TESS Sci Con 2021
Joel Ong, et al.
August 2021 | Slides at http://hyad.es/talks
How are the initial helium abundances of stars
related to their metallicities?
T_\text{eff}/\mathrm{K}
M_0 = 1.0 M_\odot; Z_0 = 0.019
T_\text{MS} = 8.6\ \mathrm{Gyr}
T_\text{MS} = 13\ \mathrm{Gyr}
T_\text{eff}/\mathrm{K}
Y_0 = 0.27; Z_0 = 0.019
grey lines: models from previous slide
Power spectra of MDI dopplergrams
Individual mode frequencies exhibit
detailed structure on an échelle diagram.
\underbrace{\color{red}\Delta\nu, \nu_\text{max}}_{\mathclap{\text{Global properties only}}}, \overbrace{\color{blue}\left\{\nu_{nl}\right\}}^{\mathclap{\text{interior structure}}}
Second frequency differences/\mu\mathrm{Hz}
“Acoustic glitches” as indicator of surface helium abundances
Main-sequence Kepler sample consistent with broad range of \Delta Y / \Delta Z.
T_\text{eff}/\mathrm{K}
only l=1, pure p-modes: subtle changes
only l=1, mixed modes: pretty sensitive
(some missing metallicities)
Avoided crossings appear to constrain Y_0
better than glitches.
(main-sequence Kepler stars, for comparison)
(TESS subgiant sample, two ways)
Suspiciously small/asymmetric
posterior errors?
Caustics in posterior distribution:
low-metallicity results prior-dominated
(we’re already fixing this)
(including Kepler/K2 subgiants)
Main-sequence results analysed differently — possible methodological offset?