All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,clip]{2988fig0.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: Solar large frequency difference $\Delta \nu _{n,1}$ ( upper panel) from standard seismic solar model S96 (Christensen-Dalsgaard et al. 1996) (solid line), compared to the observational solar large separation (dots) (Basu et al. 1997). Lower panel: as upper panel but for the ratio r₀₂.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7.7cm,clip]{2988fig1.ps}\par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7.8cm,clip]{2988fig2.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: HR diagram location of models with stellar parameters from differing fits. Labels corresponds to those in Tables 2, and 3. Upper and lower panel correspond respectively to components A and B. The error boxes for $T_{\rm eff}$ , $\log L/L_{\odot}$ , and radii correspond to 1 $\sigma$ (solid line) and $2\sigma$ (dashed-line)
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=8.2cm,clip]{2988fig3.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: Large ( upper panels) and small ( lower panels) separations for the A ( left) and B ( right) components of $\alpha$ Cen system. Points represent the observational values with their error bars assuming an error in frequencies equal to $2\sigma$ . All these curves correspond to calibrations performed including in the $\chi ^2$ functional the average of the observational large and small separations, but different classical observational constraints: masses fixed to the value given by Pourbaix et al. (2002) and $T_{\rm eff}$ (solid lines); radii (dotted-lines); and masses variable as parameter and radii (dashed-lines). All the curves were computed from stellar models including gravitational settling, and MLT treatment of convection with two mixing length adjustable parameters. For clarity only $\ell =1$ theoretical large separations are shown in the upper panels.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=8.1cm,clip]{2988fig4.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: As Fig. 3 but for models computed using different approach for convection: MLT with two mixing length parameters (solid line); FST (dashed lines); MLT with $\alpha _{\rm A}=\alpha _{\rm B}$ (dotted lines); and MLT with $\alpha _{\rm A}=\alpha _{\rm B}=\alpha _{\odot }$ (dash-dotted lines) Large and small separations are derived from stellar models, but the fitting is performed using the ratios r₀₂ for component A and $\Delta \nu$ for component B.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=8.1cm,clip]{2988fig5.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 5: As Fig. 4 but with different curves corresponding to different physics included in the stellar computation: convective overshooting (dashed lines); solar mixture from Asplund et al. (2004) instead of Grevesse & Noels (1993)(dash-dotted lines); no gravitational settling (solid lines); CEFF equation of state instead of OPAL01 (dotted lines).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{2988fig6.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Difference between theoretical and observed frequencies for the sets of parameters whose separations have been plotted in Fig. 3 ( upper panel); in Fig. 4 ( middle panel); and Fig 5 ( lower panel). Left side corresponding to $\alpha$ Cen A, and right side to $\alpha$ Cen B. The labels correspond to the identification of the model used in Table 2.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.7cm,clip]{2988fig7.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: Difference of frequencies between a reference calibration (A3, B3), and both, that with a different EoS (A3e, B3e) (solid lines), and without microscopic diffussion (A3nd, B3nd) (dahsed lines). Upper panel corresponds to component A, and lower panel to component B.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7.6cm,clip]{2988fig8.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 8: r₁₀(n) ratios for A component. Points represent the observational values with their error bars assuming an error in frequencies equal to $2\sigma$ . Short-dashed line corresponds to the model calibrated using large and small separation in the $\chi ^2$ functional, as well as the effective temperatures instead of the radii. The other three curves correspond to modes calibrated using r₀₂(n) in $\chi ^2$ : model including overshooting (solid line) and presenting a convective core; the same calibration without overshooting (dot-dashed line), and calibration without overshooting and without microscopic diffusion (long-dashed line).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,clip]{2988fig0.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 1: Solar large frequency difference $\Delta \nu _{n,1}$ ( upper panel) from standard seismic solar model S96 (Christensen-Dalsgaard et al. 1996) (solid line), compared to the observational solar large separation (dots) (Basu et al. 1997). Lower panel: as upper panel but for the ratio r₀₂.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7.7cm,clip]{2988fig1.ps}\par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7.8cm,clip]{2988fig2.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 2: HR diagram location of models with stellar parameters from differing fits. Labels corresponds to those in Tables 2, and 3. Upper and lower panel correspond respectively to components A and B. The error boxes for $T_{\rm eff}$ , $\log L/L_{\odot}$ , and radii correspond to 1 $\sigma$ (solid line) and $2\sigma$ (dashed-line)
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=8.1cm,clip]{2988fig5.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 5: As Fig. 4 but with different curves corresponding to different physics included in the stellar computation: convective overshooting (dashed lines); solar mixture from Asplund et al. (2004) instead of Grevesse & Noels (1993)(dash-dotted lines); no gravitational settling (solid lines); CEFF equation of state instead of OPAL01 (dotted lines).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{2988fig6.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 6: Difference between theoretical and observed frequencies for the sets of parameters whose separations have been plotted in Fig. 3 ( upper panel); in Fig. 4 ( middle panel); and Fig 5 ( lower panel). Left side corresponding to $\alpha$ Cen A, and right side to $\alpha$ Cen B. The labels correspond to the identification of the model used in Table 2.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.7cm,clip]{2988fig7.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 7: Difference of frequencies between a reference calibration (A3, B3), and both, that with a different EoS (A3e, B3e) (solid lines), and without microscopic diffussion (A3nd, B3nd) (dahsed lines). Upper panel corresponds to component A, and lower panel to component B.
Open with DEXTER