The Initial Magnetic Field Distribution in AB Stars

AI-generated keywords: Initial Magnetic Field

AI-generated Key Points

  • Stars are born with magnetic fields, but the distribution of their initial field strengths is uncertain.
  • A recent study by Farrell et al. used observations and theoretical models to infer the initial distribution of magnetic fields for AB stars in the mass range of 1.6 - 3.4 M$_{\odot}$.
  • The most-favored distribution was found to be Gaussian, with a mean value of 𝜇 = 770 G and standard deviation 𝜎 = 146 G.
  • The trapezoidal form was explored but found to be less likely than the Gaussian or triangular forms.
  • Independent approaches suggest values closer to 2 - 3 kG, creating some discrepancy that could suggest either a mass-dependent and bimodal initial field distribution or an alternative theoretical picture for the origin of these magnetic fields.
  • The posterior distribution for the Gaussian form has mean 𝜇 = 770 ± 44 G and standard deviation 𝜎 = 145 ± 77 G.
  • There is still uncertainty regarding whether all stars were born with some non-zero initial magnetic field or if there is a possibility that the IFD itself is bimodal, with a second mode at very weak field strengths.
  • This study provides important insights into the initial distribution of magnetic fields in AB stars and highlights the need for further research to better understand the origin and evolution of these fields.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Eoin Farrell, Adam S. Jermyn, Matteo Cantiello, Daniel Foreman-Mackey

The Astrophysical Journal, 2022, Volume 938, Issue 1, id.10, 12 pp
arXiv: 2210.11180v1 - DOI (astro-ph.SR)
Published in ApJ
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Stars are born with magnetic fields, but the distribution of their initial field strengths remains uncertain. We combine observations with theoretical models of magnetic field evolution to infer the initial distribution of magnetic fields for AB stars in the mass range of 1.6 - 3.4 M$_{\odot}$. We tested a variety of distributions with different shapes and found that a distribution with a mean of $\sim$800 G and a full width of $\sim$600 G is most consistent with the observed fraction of strongly magnetized stars as a function of mass. Our most-favored distribution is a Gaussian with a mean of $\mu$ = 770 G and standard deviation of $\sigma$ = 146 G. Independent approaches to measure the typical field strength suggest values closer to 2 - 3 kG, a discrepancy that could suggest a mass-dependent and bimodal initial field distribution, or an alternative theoretical picture for the origin of these magnetic fields.

Submitted to arXiv on 20 Oct. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2210.11180v1

Stars are born with magnetic fields, but the distribution of their initial field strengths has remained uncertain. In a recent study, Farrell et al. combined observations with theoretical models of magnetic field evolution to infer the initial distribution of magnetic fields for AB stars in the mass range of 1.6 - 3.4 M$_{\odot}$. The authors tested a variety of distributions with different shapes and found that a distribution with a mean of $\sim$800 G and a full width of $\sim$600 G is most consistent with the observed fraction of strongly magnetized stars as a function of mass. The most-favored distribution was found to be Gaussian, with a mean value of 𝜇 = 770 G and standard deviation 𝜎 = 146 G. The trapezoidal form was also explored, which favored relatively high values at both ends and low values in between, resulting in two additional free parameters (𝐵min, 𝐵max). However, it was found to be less likely to be found in nature than the Gaussian or triangular forms. Independent approaches to measure the typical field strength suggest values closer to 2 - 3 kG, which creates some discrepancy that could suggest either a mass-dependent and bimodal initial field distribution or an alternative theoretical picture for the origin of these magnetic fields. The posterior distribution for the Gaussian form has mean 𝜇 = 770 ± 44 G and standard deviation 𝜎 = 145 ± 77 G. These are anti-correlated such that distributions with higher means tend to be narrower while those with higher variance tend to have lower means. Although all three forms obtained similar initial field distributions (IFDs), features like mean and width were considered robust. It is worth noting that there is still uncertainty regarding whether all stars were born with some non-zero initial magnetic field or if there is a possibility that the IFD itself is bimodal, with a second mode at very weak field strengths. Observations of young stars suggest the latter possibility. Overall, this study provides important insights into the initial distribution of magnetic fields in AB stars and highlights the need for further research to better understand the origin and evolution of these fields.
Created on 04 Apr. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.