![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 334, 901-910 (1998) 4. Results4.1. Evolved star counts: theory versus observationCharacteristic star counts can now be computed from our synthetic HRDs and compared with those of the HIPPARCOS HRDs. They are listed in Table 1, matching entries being emphasized. Table 1 also specifies, how the characteristic region borderlines are defined in the HRD. The choices of border lines are a compromise between the need to include all relevant stars from the evolutionary stage, and minimum confusion with stars that would, in the absence of observational errors, populate adjacent HRD areas. That has to be considered for the computed and observed HRDs at the same time.
In order to assess the stochastic count variation of the synthetic
HRDs, star counts have each been averaged from 10 (stochastically
different) synthetic samples. There is a remarkable agreement of both
hybrid grids (no. 3 and 4, marginally less good for grid 3) with
observed counts, while there are some significant differences found
with grids 1 and 2, i.e., larger than a statistical fluctuation
When respective results for the 50 pc and 100 pc HRDs are compared,
it becomes obvious (except for the low number of CW giants) that
excellent agreement with theoretical star counts (grids 3, 4) is only
achieved for the 50 pc HRD. As mentioned before, it is much more
delicate to model the deviations of stars in the 100 pc HRD (shown in
Fig. 4, computed on the basis of grid 3). That, in addition to a
larger contamination by spectroscopic binaries (see Sect. 2),
should explain why its numbers of observed HG and LGB stars are
somewhat larger than computed. With the KGC, a larger choice of
region, to account for the larger scatter, solved all the problems
related to the less good data quality. The 7-times larger star counts
of the 100 pc HRD become an advantage with the few very late type
giants in the CW region. It becomes clear that grids 3 and 4 do yield
reasonably good numbers here as well: Another group of rare stars, for which the larger sample of the
100 pc HRD is of advantage, are the more luminous blue loop (He-core
burning) giants, i.e., with 4.2. A by-product: the IMFAlthough this is not our main intention, our approach leads to an
approximate IMF for single stars in the solar neighbourhood - at least
for masses from about 1.6 to 4 For the assumed, strictly random age distribution, the IMF is
simply proportional to the PDMF devided by the lifetimes
The total, time-independent stellar birth-rate,
4.3. Properties of different evolved stagesWe have shown that with grids 3 and 4 realistic star counts can be computed for all HRD regions, which are characteristic of the main evolved stellar stages - provided that the best matching PDMF and the right evolutionary history (i.e. overshooting) come together. Thus, observation can test and verify our synthetic HRD on the basis of characteristic star counts. Once this has been done, it is interesting to look at the theoretical results in more detail. We can use them as a statistical approach to give the theoretical mass distribution, or a distribution of any structural properties, for single giants in different regions of the HRD (the KGC, e.g.) or in different evolutionary stages (e.g., the AGB and GB giants in the CW field). More detailed results are obtained by simply enlarging the number
of synthetic stars. As an example, Fig. 7 shows the expected mass
distribution function of the giants found in the KGC in Figs. 1 -
computed from a
It is remarkable to see that even the cool wind region of the HRD
is predominantly populated by stars with low (1.5 to 2.5
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998 Online publication: June 2, 1998 ![]() |