Paper detail

The Evolution of Primordial Binary Open Star Clusters: Mergers, Shredded Secondaries and Separated Twins

The basic properties of the candidate binary cluster population in the Magellanic Clouds and Galaxy are similar. The fraction of candidate binary systems is $\sim$10% and the pair separation histogram exhibits a bimodal distribution commonly attributed to their transient nature. However, if primordial pairs cannot survive for long as recognizable bound systems, how are they ending up? Here, we use simulations to confirm that merging, extreme tidal distortion and ionization are possible depending on the initial orbital elements and mass ratio of the pair. The nature of the dominant evolutionary path largely depends on the strength of the local tidal field. Merging is observed for initially close primordial binary clusters but also for wider pairs in nearly parabolic orbits. Its characteristic timescale depends on the initial orbital semi-major axis, eccentricity, and cluster pair mass ratio, becoming shorter for closer, more eccentric equal mass pairs. Shredding or extreme tidal distortion of the less massive cluster and subsequent separation is observed in all pairs with appreciably different masses. Wide pairs steadily evolve into the separated twins state characterized by the presence of tidal bridges and separations of 200-500 pc after one Galactic orbit. In the Galaxy, the vast majority of observed binary candidates appear to be following this evolutionary path which translates into the dominant peak (25-30 pc) in the pair separation distribution. The secondary peak at smaller separations (10-15 pc) can be explained as due to close pairs in almost circular orbits and/or undergoing merging. Merged clusters exhibit both peculiar radial density and velocity dispersion profiles shaped by synchronization and gravogyro instabilities. Both simulations and observations show that, for the range of parameters studied here, long term binary cluster stability in the Galactic disk is unlikely.

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.