1: \documentclass{emulateapj}
2: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: \newcommand \Angstrom {\,{\rm \AA}}
4: \newcommand \mum {\,{\rm \mu m}}
5: \newcommand \rmin {r_{\rm min}}
6: \newcommand \rmax {r_{\rm max}}
7: \newcommand \K {\,{\rm K}}
8: \newcommand \AU {\,{\rm AU}}
9: \newcommand \pc {\,{\rm pc}}
10: \newcommand \g {\,{\rm g}}
11: \newcommand \s {\,{\rm s}}
12: \newcommand \km {\,{\rm km}}
13: \newcommand \cm {\,{\rm cm}}
14: \newcommand \erg {\,{\rm erg}}
15: \newcommand \simlt {\lesssim}
16: \newcommand \simgt {\gtrsim}
17: \newcommand \gtsim {\gtrsim}
18: \newcommand \ltsim {\lesssim}
19: \newcommand \Teff {T_{\rm eff}}
20: \newcommand \amin {a_{\rm min}}
21: \newcommand \amax {a_{\rm max}}
22: \newcommand \simali {\sim\,}
23: \newcommand \md {m_{\rm d}}
24: \newcommand \rp {r_{\rm p}}
25: \newcommand \Mearth {\,{\rm M_\earth}}
26: \newcommand \Mjup {\,{\rm M_{Jup}}}
27: \newcommand \gastodust {m_{\rm gas}/m_{\rm dust}}
28: \newcommand \BP {$\beta$ Pictoris}
29:
30: \begin{document}
31:
32: \title{The Dust and Gas Around $\beta$ Pictoris}
33: \author{C.\ H.\ Chen\altaffilmark{1}, A. Li\altaffilmark{2},
34: C. \ Bohac\altaffilmark{3}, K.\ H.\ Kim\altaffilmark{3},
35: D.\ M.\ Watson\altaffilmark{3}, J. van Cleve\altaffilmark{4},
36: J.\ Houck\altaffilmark{5}, K.\ Stapelfeldt\altaffilmark{6},
37: M. W. Werner\altaffilmark{6}, G. Rieke\altaffilmark{7},
38: K.\ Su\altaffilmark{7}, M. Marengo\altaffilmark{8},
39: D.\ Backman\altaffilmark{9}, C.\ Beichman\altaffilmark{6},
40: and G.\ Fazio\altaffilmark{8}
41: }
42:
43: \altaffiltext{1}{Spitzer Fellow; NOAO, 950 North Cherry Avenue,
44: Tucson, AZ 85726; {\sf cchen@noao.edu}}
45: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics and Astronomy,
46: University of Missouri,
47: Columbia, MO 65211;
48: {\sf lia@missouri.edu}}
49: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Physics and Astronomy,
50: University of Rochester,
51: Rochester, NY 14627}
52: \altaffiltext{4}{Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp.,
53: Boulder, CO 80301}
54: \altaffiltext{5}{Center for Radiophysics and Space Research,
55: Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-6801}
56: \altaffiltext{6}{Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech,
57: %California Institute of Technology,
58: 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109}
59: \altaffiltext{7}{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona,
60: Tucson, AZ 85721}
61: \altaffiltext{8}{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
62: 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
63: \altaffiltext{9}{%SOFIA/SETI Institute,
64: NASA-Ames Research Center,
65: Moffett Field, CA 94035}
66:
67: \begin{abstract}
68: %
69: We have obtained \emph{Spitzer} IRS 5.5--35 $\mu$m spectroscopy
70: of the debris disk around $\beta$ Pictoris.
71: %
72: In addition to the 10$\mum$ silicate emission feature
73: originally observed from the ground,
74: we also detect the crystalline silicate emission
75: bands at 28$\mum$ and 33.5$\mum$.
76: This is the first time that the silicate bands
77: at wavelengths longer than 10$\mum$
78: have ever been seen in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk.
79: %
80: The observed dust emission is well reproduced
81: by a dust model consisting of fluffy cometary and
82: crystalline olivine aggregates.
83: %
84: We searched for line emission from molecular hydrogen
85: and atomic [\ion{S}{1}], \ion{Fe}{2}, and \ion{Si}{2} gas
86: but detected none. We place a 3$\sigma$ upper
87: limit of $<$\,17$\Mearth$ on the H$_{2}$ S(1) gas mass,
88: assuming an excitation temperature of $T_{\rm ex}$\,=\,100$\K$.
89: This suggests that there is less gas in this system than is
90: required to form the envelope of Jupiter.
91: %
92: We hypothesize that some of the atomic \ion{Na}{1} gas
93: observed in Keplerian rotation around $\beta$ Pictoris
94: may be produced by photon-stimulated desorption from
95: circumstellar dust grains.
96: \end{abstract}
97:
98: \keywords{circumstellar matter--- planetary systems: formation--- planetary
99: systems: protoplanetary disks--- stars: individual ($\beta$ Pictoris)}
100:
101: \section{Introduction}
102: The A5V star $\beta$ Pictoris (HD 39060 = HR 2020) at a distance
103: $d\approx 19.3\pc$ possesses a spectacular edge-on debris disk imaged in
104: scattered light and thermal emission that extends to radii $>$1400$\AU$
105: \citep{st84, hol98, gol06}. An age of $\sim$12 Myr has been estimated for
106: for the central star based on the properties of late-type members of the
107: $\beta$ Pic moving group \citep{zsbw01}.
108: The dust in this system is believed to be replenished
109: from a reservoir, such as collisions between parent bodies
110: or sublimation of comets because the estimated lifetime
111: for the dust under radiation pressure,
112: Poynting-Robertson drag, and grain-grain collisions
113: is a few orders of magnitude shorter
114: than the age of the system \citep{bp93}.
115: There may be evidence for the presence
116: of large bodies in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk
117: that perturb dust grains and parent bodies
118: and instigate collisional cascades between them.
119: A 5$\arcdeg$ warp at radii $<$80 AU has been observed
120: in scattered light using STIS on \emph{HST}
121: and may be generated by either a brown dwarf
122: close to the star (at distances $<$3 AU) or
123: a 0.17$\Mjup$ planet at larger distances
124: from the star (50$\AU$) \citep{hea00}.
125: The $\beta$ Pictoris disk may also possess infalling,
126: sublimating, refractory bodies.
127: Time-variable, high velocity, non-periodic,
128: red-shifted atomic absorption features
129: have been observed toward $\beta$ Pictoris
130: at ultraviolet (UV) and visual wavelengths
131: that vary on timescales as short as hours.
132: The velocity of the atoms, typically 100--400$\km\s^{-1}$,
133: is close to the free fall velocity at a few stellar radii,
134: suggesting that the absorption is produced as stellar photons
135: pass through the comae of infalling bodies
136: at distances $<$6$\AU$ from the star \citep{vlf98}.
137:
138: The origin of the micron-sized dust grains required to
139: account for the observed scattered light and thermal emission
140: is currently not well-constrained.
141: The broad 9.7$\mum$ silicate emission feature
142: and the narrow 11.3$\mum$ crystalline olivine
143: emission feature observed toward $\beta$ Pictoris
144: appear grossly similar to those observed toward
145: comets Halley, Bradford 1987s, and Levy 1990 XX \citep{kna93},
146: suggesting that the grains may be cometary.
147: Models of cometary grains, idealized as fluffy aggregates
148: of interstellar silicate cores with carbonaceous
149: organic refractory mantles
150: (and additional ice mantles at distances
151: larger than the snow-line),
152: in radiative equilibrium with the central star
153: are able to reproduce the observed 10$\mum$ silicate feature
154: and the spectral energy distribution (SED)
155: at IR through millimeter wavelengths \citep{lg98}.
156: Spatially-resolved studies of the silicate emission feature,
157: obtained using COMICS on the Subaru Telescope,
158: suggest that the shape of the 10$\mum$ feature
159: changes as a function of position in the disk,
160: with large and crystalline grains concentrated
161: at the center and small grains located in ring-like bands
162: at 6.4, 16, and 29$\AU$ from the central star \citep{oka04}.
163: The rings of small grains may be explained by collisions
164: between large orbiting bodies.
165: High-resolution, mid-IR imaging of $\beta$ Pictoris,
166: obtained with TReCs on the Gemini South Telescope,
167: has resolved a prominent clump on the south-west
168: side of the disk at 52$\AU$ from the central star
169: which may also indicate that a recent collision
170: has occured in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk \citep{tel05}.
171:
172: Spatially resolved visual spectroscopy of $\beta$ Pictoris has revealed a disk
173: of atomic gas in Keplerian rotation, observed via scattered emission from
174: \ion{Fe}{1}, \ion{Na}{1}, \ion{Ca}{2}, \ion{Ni}{1}, \ion{Ni}{2}, \ion{Ti}{1},
175: \ion{Ti}{2}, \ion{Cr}{1}, and \ion{Cr}{2}. The atomic gas possesses a NE/SW
176: brightness asymmetry and an inner warp similar to that observed in the dust
177: disk although the gas extends to larger heights than the dust \citep{bra04}.
178: Estimates of the radiation pressure acting on Fe and Na atoms suggest that
179: these species should be not be in Keplerian rotation but should be accelerated
180: to terminal outflow velocities $\sim$100s--1000s km/sec \citep{bra04}.
181: \cite{lag98} showed that a ring of neutral hydrogen at distance 0.5 AU could
182: slow down the radial flow of gas. However, \cite{fbw06} have recently proposed
183: that the gas will not be radially accelerated if the carbon is overabundant;
184: their model does not require a population of undetected atomic hydrogen. Since
185: carbon does not experience strong radiation pressure
186: ($F_{\rm rad}/F_{\rm grav}$ = $\beta_{\rm carbon}$ $\approx$ 0)
187: and also has a large ionization fraction ($\sim$0.5),
188: they suggest that Coulomb interactions between \ion{C}{2} and
189: other ions reduce the effective radiation pressure on the bulk gas. In this
190: case, the ions and neutral atoms in the disk couple together into a fluid, with
191: an effective radiation pressure coefficient, that is bound to the system and
192: that brakes the gas if $\beta_{\rm eff}$ $<$ 0.5.
193: In particular, they suggest that
194: if the carbon abundance is $>$10$\times$ solar, then all the atomic gas
195: will be retained. Measurements of the column density of the stable component of
196: atomic carbon (with zero velocity relative to the star) via absorption from
197: \ion{C}{1} ($^{3}$P) $\lambda$1613 \citep{rob00} and absorption from
198: \ion{C}{2}$\lambda$1036 and \ion{C}{2}$^{*}$ $\lambda$1037 superimposed on
199: chromospheric \ion{O}{6} $\lambda$1038, suggest that the bulk of the atomic gas
200: is composed of carbon with a C/Fe abundance ratio that is 16 times the solar
201: value and an ionization fraction of 0.5 \citep{rob06}.
202:
203: We report the results of a \emph{Spitzer} IRS study of the dust and gas around
204: $\beta$ Pictoris, building on the model for the composition and spatial
205: distribution of the grains by \cite{lg98} and placing 3$\sigma$ upper limits on
206: the line emission from H$_{2}$ S(2), S(1), S(0) and [\ion{S}{1}], \ion{Fe}{2},
207: and \ion{Si}{2} gas. Based upon the similarity in the spatial distribution of
208: the dust and gas observed in scattered light, we hypothesize that the dust and
209: gas in this system are physically associated and that the observed gas is
210: secondary; it has been produced from circumstellar material since the star
211: formed. We quantitatively show that the observed \ion{Na}{1}, seen in Keplerian
212: rotation around the star, can be produced via photon-stimulated desorption in a
213: time that is shorter than the residence time of the gas in the disk.
214:
215: \section{Observations}
216: We obtained IR Spectrograph (IRS) \citep{hou04} spectral
217: mapping mode observations of $\beta$ Pictoris
218: using the Short-Low
219: (SL; 5.2--14 $\mum$; $\lambda/\Delta\lambda \sim 90$),
220: Short-High
221: (SH; 9.9--19.6 $\mum$; $\lambda/\Delta\lambda \sim 600$),
222: and Long-High
223: (LH; 18.7--37.2 $\mum$; $\lambda/\Delta\lambda \sim 600$)
224: modules on the \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope} \citep{wer04}.
