Timeline for Correct relation between metallicity (z) and iron content ([Fe/H])
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:47 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Feb 6, 2020 at 18:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAstronomy/status/1225479446624378884 | ||
| Feb 6, 2020 at 15:23 | answer | added | Swastik C. | timeline score: -1 | |
| Feb 6, 2020 at 15:20 | answer | added | Swastik C. | timeline score: -3 | |
| Apr 23, 2018 at 18:52 | comment | added | ProfRob | Maybe I'll work out some $A$ values. | |
| Apr 23, 2018 at 18:40 | comment | added | Gabriel | I have never seen that $A$ parameter either, I just saw it on WP an thought is sounded reasonable. Since I could not find a "proper" general definition for the relation between the $z$ metallicity and the $[Fe/H]$ iron content (aside from the one I show above, from the Bertelli article), I was not sure about its validity. You say that "[Fe/H] is often lazily conflated with [M/H]", so you agree that the A parameter sounds reasonable? | |
| Apr 23, 2018 at 18:33 | comment | added | ProfRob | As someone who works in the field, I have not seen your middle equation (with the $A$). [Fe/H] is often lazily conflated with [M/H], but obviously it depends on the detailed composition of the star whether that is approximately true. I suspect it is approximately true for Pop I stars, but perhaps not for older, metal poor stars which have a larger predominance of alpha elements. | |
| Apr 23, 2018 at 17:39 | history | asked | Gabriel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |