TY - JOUR
T1 - Common envelope evolution
T2 - Where we stand and how we can move forward
AU - Ivanova, N.
AU - Justham, S.
AU - Chen, X.
AU - De Marco, O.
AU - Fryer, C. L.
AU - Gaburov, E.
AU - Ge, H.
AU - Glebbeek, E.
AU - Han, Z.
AU - Li, X. D.
AU - Lu, G.
AU - Marsh, T.
AU - Podsiadlowski, P.
AU - Potter, A.
AU - Soker, N.
AU - Taam, R.
AU - Tauris, T. M.
AU - Van Den Heuvel, E. P.J.
AU - Webbink, R. F.
N1 - Funding Information:
All the authors thank KIAA, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) and the Beijing Astronomical Society for providing support and hospitality. The authors also thank Gijs Nelemans for very helpful constructive criticism, and James Lombardi for Fig. . N. Ivanova acknowledges support from NSERC Discovery and Canada Research Chairs Program; this research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NSF PHY05-51164. S. Justham thanks the Kavli Foundation, NSFC (through grants 10903001 and 11250110055) and the Chinese Academy of Sciences for support. X. Chen, H. Ge and Z. Han thank the NSFC (Nos. 10973036, 11173055, 11033008, 11203065), Chinese Academy of Sciences (No. KJCX2-YW-T24 and the Talent Project of Western Light) and Yunnan National Science Foundation (No. 2008CD155) for support. The work by C.L. Fryer was carried out in part under the auspices of the National Nuclear Security Administration of the US Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory and supported by Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25396. X.-D. Li acknowledges support by the NSFC through grant 10873008 and by the National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program 2009CB824800). T.R. Marsh acknowledges support from the STFC. A.T. Potter thanks the STFC for his studentship. R. Taam acknowledges support by the NSF through grant AST-0703950. T.M. Tauris acknowledges support from Norbert Langer and the Argelander-Insitut für Astronomie, Universität Bonn. E.P.J. van den Heuvel gratefully acknowledges support by the Leids Kerkhoven–Bosscha Fonds that enabled him to participate in this program. R.F. Webbink acknowledges support from the Department of Astronomy, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and from NSFC grant 11033008.
PY - 2013/11
Y1 - 2013/11
N2 - This work aims to present our current best physical understanding of common-envelope evolution (CEE). We highlight areas of consensus and disagreement, and stress ideas which should point the way forward for progress in this important but long-standing and largely unconquered problem. Unusually for CEE-related work, we mostly try to avoid relying on results from population synthesis or observations, in order to avoid potentially being misled by previous misunderstandings. As far as possible we debate all the relevant issues starting from physics alone, all the way from the evolution of the binary system immediately before CEE begins to the processes which might occur just after the ejection of the envelope. In particular, we include extensive discussion about the energy sources and sinks operating in CEE, and hence examine the foundations of the standard energy formalism. Special attention is also given to comparing the results of hydrodynamic simulations from different groups and to discussing the potential effect of initial conditions on the differences in the outcomes. We compare current numerical techniques for the problem of CEE and also whether more appropriate tools could and should be produced (including new formulations of computational hydrodynamics, and attempts to include 3D processes within 1D codes). Finally we explore new ways to link CEE with observations. We compare previous simulations of CEE to the recent outburst from V1309 Sco, and discuss to what extent post-common-envelope binaries and nebulae can provide information, e.g. from binary eccentricities, which is not currently being fully exploited.
AB - This work aims to present our current best physical understanding of common-envelope evolution (CEE). We highlight areas of consensus and disagreement, and stress ideas which should point the way forward for progress in this important but long-standing and largely unconquered problem. Unusually for CEE-related work, we mostly try to avoid relying on results from population synthesis or observations, in order to avoid potentially being misled by previous misunderstandings. As far as possible we debate all the relevant issues starting from physics alone, all the way from the evolution of the binary system immediately before CEE begins to the processes which might occur just after the ejection of the envelope. In particular, we include extensive discussion about the energy sources and sinks operating in CEE, and hence examine the foundations of the standard energy formalism. Special attention is also given to comparing the results of hydrodynamic simulations from different groups and to discussing the potential effect of initial conditions on the differences in the outcomes. We compare current numerical techniques for the problem of CEE and also whether more appropriate tools could and should be produced (including new formulations of computational hydrodynamics, and attempts to include 3D processes within 1D codes). Finally we explore new ways to link CEE with observations. We compare previous simulations of CEE to the recent outburst from V1309 Sco, and discuss to what extent post-common-envelope binaries and nebulae can provide information, e.g. from binary eccentricities, which is not currently being fully exploited.
KW - Close binaries
KW - Hydrodynamics
KW - Stellar structure, interiors, evolution
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874163432&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874163432&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2
DO - 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:84874163432
SN - 0935-4956
VL - 21
JO - Astronomy and Astrophysics Review
JF - Astronomy and Astrophysics Review
IS - 1
M1 - 59
ER -