225: The SL2 slit has a size 3.6$\arcsec\times$57$\arcsec$;
226: the SL1 slit has a size 3.7$\arcsec\times$57$\arcsec$;
227: the SH slit has a size 4.7$\arcsec\times$11.3$\arcsec$;
228: the LH slit has a size 11.1$\arcsec\times$22.3$\arcsec$.
229: Both the low and high resolution observations
230: were made with the spectrograph long slits aligned
231: along the position angle of $\beta$ Pictoris disk to within 5$\arcdeg$.
232:
233: The SL2 (AOR key: 8972288) and SL1 (AOR key: 8972544) spectra were obtained on
234: 16 November 2004 by stepping the slit in 7 and 11 1.8$\arcsec$ intervals
235: perpendicular to the disk, respectively, with the center position centered on
236: the disk. Each SL2 and SL1 map position was observed using 9 and 14 cycles,
237: respectively, of 6 second ramps. The SH (AOR key: 4879616) and LH (AOR key:
238: 4876800) spectra were obtained on 15 December 2003 and 4 March 2004,
239: respectively, by stepping the slit in 3 2.4$\arcsec$ and 4.8$\arcsec$ intervals
240: perpendicular to the disk, respectively, with the center position centered on
241: the disk. Each SH and LH map position was observed using 25 and 24 cycles,
242: respectively, of 30 and 14 second ramps. High accuracy peak-up, with the blue
243: (13.3--18.7$\mum$) array, on the nearby star HD 38891
244: (located 12$\arcmin$ north of $\beta$ Pictoris),
245: was used to center the disk in the SL2, SL1, and SH slits;
246: high accuracy peak-up, with the red array (18.5--26$\mum$),
247: on HD 38891 was used to center the disk in the LH slit.
248:
249: The raw data were processed into calibrated (flat-fielded, stray light
250: corrected) 2-dimensional spectra with version S11.0.2 of the SSC pipeline. We
251: removed masked and rogue pixels from the basic calibrated data by interpolating
252: between their nearest neighbors, coadded the resulting images, and extracted
253: 1-dimensional spectra using the IRS team's SMART program \citep{hig04}. Since
254: separate nod observations of the sky were not made when $\beta$ Pictoris was
255: observed, we approximated the SL sky background as a constant at each
256: wavelength and subtracted this value from each pixel in the spatial direction
257: across the source. Since the SL slits are long enough to sample the
258: PSF in the spatial direction, we fit 1-dimensional Gaussians to the SL spectra
259: in the spatial direction to determine the positions of the source in the slits.
260: We extracted our low resolution spectra by summing over a window whose width
261: varied as a function of wavelength to account for the changing size of the
262: point spread function and was centered on the source position. Finally, we
263: multiplied the resulting spectra with an $\alpha$ Lac relative spectral
264: response function (RSRF), obtained by dividing an $\alpha$ Lac template
265: spectrum with an observed $\alpha$ Lac SL spectrum \citep{jur04}. Since point
266: sources fill the high resolution slits, we extracted our high resolution
267: spectra (without background subtraction) by summing over all of the pixels in
268: the SH and LH slits. The extracted high resolution spectra were multiplied by a
269: $\xi$ Dra high resolution RSRF.
270:
271: We constructed a spectrum that is consistent with the LH slit, the largest slit
272: we used to observe $\beta$ Pictoris, centered on the disk. Since the source is
273: extended in our IRS observations, we added multiple SL measurements together
274: to construct an aperture equal to the LH aperture. Since our SH map was not
275: large enough to cover the LH central slit position, we scaled our SH spectrum
276: by a factor of 1.068 to match the SL and LH spectra, using the LL spectrum at
277: 5.1939 $\mu$m to 9.9232 $\mu$m, the SH spectrum at 9.9461 $\mu$m to 19.3179
278: $\mu$m, and the LH spectrum at 19.2636 $\mu$m to 35.9892 $\mu$m. The final
279: spectrum of $\beta$ Pic (shown in Figure \ref{fig:sedobs}) is that of a
280: 11$\arcsec$$\times$22$\arcsec$ region centered on the star and oriented along
281: the disk.
282:
283: The signal:noise in our spectrum is very high. Over spans of many spectral
284: resolution elements, the sensitivity of our spectrum is limited by
285: flat-fielding errors to 1-2\% of the continuum flux density. Over smaller
286: spans, $\le$ 10 spectral resolution elements or so, the sensitivity is limited
287: only by photon noise from the background and target, and is significantly
288: better: 0.1-0.5\% of the continuum flux density in SH and LH, and 0.05-0.2\% in
289: SL, consistent with the point-to-point scatter in the spectrum over such small
290: spans, and (perforce) consistent with the {\it Spitzer}-IRS facility
291: sensitivity tool, SPEC-PET. Thus, every spectral feature visible in our $\beta$
292: Pic spectrum that is at least as wide as the spectral resolution is real, and
293: the upper limits on weaker spectral lines are significantly smaller than 1\% of
294: the continuum. For simplicity we have calculated such upper limits directly
295: from the point-to-point variation of the continuum-subtracted spectrum.
296:
297: \section{Dust Properties}
298: Figure \ref{fig:sedobs} plots the 5.2--36$\mum$ IRS spectrum
299: and the PHOENIX model stellar atmospheric spectrum
300: with effective temperature $T_\star\,=\,8000\K$
301: and surface gravity log\,$g$ = 4.2.
302: Figure \ref{fig:sedobs} clearly shows that
303: the dust excess emission above the stellar
304: atmospheric radiation is even seen at wavelengths
305: as short as $\lambda\sim$\,5--8$\mum$,
306: indicating that there may exist a population of
307: hot dust ($\sim$\,400--600$\K$)
308: at a distance of $<$10$\AU$ from the central star
309: [see Figure 1 of \cite{lg98}].
310:
311: Mostly prominent in Figure \ref{fig:sedobs}
312: are the broad 10$\mum$ feature (which reveals
313: the presence of both amorphous silicates and
314: crystalline silicates in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk),
315: and the 28$\mum$ and 33.5$\mum$
316: crystalline olivine emission features
317: (see the inset in Figure \ref{fig:sedobs}a)
318: which closely resemble the \cite{lg98} model
319: spectrum (see their Figure 6c).\footnote{%
320: Crystalline pyroxene Mg$_{x}$Fe$_{(1-x)}$SiO$_3$
321: grains also have a rich set
322: of features in the mid-IR. But their peak wavelengths
323: and relative feature strengths are inconsistent
324: with the IRS spectrum (e.g. see Chihara et al.\ 2001).
325: Olivine Mg$_{2x}$Fe$_{2(1-x)}$SiO$_4$ is a mixture
326: of forsterite Mg$_2$SiO$_4$ and fayalite Fe$_2$SiO$_4$
327: with a mixing proportion $x$.
328: In this work as well as in Li \& Greenberg (1998) we
329: adopt the refractive indices of Mg$_{1.8}$Fe$_{0.2}$SiO$_4$
330: (Mukai \& Koike 1990). Although in principle
331: it is possible to infer the Mg:Fe ratio from the locations
332: and strengths of the IR features
333: (e.g. see Koike et al.\ 1993, 2003, Fabian et al.\ 2001),
334: neither the IRS spectrum reported here reveals a large number
335: of crystalline silicate features nor does it cover a sufficiently
336: broad wavelength range for constraining the exact crystal composition.
337: As shown in Figure 2, the dust model consisting of
338: crystalline Mg$_{1.8}$Fe$_{0.2}$SiO$_4$ olivine reproduces
339: the IR features reasonably well.
340: }
341: %
342: This is the first time that the silicate bands
343: at wavelengths longer than 10$\mum$ have ever
344: been detected in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk.
345:
346: For comparison, we also show in Figure \ref{fig:sedobs}
347: the IRAS broadband photometry of \cite{gil86},
348: the photometry of \cite{tk91}
349: at 8.8, 10.3, 11.7 and 12.5$\mum$
350: obtained using the {\it Big Mac} spectral filters
351: at the NASA {\it Infrared Telescope Facility} (IRTF),
352: the IRTF $N$ band (10.1$\mum$) and $Q$ band (20$\mum$)
353: photometry of \cite{bgw92},
354: the IRTF 2.6--13.5$\mum$ intermediate resolution
355: ($\lambda/\Delta\lambda\approx 50$) spectrometry
356: of \cite{kna93},
357: and the {\it Kuiper Airborne Observatory} (KAO)
358: 47 and 95$\mum$ photometry of \cite{har96}.
359: %Since these observations were made
360: %with different aperture sizes,
361: While the photometry of \cite{tk91}
362: and the IRTF $N$ band photometry of \cite{bgw92}
363: agree with the spectrometry of \cite{kna93} very well,
364: they are below the IRS spectrum by a factor of $\sim$\,1.94
365: (see Figure \ref{fig:sedobs}b and Figure \ref{fig:sedmod}b).
366: This difference is
367: much larger than the calibration uncertainty of IRS and
368: is attributed to the fact that the Spitzer apertures
369: ($3.6^{\prime\prime}\times 57^{\prime\prime}$ for SL,
370: $4.7^{\prime\prime}\times 11.3^{\prime\prime}$ for SH,
371: $11.1^{\prime\prime}\times 22.3^{\prime\prime}$ for LH)
372: are much larger than the apertures of ground-based observations
373: [e.g. $3.7^{\prime\prime}$ diameter of \cite{kna93},
374: $3.9^{\prime\prime}\times 4.2^{\prime\prime}$ of \cite{tk91},
375: $7.8^{\prime\prime}$ diameter of \cite{bgw92}],
376: and therefore Spitzer detects more flux from extended
377: material than in previous observations.\footnote{%
378: Indeed, as shown in Figure 1a, the SL point-source-extracted
379: spectrum centered on the star (with a beam diameter of
380: $\sim$\,3.6$^{\prime\prime}$, approximately the same
381: as \cite{kna93}'s spectroscopic observation) is close
382: to that of \cite{kna93}.
383: % {\bf Dana: could you write a few words to answer
384: % the referee's question ...}
385: }
386:
387: The nature (e.g. size, composition, and morphology)
388: of the dust and its spatial distribution in protoplanetary
389: and debris disks is mostly revealed through the interaction
390: of the dust with the electromagnetic radiation of
391: the central star: absorbing, scattering and polarizing
392: the stellar radiation and re-radiating
393: the absorbed UV/visible photons at longer wavelengths,
394: ranging from the IR to submillimeter and millimeter.
395: Since the disk around $\beta$ Pictoris subtends
396: more than 100$\arcsec$, it has been studied in great detail.
397: There exists a vast variety of observational data
398: for the dust in this disk (see \cite{mann06}),
399: including (1) imaging observations of scattered light
400: \citep{st84, pb87, gdc93, lde93,
401: kj95, mou97, hea00, kal00, gol06};
402: (2) imaging observations of dust thermal emission
403: in the mid-IR
404: \citep{lp94, pla97, hei99, wah03, tel05}
405: and submillimeter \citep{hol98};
406: (3) mid-R narrow band photometry \citep{tk91},
407: as well as broadband photometry
408: in the mid-IR \citep{gil86, bgw92}
409: and millimeter \citep{chi91, lis03};
410: (4) optical \citep{gsw91, wsg95} and near-IR \citep{tam06}
411: imaging of polarized light; and
412: (5) mid-IR spectroscopy \citep{ait93, kna93, wbz03, oka04}.
413:
414: To accurately describe the dust grains
415: in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk,
416: all of the aforementioned observational
417: data must be modeled {\it simultaneously}.
418: %So far, there lacks such a comprehensive modeling,
419: %although extensive modeling efforts have been
420: %performed in literature. All existing work focus
421: %on particular observations of the disk --
422: %either scattered light \citep{abp89, kj95, aug01, gol06},
423: %polarization \citep{vk99, kkm00, tam06},
424: %or dust thermal emission \citep{chi91, bgw92, ait93,
425: %kna93, lg98, hei99, sdw04}.\footnote{%
426: % \cite{pla97} modeled both the optical scattered light
427: % and the mid-IR emission; however, they simply adopted
428: % the Henyey-Greenstein phase function instead of
429: % calculating the scattering parameters of the dust.
430: % }
431: %
432: While recognizing the importance of a comprehensive,
433: simultaneous modeling of all of the $\beta$ Pictoris
434: observations, in this paper we present a simple model
435: focusing on our \emph{Spitzer} IRS spectrum.
436: We defer the comprehensive modeling of the dust
437: around $\beta$ Pictoris that attempts to simultaneously
438: fit all of the observed data
439: to a separate paper (A. Li et al.\ 2007, in preparation).
440:
441: We model the \emph{Spitzer} IRS spectrum of $\beta$ Pictoris
442: building on the work of \cite{lg98} which includes
443: (1) a population of cometary dust, composed of low-density
444: porous aggregates of amorphous silicate core-carbonaceous
445: mantle grains,\footnote{%
446: The mass ratio of the silicate core to the carbon mantle
447: is assumed to be $m_{\rm carb}/m_{\rm sil} \approx 0.7$
448: based on the cosmic abundance consideration
449: (see Appendix A of Li \& Lunine 2003).
450: }
451: and (2) a population of crystalline olivine aggregates
452: with the same size and spatial distributions
453: as the amorphous cometary grains
454: (but actually we do not require crystalline dust
455: outside $\sim$\,60$\AU$ from the star
456: since at distances $>$\,60$\AU$ from the star
457: silicate grains are too cold to emit at
458: the characteristic mid-IR bands).
459:
460: For the amorphous cometary and crystalline olivine
461: fluffy aggregates, we assume a vacuum volume fraction
462: $P$\,=\,0.90 (see \S2 of Li, Lunine, \& Bendo 2003 for justification)
463: and approximate the porous grains as spheres with radii $a$.
464: We assume a power-law dust size distribution
465: $dn(a)/da \propto a^{-\alpha}$,
466: with a minimum grain radius $\amin=1\mum$,
467: and a maximum grain radius $\amax=10000\mum$
468: (see Li, Lunine, \& Bendo 2003 for justification).
469:
470: Similar to \cite{ac97}, we assume a modified power-law
471: spatial distribution for the dust,
472: $n(r) \propto
473: 1/\left[f\left(r/\rp\right)^{-1}+\left(r/\rp\right)^{\gamma}\right]$.
474: This functional form, peaking at
475: $\rp\times\left(f/\gamma\right)^{1/\left(\gamma+1\right)}$,
476: behaves like a power-law $n(r) \propto r^{-\gamma}$
477: at large distances ($r>\rp$).
478: At $r<\rp$, the $\left(r/\rp\right)^{-1}$ term
479: dominates, approximating an increasing profile
480: in the inner, dust-relatively-depleted region.
481: We take $\rp=100\AU$ and $\gamma=2.7$ as derived
482: from scattered light modeling \citep{abp89}.
483: The inner boundary $\rmin$ of the disk is taken to
484: be the location inside which silicate dust sublimates.
485: For the $\beta$ Pictoris disk, micron-sized silicate
486: grains possess an equilibrium temperature
487: $T\approx 1500\K$ at $r\approx 0.2\AU$;
488: therefore, we take $\rmin=0.2\AU$.
489: We take $\rmax$\,=\,2000$\AU$.
490:
491: In modeling the dust IR emission,
492: we -- with all other parameters
493: (i.e. $\rp$, $\gamma$, $\rmin$, $\rmax$) pre-chosen --
494: are therefore left with only 2 free parameters:
495: $\alpha$ -- the dust size distribution power-index,
496: and $f$ which determines the amount of dust
497: in the inner disk region $r<\rp$
498: [we note that \cite{ac97} took $f$\,=\,1].
499: It is found that, with $\alpha\approx 3.2$
500: and $f \approx 0.15$, we are able to obtain
501: a reasonably good fit to
502: the overall SED and the Spitzer IRS spectrum
503: including the silicate emission features
504: at 10, 28 and 33.5$\mum$
505: (see Figure \ref{fig:sedmod}).\footnote{%
506: The amount of dust in the inner disk ($r<\rp$)
507: is inverse proportional to $f$.
508: With $f$\,=\,0.15 and $\gamma$\,=\,2.7,
509: the dust spatial distribution peaks at
510: $0.46\,\rp\approx 46\AU$. At a first glance,
511: this appears inconsistent with the scattered light images
512: which suggest a dust spatial distribution slope
513: change at $\sim$\,80--120\,AU
514: (e.g. see \cite{gdc93,gol06}).
515: However, the dust spatial distribution from
516: 46\,AU ($\approx\frac{1}{2}\rp$) to $\rp$ is rather
517: flat: $n(r)$ only changes by a factor of $\approx$2.3
518: from $\frac{1}{2}\rp$ to $\rp$, while it drops much more
519: steeply from $\rp$ to 2\,$\rp$ (by a factor of
520: $\approx$5.8). In a subsequent paper (A. Li et al.\ 2007,
521: in preparation), we will investigate in detail whether
522: the present dust spatial distribution
523: is able to reproduce the scattered light images.
524: }
525: %except the deficiencies at $\lambda\sim$\,5--8$\mum$
526: %and $\lambda\sim$\,17--24$\mum$
527: %[see \S6 and A. Li et al.\ (2007, in preparation)].
528: The required dust masses are approximately
529: $1.63\times 10^{27}\g\approx 0.27\,{\rm M}_\earth$
530: and $4.89\times 10^{25}\g\approx 0.0082\,{\rm M}_\earth$
531: for the amorphous and crystalline components, respectively.
532:
533: As shown in Figure \ref{fig:sedmod}b,
534: the model is somewhat deficient
535: at $\lambda\sim$\,5--8$\mum$
536: and $\lambda\sim$\,17--24$\mum$.
537: This is due to the oversimplified dust spatial
538: distribution function adopted above.
539: By including 2 rings or clumps of dust
540: at $r<10\AU$ and at $r\sim$\,20--30$\AU$
541: as implied by \cite{tel05} and \cite{oka04},
542: it is expected that the model will account for
543: the excess emission at 5--8$\mum$ and 17--24$\mum$
544: (see A. Li et al.\ 2007, in preparation).
545: %
546: The oversimplification of the assumed dust spatial
547: distribution is also reflected by the model-predicted
548: IR emission from the dust within a 3.6$^{\prime\prime}$
549: diameter (corresponding to $\sim$\,35$\AU$; see Figure 2a):
550: the model-predicted emission from the inner 35$\AU$ region
551: accounts for almost all the observed $\lambda$\,$<$\,15$\mum$
552: emission for the entire disk. Although this is consistent with
553: the previous spatially resolved mid-IR spectroscopy
554: which show that 10$\mum$ silicate emission
555: originates from the inner $\sim$\,20$\AU$
556: \citep{wbz03, oka04}, it appears to contradict the IRS
557: detection of an appreciable amount of silicate emission
558: from the outer $\sim$\,35$\AU$ (see Figure 1a).
559: This will be investigated in detail in a subsequent
560: paper (see A. Li et al.\ 2007, in preparation).
561:
562: \section{Gas Mass Upper Limits}
563: Core-accretion models suggest that giant planets accrete their gaseous
564: envelopes on timescales between 1 and 20\,Myr. Therefore the $\beta$ Pictoris
565: disk, with an age of $\simali$12\,Myr, is an excellent source to search for
566: bulk gas. If the gas has a solar composition, then the bulk gas is expected to
567: be hydrogen. \emph{ISO} observations indicated line emission from H$_{2}$ S(0)
568: at 28.2$\mum$ and S(1) at 17.0$\mum$, suggesting that the disk possesses
569: 54$\Mearth$ warm H$_{2}$ with an excitation temperature
570: $T_{\rm ex}$\,=\,110$\K$ \citep{thi01}. However, apparently conflicting
571: \emph{FUSE} observations constrain the circumstellar H$_{2}$ Lyman series
572: absorption and place a 3$\sigma$ upper limit of
573: $N({\rm H}_2) \leq 10^{18}\cm^{-2}$ on the H$_{2}$ column density,
574: significantly lower than (5--500)$\times 10^{20}\cm^{-2}$ expected if the
575: \emph{ISO}-detected H$_{2}$ were uniformly distributed in an edge-on disk in
576: the beam \citep{lde01}, an assumed geometry that is consistent with
577: observations of the atomic gas. Detailed studies of gas drag on the dust
578: dynamics suggest that the gas:dust ratio is less than 1 (or $<$0.4 $M_{\earth}$
579: molecular hydrogen exists in the disk). For example, if the disk possessed
580: 40 M$_{\earth}$ gas, then small grains would collect at distances $>$200 AU and
581: would increase the scattered light surface brightness by more than a factor of
582: 10 \citep{ta05}. Searches for \ion{H}{1} 21 cm emission constrain the mass of
583: atomic hydrogen $M_{\rm HI} \leq 0.5\Mearth$ \citep{fre95}; recent chemical
584: models constrain the total mass of hydrogen $\leq$15 M$_{\earth}$ including the
585: molecular component based on these observations \citep{kfc07}.
586:
587: We searched for emission from H$_{2}$ S(2), S(1), S(0) and [\ion{S}{1}],
588: \ion{Fe}{2}, and \ion{Si}{2} but did not detect any of these species. We place
589: 3$\sigma$ upper limits on their line fluxes toward $\beta$ Pictoris (see Table
590: 1). Our 3$\sigma$ upper limit on the H$_{2}$ S(1) line flux is
591: $<$1.2$\times 10^{-14}\erg\s^{-1}\cm^{-2}$, a factor of $\simali$6.4 times
592: lower than the reported \emph{ISO} detection
593: (see Figure \ref{fig:H2_spec}).
594: Although the \emph{Spitzer} IRS SH slit
595: is a factor of two shorter than the \emph{ISO} SWS
596: slit (14$\arcsec \times$27$\arcsec$), our upper limits effectively constrain
597: the H$_{2}$ line emission because the warm, bulk H$_{2}$ is expected to be
598: located at radii $<$100$\AU$ ($<$6$\arcsec$). %Detailed chemical models of
599: %intermediate-age disks by \cite{gh04} suggest that [\ion{S}{1}] may set the
600: %most stringent gas mass upper limit of the \emph{Spitzer} infrared line
601: %diagnostics. Our 3$\sigma$ upper limit on the [\ion{S}{1}] line flux is
602: %$<$8.6$\times 10^{-14}\erg\s^{-1}\cm^{-2}$.
603:
604: Converting 3$\sigma$ upper limits on the line fluxes from any species into gas
605: masses depends sensitively on the assumed gas temperature. Detailed models of
606: the heating and cooling of molecular and atomic gas via gas-grain collisions,
607: cosmic rays, line emission, etc. have been used to infer the temperature and
608: chemical structure of the $\beta$ Pictoris disk. However, these models depend
609: on the initial gas:dust ratio or gas mass assumed. For example, a
610: 2$\Mearth$ disk (with an interstellar gas:dust ratio of $\sim$100) heated
611: primarily by gas-grain collisions may possess gas as warm as 100--150$\K$ at
612: intermediate heights at distances of 300--500$\AU$ where [\ion{O}{1}] fine
613: structure emission at 63.2$\mum$ is the dominant coolant; while, a 0.2$\Mearth$
614: disk may possess gas as warm as 300$\K$ at lower heights and similar radii in
615: the disk where [\ion{O}{1}] and H$_{2}$ rotational/vibrational emission are the
616: dominant coolants \citep{kvz01}. Estimates of the total gass mass, inferred
617: from the measured column densities of atomic species and the scattered light
618: gas density profile of \ion{Na}{1}, suggest that the $\beta$ Pictoris disk
619: contains $\sim$7.4$\times$10$^{-4}$ $M_{\earth}$ measured gas, corresponding to
620: a gas:dust ratio $\sim$0.019, significantly less than assumed in many detailed
621: chemical models. Even if the gas has a solar hydrogen abundance relative to the
622: heavy elements, then the disk possesses $\sim$3.7$\times$10$^{-3}$ $M_{\earth}$
623: gas, corresponding to a gas:dust ratio $\sim$0.093 (A. Roberge, private
624: communication), still significantly less than the gas:dust ratios of 100 or 10
625: assumed in these models.
