Paper detail

Accretion from debris disks onto white dwarfs : Fingering (thermohaline) instability and derived accretion rates

Recent observations of a large number of DA and DB white dwarfs show evidence of debris disks, which are the remnants of old planetary systems. The infrared excess detected with \emph{Spitzer} and the lines of heavy elements observed in their atmospheres with high-resolution spectroscopy converge on the idea that planetary material accretes onto these stars. Accretion rates have been derived by several authors with the assumption of a steady state between accretion and gravitational settling. The results are unrealistically different for DA and DB white dwarfs. When heavy matter is accreted onto stars, it induces an inverse $μ$-gradient that leads to fingering (thermohaline) convection. The aim of this letter is to study the impact of this specific process on the derived accretion rates in white dwarfs and on the difference between DA and DB. We solve the diffusion equation for the accreted heavy elements with a time-dependent method. The models we use have been obtained both with the IRAP code, which computes static models, and the La Plata code, which computes evolutionary sequences. Computations with pure gravitational settling are compared with computations that include fingering convection. The most important result is that fingering convection has very important effects on DAs but is inefficient in DBs. When only gravitational settling is taken into account, the time-dependent computations lead to a steady state, as postulated by previous authors. When fingering convection is added, this steady state occurs much later. The surprising difference found in the past for the accretion rates derived for DA and DB white dwarfs disappears. The derived accretion rates for DAs are increased when fingering convection is taken into account, whereas those for DBs are not modified. More precise and developed results will be given in a forthcoming paper.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.