6533b85cfe1ef96bd12bd54b

RESEARCH PRODUCT

AMBER observations of the AGB star RS Cap: extended atmosphere and comparison with stellar models

J. C. GuiradoJ. M. MarcaideMarkus WittkowskiIvan Marti-vidalIvan Marti-vidalAndreas QuirrenbachKeiichi Ohnaka

subject

PhysicsPhotosphereOpacityStellar atmosphereFOS: Physical sciencesAstronomy and AstrophysicsAstrophysicsAstrophysics::Cosmology and Extragalactic AstrophysicsEffective temperatureAstrophysics - Solar and Stellar AstrophysicsSpace and Planetary ScienceAngular diameterAsymptotic giant branchAstrophysics::Solar and Stellar AstrophysicsAstrophysics::Earth and Planetary AstrophysicsStellar evolutionAstrophysics::Galaxy AstrophysicsSolar and Stellar Astrophysics (astro-ph.SR)Envelope (waves)

description

We report on K-band VLTI/AMBER observations at medium spectral resolution ($\sim$1500) of RS Capricorni, an M6/M7III semi-regular AGB star. From the spectrally-dispersed visibilities, we measure the star diameter as a function of observing wavelength from 2.13 to 2.47 microns. We derive a Rosseland angular diameter of $7.95 \pm 0.07$ mas, which corresponds to an effective temperature of $3160 \pm 160$ K. We detect size variations of around 10% in the CO band heads, indicating strong opacity effects of CO in the stellar photosphere. We also detect a linear increase of the size as a function of wavelength, beginning at 2.29 microns. Models of the stellar atmosphere, based on the mass of the star as estimated from stellar-evolution models, predict CO-size effects about half of those observed, and cannot reproduce the linear size increase with wavelength, redward of 2.29 microns. We are able to model this linear size increase with the addition of an extended water-vapor envelope around the star. However, we are not able to fit the data in the CO bandheads. Either the mass of the star is overestimated by the stellar-evolution models and/or there is an additional extended CO envelope in the outer part of the atmosphere. In any case, neither the water-vapor envelope, nor the CO envelope, can be explained using the current models.

https://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1101.5749