Paper detail

Adiabatic mass loss in binary stars. III. From the base of the red giant branch to the tip of asymptotic giant branch

The distinguishing feature of the evolution of close binary stars is the role played by the mass exchange between the component stars. Whether the mass transfer is dynamically stable is one of the essential questions in binary evolution. In the limit of extremely rapid mass transfer, the response of a donor star in an interacting binary becomes asymptotically one of adiabatic expansion. We use the adiabatic mass loss model to systematically survey the thresholds for dynamical timescale mass transfer over the entire span of possible donor star evolutionary states. We also simulate mass loss process with isentropic envelopes, the specific entropy of which is fixed to be that at the base of the convective envelope, to artificially mimic the effect of such mass loss in superadiabatic surface convection regions, where the adiabatic approximation fails. We illustrate the general adiabatic response of 3.2 Msun donor stars at different evolutionary stages. We extend our study to a grid of donor stars with different masses (from 0.1 to 100 Msun with Z = 0.02) and at different evolutionary stages. We proceed to present our criteria for dynamically unstable mass transfer in both tabular and graphical forms. For red giant branch and asymptotic giant branch donors in systems with such mass ratios, they may have convective envelopes deep enough to evolve into common envelopes on a thermal timescale, if the donor star overfills its outer Lagrangian radius. Our results show that the red giant branch and asymptotic giant branch stars tend to be more stable than previously believed, and this may be helpful to explain the abundance of observed post-AGB binary stars with an orbital period of around 1000 days.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.