Paper detail

$^7$Be abundance in nova V5668 Sgr doesn't contradict theory

Resonance lines of $^7$Be are detected currently in five novae. Available abundances for this isotope estimated from equivalent widths of $^7$Be\,II and Ca\,II lines are significantly higher compared to predictions of models for the thermonuclear flash. In attempt to pinpoint the reason for this disparity we explore the possibility for the higher $^7$Be yield via computing kinetics of the thermonuclear burning in the framework of two-zone model and find that even for a favorable choice of parameters $^7$Be mass fraction does not exceed $3\cdot10^{-5}$. This is consistent with known theoretical results and leaves the disparity between the theory and observations unresoved. We find that the contradiction is caused by the assumption that the ionization fraction of Be\,II/Be is equal to that of Ca\,II/Ca, which has been adopted formerly in order to estimate the $^7$Be abundance. In the case of nova V5668 Sgr the ionization fraction of Be\,II/Be turns out to be at least by a factor of $\sim 10$ higher compared to Ca\,II/Ca due to the difference of ionization potentials. Our new estimate of the $^7$Be mass fraction for nova V5668 Sgr does not contradict the theory. The calculated flux of 478 keV gamma-quanta from the $^7$Be decay is consistent with the upper limit according to {\em INTEGRAL} observations.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.