I have been calculating the solar rotation rate from the population of
halo stars. Halo stars are thought to have no net rotation, so by
finding an average V-velocity one finds the orbital speed of the Sun.
I took the metal poor database of Beers and restricted to stars inside
2kpc, to keep errors under control while having a large enough
population for the statistical analysis. To study the halo I restricted
to metalicities [Fe/H] < -1.6. I subdivided the population into three,
Giants, Dwarfs (or main sequence stars) and RRLyrae.
I am interested in systematic radial velocity errors and systematic
distance errors, so I subdivided each population again with a cone of
semi-angle 65deg from the direction, V, of rotation. For each population
I calculate a much higher mean V-velocity for the sun from the stars
within the cone, and I found much higher V-velocities from RR Lyrae than
the other populations. This appears indicative of the systematic errors
I am looking for.
One might try to account for that by supposing that distances are
understated. By increasing distances to dwarves by 30%, to RRLyrae by
20% and to Giants by 50%, I got a reasonable match between the stars
inside and outside the cone, but did not completely eliminate the
difference. These increases gives a mean velocity of about 270-280 from
each population and leads to a distance to SgrA* of 9kpc or more, which
is too large by other measurements.
I then applied the teleconnection correction to radial velocity (about
23%). That brought things under more control, but to achieve the most
consistent result I had to reduce distances to RRLyrae by 5%, increase
distances to dwarfs by 7% and increase distances to giants by 21%. With
these corrections all populations agree with a radial velocity of the
sun as 225km/s +-12 statistical +-15 systematic. In conjunction with
Reid's proper motion measurement that gives a distance to SgrA* of
7.5+-0.4 +- 0.5 kpc, in line with recent measurements:
H20 masers 7.2 +- 0.7 (Reid, 1993),
infrared photometry of bulge red clump stars, 7.52+-0.10 (stat) +-0.35
(sys) (Nishiyama et. al, 2006)
Globular clusters 7.2 +- 0.30 kpc (Bica et al 2006),
Keplerian motions, 7.62 +- 0.32 kpc (Eisenhauer et al, 2005),
Regards

Signature
Charles Francis
moderator sci.physics.foundations.
substitute charles for NotI to email
Kent Paul Dolan - 30 Apr 2007 07:35 GMT
> I have been calculating the solar rotation rate from the population of
> halo stars. Halo stars are thought to have no net rotation,
For that to be literally true for the purpose of excluing red shifts,
rather
than just a generalization, the halo stars would all have to have
orbits
in vertical planes containing the vertical axis of rotation of the
galaxy.
I don't think such assumptions, being nonsensical, are a good place to
start statistical analyses.
I'm not that sure that "halo stars" would having anything
approximating
an elliptical orbit at all. Wouldn't the density cause fairly chaotic
motions?
I'd guess, though, that there is a smooth blend from that chaotic
motion,
to orbits rotating with the bulk of the galaxy, and that no one is
going to
be especially careful, in data sets gathered for other purposes, in
the
exclusion of galaxy-central stars which nevertheless are in
rotational, if
variously inclined, orbits.
xanthian.
Oh No - 30 Apr 2007 10:36 GMT
Thus spake Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com>
>Oh No <N...@charlesfrancis.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>in vertical planes containing the vertical axis of rotation of the
>galaxy.
No they wouldn't. No net rotation means no rotation for the population
as a whole, or no mean rotation.
>I'm not that sure that "halo stars" would having anything
>approximating
>an elliptical orbit at all. Wouldn't the density cause fairly chaotic
>motions?
The mass due to the density of the galaxy at a given radius is low
compared to the contained mass. Elliptical motions are a good first
approximation. Clearly the approximation will be less good for highly
elliptical orbits, and if one wants a more precise analysis one should
also take into account that much of the mass is in the disk - how much
depends heavily on whether one is dealing with a CDM or no CDM model.
Actually there is not enough information to do a meaningful analysis of
this sort as on the time scales involved we can only look at a tiny
proportion of a stars orbit. Whether or not the motions are strictly
elliptical is not an issue for a study on net rotation.
>I'd guess, though, that there is a smooth blend from that chaotic
>motion,
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>rotational, if
>variously inclined, orbits.
In practice there is a blend from chaotic motion to smooth rotation.
Studying this has been a major purpose of gathering the data set which I
used. By restricting to the lowest metal stars with [Fe/H]<-1.6 one
obtains a population of mainly halo stars with chaotic motions. I
further restricted the population by cutting stars with low W
velocities, i.e. perpendicular to the galactic plane, and plotting mean
orbital velocity against minimum W velocity. After making the reported
correction, the plots are fairly level, but decrease from about -200km/s
with no cut, to -220 km/s with a W cut at 60 km/s, then they level off,
showing that net rotation is pretty well eliminated at that point.
Regards

Signature
Charles Francis
moderator sci.physics.foundations.
substitute charles for NotI to email
Thomas Smid - 30 Apr 2007 15:34 GMT
> I have been calculating the solar rotation rate from the population of
> halo stars.
You shouldn't be saying 'solar rotation rate' here as this would
generally be understood as having to do with the sun's rotation about
its own center of mass. 'solar orbital velocity' would be a better
expression.
Thomas