Paper detail

On the missing second generation AGB stars in NGC6752

[Abridged] In recent years the view of Galactic globular clusters as simple stellar populations has changed dramatically, as it is now thought that basically all GCs host multiple stellar populations, each with its own chemical abundance pattern and colour-magnitude diagram sequence. Recent spectroscopic observations of asymptotic giant branch stars in the GC NGC6752 have disclosed a low [Na/Fe] abundance for the whole sample, suggesting that they are all first-generation stars, and that all second-generation stars fail to reach the AGB in this cluster. A scenario proposed to explain these observations invokes strong mass loss in second-generation horizontal branch stars possibly induced by the metal enhancement associated to radiative levitation. This enhanced mass loss would prevent second generation stars from reaching the AGB phase, thus explaining at the same time the low value of the ratio between HB and AGB stars (the R_2 parameter) observed in NGC6752. We have critically discussed this scenario, finding that the required mass-loss rates are of the order of 10^{-9} Mo/yr, significantly higher than current theoretical and empirical constraints. By making use of synthetic HB simulations, we demonstrate that our modelling predicts correctly the R_2 parameter for NGC6752, without the need to invoke very efficient mass loss during the core He-burning stage. Our simulations for NGC6752 HB predict however the presence of a significant fraction - at the level of about 50% - second generation stars along the cluster AGB. We conclude that there is no simple explanation for the lack of second generation stars in the spectroscopically surveyed sample, although the interplay between mass loss (with low rates) and radiative levitation may play a role in explaining this puzzle.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.