Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T14:23:11.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Can Pre-Main Sequence Binary Star Populations Tell Us about Binary Formation Mechanisms?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2016

Andrea M. Ghez
Andrea M. Ghez*
Affiliation:
University of California Los Angeles Department of Physics and Astronomy Los Angeles, CA 90095–1562

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

We review current observations of binary star populations with particular attention to what insight these populations can give us into the problem of how binary stars form. Significant progress has been made in the past few years, revealing variations as a function of site, primary star mass, and binary star separations. The variations in the binary star population with type of star formation site in comparison with the field, suggests that ∼30% of the field binaries formed in loose T associations and ∼70% formed in the dense progenitors of open clusters. Variations with mass and separation on the whole are well matched by the predictions of fragmentation followed by competitive accretion. However, there remains much work to be done on both the observational and theoretical end before a complete picture of binary star formation can be developed.

Information

Type
VI. Binary Populations in Young Clusters
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 200: The Formation of Binary Stars , 2001, pp. 210 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2001 

References

Bate, M. 2000, MNRAS, 314, 33.Google Scholar
Bate, M. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Bate, M., & Bonnell, I. A. 1997, MNRAS, 285, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodenheimer, P. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Bonnell, I. A. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Boss, A. P. 1988, ComAp, 12, 169.Google Scholar
Bouvier, J. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Bouvier, J., Rigaut, F., Nadeau, D. 1997, A&A, 323, 139.Google Scholar
Brandner, W., & Köhler, R. 1998, ApJ, 499, 79.Google Scholar
Brandner, W., & Zinnecker, H. 1997, A&A, 321, 220.Google Scholar
Burrows, A., Hubbard, W. B., Lunine, J. L., Marley, M., & Saumon, D. 1998, Protostars and Planets IV, ed. Mannings, V., Boss, A. & Russel, S. Google Scholar
Clarke, C. 1996, in Evolutionary Processes in Binary Stars, ed. Wijers, R., Davies, M. & Tout, C. (NATO ASI Series).Google Scholar
Clarke, C. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Duchene, G. 1999, A&A, 341, 547.Google Scholar
Duchene, G. 2000, Ph.D., University of Grenoble.Google Scholar
Durisen, R. H., & Sterzik, M. F. 1994, A&A, 286, 84.Google Scholar
Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., & Simon, M. 1994, A&A, 286, 149.Google Scholar
Ghez, A. M., Sand, D., White, R. J. 2000, in prep.Google Scholar
Ghez, A. M., McCarthy, D. W., Patience, J. L., & Beck, T. L. 1997a, ApJ, 481, 378.Google Scholar
Ghez, A. M., Neugebauer, G., & Matthews, K. 1993, AJ, 106, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghez, A. M., White, R. J., & Simon, M. 1997b, ApJ, 490, 353.Google Scholar
Hall, S. M., Clarke, C. J., & Pringle, J. E. 1997, MNRAS, 278, 303.Google Scholar
Hartigan, P., Strom, K. M., & Strom, S. E. 1994, ApJ, 427, 96.Google Scholar
Köhler, R., & Leinert, C. 1998, A&A, 331, 977.Google Scholar
Kroupa, P. 1995, MNRAS, 277, 1491.Google Scholar
Kroupa, P., Petr, M. G., & McCaughrean, M. J. 1999, New Astronomy, 4, 495.Google Scholar
Lada, E. A., Evans, N. J., Depoy, D. L., & Gatley, I 1991, ApJ, 371, 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leinert, Ch., Zinnecker, H., Weitzel, N., Christou, J., Ridgway, S.T., Jameson, R., Haas, M., & Lenzen, R. 1993, A&A, 278, 129.Google Scholar
McCabe, C., & Ghez, A. M. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. M., & Clarke, C.J. 1993, MNRAS, 262, 800.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. M., & Clarke, C.J. 1995, MNRAS, 275, 671.Google Scholar
Meyer, M. R., Beckwith, S. V. W., Herbst, T. M., & Robberto, M. 1997, ApJ, 489, L173.Google Scholar
Monin, J.-L., Menard, F., & Duchene, G. 1998, A&A, 339, 113.Google Scholar
Padgett, D. L., Strom, S. E., & Ghez, A. M. 1997, ApJ, 477, 705.Google Scholar
Patience, J. L. 1999, Ph.D. UCLA.Google Scholar
Patience, J. L., Ghez, A. M., Reid, I. N. 2000, in prep.Google Scholar
Patience, J. L., Macintosh, B., Ghez, A. M. 2000, in prep.Google Scholar
Prato, L. 1998, Ph.D., SUNY Stony Brook.Google Scholar
Prato, L., & Monin, J.-L. 2001, this volume.Google Scholar
Prato, L., & Simon, M. 1997, ApJ, 474, 455.Google Scholar
Prosser, C. E., Stauffer, J. R., Hartmann, L., Soderblom, D. R., Jones, B. F., Werner, M. W., McCaughrean, M. J. 1994, ApJ, 421, 517.Google Scholar
Roddier, C., Roddier, F., Northcott, M. J., Graves, J. E., & Jim, K. 1996, ApJ, 463, 326.Google Scholar
Scally, A., Clarke, C., McCaughrean, M. J. 1999, MNRAS, 306, 253.Google Scholar
Simon, M., Close, L. M., & Beck, T. L. 1999, AJ, 117, 1375.Google Scholar
Simon, M., Ghez, A. M., Leinert, Ch., Cassar, L., Chen, W. P., Howell, R. R., Jameson, R. F., Matthews, K., Neugebauer, G., & Richichi, A. 1995, ApJ, 443, 625.Google Scholar
Sterzik, M., & Durisen, R. H. 1998, A&A, 339, 95.Google Scholar
White, R. J. 1999, Ph.D. UCLA.Google Scholar
White, R. J., & Ghez, A. M. 2000, in prep.Google Scholar
White, R. J., & Ghez, A. M. 1998, BAAS, 193, 7311.Google Scholar
White, R. J., Ghez, A. M., Reid, I. N., & Schultz, G. 1999, ApJ, 520, 811.Google Scholar
Woitas, J., & Leinert, Ch. 2000, A&A, submitted.Google Scholar