Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:36:47.553Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What we can say about PN if their luminosity function distances are correct

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2016

George H. Jacoby
George H. Jacoby*
Affiliation:
National Optical Astronomy Observatories P.O. Box 26732, Tucson, AZ 85726

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

I review the arguments favoring the high reliability of the PNLF method. Agreement with Cepheid distances is better than 8%, and consistency for multiple PNLF distances within clusters is even better. Agreement between Cepheid distances to spirals and PNLF distances to ellipticals within the same cluster also is excellent. In order for the PNLF method to work despite the vast diversity of properties seen among PN, several factors must operate. Most importantly, the progenitors of the bright extragalactic PN probably have ages less than ∼10 Gyrs. Also, very young PN must either be absent from the bright extragalactic samples or must have lower luminosities than suggested by their predicted central star masses. The latter may be due to internal dust, nitrogen enrichment that competes with oxygen for ionizing photons, and/or a tendency for massive PN to be optically thin to ionizing radiation. In addition, models that reproduce observed PNLFs rely on theoretical evolutionary tracks of central stars, and so these tracks also must be reasonably correct. PNLF observations suggest, however, that the slope of the initial-to-final mass relation is shallower than the Weidemann (1987) relation.

Type
VIII. Planetary Nebulae in Extragalactic Systems
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 180: Planetary Nebulae , 1997 , pp. 448 - 459
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1997 

References

Burstein, D. & Heiles, C. (1984) Ap.J. Suppl. 54, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciardullo, R. & Jacoby, G. H. (1992) Ap.J. 388, 268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciardullo, R., Jacoby, G. H., Ford, H. C., & Neill, J. D. (1989) Ap.J. 339, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciardullo, R., Jacoby, G. H., & Harris, W. E. (1991) Ap.J. 383, 487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciardullo, R., Jacoby, G. H., & Tonry, J. L. (1993) Ap.J. 419, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dopita, M. A., Jacoby, G. H., & Vassiliadis, E. (1992) Ap.J. 389, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldmeier, J., Ciardullo, R., & Jacoby, G. H. (1997) Ap.J., in press.Google Scholar
Ford, H. C., Hui, X., Ciardullo, R., Jacoby, G. H., & Freeman, K. C. (1996) Ap.J. 458, 455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, W. L. & Madore, B. F. (1990) Ap.J. 365, 186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, et al 1993, , .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J. A., Phelps, R. L., Freedman, W. L., Saha, A., Stetson, P. B., Madore, B. F., Silbermann, N. A., Sakai, S., Kennicutt, R. C., Harding, P., Turner, A., Mould, J. R., Ferrarese, L., Ford, H. C., Hoessel, J. G., Han, M., Huchra, J. P., Hughes, S. M., Illingworth, G. D., & Kelson, D. D. (1996) Ap.J., in press.Google Scholar
Gussie, G. T., & Taylor, A. R. (1994) P.A.S.P. 106 500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, X., Ford, H. C., Ciardullo, R., & Jacoby, G. H. (1993) Ap.J. 414 463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, G. H. (1989) Ap.J. 339, 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, G. H. (1995) in Science With the VLT, eds. Walsh, J. R. & Danziger, I. J., 267.Google Scholar
Jacoby, G. H. (1996) in Proceedings of the Space Telescope Science Institute Symposium on The Extragalactic Distance Scale, eds. Livio, M. & Donahue, M., in press.Google Scholar
Jacoby, G. H., Branch, D., Ciardullo, R., Davies, R. L., Harris, W. E., Pierce, M. J., Pritchet, C. J., Tonry, J. L., & Welch, D. L. (1992) PASP 104, 599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, G. H., Ciardullo, R., & Harris, W. E. (1996) Ap.J. 462, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, G. H., Walker, A. R., & Ciardullo, R. (1990) Ap.J. 365, 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaler, J. B. & Jacoby, G. H. (1991) Ap.J. 382, 134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madore, B. F. & Freedman, W. L. (1991) PASP, 103, 933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Méndez, & Soffner, et al (1996), in IAU Symposium 180, Planetary Nebulae, in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Méndez, R. H., Kudritzki, R. P., Ciardullo, R. P., & Jacoby, G. H. (1993) Astr. Ap. 275, 534.Google Scholar
McMahon, R. K. (1989) Ap.J. 336, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMillan, R., Ciardullo, R., & Jacoby, G. H. (1993) Ap.J. 416, 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMillan, R., Ciardullo, R., & Jacoby, G. H. (1994) AJ 108, 1610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paczynski, et al (1971) Acta. Astron. 21, 417.Google Scholar
Phillips, M. M., Jacoby, G. H., Walker, A. R., Tonry, J. L., & Ciardullo, R. (1992) B.A.A.S. 180, 1304.Google Scholar
Pierce, M. J., Welch, D. L., McClure, R. D., van den Bergh, S., Racine, R., & Stetson, P. B. (1994) Nature 371, 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pottasch, S. R. (1990) Astr. Ap. 236, 231.Google Scholar
Richer, M. G., & McCall, M. L. (1992) AJ 103, 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schönberner, D. (1981) Astr. Ap. 103, 119.Google Scholar
Silbermann, N. A., and 18 others (1996) Ap.J. 470, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soffner, T., Méndez, R. H., Jacoby, G. H., Ciardullo, R., Roth, M. M., & Kudritzki, R. P. (1996) Astr. Ap. 306, 9.Google Scholar
Stanghellini, L. (1995) Ap.J. 452, 515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tammann, G. A. & Federspiel, M. (1996) in Proceedings of the Space Telescope Science Institute Symposium on The Extragalactic Distance Scale, eds. Livio, M. & Donahue, M., in press.Google Scholar
Tanvir, N. R., Shanks, T., Ferguson, H. C., & Robinson, D. R. T. (1995) Nature 377, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vassiliadis, E., & Wood, P.R. (1994) Ap.J. Sup. 92, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weidemann, V. (1987) Astr. Ap. 188, 74.Google Scholar