Paper detail

Comparison of theoretical white dwarf cooling timescales

An accurate assessment of white dwarf cooling times is paramount to place white dwarf cosmochronology of Galactic populations on more solid grounds. This issue is particularly relevant in view of the enhanced observational capabilities provided by the next generation of Extremely Large Telescopes, that will offer more avenues to employ white dwarfs as probes of Galactic evolution and test-beds of fundamental physics. We estimate for the first time the consistency of results obtained from two independent and widely used evolutionary codes (BaSTI and LPCODE) for white dwarf models with fixed mass and chemical stratification, when the same input physics is employed in both codes. We considered 0.55Msun white dwarf models with both pure carbon and uniform carbon-oxygen (50/50 mass fractions) core. We have assessed for the first time the maximum possible accuracy in the current estimates of white dwarf cooling times, resulting only from the different implementations of the stellar evolution equations and homogeneous input physics in two independent stellar evolution codes. This accuracy amounts to 2% at luminosities lower than log(L/L_{\sun})= -1.5$. This agreement is true for both pure carbon and uniform carbon-oxygen stratification core models, and also when the release of latent heat and carbon-oxygen phase separation are considered. This difference is smaller than the uncertainties in cooling times due to the present uncertainties in the white dwarf chemical stratification. We have also determined quantitatively and explained the effect of varying equation of state, low-temperature radiative opacities and electron conduction opacities in our calculation. Finally, we extend the scope of our work by providing tabulations of our cooling sequences and the required input physics, that can be used as a comparison test of cooling times obtained from other white dwarf evolutionary codes.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.