Tag Archive


amateur astronomy awk bash be b[e] supergiant cartoon conference convert exoplanet fedora figaro fits fun galaxy history iraf jupiter latex linux lmc massive star matplotlib meteor mypaper ondrejov observatory optical paper peblo photometry planet pro-am pyraf python scisoft skinakas observatory small magellanic cloud smc spectroscopy starlink talk theli ubuntu university of crete video x-ray

New Paper: Evolved Massive Stars at Low-metallicity IV. Using 1.6μm “H-bump” to identify red supergiant stars: a case study of NGC 6822

Evolved Massive Stars at Low-metallicity IV.Using 1.6μm “H-bump” to identify red supergiant stars:a case study of NGC 6822

Ming Yang, Alceste Z. Bonanos, Biwei Jiang, Man I Lam, Jian Gao, Panagiotis Gavras, Grigoris Maravelias, Shu Wang, Xiao-Dian Chen, Frank Tramper, Yi Ren, Zoi T. Spetsieri

Abstract

We present a case study of using a novel method to identify red supergiant (RSG) candidates in NGC 6822, based on their 1.6 μm “H-bump”. We collected 32 bands of photometric data for NGC 6822 ranging from optical to MIR. By using the theoretical spectra from MARCS, we demonstrate that there is a prominent difference around 1.6 μm (“H-bump”) between low-surface-gravity (LSG) and high-surface-gravity (HSG) targets. Taking advantage of this feature, we identify efficient color-color diagrams (CCDs) of rzH and rzK to separate HSG and LSG targets from crossmatching of optical and NIR data. Moreover, synthetic photometry from ATLAS9 also give similar results. Further separating RSG candidates from the rest of the LSG candidates is done by using semi-empirical criteria on NIR CMDs and resulted in 323 RSG candidates. Meanwhile, the simulation of foreground stars from Besançon models also indicates that our selection criteria is largely free from the contamination of Galactic giants. In addition to the “H-bump” method, we also use the traditional BVR method as a comparison and/or supplement, by applying a slightly aggressive cut to select as much as possible RSG candidates (358 targets). Furthermore, the Gaia astrometric solution is used to constrain the sample, where 181 and 193 targets were selected from the “H-bump” and BVR method, respectively. The percentages of selected targets in both methods are similar as 60\%, indicating the comparable accuracy of the two methods. In total, there are 234 RSG candidates after combining targets from both methods with 140 (60\%) of them in common. The final RSG candidates are in the expected locations on the MIR CMDs, while the spatial distribution is also coincident with the FUV-selected star formation regions, suggesting the selection is reasonable and reliable.