Paper detail

Age and mass of solar twins constrained by lithium abundance

We analyze the non-standard mixing history of the solar twins HIP 55459, HIP 79672, HIP 56948, HIP 73815, and HIP 100963, to determine as precisely as possible their mass and age. We computed a grid of evolutionary models with non-standard mixing at several metallicities with the Toulouse-Geneva code for a range of stellar masses assuming an error bar of +-50K in Teff. We choose the evolutionary model that reproduces accurately the observed low lithium abundances observed in the solar twins. Our best-fit model for each solar twin provides a mass and age solution constrained by their Li content and Teff determination. HIP 56948 is the most likely solar-twin candidate at the present time and our analysis infers a mass of 0.994 +- 0.004 Msun and an age of 4.71 +-1.39 Gyr. Non-standard mixing is required to explain the low Li abundances observed in solar twins. Li depletion due to additional mixing in solar twins is strongly mass dependent. An accurate lithium abundance measurement and non-standard models provide more precise information about the age and mass more robustly than determined by classical methods alone.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors2 topics

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.