Paper detail

Measuring the stellar wind parameters in IGR J17544-2619 and Vela X-1 constrains the accretion physics in Supergiant Fast X-ray Transient and classical Supergiant X-ray Binaries

Classical Supergiant X-ray Binaries (SGXBs) and Supergiant Fast X-ray Transients (SFXTs) are two types of High-mass X-ray Binaries (HMXBs) that present similar donors but, at the same time, show very different behavior in the X-rays. The reason for this dichotomy of wind-fed HMXBs is still a matter of debate. Among the several explanations that have been proposed, some of them invoke specific stellar wind properties of the donor stars. Only dedicated empiric analysis of the donors' stellar wind can provide the required information to accomplish an adequate test of these theories. However, such analyses are scarce. To close this gap, we perform a comparative analysis of the optical companion in two important systems: IGR J17544-2619 (SFXT) and Vela X-1 (SGXB). We analyse the spectra of each star in detail and derive their stellar and wind properties. We compare the wind parameters, giving us an excellent chance of recognizing key differences between donor winds in SFXTs and SGXBs. We find that the stellar parameters derived from the analysis generally agree well with the spectral types of the two donors: O9I (IGR J17544-2619) and B0.5Iae (Vela X-1). An important difference between the stellar winds of the two stars is their terminal velocities v_inf=1500km/s in IGR J17544-2619 and v_inf=700km/s in Vela~X-1, which has important consequences on the X-ray luminosity of these sources. Their specific combination of wind speed and pulsar spin favours an accretion regime with a persistently high luminosity in Vela X-1, while it favours an inhibiting accretion mechanism in IGR~J17544-2619. Our study demonstrates that the wind relative velocity is critical in the determination of the class of HMXBs hosting a supergiant donor, given that it may shift the accretion mechanism from direct accretion to propeller regimes when combined with other parameters.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 authors2 topics

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.

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.