skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Shahaf, Sahar"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract Astrometry from Gaia DR3 has enabled the discovery of a sample of 3000+ binaries containing white dwarfs (WD) and main-sequence (MS) stars in relatively wide orbits, with orbital periodsPorb= (100–1000) days. This population was not predicted by binary population synthesis models before Gaia and—if the Gaia orbits are robust—likely requires very efficient envelope ejection during common envelope evolution (CEE). To assess the reliability of the Gaia solutions, we measured multi-epoch radial velocities (RVs) of 31 WD+MS binary candidates withPorb= (40–300) days andAstroSpectroSB1orbital solutions. We jointly fit the RVs and astrometry, allowing us to validate the Gaia solutions and tighten constraints on component masses. We find a high success rate for the Gaia solutions, with only 2 out of the 31 systems showing significant discrepancies between their Gaia orbital solutions and our RVs. Joint fitting of RVs and astrometry allows us to directly constrain the secondary-to-primary flux ratio S , and we find S 0.02 for most objects, confirming the companions are indeed WDs. We tighten constraints on the binaries’ eccentricities, finding a mediane≈ 0.1. These eccentricities are much lower than those of normal MS+MS binaries at similar periods, but much higher than predicted for binaries formed via stable mass transfer. We present MESA single and binary evolution models to explore how the binaries may have formed. The orbits of most binaries in the sample can be produced through CEE that begins when the WD progenitor is an AGB star, corresponding to initial separations of 2–5 au. Roughly 50% of all post-common envelope binaries are predicted to have first interacted on the AGB, ending up in wide orbits like these systems. 
    more » « less
  2. We report discovery and characterization of a main-sequence G star orbiting a dark object with mass 1.90 ± 0.04 M . The system was discovered via Gaia astrometry and has an orbital period of 731 days. We obtained multi-epoch RV follow-up over a period of 639 days, allowing us to refine the Gaia orbital solution and precisely constrain the masses of both components. The luminous star is a 12 ,Gyr-old, low-metallicity halo star near the main-sequence turnoff (,K; ; ; M 0.79 M ) with a highly enhanced lithium abundance. The RV mass function sets a minimum companion mass for an edge-on orbit of M 2 > 1.67 M , well above the Chandrasekhar limit. The Gaia inclination constraint, i = 68.7 ± 1.4 ,deg, then implies a companion mass of M 2 = 1.90 ± 0.04 M . The companion is most likely a massive neutron star: the only viable alternative is two massive white dwarfs in a close binary, but this scenario is disfavored on evolutionary grounds. The system’s low eccentricity ( e = 0.122 ± 0.002 ) disfavors dynamical formation channels and implies that the neutron star likely formed with little mass loss ( 1 M ) and with a weak natal kick (). Stronger kicks with more mass loss are not fully ruled out but would imply that a larger population of similar systems with higher eccentricities should exist. The current orbit is too small to have accommodated the neutron star progenitor as a red supergiant or super-AGB star. The simplest formation scenario – isolated binary evolution – requires the system to have survived unstable mass transfer and common envelope evolution with a donor-to-accretor mass ratio > 10 . The system, which we call Gaia NS1, is likely a progenitor of symbiotic X-ray binaries and long-period millisecond pulsars. Its discovery challenges binary evolution models and bodes well for Gaia’s census of compact objects in wide binaries. 
    more » « less
  3. ABSTRACT Post-common envelope binaries (PCEBs) containing a white dwarf (WD) and a main-sequence (MS) star can constrain the physics of common envelope evolution and calibrate binary evolution models. Most PCEBs studied to date have short orbital periods (Porb ≲ 1 d), implying relatively inefficient harnessing of binaries’ orbital energy for envelope expulsion. Here, we present follow-up observations of five binaries from 3rd data release of Gaia mission containing solar-type MS stars and probable ultramassive WDs ($$M\gtrsim 1.2\ {\rm M}_{\odot}$$) with significantly wider orbits than previously known PCEBs, Porb = 18–49 d. The WD masses are much higher than expected for systems formed via stable mass transfer at these periods, and their near-circular orbits suggest partial tidal circularization when the WD progenitors were giants. These properties strongly suggest that the binaries are PCEBs. Forming PCEBs at such wide separations requires highly efficient envelope ejection, and we find that the observed periods can only be explained if a significant fraction of the energy released when the envelope recombines goes into ejecting it. Our one-dimensional stellar models including recombination energy confirm prior predictions that a wide range of PCEB orbital periods, extending up to months or years, can potentially result from Roche lobe overflow of a luminous asymptotic giant branch (AGB) star. This evolutionary scenario may also explain the formation of several wide WD + MS binaries discovered via self-lensing, as well as a significant fraction of post-AGB binaries and barium stars. 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)
  5. null (Ed.)