Cracking the relation between mass and 1P-star fraction of globular clusters: II. The masses in 1P and 2P stars as a second tool

TL;DR

This paper extends a model linking globular cluster mass and star population fractions, revealing how initial conditions and environment influence the relation between 1P and 2P stars, with implications for cluster formation history.

Contribution

It introduces an expanded model connecting pristine and polluted star populations to cluster mass, clarifying the origins of observed correlations and differences among clusters in various environments.

Findings

F_{1P} inversely correlates with cluster mass.

Tight anticorrelation between 2P mass and F_{1P}.

LMC clusters are more massive than SMC clusters at similar F_{1P}.

Abstract

Galactic globular clusters contain two main groups of stars, the pristine or 1P stars, and the polluted or 2P stars. The pristine-star fraction in clusters, $F_{1P}$, is a decreasing function of the cluster present-day mass, $m_{prst}$. Paper~I has introduced a model mapping the region of the $(m_{prst},F_{1P})$ space occupied by clusters, with the cluster mass threshold for 2P-star formation a key building-block. We now expand this model to the pristine-star fraction in dependence of the pristine- and polluted-population masses. Milone et al.(2020) found that $F_{1P}$ anticorrelates more tightly with the polluted-population present-day mass, $m_{2P,prst}$, than with the cluster total mass, $m_{prst}$. In contrast, $F_{1P}$ anticorrelates poorly with the pristine-population current mass, $m_{1P,prst}$. We show the loose anticorrelation between $F_{1P}$ and $m_{1P,prst}$ to result from a roughly constant pristine-population mass among clusters as they start their long-term evolution in the Galactic tidal field. As for the tight anticorrelation between $m_{2P,prst}$ and $F_{1P}$, it stems from the initially shallow relation between $m_{2P}$ and $F_{1P}$ (Fig.4). Clusters of the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (LMC and SMC, respectively) appear to behave unexpectedly with respect to each other. For a given $F_{1P}$, LMC clusters are more massive than SMC clusters despite their enduring a stronger tidal field (Fig.6). This is opposite to how the Galactic outer- and inner-halo clusters behave (bottom panels of Figs 1-3). The explanation may lie in cluster formation conditions. Finally, we wonder whether the single-population clusters NGC~419 and Rup~106 formed as multiple-populations clusters.