626:
627: To estimate an upper limit on the mass of H$_{2}$ based on our S(1) line flux
628: upper limit, we must assume a gas excitation temperature. Gas temperatures can
629: be inferred from (1) detailed models of gas in thermal balance that calculate
630: the composition and density structure of disks in addition to the temperature
631: structure (as described above) or (2) observations if multiple electronic
632: transitions are observed. Far-UV observations of $\beta$ Pictoris have
633: constrained the bulk circumstellar gas temperature. Analysis of the \ion{C}{1}
634: ($^{3}$P) $\lambda$1613 and $\lambda$1561 multiplets suggest that the
635: excitation temperature of the stable \ion{C}{1} component, $T_{\rm ex}$\,=\,
636: 50--100$\K$ \citep{rob00}. Since bulk hydrogen with a gas:dust ratio of 100 has
637: not been directly detected (as assumed for the Kamp \& van Zadelhoff models),
638: we rely on the measured \ion{C}{1} excitation temperature to act as a guide for
639: the bulk gas kinetic temperature $T_{\rm kin}$\,=\,50--100$\K$. Therefore, we
640: place 3$\sigma$ upper limits on the mass in each of the listed species assuming
641: gas temperatures $T_{\rm ex}$\,=\,50 and 100$\K$ (see Table 1). The total flux
642: produced by $N$ atoms or molecules
643: \begin{equation}
644: F = \frac{h\nu N \chi_{u} A_{ul}}{4 \pi d^{2}}
645: \end{equation}
646: where $d$ is the distance to the star, $E = h \nu$ is the energy of the
647: radiated photons, $\chi_{u}$ is the fraction of atoms or molecules in level
648: $u$, and $A_{ul}$ is the transition probability. Since the temperature of any
649: H$_{2}$ is uncertain, we plot the 3$\sigma$ upper limits on the H$_{2}$ mass
650: obtained from our S(1) and S(0) line fluxes %and from our \ion{S}{1} line flux
651: %(assuming that the gas has an interstellar composition)
652: as a function of temperature (see Figure \ref{fig:H2_mass}).
653: If $T_{\rm gas}$\,=\,100\,K, we estimate that $<$17$\Mearth$ H$_{2}$
654: %or $<$0.17$\Mearth$
655: hydrogen remains in the disk from our H$_{2}$ S(1) %and [\ion{S}{1}]
656: upper limit.
657:
658: The nondetection of H$_{2}$, [\ion{S}{1}], \ion{Fe}{2}, and \ion{Si}{2}
659: emission toward $\beta$ Pictoris is consistent with \emph{Spitzer} observations
660: of other 10--30\,Myr old disks. \emph{ISO} observations of the 20\,Myr old
661: dusty A1V star 49 Ceti have indicated line emission from H$_{2}$ S(0) at
662: 28.2$\mum$, suggesting that the 49 Cet disk possesses $>$110$\Mearth$ warm
663: H$_{2}$ with an excitation temperature $T_{\rm ex} < 100\K$ \citep{thi01}.
664: However, high resolution \emph{Spitzer} IRS observations place 3$\sigma$ upper
665: limits on the H$_{2}$ S(0) line flux that are a factor $\sim$9 lower than
666: the reported detection \citep{che06}. A recent \emph{Spitzer} IRS search for
667: H$_{2}$ emission from warm gas and millimeter search for $^{12}$CO from cool
668: gas around 8 sun-like systems with ages $<$30 Myr measured upper limits
669: $<$0.04 $M_{\rm Jup}$ gas within a few AU of the disk inner radius (1--40 AU)
670: and $<$0.04 $M_{\earth}$ gas at 10--40 AU \citep{pas06}. \emph{Spitzer} IRS
671: observations place 5$\sigma$ upper limits on the line flux from H$_{2}$ S(1)
672: and S(0) toward HD 105, a G0V member of the Tucana-Horolgium association at
673: 40$\pc$ from the Sun, suggesting that less than 1500, 12, and 0.95$\Mearth$,
674: respectively, at $T_{\rm gas}$\,=\,50, 100, or 200$\K$ remains in this disk at
675: an age of 30\,Myr \citep{hol05}. Together, these observations suggest that warm
676: molecular hydrogen, with $T_{ex}$ = 100 K, dissipates from circumstellar disks
677: on timescales $<$10 Myr.
678:
679: \section{The Origin of the Atomic Gas}
680: The origin of the observed stable atomic gas in Keplerian rotation around
681: $\beta$ Pictoris (described in the Introduction), like the micron-sized dust
682: grains, is currently not well-constrained. There have been suggestions in the
683: literature that the stable gas component is produced by infalling refractory
684: bodies \citep{bv07} or by collisions between dust grains \citep{cm07, fbw06}.
685: We consider these possibilities and hypothesize that some of the observed
686: atomic sodium is generated by photon-stimulated desorption from SiO$_{2}$-like
687: surfaces.
688:
689: Infalling refractory bodies undoubtably contribute at least some portion of the
690: observed gas but whether all of the gas is generated by the evaporation of
691: parent bodies is uncertain. The spatial distribution of the gas may provide a
692: clue to its origin. The atomic gas is detected to distances of 150--200$\AU$ on
693: the southwest side and distances of 300--350$\AU$ on the northeast side of the
694: disk. These distances correspond to the inner regions of the dusty disk that
695: has been detected in thermal emission and scattered light to distances $>$1400
696: AU. The SW/NE dust brightness asymmetry observed in scattered light is also
697: seen in the resonantly scattered gas emission lines; however, the asymmetry in
698: the \ion{Na}{1} emission is more pronounced. Finally, the gas and dust
699: populations share an inner disk that is tilted $\sim$5$\arcdeg$ with respect
700: to the outer disk \citep{bra04}. If infalling refractory bodies produce all of
701: the observed gas,
702: %(1) how does the gas migrate from regions near the star to distances of
703: % 150--350$\AU$?
704: %(2)
705: why are the spatial distributions of the
706: gas and dust so similar?
707:
708: To explain the similarity in the spatial distributions of the dust and gas
709: around $\beta$ Pictoris, \cite{cm07} recently proposed that the atomic gas
710: is produced via collisions between dust grains that vaporize at least some
711: portion of the dust. Vaporization of dust grains in energetic collisions is
712: believed to produce atomic gas in supernovae shocks and may generate a
713: non-trivial fraction of the gas observed in the exospheres of Mercury and the
714: moon \citep{kil01}. In the \cite{cm07} model, radiation pressure accelerates
715: sub-blowout sized grains ($\beta$ meteoroids) to large radial velocities; these
716: small particles then collide with bound, orbiting grains with relative
717: velocities as high as 90 km/sec (for carbonaceous grains). The observed
718: abundances of the $\beta$ Pictoris dust and atomic gas may provide a clue to
719: the origin of the stable atomic gas. If the gas is liberated in vaporizing
720: collisions and no atomic species are selectively removed (e.g. via outgassing
721: or differentiation), then the gas composition should be the same as the grain
722: composition. Our models for the dust grains around $\beta$ Pictoris reproduce
723: the \emph{Spitzer} IRS spectrum assuming a carbon relative to silicon abundance
724: ratio of $\simali$8.9, significantly smaller than the measured ratio of the
725: column densities of atomic carbon and silicon gas, $\simali$500 \citep{rob06}.
726:
727: Photon-stimulated desorption (PSD) may produce a substantial fraction of the
728: sodium observed in the tenuous exospheres of Mercury and the Moon
729: \citep{leb06,lam03,ym99} and may produce some of the spatially-extended sodium
730: gas observed via resonant scattering toward $\beta$ Pictoris. Since PSD
731: produces gas directly from the dust, it might naturally explain the similarity
732: in the gas and dust density distributions. The cross-section for PSD jumps
733: dramatically at UV wavelengths, becoming most efficient at
734: $\lambda < 2500\Angstrom$ \citep{ym99}. $\beta$ Pictoris has been observed
735: extensively in the far and near ultra violet using \emph{FUSE} \citep{lde01,
736: rob06}, \emph{HST} GHRS and STIS \citep{rob00}, with a continuum flux at
737: $2000\Angstrom < \lambda < 2500 \Angstrom$ measured by \emph{IUE},
738: $F_{\lambda} > 4\times 10^{-11}\erg\s^{-1}\cm^{-2}\Angstrom^{-1}$
739: \citep{lhh95}. \cite{fbw06} model the observed stellar ultra violet spectrum of
740: $\beta$ Pic using a rotationally broadened
741: ($v_{\rm rot}$ = 130$\pm$4\,km\,sec$^{-1}$)
742: PHOENIX model with effective temperature $T_\star\,=\,8000\,K$,
743: and surface gravity, log\,$g$\,=\,4.2,
744: suggesting a stellar UV photon production rate,
745: $L_{1000-2500 \Angstrom}$ = 2.0$\times$10$^{44}$ s$^{-1}$.
746:
747: The efficiency with which photons desorb sodium, averaged over the surface of
748: a sphere, is
749: \begin{equation}
750: \epsilon = \frac{1}{4} Q \sigma
751: \end{equation}
752: \citep{ym99} where $Q$ is the photon-stimulated desorption cross section
753: and $\sigma$ is the atomic surface coverage. Laboratory experiments
754: measure $Q_{Na}$ $\sim$ (3$\pm$1) $\times$ 10$^{-20}$ cm$^{2}$ for lunar
755: samples with temperatures of 250 K and using incident photons with $\lambda$
756: $<$ 2500 \AA, suggesting an efficiency of $\epsilon_{Na,250K}$ = 2.3
757: $\times$ 10$^{-8}$ for materials with a lunar temperatures and compositions,
758: $\sigma_{Na}$ = 3 $\times$ 10$^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ \citep{ym99}. In addition, the
759: photon-stimulated desoprtion efficiency of sodium is also function of substrate
760: temperature, $T_{\rm gr}$. We estimate
761: \begin{equation}
762: \epsilon_{Na} = (6.93 \times 10^{-8}) 10^{-122.8 K /T_{\rm gr}}
763: \end{equation}
764: from measurements of sodium desorption yields in the laboratory \citep{ym04},
765: normalized to the sodium desorption efficiency at the moon as discussed above.
766:
767: The rate at which atomic sodium is produced in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk is
768: \begin{equation}
769: \Gamma = \int_{R_{\rm min}}^{R_{\rm max}} 2 \pi r dr
770: \int_{z_{\rm min}}^{z_{\rm max}} dz\,
771: \frac{L_{1000-2500 \Angstrom}}{4 \pi r^{2}}\,
772: \epsilon[T_{\rm dust}(r)]\,\pi a^{2}\,n_{\rm dust}(r,z)
773: \end{equation}
774: where $R_{\rm min} = 3\AU$ and $R_{\rm max} = 232\AU$ are the minimum and
775: maximum radii, and $z_{\rm min} = -100\AU$ and $z_{\rm max} = 100\AU$ are the
776: minimum and maximum heights at which the atomic sodium gas is observed.
777: Since the \ion{Na}{1} gas in the $\beta$ Pic disk is located at distances of up
778: 350 AU, well beyond our IRS slit, we use a dust density distribution inferred
779: based on observations of the disk on large scales (rather than the dust
780: density profile that we derive in Section 3). Artymowicz (private
781: communication) has inferred the quantity $\pi a^2 n_{\rm dust}$, summed over
782: all grain sizes, from \emph{HST} STIS observations \citep{hea00} assuming a
783: grain albedo 0.5:
784: \begin{equation}
785: \pi a^2 n_{\rm dust} = \frac{\tau_{\rm o}}{W}
786: \left[\left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm o}}\right)^{-4}+
787: \left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm o}}\right)^{6} \right]^{-1/2}
788: \exp\left[-\left(\frac{z}{W}\right)^{0.7}\right]
789: \end{equation}
790: where $r_{\rm o}$\,=\,120\,AU, $W$\,=\,6.6\,$\left(r/r_{\rm o}\right)^{0.75}$,
791: and $\tau_{\rm o}$\,=\,2$\times 10^{-3}$. We assume that the bulk of the
792: surface area is contained in 1 $\mu$m amorphous olivine grains and estimate
793: the grain temperature as a function of distance using Mie theory (the grains
794: are spherical) and using laboratory-measured indices of refraction
795: \citep{dor95}. If $R_\star = 1.69\,R_{\sun}$ and $T_\star = 8000\K$, we
796: estimate a sodium production rate $1.3\times 10^{33}\s^{-1}$ from the grains
797: via photon-stimulated desorption. We do not use the same dust spatial
798: distribution as adopted in \S3 for modeling the IR emission because the
799: desorption properties of porous aggregates invoked in \S3 are poorly known,
800: while the desorption properties of compact grains (assumed in eq.[4])are better
801: quantified (e.g. experimental data are available). Moreover, the dust spatial
802: distribution adopted in \S3 is already oversimplified.
