Paper detail

Exploring mass loss, low-Z accretion, and convective overshoot in solar models to mitigate the solar abundance problem

Solar models using the new lower abundances of Asplund et al. (2005, 2009) or Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) do not agree as well with helioseismic inferences as models that use the higher Grevesse & Noels (1993) or Grevesse & Sauval (1998) abundances. Adopting the new abundances leads to models with sound speed discrepancies of up to 1.4$%$ below the base of the convection zone (compared to discrepancies of less than 0.4$%$ with the old abundances), a convection zone that is too shallow, and a convection zone helium abundance that is too low. Here we review briefly recent attempts to restore agreement, and we evaluate three changes to the models: early mass loss, accretion of low-Z material, and convective overshoot. One goal of these attempts is to explore models that could preserve the structure in the interior obtained with the old abundances while accommodating the new abundances at the surface. Although the mass-losing and accretion models show some improvement in agreement with seismic constraints, a satisfactory resolution to the solar abundance problem remains to be found. In addition, we perform a preliminary analysis of models with the Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) abundances that shows that the sound speed discrepancy is reduced to only about 0.6$%$ at the convection zone base, compared to 1.4$%$ for the Asplund et al. (2005) abundances and 0.4$%$ for the Grevesse & Noels (1993) abundances. Furthermore, including mass loss in models with the Caffau et al. (2008, 2009) abundances may improve sound speed agreement and help resolve the solar lithium problem.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.