Paper detail

The Contribution of Chemical Abundances in Nova Ejecta to the Interstellar Medium

According to the nova model from \citet{Yaron2005} and \citet{Jose1998} and using Monte Carlo simulation method, we investigate the contribution of chemical abundances in nova ejecta to the interstellar medium (ISM) of the Galaxy. We find that the ejected mass by classical novae (CNe) is about $2.7\times10^{-3}$ $ \rm M_\odot\ {\rm yr^{-1}}$. In the nova ejecta, the isotopic ratios of C, N and O, that is, $^{13}$C/$^{12}$C, $^{15}$N/$^{14}$N and $^{17}$O/$^{16}$O, are higher about one order of magnitude than those in red giants. We estimate that about 10$\%$, 5$\%$ and 20$\%$ of $^{13}$C, $^{15}$N and $^{17}$O in the ISM of the Galaxy come from nova ejecta, respectively. However, the chemical abundances of C, N and O calculated by our model can not cover all of observational values. This means that there is still a long way to go for understanding novae.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 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.