803:
804: We estimate the number of sodium atoms in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk from
805: observations of resonantly scattered \ion{Na}{1} and infer the time required to
806: produce the circumstellar sodium. Since the ionization potential of sodium is
807: 5.1 eV and $\beta$ Pic possesses a high UV luminosity, the majority of the
808: circumstellar sodium is expected to be ionized. \cite{fbw06} have written
809: a photoionization code that calculates the densities of neutral and ionized
810: elements from H to Ni, assuming that the $\beta$ Pic disk is optically thin
811: and has a solar composition; they estimate a sodium neutral fraction of
812: 3$\times$10$^{-4}$ at the disk midplane at 100$\AU$ from the central star.
813: Since the sodium neutral fraction is a function of distance from the stellar
814: ionizing source, we have written a simple photoionization code which calculates
815: the densities of neutral and ionized carbon and sodium in the disk as a
816: function of position assuming that (1) the gas is optically thin, (2) the disk
817: gas contains only carbon and sodium, (3) ionization of carbon produces the
818: electron density in the disk, (4) the gas temperature,
819: $T_{\rm ex}$ = $T_{\rm gr}$,
820: and (5) the circumstellar \ion{Na}{1} possesses a density distribution
821: \begin{equation}
822: n_{\rm NaI} = n_{\rm o}
823: \left[\left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm o}}\right)^{a}+
824: \left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm o}}\right)^{b} \right]^{-1/2}
825: \exp\left[-\left(\frac{z}{\alpha r}\right)^{2}\right]
826: \end{equation}
827: \citep{bra04} where $n_{\rm o} = (1.02\pm0.04) \times 10^{-5}\cm^{-3}$,
828: $r_{\rm o} = 117\pm3\AU$, $a = 0.94\pm0.06$, $b = 6.32\pm0.04$, and
829: $\alpha = 0.168\pm0.05$. We use published carbon and sodium photoionization
830: cross sections \citep{ver96} and radiative recombination coefficients
831: \citep{vf96, nah95} to estimate the carbon and sodium densities assuming that
832: the atoms are in ionization equilibrium at each point in the disk. If the
833: gas has a solar carbon:sodium abundance ratio, then the $\beta$ Pictoris disk
834: possesses 4.6$\times$10$^{44}$ sodium atoms and a time of $\sim$13000 years is
835: required to produce the sodium gas. Models of the breaking of atomic gas in
836: the $\beta$ Pic disk suggest that the lifetime of an atom in the disk is
837: $\sim$10$^{4}$ to 10$^{5}$ years \citep{fbw06}, suggesting that the sodium gas
838: is in a steady state if it is produced by PSD and braked by Coulomb
839: interactions.
840:
841: We can estimate the radial dependence of the sodium number density and compare
842: it to that inferred from resonantly scattered sodium observations
843: \citep{bra04}. If atomic sodium produced in the disk does not migrate radially,
844: then sodium gas generated by photon-stimulated desorption will have a number
845: density distribution
846: \begin{equation}
847: n(r,z) \propto \frac{L_{1000-2500 \Angstrom}}{4 \pi r^{2}}\,
848: \epsilon_{Na}[T_{\rm dust}(r,z)]\,\pi a^{2}\,n_{\rm dust}(r,z)
849: \end{equation}
850: where $r$ is the distance to the central star and $\pi a^2 n_{dust} $ is the
851: surface area contained in the dust grains. The predicted PSD-produced sodium
852: density distribution at the disk midplane falls too quickly as a function of
853: radius compared to that inferred from observations (see Figure 5). The rapid
854: fall off in predicted sodium density is the result of the 1/$r^{2}$ dilution of
855: stellar photons. The sodium desorption efficiency is able to partially overcome
856: this effect because $\epsilon_{Na}[T_{dust}(r,z)]$ $\propto$ $r$ if the grains
857: are 1 $\mu$m olivine spheres. However, even taking into account the temperature
858: dependence of the desorption efficiency, our predicted sodium number density
859: falls off too quickly with radius by a factor of $r$. If PSD produces the bulk
860: of the observed sodium, sodium atoms must migrate to larger distances via
861: radiation pressure.
862:
863: %The observation that the scale height for \ion{Na}{1} is larger than that
864: %observed for the dust may be explained if the circumstellar sodium is produced
865: %via PSD. Laboratory studies suggest that sodium desorbs from lunar samples
866: %with an escape velocity peaked at 800 m/s, corresponding to a temperature of
867: %$\sim$900 K \citep{ym04}. This is the same temperature inferred for the
868: %$\beta$ Pictoris gas based on measurements of the \ion{Na}{1} scale height at
869: %100 AU \citep{fbw06}. Therefore, the kinetic energy transfered to desorbed
870: %sodium atoms may heat the gas, producing the observed gas scale height.
871: Our model for the origin of circumstellar sodium could be extended to other
872: atomic species in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk. At the current time, few
873: laboratory measurements have been made for the photon-stimulated desorption
874: rates of other atoms. Potassium is the only species, other than sodium, for
875: which PSD rates have been measured. \cite{mad98} measure cross sections for
876: postassium desorption from Cr$_{2}$O$_{3}$ surfaces, $Q_{K}$ = 2 $\times$
877: 10$^{-20}$ cm$^{2}$ at 2500 - 3500 \AA \ and 2 $\times$ 10$^{-19}$ cm$^{2}$ at
878: 1900 \AA. If photon-stimulated desorption of potassium has the same temperature
879: dependence as observed for sodium and the $\beta$ Pic circumstellar grains have
880: a solar potassium to sodium abundance ratio, $\sigma_{K}$ = 2.1 $\times$
881: 10$^{11}$ cm$^{-2}$, then we estimate a potassium production rate in the
882: $\beta$ Pic disk of 3.3 $\times$ 10$^{32}$ K atoms s$^{-1}$, $\sim$3000 times
883: less than the sodium production rate. Atomic potassium has not yet been
884: detected in the $\beta$ Pictoris disk and 3$\sigma$ upper limits on the
885: circumstellar potassium mass have not yet been reported in the literature.
886:
887: \section{Discussion}
888: The simple dust model presented in \S3,
889: consisting of cometary grains with a power-law size
890: distribution and a modified power-law spatial distribution,
891: provides a reasonably good fit to the overall
892: SED and the observed {\it Spitzer} IRS spectrum.
893: At a first glance, the model has many
894: free parameters: (1) $\amin$, $\amax$ and $\alpha$ for
895: the dust size distribution $dn/da$;
896: and (2) $\rmin$, $\rmax$, $f$, $\rp$, $\gamma$ for
897: the dust spatial distribution $dn/dr$.
898: With general constraints from the disk structure
899: and the dust absorption and emission properties,
900: we actually have only 2 free parameters $\alpha$
901: and $f$ left (see \S3 for details).
902: In so doing, 2 assumptions have been made:
903: (1) all grains have the same spatial distribution;
904: and (2) the grains producing the IRS emission spectrum
905: are also responsible for the optical scattered light
906: or their spatial distribution follows that of the dust
907: responsible for the optical scattered light.
908: Admittedly, the former assumption is oversimplified
909: since the response of the grains to the stellar radiation
910: pressure and Poynting-Robertson drag varies with grain size
911: and therefore the simple radial power law is probably
912: not all that representative of the actual grain distribution
913: uniformly with size. To justify the latter assumption,
914: a simultaneous modeling of both the scattered light and
915: IR emission is required.
916: Nevertheless, the general conclusion for the dust
917: (the presence of crystalline silicates
918: and an inner warm dust component in the disk)
919: remains valid.
920:
921: We have presented a model for the production of circumstellar sodium gas
922: around $\beta$ Pictoris from dust via photon-stimulated desorption. Our model
923: is able to generate the inferred circumstellar sodium within the residence time
924: of the gas but is unable to reproduce the radial dependence of the number
925: density distribution if the sodium atoms do not migrate to larger distances via
926: radiation pressure. Our estimate for the time required to desorb the observed
927: sodium is a function of (1) the circumstellar grain temperature, (2) the
928: circumstellar gas temperature, and (3) the gas carbon:sodium abundance ratio.
929:
930: The photon-stimulated desorption rate of sodium from orbiting dust grains is
931: dependent on the grain temperature with sodium more efficiently desorbed from
932: warmer surfaces. Since the bulk of the surface area of the dust is contained in
933: the smallest grains, we estimated the grain temperature assuming that the
934: grains have radii of $a$ = 1 $\mu$m, are composed of amorphous silicates, and
935: are spherical. However, if the grains are very small (2$\pi a < \lambda$) then
936: the grain temperature, $T_{\rm gr}$ =
937: $\left[0.25 (R_\star/r)^{2}\right]^{0.2} T_\star$,
938: and the sodium desorption rate,
939: $\Gamma$ = $3.7\times 10^{33}\s^{-1}$, and 4000 years are required to produce
940: the sodium gas. Or, if the grains are very large (black bodies), then the grain
941: temperature, $T_{\rm gr}$ =
942: $\left[0.25 (R_\star/r)\right]^{0.5} T_\star$,
943: and the sodium desorption rate,
944: $\Gamma$ = $2.5\times 10^{32}\s^{-1}$, and 58000 years are required to produce
945: the sodium gas.
946:
947: In our simple model, we have assumed that the gas and dust have the same
948: temperatures and we have explored the possible range in dust temperature
949: profiles. We also consider how changes in the gas temperature profile affect
950: our estimates for the sodium neutral fraction and therefore the total number
951: of sodium atoms in the disk. The estimated neutral fraction of sodium is weakly
952: dependent on the gas temperature and composition. The radiative recombination
953: coefficients for carbon and sodium decrease by factors of $\sim$5 if the gas
954: temperature increases from 10 K to 100 K or 100 K to 1000 K. If the gas has a
955: temperature profile similar to small grains or black bodies (instead of 1
956: $\mu$m olivine spheres), then we estimate that the $\beta$ Pictoris disk
957: possesses either 7.0$\times$10$^{44}$ or 5.4$\times$10$^{44}$ sodium atoms,
958: respectively, similar to the 4.6$\times$10$^{44}$ sodium atoms expected if the
959: gas has the temperature profile expected from 1 $\mu$m amorphous silicate
960: grains. The assumed abundance of sodium relative to carbon also affects the
961: total number of sodium atoms inferred from the neutral sodium observations. In
962: our model, we have assumed that the gas has a solar composition; however, a
963: recent inventory of the circumstellar atomic gas around $\beta$ Pictoris
964: suggests that carbon is enriched compared to iron and oxygen by factors of 16
965: and 18, respectively \citep{rob06}. If the $\beta$ Pictoris disk is enriched in
966: carbon relative to sodium by a factor of 16, then the disk possesses
967: 1.7$\times$10$^{44}$ sodium atoms, somewhat less than the number inferred if
968: the gas has a solar composition.
969:
970: %\newpage
971: %\begin{equation}
972: %T_{gr} = \left[ \frac{1}{4} \left(\frac{R_{*}}{D} \right)^{2} T_{*}^{5}
973: % \right]^{1/5}
974: %\end{equation
975: %\newpage
976:
977: \section{Conclusions}
978: We have obtained \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope} IRS spectra
979: of the 12\,Myr old debris disk around $\beta$ Pictoris.
980: We find that:
981:
982: %1. The \cite{lg98} model for the composition
983: %and spatial distribution of dust
984: %around $\beta$ Pictoris reproduces
985: %the observed spectrum well. However, fluffy
986: %cometary and crystalline olivine aggregates
987: %alone are not sufficient to explain
988: %the excess emission observed at $\lambda$ $<$ 15 $\mu$m.
989: %An additional warm amorphous silicate grain population
990: %is needed to account for the short wavelength excess emission
991:
992: 1. In addition to the 10$\mum$ silicate emission feature
993: originally detected in ground-based observations,
994: we, for the first time, also observe weak crystalline
995: silicate emission features at 28$\mum$ and 33.5$\mum$.
996:
997: 2. The IRS dust emission spectrum and the overall SED
998: are well reproduced by a dust model consisting of
999: fluffy cometary and crystalline olivine aggregates.
