1 / 20

Cataclysmic Variables: 10 Breakthroughs in 10 Years

Cataclysmic Variables: 10 Breakthroughs in 10 Years. Christian Knigge University of Southampton. P. Marenfeld and NOAO/AURA/NSF . Outline. Introduction Cataclysmic variables: a primer 10 breakthroughs in 10 years (a personal and hugely biased perspective...) Evolution

gary
Télécharger la présentation

Cataclysmic Variables: 10 Breakthroughs in 10 Years

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cataclysmic Variables: 10 Breakthroughs in 10 Years Christian Knigge University of Southampton P. Marenfeld and NOAO/AURA/NSF

  2. Outline • Introduction • Cataclysmic variables: a primer • 10 breakthroughs in 10 years (a personal and hugely biased perspective...) • Evolution • Accretion • Outflows • The Role of UV Astronomy • Summary 98 7 654321 35 minutes XX XXXXX Links to Other Systems (BH/NS LMXBs)

  3. Cataclysmic Variables: A PrimerThe Physical Structure of CVs • White dwarf primary • UV bright • “Main-sequence” secondary • 75 mins < Porb < 6 hrs • Roche-lobe overflow • Accretion usually via a disk • UV-bright • Disk accretion is unstable if below critical rate • dwarf novae • Mass transfer and evolution driven by angular momentum loss • Evolution is (initially) from long to short periods Red Dwarf White Dwarf Accretion Disk Credit: Rob Hynes

  4. Cataclysmic Variables: A PrimerThe Orbital Period Distribution and the Standard Model of CV Evolution • Clear “Period Gap” between 2-3 hrs • Suggests a change in the dominant angular momentum loss mechanism: • Above the gap: • Magnetic Braking • Fast AML  High • Below the gap: • Gravitational Radiation • Slow AML  Low • Minimum period at Pmin ≈ 80 min • donor transitions from MS  BD • beyond this, Porb increases again • This disrupted magnetic braking scenario is the standard model for CV evolution Knigge 2006

  5. Breakthrough I: EvolutionDisrupted Angular Momentum Loss at the Period Gap Howell et al. 2001 • Standard model prediction • The period gap is caused by a disruption in AML when the donor becomes fully convective • Magnetic braking drives high above the gap • Donor is slightly out of TE and thus oversized • At , donor becomes fully convective • MB ceases (or is severely reduced) • drops --> donor relaxes (shrinks) to TE radius • Donor loses contact with RL • CV evolves through gap as detached binary • Residual AML (e.g. GR) shrinks orbit (and RL) • Contact with donor re-established at • Observational reality pre-2005 • No direct empirical support for this picture (other than the existence of the gap itself)

  6. Breakthrough I: EvolutionDisrupted Angular Momentum Loss at the Period Gap Patterson et al. (2005), Knigge (2006) • Donors are significantly larger than MS stars both above and below the gap • Clear discontinuity at M2 = 0.20 M☼, separating long- and short-period CVs! • Direct evidence for disrupted angular momentum loss! M-R relation based on eclipsing and “superhumping” CVs

  7. Breakthrough II: EvolutionReconstructing CV Evolution Empirically • We can even use the donor relation to quantitatively reconstruct CV evolution • CV Donors are significantly larger than MS stars because they are bloated by mass loss • Higher Larger • So we can use the degree of donor bloating at given to infer • Above the gap: slightly reduced “standard” MB recipes work well • Below the gap: need enhanced AML,  significant revision of the standard model! Knigge(2006) Knigge, Baraffe& Patterson (2011)

  8. Breakthrough III: EvolutionPeriod Bouncers with Brown Dwarf Secondaries • Standard model predictions • 99% of CVs should be found below the period gap • A full 70% should be “period bouncers” with brown dwarf secondaries • Observational reality pre-2006 • Not a single definitive period bouncer • Only ~10 candidates out of ~1000 CVs • No secondary with a well-established mass below the H-burning limit • Is this a selection effect or model failure? Howell et al. 2001

  9. Breakthrough III: EvolutionPeriod Bouncers with Brown Dwarf Secondaries Littlefair et al. 2006, Science, 314, 1578 • SDSS has yielded a deep new sample of ~200 CVs (Szkody et al. 2002-9)... • ...including a sub-set of faint, WD-dominated systems near Pmin(Gaensicke et al. 2009; see later) • A few of these are eclipsing, allowing precise system parameter determinations • At least 3 of these have M2 < 0.072 M☼(Littlefair et al. 2006, 2008) At least some post-period-minimum systems with brown dwarf donors do exist! But one of them is very strange…

