Angular diameter measurements of 24 giant and supergiant stars from the Mark III optical interferometer

Hutter, D. J.; Johnston, K. J.; Mozurkewich, David; Simon, R. S.; Colavita, M. M.; Pan, Xiaopei; Shao, M.; Hines, Braden E.; Staelin, D. H.; Hershey, J. L.; Hughes, J. A.; Kaplan, G. H.

doi:10.1086/167461

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because of the difficulties involved in achieving milli-arcsecond resolution, that sample was almost entirely composed of giants with angular diameters measured via Lunar Occultations and Michelson Interferometry (T eff < 5000 K) or Intensity Interferometry (T eff > 6000 K). One of the intriguing results of that analysis was the impossibility of setting the same zero point of the absolute calibration using angular diameters measured by Lunar Occultations (White & Feierman 1987;Ridgway et al 1980) and Michelson Interferometry (Hutter et al 1989;di Benedetto & Rabbia 1987;Mozurkewich et al 1991) with those measured by Intensity Interferometry (Hanbury Brown et al 1974). The absolute calibration (in the Johnson system) proposed by Alonso et al (1994a) is a weighted average from their table 10 and it is interesting to notice that the one derived from Intensity Interferometry alone is 4.8 (J) 1.3 (H) and 4.0 (K) percent lower than the averaged, proposed one.…”

Section: Appendix A: Comparing the Tcs And 2mass Absolute Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An absolutely calibratedT_effscale from the infrared flux method

Casagrande¹,

Ramírez²,

Meléndez

et al. 2010

A&A

721

104

985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various effective temperature scales have been proposed over the years. Despite much work and the high internal precision usually achieved, systematic differences of order 100 K (or more) among various scales are still present. We present an investigation based on the infrared flux method aimed at assessing the source of such discrepancies and pin down their origin. We break the impasse among different scales by using a large set of solar twins, stars which are spectroscopically and photometrically identical to the Sun, to set the absolute zero point of the effective temperature scale to within few degrees. Our newly calibrated, accurate and precise temperature scale applies to dwarfs and subgiants, from super-solar metallicities to the most metal-poor stars currently known. At solar metallicities our results validate spectroscopic effective temperature scales, whereas for [Fe/H] < ∼ −2.5 our temperatures are roughly 100 K hotter than those determined from model fits to the Balmer lines and 200 K hotter than those obtained from the excitation equilibrium of Fe lines. Empirical bolometric corrections and useful relations linking photometric indices to effective temperatures and angular diameters have been derived. Our results take full advantage of the high accuracy reached in absolute calibration in recent years and are further validated by interferometric angular diameters and space based spectrophotometry over a wide range of effective temperatures and metallicities.

show abstract

Section: Appendix A: Comparing the Tcs And 2mass Absolute Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An absolutely calibratedT_effscale from the infrared flux method

Casagrande¹,

Ramírez²,

Meléndez

et al. 2010

A&A

721

104

985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The high efficiency allowed many astronomical programs to be carried out until it was shut down in about 1993, and is widely considered one of the most productive interferometers to date. Numerous articles were published covering areas of astrometry, angular diameters, precision binary orbits, and limb-darkening (e.g., Mozurkewich et al, 1988;Hutter et al, 1989;Mozurkewich et al, 1991;Armstrong et al, 1992;Hummel et al, 1995;Quirrenbach et al, 1996).…”

Section: Brief Historical Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optical interferometry in astronomy

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Here I review the current state of the field of optical stellar interferometry, concentrating on ground-based work although a brief report of space interferometry missions is included. We pause both to reflect on decades of immense progress in the field as well as to prepare for a new generation of large interferometers just now being commissioned (most notably, the CHARA, Keck and VLT Interferometers). First, this review summarizes the basic principles behind stellar interferometry needed by the lay-physicist and general astronomer to understand the scientific potential as well as technical challenges of interferometry. Next, the basic design principles of practical interferometers are discussed, using the experience of past and existing facilities to illustrate important points. Here there is significant discussion of current trends in the field, including the new facilities under construction and advanced technologies being debuted. This decade has seen the influence of stellar interferometry extend beyond classical regimes of stellar diameters and binary orbits to new areas such as mapping the accretion disks around young stars, novel calibration of the Cepheid Period-Luminosity relation, and imaging of stellar surfaces. The third section is devoted to the major scientific results from interferometry, grouped into natural categories reflecting these current developments. Lastly, I consider the future of interferometry, highlighting the kinds of new science promised by the interferometers coming on-line in the next few years. I also discuss the longer-term future of optical interferometry, including the prospects for space interferometry and the possibilities of large-scale ground-based projects. Critical technological developments are still needed to make these projects attractive and affordable. †

show abstract

“…Fortunately, added to this sample are the well-calibrated measurements for the Sun (Allen 1973). Shorter wavelength observations of giant and supergiant stars, while available (eg., Hutter et al 1989, Mozurkewich et al 1991, were not utilized in this study for two reasons.…”

Section: Ptimentioning

confidence: 99%