1000:
1001: 3. No H$_{2}$, [\ion{S}{1}], \ion{Fe}{2}, or \ion{Si}{2}
1002: emission is detected. Our 3$\sigma$ upper limits
1003: suggest that $<$17$\Mearth$ H$_{2}$ remains in
1004: the disk significantly less than the previously reported detections
1005: of H$_{2}$ S(1) and S(0) emission.
1006: The circumstellar disk around $\beta$ Pictoris has
1007: too little gas to support the formation of giant planets.
1008:
1009: 4. Some of the observed resonantly scattered \ion{Na}{1},
1010: observed at visual wavelengths, may be produced
1011: via photon-stimulated desorption; the timescale to generate
1012: all of the inferred circumstellar sodium is 13000 yr,
1013: approximately the residence time of the gas in the disk if
1014: the gas is braked by Coulomb forces.
1015:
1016: \acknowledgements
1017: We would like to thank A. Brandeker for providing the rotationally broadened
1018: PHOENIX stellar atmosphere model for $\beta$ Pictoris and I. Mann for providing
1019: us a preprint of their manuscript on their model for a collisional origin for
1020: the $\beta$ Pic atomic gas prior to publication. We would also like to thank
1021: our two anonymous referees and E. Chiang, D. Hollenbach, M. Jura, J. Najita,
1022: A. Roberge, N. Samarasinha, W. Sherry, A. Weinberger, K. Willacy, and Y. Wu for
1023: their helpful comments and suggestions. Support for this work at NOAO was
1024: provided by NASA through the Spitzer Space Telescope Fellowship Program,
1025: through a contract issued by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California
1026: Institute of Technology under a contract with NASA. Support for this work at
1027: the University of Missouri was provided in part by the University of Missouri
1028: Summer Research Fellowship, the University of Missouri Research Board, a
1029: NASA/HST Theory Program grant, and a NASA/Spitzer Theory Program grant. Support
1030: for this work at the University of Arizona was provided by NASA through
1031: Contract Number 1255094 issued by JPL/Caltech.
1032:
1033: \begin{thebibliography} {}
1034: \bibitem[{{Aitken} {et~al.}(1993){Aiken}, {Moore}, {Roche}, {Smith}, {Wright}}]
1035: {ait93}
1036: {Aiken}, D.~K., {Moore}, T.~J.~T, {Roche}, P.~F., {Smith}, C.~H., \&
1037: {Wright}, C.~M. 1993, MNRAS 265, L41
1038: \bibitem[{{Artymowicz} {et~al.}(1989){Artymowicz},{Burrows},{Paresce}}]{abp89}
1039: {Artymowicz}, P., {Burrows}, C., \& {Paresce}, F. 1989, ApJ, 337, 494
1040: \bibitem[{{Artymowicz} \& {Clampin}(1997)}]{ac97}
1041: {Artymowicz}, P., \& {Clampin}, M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 863
1042: \bibitem[{{Augereau} {et~al.}(2001){Augereau}, {Nelson}, {Lagrange},
1043: {Papaloizou}, {Mouillet}}]{aug01}
1044: {Augereau}, J.-C., {Nelson}, R.~P., {Lagrange}, A.~M., {Papaloizou}, J.~C.~B.,
1045: \& {Mouillet}, D. 2001, A\&A, 370, 447
1046: \bibitem[{{Backman} {et~al.}(1992){Backman}, {Gillett}, {Witteborn}}]{bgw92}
1047: {Backman}, D.~E., {Gillett}, F.~C., \& {Witteborn}, F.~C. 1992, ApJ, 385, 670
1048: \bibitem[{{Backman} \& {Paresce}(1993)}]{bp93}
1049: {Backman}, D.~E., \& {Paresce}, F. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, eds.
1050: E. Levy and J.~I. Lunine (Tuscon: University of Arizona Press), 1253
1051: \bibitem[{{Beust} \& {Valiron}(2007)}]{bv07}
1052: {Beust}, H., \& {Valiron}, P. 2007, A\&A, 466, 201
1053: \bibitem[{{Brandeker} {et~al.}(2004){Brandeker}, {Liseau}, {Olofsson},
1054: {Fridlund}}]{bra04}
1055: {Brandeker}, A., {Liseau}, R., {Olofsson}, G., \& {Fridlund}, M. 2004,
1056: A\&A, 413, 681
1057: \bibitem[{{Chen} {et~al.}(2006){Chen}, {Sargent}, {Bohac}, {Kim},
1058: {Leibensperger},{Jura}, {Najita}, {Forrest}}]{che06}
1059: {Chen}, C.~H., {Sargent}, B., {Bohac}, C., {Kim}, K.~H., {Leibensperger}, E.,
1060: {Jura}, M., {Najita}, J., {Forrest}, W.~J. et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 351
1061: \bibitem[{{Chihara} {et~al.}(2001){Chihara},{Koike},{Tsuchiyama}}]{ckt01}
1062: {Chihara}, H., {Koike}, C., \& {Tsuchiyama}, A. 2001, \pasj, 53, 243
1063: \bibitem[{{Chini} {et~al.}(1991){Chini}, {Krugel}, {Shustov}, {Tutukov},
1064: {Kreysa}}]{chi91}
1065: {Chini}, R., {Krugel}, E., {Shustov}, B., {Tutukov}, A., \& {Kreysa}, E. 1991
1066: A\&A, 252, 220
1067: \bibitem[{{Czechowski} \& {Mann}(2007)}]{cm07}
1068: {Czechowski}, A., \& {Mann}, I. 2007, ApJ, 660, 1541
1069: \bibitem[{{Dent} {et~al.}(2005){Dent}, {Greaves}, \& {Coulson}}]{dgc05}
1070: {Dent}, W.~R.~F., {Greaves}, J.~S., \& {Coulson}, I.~M. 2005, MNRAS, 359, 663
1071: \bibitem[{{Dorschner} {et~al.}(1995){Dorschner}, {Begemann}, {Henning},
1072: {Jaeger}, {Mutschke}}]{dor95}
1073: {Dorschner}, J., {Begemann}, B., {Henning}, T., {Jaeger}, C., \& {Mutschke}, H.
1074: 1995, A\&A, 300, 500
1075: \bibitem[{{Fabian} {et~al.}(2001){Fabian},{Henning},{Mutschke},{Dorschner},
1076: {Wehrhan}}]{fab01}
1077: {Fabian}, D., {Henning}, T., {J{\"a}ger}, C., {Mutschke}, H., {Dorschner}, J.,
1078: \& {Wehrhan}, O. 2001, \aap, 378, 228
1079: \bibitem[{{Fernandez} {et~al.}(2006){Fernandez}, {Brandeker}, {Wu}}]{fbw06}
1080: {Fernandez}, R., {Brandeker}, A. \& {Wu}, Y. 2006, ApJ, 643, 509
1081: \bibitem[{{Freudling} {et~al.}(1995){Freudling}, {Lagrange}, {Vidal-Madjar},
1082: {Ferlet}, {Forveille}}]{fre95}
1083: {Freudling}, W., {Lagrange}, A.-M., {Vidal-Madjar}, A., {Ferlet}, R., \&
1084: {Forveille}, T. 1995, A\&A, 301, 231
1085: \bibitem[{Gillett}(1986)]{gil86}
1086: {Gillett}, F.~C.\ 1986, in Light on Dark Matter, Proc. First Infra-Red
1087: Astronomical Satellite Conf. (Dordrecht: Reidel), 61
1088: \bibitem[{{Gledhill} {et~al.}(1991){Gledhill}, {Scarrott}, {Wolstencroft}}]
1089: {gsw91}
1090: {Gledhill}, T.~M., {Scarrott}, S.~M., \& {Wolstencroft}, R.~D. 1991, MNRAS,
1091: 252, 50
1092: \bibitem[{{Golimowski} {et~al.}(1993){Golimowski},{Durrance},{Clampin}}]{gdc93}
1093: {Golimowski}, D.~A., {Durrance}, S.~T., \& {Clampin}, M. 1993, ApJ, 411, L41
1094: \bibitem[{{Golimowski} {et~al.}(2006){Golimowski}}]{gol06}
1095: {Golimowski}, D.~A., {Ardila}, D.~R., {Krist}, J.~E., {Clampin}, M.,
1096: {Ford}, H.~C., {Illingworth}, G.~D., {Bartko}, F., {Ben\'{i}tez}, N. et al.
1097: 2006, AJ, 131, 3109
1098: \bibitem[{{Gorti} \& {Hollenbach}(2004)}]{gh04}
1099: {Gorti}, U., \& {Hollenbach}, D. 2004, ApJ, 613, 424
1100: \bibitem[{{Haas} {et~al.}(1998){Haas}, {Hollenbach}, {Erickson}}]{hhd91}
1101: {Haas}, M.~R., {Hollenbach}, D., \& {Erickson}, E.~F. 1991, ApJ, 374, 555
1102: \bibitem[{Harvey} {et~al.}(1998)]{har96}
1103: {Harvey}, P.~M., {Smith}, B.~J., {DiFrancesco}, J., {Colome}, C., \& {Low},
1104: F.~J. 1996, ApJ, 471, 973
1105: \bibitem[{{Heap} {et~al.}(2000){Heap}, {Lindler}, {Lanz}, {Cornett}, {Hubeny},
1106: {Maran}, {Woodgate}}]{hea00}
1107: {Heap}, S.~R., {Lindler}, D.~J., {Lanz}, T.~M., {Cornett}, R.~H., {Hubeny}, I.,
1108: {Maran}, S.~P., \& {Woodgate}, B. 2000, ApJ, 539, 435
1109: \bibitem[{{Heinrichsen} {et~al.}(1999){Heinrichsen}, {Walker}, {Klauss},
1110: {Sylvester}, {Lemke}}]{hei99}
1111: {Heinrichsen}, I., {Walker}, H.~J., {Klauss}, U., {Sylvester}, R.~J., \&
1112: {Lemke}, D. 1999, MNRAS, 304, 589
1113: \bibitem[{{Higdon} {et~al.}(2004){Higdon}, {Devost}, {Brandl}, {Houck}, {Hall},
1114: {Barry}, {Charmandaris}}]{hig04}
1115: {Higdon}, S.~J.~U., {Devost}, D., {Higdon}, J.~L., {Brandl}, B.~R.,
1116: {Houck}, J.~R., {Hall}, P., {Barry}, D., {Charmandaris}, V. et al. 2004,
1117: PASP, 116 975
1118: \bibitem[{{Holland} {et~al.}(1998){Holland}, {Greaves}, {Zuckerman}, {Webb},
1119: {McCarthy}, {Coulson}, {Walther}, {Dent}}]{hol98}
1120: {Holland}, W.~S., {Greaves}, J.~S., {Zuckerman}, B., {Webb}, R.~A., {McCarthy},
1121: C., {Coulson}, I.~M., {Walther}, D.~M., {Dent}, W.~R.~F. et al. 1998, Nature,
1122: 392, 788
1123: \bibitem[{{Hollenbach} {et~al.}(2005){Hollenbach}, {Gorti}, {Meyer}, {Kim},
1124: {Morris}, {Najita}, {Pascucci}, {Carpenter}}]{hol05}
1125: {Hollenbach}, D., {Gorti}, U., {Meyer}, M., {Kim}, J.~S., {Morris}, P.,
1126: {Najita}, J., {Pascucci}, I., {Carpenter}, J. et al. 2005, ApJ, 631, 1180
1127: \bibitem[{{Houck} {et~al.}(2004){Houck}, {Roellig}, {van Cleve}, {Forrest},
1128: {Herter}, {Lawrence}, {Matthews}, {Reitsema}}]{hou04}
1129: {Houck}, J. R., {Roellig}, T. L., {van Cleve}, J., {Forrest}, W. J.,
1130: {Herter}, T., {Lawrence}, C. R., {Matthews}, K., {Reitsema}, H. J.
