Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Analysis of Doppler-Broadened X-ray Emission Line Profiles from Hot Stars David Cohen - Swarthmore College with Roban Kramer - Swarthmore College Stanley.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Analysis of Doppler-Broadened X-ray Emission Line Profiles from Hot Stars David Cohen - Swarthmore College with Roban Kramer - Swarthmore College Stanley."— Presentation transcript:

1 Analysis of Doppler-Broadened X-ray Emission Line Profiles from Hot Stars David Cohen - Swarthmore College with Roban Kramer - Swarthmore College Stanley Owocki - Bartol Research Institute

2 Outline 0. The astrophysical context I. Introduction: What line profiles can tell us II. The basic model III. Fitting Chandra data from hot stars -  Pup: Constraining parameters IV. What the data are telling us: Integration with other X-ray spectral diagnostics

3 What produces hot-star X-rays? Hot stars have massive radiation- driven winds, with a significant amount of continuum opacity Hot stars are thought not to have convective envelopes, magnetic activity, or coronae

4 What Line Profiles Can Tell Us The wavelength of an emitted photon is proportional to the line-of-sight velocity: Line shape maps emission measure at each velocity/wavelength interval Continuum absorption by the cold stellar wind affects the line shape Correlation between line-of-sight velocity and absorption optical depth will cause asymmetries in emission lines X-ray line profiles can provide the most direct observational constraints on the X-ray production mechanism in hot stars

5 Emission Profiles from a Spherically Symmetric, Expanding Medium A uniform shell gives a rectangular profile. A spherically-symmetric, X-ray emitting wind can be built up from a series of concentric shells. Occultation by the star removes red photons, making the profile asymmetric

6 Continuum Absorption Acts Like Occultation Red photons are preferentially absorbed, making the line asymmetric: The peak is shifted to the blue, and the red wing becomes much less steep.

7 We calculate line profiles using a 4-parameter model 3 parameters describe the spatial and velocity distribution of the emission: R o is the minimum radius of X-ray emission;  describes the acceleration of the wind; q parameterizes the radial dependence of the filling factor. 1 parameter,  *, describes the level of continuum absorption in the overlying wind. A wind terminal velocity is assumed based on UV observations, and the calculated line profile is convolved with the appropriate instrument-response function for each line.

8 In addition to the wind-shock model, our empirical line profile model can also describe a corona With most of the emission concentrated near the photosphere and with very little acceleration, the coronal line profiles are very narrow.

9 Line profiles change in characteristic ways with  * and R o, becoming broader and more skewed with increasing  * and broader and more flat-topped with increasing R o. A wide variety of wind- shock characteristics can be modeled R o =1.5 R o =3 R o =10   =1,2,8

10 We fit six lines in the Chandra MEG spectrum of  Pup N VII O VIII Fe XVII Ne X The X-ray lines in O stars are observed to be broad;  Pup is the prototypical O supergiant with a strong wind

11 For each line, we are able to achieve a good fit with reasonable model parameters Best-fit model:   =1.0, R o =1.4, q=-0.4, with  =1 fixed blend

12 We also determine the extent of the confidence limits within the model parameter space – Note how the line profile changes with increasing wind opacity   increasing  68% 95% 99%   increasing 

13 The fitted lines span a range of wind optical depth and X-ray temperature The Fe XVII line at 15 Å (left) has a more typical profile, while the N VII (right) is more flat-topped and broad. And despite having a longer wavelength, it doesn’t suffer a lot of attenuation.

14 The confidence regions define the widest possible variation among acceptable models The best fit and two other acceptable (at the 95% confidence level) fits best fit model lowest   highest  

15 The best-fit parameters and 95% confidence limits are derived for all six lines  The formation radii for all lines are close to the surface of the star

16  very little radial dependence of the X-ray filling factor

17  Wind optical depth is only moderate, and  only varies weakly with wavelength

18 Discussion A spherically symmetric, distributed wind X-ray source (i.e. ‘wind shock model’) can account for the line profiles in  Pup in a reasonable way The X-ray formation zone begins close to the photosphere (within 3 R  for all lines) Continuum absorption by the overlying cool wind is important, but not as strong as models (and UV observations of the wind) would seem to suggest (   is between 8 and 20 according to models calculated by Hillier et al. (1993)).

19 more Discussion… Above R o, the amount of X-ray emitting gas scales close to density-squared (i.e. the filling factor has very little radial dependence) The lower-than-expected absorption could have to do with overestimation of the wind opacity, or possibly with overestimation of the mass-loss rate…but, it could also be due to clumping in the wind (which might also be associated with the wind-shock process itself) Other O stars observed with Chandra do not seem to have wind absorption signatures (broad but symmetric lines) and B stars have basically narrow lines – could this have to do with clumping too? Or non-spherical winds? (see Owocki’s poster on MHD simulations of magnetic hot star winds)

20 Extra Slides

21 Rad-hydro simulations of the line- force instability – copius shock- heated material distributed throughout the wind

22 The Basic Model for Described in Owocki & Cohen (2001, ApJ, 559, 1108), the model assumes a smoothly and spherically symmetrically distributed accelerating X-ray emitting plasma subject to continuum attenuation by the cold stellar wind. The wind velocity is assumed to have the form: which dictates the density of the wind as well. where The optical depth of the wind along a ray with impact parameter p is given by: The delta function picks out the resonance velocity, mapping  into. q parameterizes the radial fall-off of the emissivity. R o parameterizes the lower radius of X-ray emission Note that while spherical symmetry is natural for the emission, cylindrical symmetry is natural for the absorption; Combining expressions in these two sets of variables requires the transformation:

23

24

25

26

27


Download ppt "Analysis of Doppler-Broadened X-ray Emission Line Profiles from Hot Stars David Cohen - Swarthmore College with Roban Kramer - Swarthmore College Stanley."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google