Paper detail

Revisiting the fundamental properties of Cepheid Polaris using detailed stellar evolution models

Polaris the Cepheid has been observed for centuries, presenting surprises and changing our view of Cepheids and stellar astrophysics, in general. Specifically, understanding Polaris helps anchor the Cepheid Leavitt law, but the distance must be measured precisely. The recent debate regarding the distance to Polaris has raised questions about its role in calibrating the Leavitt law and even its evolutionary status. In this work, I present new stellar evolution models of Cepheids to compare with previously measured CNO abundances, period change and angular diameter. Based on the comparison, I show that Polaris cannot be evolving along the first crossing of the Cepheid instability strip and cannot have evolved from a rapidly-rotating main sequence star. As such, Polaris must also be at least 118 pc away and pulsates in the first overtone, disagreeing with the recent results of Turner et al. (2013).

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.