  10. Breakthrough III: EvolutionPeriod Bouncers with Brown Dwarf Secondaries Littlefair et al. (2007) Patterson et al. (2008) • SDSS J1507 is one of the three eclipsing CVs with sub-stellar donors… • … but its for other CVs • Two ideas: • J1507 is young -- born with a sub-stellar donor (Littlefair et al. 2007) • J1507 is a low metallicityhalo CV (Patterson et el. 2008)  How can we test which is correct? • UV astronomy to the rescue! • FUV spectroscopy shows that [Fe/H] = -1.2 • SDSS J1507 is an eclipsing period bouncer in the Galactic halo! • Rosetta stone for studying effects of metallicity on accretion and evolution? Littlefair et al. (2007) Stehle et al. (1999) Uthas et al. (2011)

  11. Breakthrough IV: EvolutionThe Period Spike at Pmin • Standard model prediction • The number of CVs found in a particular Porb range is inversely proportional to the speed with which they evolve through it • So there should be a spike at Pmin, in the period distribution since • Observational reality pre-2009 • No convincing spike anywhere near Pmin in the CV Porb distribution Barker & Kolb 2003

  12. Breakthrough IV: EvolutionThe Period Spike at Pmin Gaensicke et al. 2009 • Boris Gaensicke and collaborators have obtained orbital periods for most of the new SDSS CVs • The resulting period distribution does show a spike at Pmin for the first time (Gaensicke et al. 2009) CVs do in fact “bounce” at Pmin! Previously known CVs SDSS CVs

  13. White Dwarf Breakthrough V: EvolutionCVs in Globular Clusters • CV space density: (e.g. Pretorius & Knigge 2007, 2011) • Effective volume of MW: • Expected # of CVs in MW: • Fraction of MW mass in GCs: • # of GCs in MW: • → expected # of CVs per GC: • A typical GC should contain ~100 CVs purely based on its stellar mass content • But bright X-ray binaries are overabundant in GCs by ~100x (Clark 1975, Katz 1975) • New dynamical formation channels are available in GCs • tidal capture (Fabian, Pringle & Rees 1976) • 3- and 4-body interactions • Could CV numbers also be enhanced? • Theory says yes, but “only” by a factor of ~2 (di Stefano & Rappaport 1994, Davies 1995/7, Ivanovaet al. 2006) • There should be hundreds of accreting WDs in GCs! • Important and useful: • Large samples of CVs at known distances • Drivers and tracers of GC dynamical evolution • Are GCs SN Ia factories?(Shara & Hurley 2006) So where are they? 3-body exchange encounter

  14. Breakthrough V: EvolutionCVs in Globular Clusters • Early searches typically found only a handful per GC (e.g. Shara et al. 1996, Bailyn et al. 1996, Cool et al. 1998) • Are CVs not formed or maybe even destroyed in CVs? • Significant implications for GC dynamics! • Selection effects? • Survey depth? • Dwarf nova duty cycle? • X-rays would be a great way to find CVs in GCs • But this used to be really hard! • Chandra has revolutionized the field • Deep X-ray surveys typically find tens per cluster • Numbers scale with collision rate  dynamical formation matters! GCs do harbour significant populations of dynamically-formed CVs! Shara et al. (1996) Shara et al. (1996) Difference Imaging of the Core of 47 Tuc 47 Tuc with Chandra (Grindlay et al. 2001; Heinke et al. 2005) 47 Tuc with Chandra (Grindlay et al. 2001; Heinke et al. 2005) 47 Tuc with the ROSAT HRI (Hasinger et al. 1994) Pooley & Hut (2006)

  15. Breakthrough V: EvolutionCVs in Globular Clusters • UV astronomy has also played a key role • Efficient way of finding new CVs and confirming X-ray-selected candidates (Knigge et al. 2002, Dieball et al. 2005, 2009, 2010, Thomson et al. 2012) • Even slitless multi-object spectroscopic identification/confirmation is possible! • Still many key unsolved questions! • Are there enough CVs in GCs? • Are they different from field CVs? • Where are the double WDs? • Are there SN Ia progenitors? The core of 47 Tuc: FUV (~1500A) The core of 47 Tuc: U-band Knigge et al (2002, 2003, 2008)

