Paper detail

Binarity and the abundance discrepancy problem in planetary nebulae

The discrepancy between abundances computed using optical recombination lines (ORLs) and collisionally excited lines (CELs) is a major unresolved problem in nebular astrophysics. We show here that the largest abundance discrepancies are reached in planetary nebulae with close binary central stars. This is illustrated by deep spectroscopy of three nebulae with a post common-envelope (CE) binary star. Abell 46 and Ou5 have O++/H+ abundance discrepancy factors larger than 50, and as high as 300 in the inner regions of Abell 46. Abell 63 has a smaller discrepancy factor around 10, but still above the typical values in ionized nebulae. Our spectroscopic analysis supports previous conclusions that, in addition to "standard" hot (Te~10000 K) gas, a colder (Te~1000 K) ionized component that is highly enriched in heavy elements also exists. These nebulae have low ionized masses, between 0.001 and 0.1 solar masses depending on the adopted electron densities and temperatures. Since the much more massive red-giant envelope is expected to be entirely ejected in the CE phase, the currently observed nebulae would be produced much later, in post-CE mass loss episodes when the envelope has already dispersed. These observations add constraints to the abundance discrepancy problem. Possible explanations are revised. Some are naturally linked to binarity, such as for instance high-metallicity nova ejecta, but it is difficult at this stage to depict an evolutionary scenario consistent with all the observed properties. The hypothesis that these nebulae are the result of tidal destruction, accretion and ejection of Jupiter-like planets is also introduced.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.