Paper detail

Post-common-envelope binaries from SDSS. IX: Constraining the common-envelope efficiency

Reconstructing the evolution of post-common-envelope binaries (PCEBs) can constrain current prescriptions of common-envelope (CE) evolution. Analyzing a new sample of PCEBs we derive constraints on one of the most important parameters in the field of close compact binary formation, i.e. the CE efficiency alpha. After reconstructing the post-CE evolution and based on fits to stellar evolution calculations as well as a parametrized energy equation for CE evolution that incorporates realistic approximations of the binding energy parameter lambda, we determine the possible evolutionary histories of the observed PCEBs. We also reconstruct CE evolution replacing the classical energy equation with a scaled angular momentum equation and compare the results obtained with both algorithms. We find that all PCEBs in our sample can be reconstructed with the energy equation if the internal energy of the envelope is included. Although most individual systems have solutions for a broad range of values for alpha, only for alpha=0.2-0.3 do we find simultaneous solutions for all PCEBs in our sample. If we adjust alpha to this range of values, the values of the angular momentum parameter gamma cluster in a small range of values. In contrast if we fix gamma to a small range of values that allows us to reconstruct all our systems, the possible ranges of values for alpha remains broad for individual systems. The classical parametrized energy equation seems to be an appropriate prescription of CE evolution and turns out to constrain the outcome of the CE evolution much more than the alternative angular momentum equation. If there is a universal value of the CE efficiency, it should be in the range of alpha=0.2-0.3. We do not find any indications for a dependence of alpha on the mass of the secondary star or the final orbital period.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.