  16. Breakthroughs VI and VII: Accretion /OutflowsOutburst Hysteresis and Jets GX339: Gallo et al. (2004) SS Cyg: Koerding et al. 2008, Science • Both CVs (dwarf novae) and XRBs (X-ray transients) exhibit outbursts • Thermal/viscous disk instability • XRBs • Outbursts trace a q-shape in the X-ray hardness vs intensity plane (Fender, Belloni & Gallo 2004)  hysteresis • Collimated (radio) jets are seen (almost only) in the hard state • Hard-soft transition produces a powerful jet ejection episode • CVs (pre-2008) • No evidence for collimated jets in any CV • Constraint on theories of jet formation (e.g. Livio 1999)? • No constraints on outburst hysteresis • ElmarKoerding et al. (2008) • Do dwarf novae also execute a q-shaped outburst pattern? • Yes they do! • Best chance to see a powerful jet is during the “hard-to-soft” transition during the rise to a dwarf nova outburst • Discovery of the first CV radio jet! Dwarf nova eruption (optical): SS Cyg Wheatley et al (2003) Gallo et al. 2004 X-ray transient outburst (X-ray): GX 339 Gallo et al (2004) Adapted from Fender, Belloni & Gallo 2004

  17. Breakthrough VIII: Accretion Periodic Variability: Oscillations • Both XRBs and CVs often exhibit (quasi-)periodic oscillations on short (~dynamical) time-scales • Origin is poorly understood, but intimately connected to accretion/outflow processes in the innermost disk regions • Key result in XRBs (accreting NSs and BHs): • strong correlations between different types of oscillations, especially LKO and HBO • CVs also exhibit two types of oscillations • Is there a direct connection to LMXBs?s • Yes!(Warner & Woudt [2002...2010], Mauche [2003]) • DNOs : QPOs in CVs ↔ LKOs : HBOs in LMXBs • Universality of accretion physics extends to periodic variability • Models relying on ultra-strong gravity or B-fields are ruled out Warner & Woudt 2004 Psaltis, Belloni & van der Klis 1999 NS & BH LMXBs 26 CVs DNOs in VW Hyi Woudt & Warner (2002)

  18. Breakthrough IX: Accretion Non-Periodic Variability: The RMS-Flux Relation A CV (Pretorius & Knigge 2007) Black Hole XRB (Uttley & McHardy 2001) MV Lyr (Scaringi et al. 2011) • What about non-periodic accretion-induced variability (“flickering”)? • Stochastic variability has been closely studied in XRBs • Key discovery: the “rms-flux relation” (Uttley & McHardy 2001) • Rules out “additive” models (e.g. shot-noise) • What about CVs? • Non-trivial to study: variability time-scales are much longer, so need high-cadence, uninterrupted long-term light curves --> Kepler! • CVs also show the rms-flux relation! (Scaringi et al. 2011) • Accretion-induced variability is universal! • Key properties shared by supermassive BHs, stellar-mass BHs, NSs and WDs MV Lyr (Scaringi et al. 2011) An XRB (Churazov et al. 2003) AGN (Vaughan et al. 2011) Neutron Star XRB (Uttley & McHardy 2001) NGC 4051 (Seyfert 1)

  19. Breakthrough X: Evolution / Accretion / Outflows Do all CVs go nova? • We all “know” that CVs burn accreted matter explosively (Fujimoto, Iben, Starrfield, Shaviv, Shara, Townsley, Bildsten, Yaron...) → Nova Eruptions (typical recurrence time ~10,000 yrs) • But all known novae were actually discovered as such • How can we establish the general link empirically ? • Ejected nova shells may be detectable for ~1000 yrs! • So Shara et al. (2007) searched for resolved nebulae around ordinary CVs in the GALEX imaging archive.... • ...and disovered an ancient nova shell around the proto-typical dwarf nova Z Cam → ordinary CVs do undergo nova eruptions! • Postscript: Chinese astronomers would have disagreed with the classification of Z Cam as an “ordinary CV”... Shara et al. 2007, Nature 446, 159 r

  20. Summary The last decade has seen several breakthroughs in our understanding of CVs, many of which were made possible by ultraviolet observations • Evolution • The basic disrupted-angular-momentum-loss picture of CV evolution is correct ! • We know how to reconstruct CV evolution from both primary and secondary properties • CVs do exist in significant numbers in GCs • CVs not discovered as novae can still have nova shells --> all CVs experience nova eruptions • Accretion, Outflows and Links to Other Systems • CV outbursts exhibit hysteresis (“turtlehead” diagram) – just like XRBs and AGN • CVs can drive radio jets – just like XRBs and AGN • Accretion-induced oscillations in CVs are… – just like those in XRBs • Stochastic variability in CVs follows an rms-flux relation – just like XRBs and AGN The physics of disk accretion is universal CVs provide excellent, nearby, bright accretion laboratories

More Related