Mass loss law for red giant stars in simple population globular clusters
M. Tailo, A. P. Milone, E. P. Lagioia, F. D'Antona, S. Jang, E., Vesperini, A. F. Marino, P. Ventura, V. Caloi, M. Carlos, G. Cordoni, E., Dondoglio, A. Mohandasan, J. E. Nastasio, M. V. Legnardi

TL;DR
This study derives an empirical mass-loss law for red giant stars in simple population globular clusters, showing a clear correlation with metallicity and suggesting a universal stellar evolution outcome.
Contribution
It provides the first mass-loss law for simple-population GCs based on high-precision photometry, extending understanding of stellar evolution in these environments.
Findings
Mass loss varies from 0.1 to 0.3 solar masses across clusters.
Mass loss correlates with cluster metallicity.
Simple-population GCs follow similar mass-loss relations as 1G stars in multiple populations.
Abstract
The amount of mass lost by stars during the red-giant branch (RGB) phase is one of the main parameters to understand and correctly model the late stages of stellar evolution. Nevertheless, a fully-comprehensive knowledge of the RGB mass loss is still missing. Galactic Globular Clusters (GCs) are ideal targets to derive empirical formulations of mass loss, but the presence of multiple populations with different chemical compositions has been a major challenge to constrain stellar masses and RGB mass losses. Recent work has disentangled the distinct stellar populations along the RGB and the horizontal branch (HB) of 46 GCs, thus providing the possibility to estimate the RGB mass loss of each stellar population. The mass losses inferred for the stellar populations with pristine chemical composition (called first-generation or 1G stars) tightly correlate with cluster metallicity. This…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
