REVIEW
Empirical Determination of the Lithium 6707.856 {\AA} Wavelength in Young Stars
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Absorption features in stellar atmospheres are often used to calibrate photocentric velocities for kinematic analysis of further spectral lines. The Li feature at $\sim$ 6708 {\AA} is commonly used, especially in the case of young stellar objects for which it is one of the strongest absorption lines. However, this is a complex line comprising two isotope fine-structure doublets. We empirically measure the wavelength of this Li feature in a sample of young stars from the PENELLOPE/VLT programme (using X-Shooter, UVES and ESPRESSO data) as well as HARPS data. For 51 targets, we fit 314 individual spectra using the STAR-MELT package, resulting in 241 accurately fitted Li features, given the automated goodness-of-fit threshold. We find the mean air wavelength to be 6707.856 {\AA}, with a standard error of 0.002 {\AA} (0.09 km/s) and a weighted standard deviation of 0.026 {\AA} (1.16 km/s). The observed spread in measured positions spans 0.145 {\AA}, or 6.5 km/s, which is up to a factor of six higher than typically reported velocity errors for high-resolution studies. We also find a correlation between the effective temperature of the star and the wavelength of the central absorption. We discuss how exclusively using this Li feature as a reference for photocentric velocity in young stars could potentially be introducing a systematic positive offset in wavelength to measurements of further spectral lines. If outflow tracing forbidden lines, such as [O i] 6300 {\AA}, are actually more blueshifted than previously thought, this then favours a disk wind as the origin for such emission in young stars.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.