1131: 2004, ApJS, 154, 18
1132: \bibitem[{{Jennings} {et~al.}(1987){Jennings}, {Weber}, {Brault}}]{jwb87}
1133: {Jennings}, D.~E., {Weber}, A., \& {Brault}, J.~W. 1987, J. Mol. Spectrosc.,
1134: 126, 19
1135: \bibitem[{{Jura} {et~al.}(2004){Jura}, {Chen}, {Furlan}, {Green}, {Sargent},
1136: {Forrest}, {Watson}}]{jur04}
1137: {Jura}, M., {Chen}, C.~H., {Furlan}, E., {Green}, J., {Sargent}, B.,
1138: {Forrest}, W.~J., {Watson}, D.~M. et al. 2004, ApJS, 154, 453
1139: \bibitem[{{Kalas} \& {Jewitt}(1995)}]{kj95}
1140: {Kalas}, P., \& {Jewitt}, D. 1995, AJ, 110, 794
1141: \bibitem[{{Kalas} {et~al.}(2000){Kalas},{Larwood},{Smith},{Schultz}}]{kal00}
1142: {Kalas}, P., {Larwood}, J., {Smith}, B.~A., {Schultz}, A. 2000, ApJ, 530, L133
1143: \bibitem[{{Kamp} \& {van Zadelhoff}(2001)}]{kvz01}
1144: {Kamp}, I., \& {van Zadelhoff}, G.-J. 2001, A\&A, 373, 641
1145: \bibitem[{{Kamp} {et~al.}(2007){Kamp},{Freudling},{Chengalur}}]{kfc07}
1146: {Kamp}, I., {Freudling}, W., \& {Chengalur}, J.~N. 2007, ApJ, 660, 469
1147: \bibitem[{{Killen} {et~al.}(2001){Killen}, {Potter}, {Reiff}, {Sarantos},
1148: {Jackson}, {Hick}, {Giles}}]{kil01}
1149: {Killen}, R.~M., {Potter}, A.~E., {Reiff}, P.~H., {Sarantos}, M., {Jackson},
1150: B.~V., {Hick}, P., \& {Giles}, B. 2001, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 20509
1151: \bibitem[{{Knacke} {et~al.}(1993){Knacke}, {Fajardo-Acosta}, {Telesco},
1152: {Hackwell}, {Lynch}, {Russell}}]{kna93}
1153: {Knacke}, R.~F., {Fajardo-Acosta}, S.~B., {Telesco}, C.~M., {Hackwell}, J.~A.,
1154: {Lynch}, D.~K., {Russell}, R.~W. 1993, ApJ, 418, 440
1155: \bibitem[{{Koike} {et~al.}(1993){Koike},{Shibai},{Tuchiyama}}]{kst03}
1156: {Koike}, C., {Shibai}, H., \& {Tuchiyama}, A.1993, MNRAS, 264, 654
1157: \bibitem[{{Koike} {et~al.}(2003){Koike},{Chihara},{Tsuchiyama},{Suto},{Sogawa}
1158: {Okuda}}]{koi2003}
1159: {Koike}, C., {Chihara}, H., {Tsuchiyama}, A., {Suto}, H., {Sogawa}, H., \&
1160: {Okuda}, H. 2003, A\&A, 399, 1101
1161: \bibitem[{{Krivova} {et~al.}(2000){Krivova}, {Krivova}, {Mann}}]{kkm00}
1162: {Krivova}, N.~A., {Krivova}, A.~V., \& {Mann}, I. 2000, ApJ, 539, 424
1163: \bibitem[{{Lagage} \& {Pantin}(1994)}]{lp94}
1164: {Lagage}, P.~O., \& {Pantin}, E. 1994, Nature, 369, 628
1165: \bibitem[{{Lagrange} {et~al.}(1998){Lagrange}, {Beust}, {Mouillet}}]{lag98}
1166: {Lagrange}, A.-M., {Beust}, H., {Mouillet}, D., {Deleuil}, M., {Feldman},
1167: P.~D., {Ferlet}, R., {Hobbs}, L., {Lecavelier des Etangs}, A. et al. 1998
1168: A\&A, 330, 1091
1169: \bibitem[{{Lammer} {et~al.}(2003){Lammer}, {Wurz}, {Patel}, {Killen}, {Kolb},
1170: {Massetti}, {Orsini}}]{lam03}
1171: {Lammer}, H., {Wurz}, P., {Patel}, M.~R., {Killen}, R., {Kolb}, C., {Massetti},
1172: S., {Orsini}, S. et al. 2003, Icarus, 166, 238
1173: \bibitem[{{Lanz} {et~al.}(1995){Lanz}, {Heap}, {Hubeny}}]{lhh95}
1174: {Lanz}, T., {Heap}, S.~R., \& {Hubeny}, I. 1995, ApJ, 447, L41
1175: \bibitem[{{Leblanc} {et~al.}(2006){Leblanc},{Barbieri},{Cremonese},{Verani},
1176: {Cosentino},{Mendillo},{Sprague},{Hunten}}]{leb06}
1177: {Leblanc}, F., {Barbieri}, C., {Cremonese}, G., {Verani}, S., {Cosentino}, R.,
1178: {Mendillo}, M., {Sprague}, A., \& {Hunten}, D. 2006, Icarus, 185, 395
1179: \bibitem[{{Lecavelier des Etangs} {et~al.}(1993){Lecavelier des Etangs},
1180: {Perrin},{Ferlet},{Vidal-Madjar},{Colas},{Colas},{Buil},{Sevre}}]{lde93}
1181: {Lecavelier des Etangs}, A., {Perrin}, G., {Ferlet}, R., {Vidal-Madjar}, A.,
1182: {Colas}, A., {Colas}, F., {Buil}, C., {Sevre}, F. 1993, A\&A, 274, 877
1183: \bibitem[{{Lecavelier des Etangs} {et~al.}(2001){Lecavelier des Etangs},
1184: {Vidal-Madjar}, {Roberge}, {Feldman}, {Deleuil}, {Andre}, {Blair}, {Bouret},
1185: {Desert}, {Ferlet}, {Friedman}}]{lde01}
1186: {Lecavelier des Etangs}, A., {Vidal-Madjar}, A., {Roberge}, A., {Feldman},
1187: P.~D., {Deleuil}, M., {Andr\'{e}}, M., {Blair}, W.~P., {Bouret}, J.~C.,
1188: et al. 2001, Nature, 412, 706
1189: \bibitem[{{Li} \& {Greenberg}(1998)}]{lg98}
1190: {Li}, A., \& {Greenberg}, J.~M. 1998, A\&A, 331, 291
1191: \bibitem[{{Li} \& {Lunine}(2003)}]{ll03}
1192: {Li}, A., \& {Lunine}, J.~I. 2003, ApJ, 590, 368
1193: \bibitem[{{Li} {et~al.}(2003){Li}, {Lunine}, {Bendo}}]{llb03}
1194: {Li}, A., {Lunine}, J.~I., \& {Bendo}, G.~J. 2003, ApJ, 598, L51
1195: \bibitem[{{Liseau} {et~al.}(2003){Liseau}, {Brandeker}, {Fridlund}, {Olofsson},
1196: {Takeuchi}, {Artymowicz}}]{lis03}
1197: {Liseau}, R., {Brandeker}, A., {Fridlund}, M., {Olofsson}, G., {Takeuchi}, T.,
1198: \& {Artymowicz}, P. 2003, A\&A, 402, 183
1199: \bibitem[{{Madey} {et~al.}(1998){Madey}, {Yakshinskiy}, {Ageev}, {Johnson}}]
1200: {mad98}
1201: {Madey}, T.~E., {Yakshinskiy}, B.~V., {Ageev}, V.~N., \& {Johnson}, R.~E. 1998
1202: J. Geophys. Res., 103, 5873
1203: \bibitem[{{Mann} {et~al.}(2006){Mann},{K{\"o}hler},{Kimura},{Cechowski},
1204: {Minato}}]{mann06}
1205: {Mann}, I., {K{\"o}hler}, M., {Kimura}, H., {Cechowski}, A., \& {Minato}, T.
1206: 2006, \aapr, 13, 159
1207: \bibitem[{{Mouillet} {et~al.}(1997){Mouillet}, {Larwood}, {Papaloizou},
1208: {Lagrange}}]{mou97}
1209: {Mouillet}, D., {Larwood}, J.~D., {Papaloizou}, J.~C.~B., \& {Lagrange}, A.-M.
1210: 1997, MNRAS, 292, 896
1211: \bibitem[{Mukai} \& {Koike}(1990)]{mk90}
1212: {Mukai}, T., \& {Koike}, C. 1990, Icarus, 87, 180
1213: \bibitem[{{Nahar} (1995)}]{nah95}
1214: {Nahar}, S.~N. 1995, ApJ, 101, 423
1215: \bibitem[{{Nussbaumer} \& {Storey}(1980)}]{ns80}
1216: {Nussbaumer}, H., \& {Storey}, P.~J. 1980, A\&A, 308, 1980
1217: \bibitem[{{Okamoto} {et~al.}(2004){Okamoto}, {Kataza}, {Honda}, {Yamashita},
1218: {Onaka},{Watanabe}, {Miyata}, {Sako}}]{oka04}
1219: {Okamoto}, Y.~K., {Kataza}, H., {Honda}, M., {Yamashita}, T., {Onaka}, T.,
1220: {Watanabe}, J.-I., {Miyata}, T., {Sako}, S., et al. 2004, Nature, 431, 660
1221: \bibitem[{{Pantin} {et~al.}(1997){Pantin}, {Lagage}, {Artymowicz}}]{pla97}
1222: {Pantin}, E., {Lagage}, P.~O., \& {Artymowicz}, P. 1997, A\&A, 327, 1123
1223: \bibitem[{{Paresce} \& {Burrows}(1987)}]{pb87}
1224: {Paresce}, F., \& {Burrows}, C. 1987, ApJ, 319, L23
1225: \bibitem[{{Pascucci} {et~al.}(2006){Pascucci}, {Gorti}, {Hollenbach}, {Najita},
1226: {Meyer}, {Carpenter}, {Hillenbrand}, {Herczeg}}]{pas06}
1227: {Pascucci}, I., {Gorti}, U., {Hollenbach}, D., {Najita}, J., {Meyer}, M.~R.,
1228: {Carpenter}, J.~M., {Hillenbrand}, L.~A., {Herczeg}, G.~J. et al. ApJ, 2006,
1229: 651, 1177
1230: \bibitem[{{Roberge} {et~al.}(2000){Roberge}, {Feldman}, {Lagrange},
1231: {Vidal-Madjar}, {Ferlet}, {Jolly}, {Lemaire}, {Rostas}}]{rob00}
1232: {Roberge}, A., {Feldman}, P.~D., {Lagrange}, A.-M., {Vidal-Madjar}, A.,
1233: {Ferlet}, R., {Jolly}, A., {Lemaire}, J.~L., \& {Rostas}, F. 2000, ApJ, 538,
1234: 904
1235: \bibitem[{{Roberge} {et~al.}(2006){Roberge}, {Feldman}, {Weinberger},
1236: {Deleuil}, {Bouret}}]{rob06}
1237: {Roberge}, A., {Feldman}, P.~D., {Weinberger}, A.~J., {Deleuil}, M., \&
1238: {Bouret}, J.-C. 2006, Nature, 441, 724
1239: \bibitem[{{Sheret} {et~al.}(2004){Sheret}, {Dent}, {Wyatt}}]{sdw04}
1240: {Sheret}, I., {Dent}, W.~R.~F., \& {Wyatt}, M.~C. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 1282
1241: \bibitem[{{Smith} \& {Terrile}(1984)}]{st84}
1242: {Smith}, B.~A., \& {Terrile}, R.~J. 1984, Science, 226, 1421
1243: \bibitem[{{Tamura} {et~al.}(2006){Tamura}, {Fukagawa}, {Kimura}, {Yamamoto},
1244: {Suto}, {Abe}}]{tam06}
1245: {Tamura}, M., {Fukagawa}, M., {Kimura}, H., {Yamamoto}, T., {Suto}, H., \&
1246: {Abe}, L. 2006, ApJ, 641, 1172
1247: \bibitem[{{Telesco} \& {Knacke}(1991)}]{tk91}
1248: {Telesco}, C.~M., \& {Knacke}, R.~F. 1991, ApJ, 372, L29
1249: \bibitem[{{Telesco} {et~al.}(2005){Telesco}, {Fisher}, {Wyatt}, {Dermott},
1250: {Kehoe}, {Novotny}, {Marinas}, {Radomski}, {Packham}, {De Buizer},
1251: {Hayward}}]{tel05}
1252: {Telesco}, C.~M., {Fisher}, R.~S., {Wyatt}, M.~C., {Dermott}, S.~F.,
1253: {Kehoe}, T.~J.~J., {Novotny}, S., {Marinas}, N., {Radomski}, J.~T.,
1254: {Packham}, C., {De Buizer}, J., \& {Hayward} T.~L. 2005, Nature, 433, 133
1255: \bibitem[{{Th\'{e}bault} \& {Augereau}(2005)}]{ta05}
1256: {Th\'{e}bault}, P., \& {Augereau}, J.-C. 2005, A\&A, 437, 141
1257: \bibitem[{{Thi} {et~al.}(2001){Thi}, {Blake}, {van Dishoeck}, {van Zadelhoff},
1258: {Horn}, {Becklin}, {Mannings}, {Sargent}, {van den Ancker}, {Natta}}]{thi01}
1259: {Thi}, W.~F., {Blake}, G.~A., {van Dishoeck}, E.~F., {van Zadelhoff}, G.~J.,
1260: {Horn}, J.~M.~M., {Becklin}, E.~E., {Mannings}, V., {Sargent}, A.~I.,
1261: {van den Ancker}, M.~E., \& {Natta}, A. 2001, Nature, 409, 60
1262: \bibitem[{{Verner} \& {Ferland}(1996)}]{vf96}
1263: {Verner}, D.~A., \& {Ferland}, G.~J. 1996, ApJS, 103, 467
1264: \bibitem[{{Verner} {et~al.}(1996){Verner}, {Ferland}, {Korista}, {Yakovlev}}]
1265: {ver96}
1266: {Verner}, D.~A., {Ferland}, G.~J., {Korista}, K.~T., \& {Yakovlev}, D.~G.
