Paper detail

Initial-Final Mass Relationship for Stars of Different Metallicities

Following Paczyński & Ziólkowski (1968) and Han et al. (1994), we assume that the envelope of an asymptotic giant branch (AGB) or a first giant branch (FGB) star is lost when the binding energy of the envelope is equal to zero ($ΔW=0$) and the core mass of the AGB star or the FGB star at the point ($ΔW=0$) is taken as the final mass. Using this assumption, we calculate the IFMRs for stars of different metallicities.We find that the IFMRs depends strongly on the metallicity, i.e. $Z=0.0001, 0.0003, 0.001, 0.004, 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.04, 0.05, 0.06, 0.08$ and 0.1. From $Z=0.04$, the final mass of the stars with a given initial mass increases with increasing or decreasing metallicity. The difference of the final mass due to the metallicity may be up to 0.4 $M_{\odot}$. A linear fit of the initial-final mass relationship in NGC 2099 (M37) shows a potential evidence of the effect of metallicity on the IFMR. The IFMR for stars of $Z=0.02$ obtained in the paper matches well with those inferred observationally in the Galaxy. For $Z\geq 0.02$, helium WDs are obtained from the stars of $M_{\rm i}\leq 1.0 M_{\odot}$ and this result is upheld by the discovery of numerous low-mass WDs in NGC 6791 which is a metal-rich old open cluster. Using the IFMR for stars of $Z=0.02$ obtained in the paper, we have reproduced the mass distribution of DA WDs in Sloan DR4 except for some ultra-massive white dwarfs. The trend that the mean mass of WDs decreases with effective temperature may originate from the increase of the initial metallicities of stars. We predict that metal-rich low-mass stars may become under-massive white dwarfs.

preprint2008arXivOpen 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.