Paper detail

Different Dynamical Ages for the Two Young and Coeval LMC Star Clusters NGC 1805 and NGC 1818 Imprinted on Their Binary Populations

The two Large Magellanic Cloud star clusters NGC 1805 and NGC 1818 are approximately the same chronological age (~30 Myr), but show different radial trends in binary frequency. The F-type stars (1.3 - 2.2 MSun) in NGC 1818 have a binary frequency that decreases towards the core, while the binary frequency for stars of similar mass in NGC 1805 is flat with radius, or perhaps bimodal (with a peak in the core). We show here, through detailed N-body modeling, that both clusters could have formed with the same primordial binary frequency and with binary orbital elements and masses drawn from the same distributions (defined from observations of open clusters and the field of our Galaxy). The observed radial trends in binary frequency for both clusters are best matched with models that have initial substructure. Furthermore, both clusters may be evolving along a very similar dynamical sequence, with the key difference that NGC 1805 is dynamically older than NGC 1818. The F-type binaries in NGC 1818 still show evidence of an initial period of rapid dynamical disruptions (which occur preferentially in the core), while NGC 1805 has already begun to recover a higher core binary frequency, owing to mass segregation (which will eventually produce a distribution in binary frequency that rises only towards the core, as is observed in old Milky Way star clusters). This recovery rate increases for higher-mass binaries, and therefore even at one age in one cluster, we predict a similar dynamical sequence in the radial distribution of the binary frequency as a function of binary primary mass.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.