Paper detail

Asteroseismology of old open clusters with Kepler: direct estimate of the integrated RGB mass loss in NGC6791 and NGC6819

Mass loss of red giant branch (RGB) stars is still poorly determined, despite its crucial role in the chemical enrichment of galaxies. Thanks to the recent detection of solar-like oscillations in G-K giants in open clusters with Kepler, we can now directly determine stellar masses for a statistically significant sample of stars in the old open clusters NGC6791 and NGC6819. The aim of this work is to constrain the integrated RGB mass loss by comparing the average mass of stars in the red clump (RC) with that of stars in the low-luminosity portion of the RGB (i.e. stars with L <~ L(RC)). Stellar masses were determined by combining the available seismic parameters numax and Dnu with additional photometric constraints and with independent distance estimates. We measured the masses of 40 stars on the RGB and 19 in the RC of the old metal-rich cluster NGC6791. We find that the difference between the average mass of RGB and RC stars is small, but significant (Delta M=0.09 +- 0.03 (random) +- 0.04 (systematic) Msun). Interestingly, such a small DeltaM does not support scenarios of an extreme mass loss for this metal-rich cluster. If we describe the mass-loss rate with Reimers' prescription, a first comparison with isochrones suggests that the observed DeltaM is compatible with a mass-loss efficiency parameter in the range 0.1 <~ eta <~ 0.3. Less stringent constraints on the RGB mass-loss rate are set by the analysis of the ~ 2 Gyr-old NGC6819, largely due to the lower mass loss expected for this cluster, and to the lack of an independent and accurate distance determination. In the near future, additional constraints from frequencies of individual pulsation modes and spectroscopic effective temperatures, will allow further stringent tests of the Dnu and numax scaling relations, which provide a novel, and potentially very accurate, means of determining stellar radii and masses.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access24 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.

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.