1267: 1996, ApJ, 465, 487
1268: \bibitem[{{Vidal-Madjar} {et~al.}(1998){Vidal-Madjar}, {Lecavelier des Etangs},
1269: {Ferlet}}]{vlf98}
1270: {Vidal-Madjar}, A., {Lecavelier des Etangs}, A., \& {Ferlet}, R. 1998, Planet
1271: Space Sci. 46, 629
1272: \bibitem[{{Voshchinnikov} \& {Kr\"{u}gel}(1999)}]{vk99}
1273: {Voshchinnikov}, N.~V., \& {Kr\"{u}gel}, E. 1999, A\&A, 352, 508
1274: \bibitem[{{Wahhaj} {et~al.}(2003){Wahhaj}, {Koerner}, {Ressler}, {Werner},
1275: {Backman},{Sargent}}]{wah03}
1276: {Wahhaj}, Z., {Koerner}, D.~W., {Ressler}, M.~E., {Werner}, M.~W., {Backman},
1277: D.~E., \& {Sargent}, A.~I. 2003, ApJ, 584, L27
1278: \bibitem[{{Weinberger} {et~al.}(2003){Weinberger},{Becklin},{Zuckerman}}]
1279: {wbz03}{Weinberger}, A.~J., {Becklin}, E.~E., \& {Zuckerman}, B.
1280: 2003, ApJ, 584, L33
1281: \bibitem[{{Werner} {et~al.}(2004){Werner}, {Roellig}, {Low}, {Rieke}, {Rieke},
1282: {Hoffmann}, {Young}, {Houck}}]{wer04}
1283: {Werner}, M. W., {Roellig}, T., {Low}, F., {Rieke}, G., {Rieke}, M.,
1284: {Hoffmann}, W., {Young}, E., {Houck}, J. et al. 2004, ApJS, 154, 1
1285: \bibitem[{{Wolniewicz} {et~al.}(1998){Wolniewicz}, {Simbotin}, {Dalgarno}}]
1286: {wsd98}
1287: {Wolniewicz}, L., {Simbotin}, I., \& {Dalgarno}, A. 1998, ApJS, 115, 293
1288: \bibitem[{{Wolstencroft} {et~al.}(1995){Wolstencroft}, {Scarrott},
1289: {Gledhill}}]{wsg95}
1290: {Wolstencroft}, R.~D., {Scarrott}, S.~M., \& {Gledhill}, T.~M. 1995, Ap\&SS,
1291: 224, 395
1292: \bibitem[{{Yakshinskiy} \& {Madey}(1999)}]{ym99}
1293: {Yakshinskiy}, B.~V., \& {Madey}, T.~E. 1999, Nature, 400, 642
1294: \bibitem[{{Yakshinskiy} \& {Madey}(2004)}]{ym04}
1295: {Yakshinskiy}, B.~V., \& {Madey}, T.~E. 2004, Icarus, 168, 53
1296: \bibitem[{{Zuckerman} {et~al.}(1995){Zuckerman}, {Forveille}, \&
1297: {Kastner}}]{zfk95}
1298: {Zuckerman}, B., {Forveille}, T., \& {Kastner}, J. 1995, Nature, 373, 494
1299: \bibitem[{{Zuckerman} {et~al.}(2001){Zuckerman}, {Song}, {Bessell} \&
1300: {Webb}}]{zsbw01}
1301: {Zuckerman}, B., {Song}, I., {Bessell}, M.~S., \& {Webb}, R.~A. 2001, ApJ,
1302: 562, L87
1303:
1304: \end{thebibliography}
1305:
1306: \clearpage
1307: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}
1308: \tabletypesize{\small}
1309: \tablecaption{Spitzer IRS Line Flux Upper Limits for $\beta$ Pictoris}
1310: \tablehead{
1311: \omit &
1312: \omit &
1313: \omit &
1314: \colhead{50$\K$} &
1315: \colhead{100$\K$} &
1316: \colhead{Atomic/Molecular} \\
1317: \colhead{Gas Species} &
1318: \colhead{Wavelength} &
1319: \colhead{Line Flux} &
1320: \colhead{M$_{\rm gas}$} &
1321: \colhead{M$_{\rm gas}$} &
1322: \colhead{Data} \\
1323: \omit &
1324: \colhead{($\mu$m)} &
1325: \colhead{($\erg\s^{-1}\cm^{-2}$)} &
1326: \colhead{($\Mearth$)} &
1327: \colhead{($\Mearth$)} &
1328: \colhead{References} \\
1329: }
1330: \tablewidth{0pt}
1331: \tablecolumns{3}
1332: \startdata
1333: H$_{2}$ S(2) & 12.279 & $<$5.0$\times$10$^{-14}$ & $<$1.6$\times$10$^{11}$
1334: & $<$1.7$\times$10$^{4}$ & 2,4 \\
1335: H$_{2}$ S(1) & 17.035 & $<$1.2$\times$10$^{-14}$ & $<$2.1$\times$10$^{5}$
1336: & $<$17 & 2,4 \\
1337: $[$\ion{S}{1}$]$ & 25.249 & $<$8.6$\times$10$^{-14}$ & $<$0.047 & $<$0.00016
1338: & 1 \\
1339: \ion{Fe}{2} & 25.988 & $<$6.1$\times$10$^{-14}$ & $<$0.29 & $<$0.0011
1340: & 3 \\
1341: H$_{2}$ S(0) & 28.221 & $<$4.1$\times$10$^{-14}$ & $<$3400 & $<$43
1342: & 2,4 \\
1343: \ion{Si}{2} & 34.814 & $<$4.9$\times$10$^{-13}$ & $<$0.028 & $<$0.00046
1344: & 1 \\
1345: \enddata
1346: \tablerefs{(1) Haas, Hollenbach, \& Erickson 1991;
1347: (2) Jennings, Weber \& Brault 1987;
1348: (3) Nussbaumer \& Storey 1980;
1349: (4) Wolniewicz, Simbotin, \& Dalgarno 1998}
1350: \end{deluxetable}
1351:
1352: \clearpage
1353:
1354: \begin{figure}
1355: \figurenum{1}
1356: \plotone{f1.eps}
1357: \caption{
1358: \label{fig:sedobs}
1359: (a) \emph{Spitzer} IRS SL, SH, and LH spectrum
1360: of $\beta$ Pictoris (red line)
1361: with the PHOENIX atmospheric spectrum (black line) overlaid.
1362: The inserted panel illustrates the 5--36$\mum$
1363: stellar-subtracted \emph{Spitzer} IRS dust excess emission.
1364: Also plotted are the UBVRIJHK stellar photometry
1365: (magenta squares), the ground-based spectrometry
1366: of \cite{kna93} (labeled ``K93''), and the IRS spectrum
1367: in the inner 3.6$^{\prime\prime}$
1368: [corresponding to $\sim$\,35$\AU$; approximately the same
1369: beam size as that of \cite{kna93}] disk (green line).
1370: (b) Comparison of the stellar-subtracted \emph{Spitzer}
1371: IRS dust excess emission (red line) with
1372: the IRAS photometry (cyan open circles),
1373: the {\it Big Mac}/IRTF photometry (black filled circles),
1374: the IRTF $N$ band and $Q$ band photometry (green open stars),
1375: and the IRTF 2.6--13.5$\mum$ spectrometry
1376: of \cite{kna93} (blue open squares). Numerous hydrogen
1377: absorption features can be seen between 5 and 13 $\mu$m;
1378: their depths are consistent with that expected
1379: for a star with A5V photosphere at spectral resolution of
1380: the IRS.
1381: }
1382: \end{figure}
1383:
1384:
1385: \begin{figure}
1386: \figurenum{2}
1387: \plotone{f2.eps}
1388: \caption{
1389: \label{fig:sedmod}
1390: Comparison of the model (black line) to
1391: (a) the observed dust IR emission spectral energy distribution
1392: and (b) the \emph{Spitzer} IRS spectrum (red line).
1393: Also plotted is the model-predicted emission
1394: in the inner 35$\AU$ disk.
1395: Blue open squares: the IRTF 2.6--13.5$\mum$ spectrometry
1396: of \cite{kna93} increased by a factor of 1.94.
1397: Black filled circles: the {\it Big Mac}/IRTF photometry
1398: of \cite{tk91} increased by a factor of 1.94.
1399: Green open stars: the IRTF $N$ band and $Q$ band photometry
1400: of \cite{bgw92} with the $N$ band increased by a factor of 1.94.
1401: Cyan open circles: the IRAS photometry of \cite{gil86}.
1402: Magenta filled triangles: the KAO photometry of \cite{har96}.
1403: Black filled squares: the 850$\mum$ SCUBA photometry of \cite{hol98}.
1404: With this increase (of a factor of 1.94), all observational data
1405: agree with each other very well.
1406: The inserted panel in (b) illustrates the model fit
1407: to the 10$\mum$ silicate features.
1408: }
1409: \end{figure}
1410:
1411:
1412: \begin{figure}
1413: \figurenum{3}
1414: \plottwo{f3a.eps}{f3b.eps}
1415: \caption{
1416: \label{fig:H2_spec}
1417: (a) Portion of the observed \emph{Spitzer} SH spectrum
1418: of $\beta$ Pictoris around H$_{2}$ S(1)
1419: with a model for unresolved H$_{2}$ emission
1420: (overplotted in red) inferred from \emph{ISO} detection.
1421: (b) Same as (a) but for the \emph{Spitzer} LH spectrum
1422: around H$_{2}$ S(0).}
1423: \end{figure}
1424:
1425: \begin{figure}
1426: \figurenum{4}
1427: \plotone{f4.eps}
1428: \caption{
1429: \label{fig:H2_mass}
1430: Three $\sigma$ upper limits on the hydrogen gas mass
1431: as a function of disk gas temperature,
1432: estimated from the line fluxes of
1433: %[\ion{S}{1}] assuming an interstellar abundance (dashed line),
1434: H$_{2}$ S(1) (solid line), and H$_{2}$ S(0) (dotted line).}
1435: \end{figure}
1436:
1437: \begin{figure}
1438: \figurenum{5}
1439: \plotone{f5.eps}
1440: \caption{
1441: The estimated number density distribution of \ion{Na}{1} atoms at the midplane
1442: of the $\beta$ Pic disk, inferred from observations of resonantly scattered
1443: \ion{Na}{1} \citep{bra04}, is shown with triangles. For comparison, we overplot
1444: the number density distributions of Na gas produced via PSD, assuming that the
1445: grains are small (2$\pi a$ $<$ $\lambda$; dotted line), large (black bodies;
1446: dashed line), or 1 $\mu$m olivine spheres (dashed-dotted line). Our models are
1447: normalized such that they contain the same mass as the fitted model.}
1448: \end{figure}
1449:
1450: \end{document}
1451: