1: \documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}
2:
3: %%% PREAMBLE MATTER
4:
5: \usepackage{asp2004}
6: \usepackage{epsf}
7: \usepackage{psfig}
8: \usepackage{epsfig}
9: \usepackage{lscape}
10:
11: \markboth{Massa}{Mister Goodstar} %%% Fill in authors' names and short running title
12:
13: \pagestyle{myheadings}
14: \setcounter{equation}{0}
15: \setcounter{figure}{0}
16: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
17: \setcounter{section}{0}
18: \setcounter{table}{0}
19:
20: %%% EDITOR DEFINED NEWCOMMANDS FOR LUNTEREN CONFERENCE
21:
22: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
23: % Units %
24: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
25:
26: \newcommand{\amu}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{m}_{\rm amu}}} % atomic mass unit
27: \newcommand{\ergs}{\ensuremath{{\rm erg\,sec^{-1}}}} % ergs
28: \newcommand{\kms}{\ensuremath{{\rm km\,sec^{-1}}}} % km/sec
29: \newcommand{\msun}{\ensuremath{\mathit{M}_{\odot}}} % solar masses: msun
30: \newcommand{\msunyr}{\ensuremath{\mathit{M}_{\odot}{\rm yr}^{-1}}} % msun/yr
31: \newcommand{\lsun}{\ensuremath{\mathit{L}_{\odot}}} % solar luminosity
32: \newcommand{\rsun}{\ensuremath{\mathit{R}_{\odot}}} % solar radius
33: \newcommand{\zsun}{\ensuremath{\mathit{Z}_{\odot}}} % solar metal content
34:
35: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
36: % Stellar quantities %
37: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
38:
39: \newcommand{\gstar}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}_{\star}}} % surface gravity
40: \newcommand{\geff}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}_{\rm eff}}} % effective surface gravity
41: \newcommand{\logg}{\ensuremath{\log \mathrm{g}}} % log surface gravity
42: \newcommand{\lstar}{\ensuremath{\mathit{L}_{\star}}} % stellar luminosity
43: \newcommand{\mdot}{\ensuremath{\dot{M}}} % mass loss rate
44: \newcommand{\mstar}{\ensuremath{\mathit{M}_{\star}}} % stellar mass
45: \newcommand{\rstar}{\ensuremath{\mathit{R}_{\star}}} % stellar radius
46: \newcommand{\teff}{\ensuremath{\mathit{T}_{\rm eff}}} % effectieve temperatuur
47: \newcommand{\vinf}{\ensuremath{v_{\infty}}} % maximale uistroomsnelheid
48: \newcommand{\vesc}{\ensuremath{v_{\rm esc}}} % escape velocity
49: %%% ADD YOUR OWN NEWCOMMAND DEFINITIONS HERE (I.E. DO NOT MIX THEM
50: %%% WITH THE ONES ABOVE)
51:
52: %%% MAIN PART OF DOCUMENT
53:
54: \begin{document}
55: \title{Looking for Mister Goodstar (A preliminary analysis of stars with
56: S~{\sc iv}, {\sc v} and {\sc vi} wind lines)}
57: \author{D. Massa}
58: \affil{SGT, Inc., Code 665, GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771}
59:
60: \begin{abstract} %%% Abstract to run on from here.
61: The winds of stars with very specific temperatures and luminosities are
62: ideal for determining the magnitude and nature of mass loss in OB stars.
63: I identify these stars and analyze their wind lines. The results are
64: discussed within the context of recent findings which appear to indicate
65: that the mass-loss rates of OB stars may as much as an order of magnitude
66: less than commonly accepted values.
67: \end{abstract}
68:
69: %%% MAIN BODY OF TEXT GOES HERE. CONSULT "INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS USING
70: %%% LATEX2E MARKUP", SECTIONS 2.3-2.6 FOR HELP WITH EQUATIONS, FIGURES,
71: %%% AND TABLES.
72:
73: \section{Background}
74:
75: Recent measurements of O stars winds indicate that their mass loss rates,
76: $\dot{M}$, may be significantly less than previous estimates and
77: expectations (e.g., Massa et al.\ 2003, Repolust et al.\ 2004, Bouret et
78: al.\ 2005, Fullerton et al.\ 2006). The primary mass loss diagnostic used
79: in these analyses is P~{\sc v}~$\lambda \lambda 1118, 1128$. Although
80: wind models predict that the ion fraction of P$^{+4}$ should approach
81: 100\% in the winds of mid- to late O stars, this is a Na-like ion, and
82: can be quite fragile. Consequently, it is important to verify the results
83: based on P~{\sc v}.
84:
85: \section{Sulfur Ions}
86:
87: Like Phosphorus, Sulfur is a non-CNO element with a relatively low cosmic
88: abundance. Three Sulfur mass loss diagnostics are available: the
89: S~{\sc iv}~$\lambda \lambda$~1062, 1072 and S~{\sc vi}~$\lambda
90: \lambda$~933, 944 resonance doublets, and the S~{\sc v}~$\lambda$~1502
91: excited state line -- populated by the S~{\sc v}~$\lambda$~786 resonance
92: line. For wind conditions, the lower level of 1502\AA\ is populated
93: exclusively by radiative excitation. In this case, its radial optical
94: depth in the wind is (see, Lamers et al., 1987):
95: $$
96: \tau(v)_{rad}^1 = \frac{1}{4\pi m_H} \frac{\pi e^2}{mc}
97: \lambda_1 f_1 \left(r^2 v \frac{dv}{dr}\right)^{-1}
98: \frac{\omega_1}{\omega_0} \frac{\lambda_0^3}{2hc}
99: \frac{\beta(v)_c}{\beta(v)}
100: \frac{A_E}{\mu} \dot{M}q(v) F[\nu_0(1 -v/c)]_{\nu}
101: $$
102: Thus, while Sulfur provides access to three adjoining stages of ionization,
103: it introduces a model dependency through the flux term,
104: $F[\nu_0(1 -v/c)]_{\nu}$.
105:
106: \section{Results}
107:
108: S~{\sc iv}, S~{\sc v} and S~{\sc vi} occur together in luminous O4 -- O 6
109: stars with massive winds. S~{\sc v} was analyzed in both LMC and Galactic
110: stars, using the SEI code (Lamers et al., 1987) and rotationally broadened
111: TLUSTY models were used for both the UV and EUV continua. The results are
112: shown in Figure~1. The derived $\dot{M}q($S~{\sc v}) should be accurate
113: to better than $\pm 50$\%.
114:
115: \section{Conclusions}
116:
117: Preliminary Sulfur results give {\em total} sulfur mass loss rates,
118: $\dot{M}q(S^{+3})+\dot{M}q(S^{+4})+\dot{M}q(S^{+5})$, between 0.04 -- 0.18
119: times smaller than those expected from either theoretical (Vink et al.\
120: 2000) or radio or H$_\alpha$ determinations (see, Fullerton et al.\ 2006).
121: These results are similar those determined by the P~{\sc v} analyses.
122: Clumping and porosity can influence the results, and must be incorporated
123: into the analysis to determine exact factors. Nevertheless, it seems that
124: the mass loss rates of O stars will have to be revised downward by some
125: amount. We intend to extend the current analysis to a much larger sample
126: and to investigate the effects of clumping more closely.
127:
128: \begin{center}
129: \centering\epsfig{figure=fits.ps,angle=90, width=4.9in}% \linewidth}
130: \end{center}
131: \vspace{-0.2in}\noindent {\bf Figure 1:} Fits to the program stars. The
132: data are faint, solid curves, and the fits are heavy solid curves. Models
133: with $\tau_{rad}$ equal to twice and half of the best fit values are shown
134: as dashed curves. The values of $\dot{M}q(S^{+4})$ implied by the fits are
135: between 0.04 and 0.18 of the expected values.
136:
137: \begin{thebibliography}{}
138:
139: \bibitem[Bouret et al. (2005)]{code01} Bouret, J.-C., Lanz, T., \&
140: Hillier, D. J. 2005, A\&A, 438, 301
141:
142: \bibitem[Fullerton et al. (2006)]{code02} Fullerton, A.W., Massa, D., \&
143: Prinja, R.K. 2006, \apj, 637, 1025
144:
145: \bibitem[Lamers et al. (1987)]{code04} Lamers, H. J. G. L. M.,
146: Cerruti-Sola, M., \& Perinotto, M. 1987, \apj, 314, 726
147:
148: \bibitem[Massa et al. (2003)]{code03} Massa, D., Fullerton, A.W.,
149: Sonneborn, G., \& Hutchings, J. B. 2003, \apj, 586, 996
150:
151: \bibitem[Vink et al. (2000)]{code05} Vink, J. S., de Koter, A., \&
152: Lamers, H. J. G. L. M. 2000, \aa, 369, 574
153:
154: \bibitem[Repolust et al. (2004)]{code06} Repolust, T., Puls, J., Herrero,
155: A., 2004, A\&A, 415, 349
156: \end{thebibliography}
157:
158: \end{document}
159:
160: