Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:58:18.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chemical similarities between the Galactic bulge and local thick disk red giant stars: analysis from optical data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2010

Alan Alves-Brito ,
Jorge Meléndez  and
Martin Asplund
Alan Alves-Brito
Affiliation:
Universidade de São Paulo, IAG email: abrito@astro.iag.usp.br
Jorge Meléndez
Affiliation:
Centro de Astrofísica da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
Martin Asplund
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institut für Astrophysik, Germany
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

The Galactic structure and composition remain as one of the greatest open problems in modern astrophysics. We show here that there are chemical similarities between the Galactic bulge and local thick disk red giant stars. This finding puts strong constraints on the IMF, SFR and chemical enrichment timescale of the bulge and thick disk. Our results are based upon a detailed elemental abundance analysis of 80 high S/N and high resolution optical spectra of giant stars, in the range −1.5 < [Fe/H] < +0.5.

Keywords

stars: abundancesGalaxy: bulgeGalaxy: disk
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 5 , Symposium S265: Chemical Abundances in the Universe: Connecting First Stars to Planets , August 2009 , pp. 342 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2010

References

Alves-Brito, A., Barbuy, B., Zoccali, M., et al. 2006, A&A, 460, 269Google Scholar
Barbuy, B., Alves-Brito, A., Ortolani, S., et al. 2008, PhST, 133a, 4032Google Scholar
Bensby, T., Zenn, A. R., Oey, M. S., & Feltzing, S. 2007, ApJ, 663, 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bensby, T., Feltzing, S., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2009, in press, arXiv0908.2779Google Scholar
Cunha, K. & Smith, V. V. 2006, ApJ, 651, 491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulbright, J. P., McWilliam, A., & Rich, R. M. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormendy, J. & Kennicutt, R. C. Jr. 2004, ARA&A, 42, 603Google Scholar
Lecureur, A., Zoccali, M., Hill, V., et al. 2007, A&A, 465, 799LGoogle Scholar
McWilliam, A. & Rich, R. M. 1994, ApJS, 91, 749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meléndez, J., Barbuy, B., Bica, E., et al. 2003, A&A, 411, 417Google Scholar
Meléndez, J., Asplund, M., Alves-Brito, A., et al. 2008, A&A, 484, L21Google Scholar
Ortolani, S., Renzini, A., Gilmozzi, R., et al. 1995, Nature, 377, 701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryde, N., Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, B., et al. 2009a, A&A, 496, 701Google Scholar
Ryde, N., Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, B., et al. 2009b, A&A, in press, arXiv:0910.0448Google Scholar
Wyse, R. 2009, IAUS, 258, 11Google Scholar
Zoccali, M., Renzini, A., Ortolani, S., et al. 2003, A&A, 399, 931Google Scholar
Zoccali, M., Lecureur, A., Barbuy, B., et al. 2006, A&A, 457, 1Google Scholar