generation stars are the first to be noticeably
691: lost after around 100~Myr and this is nearly independent of the cluster
692: mass. On the other hand, the time until 1\% of the second generation
693: evaporates increases with the cluster mass because these stars have to
694: travel to a larger radius before being lost. For the heaviest clusters this
695: happens only after 4~Gyr (this time scales as 0.7--0.8 times the relaxation
696: time, see bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:time}). It should be noted that the
697: lightest clusters show a strong statistical effect due to the small number
698: of second generation stars initially present. As heavier clusters show an
699: almost identical time relative to their relaxation timescale, we can quite
700: confidently extrapolate our results to more massive clusters.
701:
702: As already explained, we need to find an additional mechanism which would
703: more vigorously eject first generation stars and at the same time keep the
704: second generation stars. Several processes can play this role. First, disk
705: or bulge shocking has been argued to heat up the outer part of the cluster
706: when it passes through the Galactic plane. This effect increases the loss
707: of stars. As the timescale between two passages in the Galactic plane is
708: around $10^8$~yr and the appearance of second generation stars in the outer
709: regions needs a few $10^9$~yr, a high number of shocks affecting nearly
710: exclusively the first generation should have happened. Such process can
711: also lead to the destruction of many GCs over the Galactic history
712: \citep{ShinKim2008}. However old GCs formed about 12~Gyr ago whereas the
713: Galactic disc formed continuously from 10~Gyr ago to the present. As we
714: need an efficient physical mechanism which can act at the early time of GC
715: evolution, disc shocking can be discarded to remove preferentially first
716: generation stars.
717:
718:
719: Initial gas expulsion by massive stars
720: operates early in the cluster history (a Myr after cluster formation
721: or earlier, \citealp{BaumgardtKroupa2008}). As the residual gas still
722: present after star formation is removed, the potential well of the
723: cluster can be strongly reduced and the outer parts of the cluster can
724: become unbound. This process has already been used successfully by
725: \citet{MarksKroupa2008} to explain the challenging correlation between the
726: central concentration and the mass function of GCs as found
727: by \citet{DeMarchiParesce2007}.
728:
729: Gas expulsion is expected to proceed on a short timescale similar to the
730: evolution-timescale of massive stars, and will take place well before any
731: changes due to the internal dynamics or the tidal interaction with the host
732: Galaxy, the two processes investigated in this paper. However the results
733: presented in the previous sections only apply for the limiting hypothetical
734: case of a 100\% star formation efficiency.
735:
736: Gas expulsion can occur at two different times: the intra-cluster gas can
737: be washed out by the ionising radiation of OB stars, or later by the energy
738: released by supernovae explosions. As these massive stars are also expected
739: to eject the slowly escaping matter from which the second generation stars
740: form, we have two different chronologies to form a cluster with two
741: chemically distinct populations of low-mass stars depending on the
742: efficiency of the UV radiation to eject the intra-cluster gas. Indeed, in
743: the first case the slow winds of massive stars will accumulate in the
744: cluster centre where no pristine matter will be left while some dilution is
745: expected to occur if the ionising radiation is inefficient to expel the gas
746: from the cluster. This latter case would occur in clusters at the
747: high-mass scale \citep{BaumgardtKroupa2008}. In both cases the second
748: generation stars have to be formed before the supernovae explode.
749:
750: However the anticorrelation observed between Li and Na
751: \citep{PasquiniBonifacio2005} can help us to discriminate between these two
752: possibilities. Indeed some Li is present in stars with abundance anomalies
753: and this has to come from the intra-cluster gas itself as noted above.
754: Therefore gas expulsion in GC that have abundance anomalies is more likely
755: to be due to the supernovae than the UV radiation of massive stars. Such
756: models have been studied by \citet{Goodwin1997}. It should also be noted
757: that the slow winds of massive stars will be released at the same time as
758: the ionising flux from O stars, so that it would be difficult to expel the
759: intra-cluster gas while leaving their slow winds untouched. We have thus
760: found a physical reason as to why typically more-massive GCs show more
761: pronounced abundance anomalies \citep[see Fig.~12 in ][]{Carretta2006} as
762: these clusters are more able to keep their residual gas until removal
763: though supernovae (see Fig.~3 in \citealp{BaumgardtKroupa2008}).
764:
765: \section{Conclusions}
766:
767: We have analysed the dynamical models of \citet{BaumgardtMakino2003} by
768: selecting two stellar populations according to their specific energies with
769: the aim to explain the high number of stars harbouring abundance anomalies
770: in GCs. The basic idea that we followed is that stars with
771: abundance anomalies stem from a second generation which formed centrally
772: concentrated out of the slow winds of rapidly rotating O stars. We find the
773: following results:
774: \begin{itemize}
775: \item Stars with low specific energy are initially concentrated toward the
776: cluster centre and progressively diffuse into the outer parts of the
777: cluster as a result of the system attempting to evolve to energy
778: equipartition. About two relaxation times are needed to achieve a
779: complete homogenisation between the two populations corresponding to
780: several Gyr of evolution.
781: \item At early times, stars with high specific energy are
782: preferentially lost from the cluster due to the tidal forces of the
783: host galaxy. Second generation stars are only lost after several Gyr when
784: they have diffused into the outer cluster parts.
785: \item Any radial or dynamical differences between different
786: stellar populations would be erased over the dynamical history of old
787: GCs. Even with strongly different radial distributions, as
788: we assumed in this paper, GCs would today present
789: homogeneous distributions. This finding could be in sharp contrast with
790: other explanations for the chemical enrichment of GCs. A
791: scenario which relies on the encounters between red giant stars and main
792: sequence ones \citep{SudaTsujimoto2007,YamadaOkazaki2008} should produce
793: more second generation stars in the cluster centre due to the high
794: central density. Unfortunately, we presently do not know the true radial
795: distribution of stars with abundance anomalies in GCs.
796: \item The typical timescale for a cluster to lose information of its
797: initial conditions on the angular momentum of stars is similar to the
798: time needed for radial homogenisation. Thus all initial radial and
799: kinematic properties of GCs are lost after about two
800: relaxation times.
801: \item The number ratio between the second and first stellar generation
802: increases by a factor 2.5 during the cluster evolution (see also the results of \citealp{DErcoleVesperini2008}). The resulting
803: ratio at old age would be too low to explain the ratio of anomalous to
804: standard stars observed in GCs if we assume a standard IMF
805: for the first generation stars.
806: \item The observed ratio would be achieved if the IMF of the first
807: generation were top-heavy. This however would raise the problem of cluster
808: survival \citep{BekkiNorris2006}.
809: \item To reproduce the observed ratio for an invariant IMF, a more powerful
810: mass-loss mechanism is needed. Residual gas expulsion due to stellar
811: feedback from OB stars is the prime physical candidate occurring on a
812: short enough timescale and mainly removing the outer part of the cluster
813: \citep{MarksKroupa2008}. Further investigations in this direction will be
814: addressed in a forthcoming paper.
815:
816: \end{itemize}
817:
818: \begin{acknowledgements}
819: We thank an anonymous referee for comments that
820: have improved this paper. T. D. acknowledges financial support from
821: swiss FNS.
822: \end{acknowledgements}
823:
824: \bibliographystyle{aa}
825: \bibliography{BibADS}
826:
827: \end{document}
828: