[vsnet-chat 2250] Re: (fwd) Nova Paper research

[Taichi Kato <tkato>]

Re: [vsnet-chat 2249] Re: (fwd) Nova Paper research

Dr. Retter,

   You must be misunderstanding in this part.

> Anyway, in recurrent novae the secondaries are believed to be giant stars,
> unlike the red dwarfs in classical novae.  So, there is a clear difference.

   Remember T Pyx.  This single example is already enough to tell this
classfication can be done regardless of the secondary's nature.  No one
probably exclude T Pyx from CVs.  Here again the recurrence time is
the only discrimination.

> Individual cases should be checked accordingly. However, since the
> recurrence times of recurrent novae are a few decades, while those
> of classical novae (according to the models) are ~10^4 - 10^6 years,
> there is no smooth behaviour.

   It is not known whether the distribution of recurrence time composes
a separate popluations or a continuous entity.  However, as recent
caluclations suggest (disregarding the hivernation now), basically the
same model can explain very fast to very slow novae, short to long
recurrence periods, by changing the white dwarf mass, mass-transfer rate,
white dwarf temperature etc.  So all "novae" (including very slow novae)
can be within the same thermonuclear runaway scheme.  The difference is
just parameters.  If a symbiotic star has a moderate-mass white dwarf,
and accretes material at a similar rate as in short-period CVs, we may
observe a typical "classcal nova"-like explosion.  Such novae, if exist,
are in nature "symbiotic novae" but not NC-type novae.

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp