1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'rtcru_apj.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2005 December 5
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
19: \documentclass{emulateapj}
20:
21: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
22:
23: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
24:
25: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
26:
27: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
28:
29: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
30: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
31: %% use the longabstract style option.
32:
33: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
34:
35: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
36: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
37: %% the \begin{document} command.
38: %%
39: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
40: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
41: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
42: %% for information.
43:
44: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
45: \newcommand{\myemail}{skywalker@galaxy.far.far.away}
46: %\setlength{\textwidth}{80mm}
47: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
48:
49: %\slugcomment{Submitted to ApJ}
50:
51: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
52: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
53: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
54: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
55: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
56: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
57:
58: \shorttitle{The Hard-X-Ray Symbiotic RT Cru}
59: \shortauthors{Luna \& Sokoloski}
60:
61: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
62: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
63:
64: \begin{document}
65:
66: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
67: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
68: %% you desire.
69:
70: \title{The Nature of the Hard-X-Ray Emitting Symbiotic Star RT Cru}
71:
72: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
73: %% author and affiliation information.
74: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
75: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
76: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
77: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
78:
79: \author{G. J. M. Luna}
80: \affil{Instituto de Astronomia, Geof\'\i sica e Ciencias
81: Atmosf\^ericas, Universidade de
82: S\~ao Paulo, Rua do Mat\~ao 1226, Cid. Universitaria, S\~ao Paulo,
83: Brazil 05508-900}
84: \email{gjmluna@astro.iag.usp.br}
85:
86: \and
87:
88: \author{J. L. Sokoloski}
89: \affil{Columbia Astrophysics Lab. 550 W120th St., 1027
90: Pupin Hall, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA}
91: \email{jeno@astro.columbia.edu}
92:
93:
94: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
95: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
96: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
97: %% affiliation.
98: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
99: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
100: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
101: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
102: %% editorial office after submission.
103:
104: \begin{abstract}
105: We describe $Chandra$ High-Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer
106: observations of RT Cru, the first of a new sub-class of symbiotic
107: stars that appear to contain white dwarfs (WDs) capable of producing
108: hard X-ray emission out to greater than 50~keV.
109: %The three other
110: %members of this class so far are .
111: The production of such hard X-ray emission from the objects in this
112: sub-class (which also includes CD~$-57$~3057, T~CrB, and CH~Cyg)
113: challenges our understanding of accreting WDs. We find that the 0.3
114: -- 8.0~keV X-ray spectrum of RT Cru emanates from an isobaric cooling
115: flow, as in the optically thin accretion-disk boundary layers of some
116: dwarf novae. The parameters of the spectral fit confirm that the
117: compact accretor is a WD, and they
118: %indicate that the WD is probably
119: are consistent with the WD being massive.
120: We
121: %do, however,
122: detect rapid, stochastic variability from the X-ray emission below 4
123: keV. The combination of flickering variability and a cooling-flow
124: spectrum indicates that RT~Cru is likely powered by accretion through
125: a disk. Whereas the cataclysmic variable stars with the hardest X-ray
126: emission are typically magnetic accretors with X-ray flux modulated at
127: the WD spin period, we find that the X-ray emission from RT~Cru is not
128: pulsed. RT~Cru therefore shows no
129: %clear
130: evidence for magnetically channeled accretion, consistent with our
131: interpretation that the $Chandra$ spectrum arises from an
132: accretion-disk boundary layer.
133:
134:
135: \end{abstract}
136:
137: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
138: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
139: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
140: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
141:
142: \keywords{binary stars: general --- white dwarf: accretion -- X-rays}
143:
144: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
145: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
146: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
147: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
148: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
149: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
150: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
151: %% each reference.
152: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
153: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
154: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
155: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
156: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
157: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
158: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
159: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
160: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers %%
161: %% Note that for sources with brackets in their names, e.g. [WEG2004] 14h-090,
162: %% the brackets must be escaped with backslashes when used in the first
163: %% square-bracket argument, for instance, \object[\[WEG2004\] 14h-090]{90}).
164: %% Otherwise, LaTeX will issue an error.
165:
166: \section{Introduction}
167:
168: Symbiotic stars are interacting binaries in which a hot, compact star
169: accretes from the wind of a red-giant companion. Although a few
170: symbiotics contain neutron-star accretors \cite[e.g.,GX~1+4,
171: 4U~1700+24, 4U~1954+31,
172: IGR~J16194-2810;][]{davidsen77,masetti02,galloway02,masetti07,masetti07b},
173: the accreting compact object is usually a white dwarf (WD). Typical
174: binary separations are on the order of AU, with orbital periods on the
175: order of a few hundred days to a few decades
176: \citep[][]{kenyon,belczynski}. Symbiotics can thus be thought of as
177: very large cousins of cataclysmic variables (CVs). The accretion rate
178: onto the WD appears to be high enough in most symbiotic systems that
179: accreted material is burned quasi-steadily in a shell on the WD
180: surface, producing a high UV luminosity \citep{jeno2001,orio}.
181: Although accretion disks are likely to exist around the WDs in some
182: symbiotics \citep{livio97,jeno2003}, there is little direct evidence
183: for these disks. Finally, the red-giant wind produces a dense nebula
184: that surrounds the system.
185:
186: Most symbiotic stars with detectable X-ray emission display soft, or
187: supersoft, thermal X-ray spectra. As in the supersoft X-ray sources,
188: the lowest-energy X-rays could emanate directly from material burning
189: quasi-steadily on the WD surface \citep{jordan94,orio}. Based on a
190: survey of symbiotics with $ROSAT$, \citet{murset97} proposed that
191: symbiotics be classified according to the hardness of their X-ray
192: spectra. They labeled sources with supersoft spectra $\alpha$-types,
193: sources with the slightly harder spectra likely to arise from
194: collision of the red-giant and white-dwarf winds $\beta$-types, and
195: systems with the hardest spectra that might be indicative of neutron
196: stars $\gamma$-types. Although more recent observations using the
197: broader X-ray coverage and greater sensitivity of $Chandra$ and
198: XMM-$Newton$ have shown that some symbiotics do not fit into the
199: simple $\alpha$/$\beta$/$\gamma$ classification scheme \cite[e.g.,
200: Z~And and $o$~Ceti;][]{zand,karovska2005}, most still appear to
201: produce primarily soft X-rays ($E < 3$ keV).
202:
203: With the advent of the sensitive hard X-ray detectors on the $Swift$
204: and INTEGRAL satellites, a new picture has emerged. Some symbiotic
205: stars can produce X-ray emission out to greater than 50~keV. Such
206: hard X-ray emission has so far been detected from 4 symbiotics thought
207: to harbor WDs -- RT Cru \citep{integral,bird2007}, T CrB
208: \citep{tcrb,luna2007}, CH Cyg \citep{koji2007} and CD -57 3057
209: \citep{cd57,bird2007}. Although the origin of this hard X-ray
210: emission is not known, there are some underlying similarities between
211: these hard X-ray emitting symbiotics. Unlike most other symbiotic
212: stars, they display a high incidence of optical flickering. They also
213: tend to have low optical line strengths, indicating that they are
214: often only ``weakly" symbiotic. Both the visibility of the optical
215: flickering \cite[which in most symbiotics is overwhelmed by
216: reprocessed shell-burning emission;][]{soko03} and the weakness or
217: low-ionization-state of the optical lines suggest that quasi-steady
218: shell burning is not taking place in these objects, either because: 1)
219: the WD is more massive, or 2) the accretion rate is lower than in
220: other symbiotics. Hard X-ray emission might therefore be a proxy for
221: high WD mass. In fact, at least one of the hard-X-ray symbiotics,
222: T~CrB, is a recurrent nova and contains a high-mass WD
223: \citep{hachisu01}. Finally, jet production appears to be more common
224: in flickering symbiotics, and one of the 4 hard X-ray symbiotics --
225: CH~Cyg -- regularly produces jets
226: \citep{taylor,karovska98,crocker2001, crocker2002}. Other WDs in hard
227: X-ray symbiotics might thus also harbor jets.
228:
229: \citet{dionisio94} classified RT~Cru as a symbiotic star based on its
230: optical spectrum. They noted that the lack of strong high-ionization
231: emission lines and the very weak forbidden emission lines make the
232: optical spectrum similar to that of T~CrB. They detected optical
233: flickering in the U band with a time scale of a few tens of minutes.
234: %[add NS vs WD stuff here].
235: Except for GX~1+4 \citep{jabl97,chak97}, none of the neutron-star
236: containing symbiotic stars produce optical flickering
237: \citep[e.g.][]{jeno2001}, which is common in CVs, or show Balmer
238: or He~II emission lines \citep{masetti07b}. The presence of
239: optical flickering and Balmer and He~II emission lines from RT Cru
240: \citep{dionisio94} suggests that it therefore contains an accreting WD
241: rather than a neutron star. Reddening estimates from optical spectra
242: and infrared magnitudes \cite[coupled with the assumption that the
243: radius of the M5 III red giant is about 0.5~AU;][]{vanbelle99} suggest
244: that RT Cru is between 1.5 and 2~kpc away (J. Miko{\l}ajewska, {\em
245: private communication}).
246:
247: In 2003 and 2004, the IBIS instrument on board INTEGRAL detected hard
248: X-ray emission extending out to $\sim$100~keV from the source
249: IGR~J12349-6434, which \cite{integral} found to have a 20-60~keV flux
250: density of $\sim$3~mCrab. \cite{masetti} suggested an association
251: between IGR~J12349-6434 and RT~Cru, which observations with the
252: $Swift$ satellite later confirmed \citep{swift}. The long-term
253: optical light curve from the AAVSO indicates that at the time of the
254: INTEGRAL observations, RT Cru was in an optical bright state; it
255: brightened from 13.5 to 11.5 mag sometime between 1998 and 2000.
256: Between 2000 and 2005, the optical brightness slowly decreased to
257: approximately 12.1 mag. The short (4.7~ks) Swift observation of 2005
258: August showed that between 2003 and 2005, the hard X-ray flux also
259: decreased.
260:
261: In this paper, we describe $Chandra$ High Energy Transmission Grating
262: (HETG) observations of RT~Cru, the first member of a new class of hard
263: X-ray emitting symbiotic WDs. We detail the observations and data
264: reduction in \S\ref{sec:obs} and the results from spectral and timing
265: analyses in \S\ref{sec:results}. In \S\ref{sec:disc}, we discuss our
266: interpretation of the observations, which confirm that the accreting
267: compact object in RT~Cru is a WD and provide some of the most direct
268: evidence to date for an accretion disk around a wind-fed WD in a
269: symbiotic system. In this section, we also discuss the implications
270: of a system that can accelerate particles to relativistic speeds and
271: produce X-ray emission out to greater than 50~keV being powered by an
272: accreting WD. We summarize our conclusions in \S\ref{sec:conclusion}.
273:
274:
275: \section{Observations and Data Reduction} \label{sec:obs}
276:
277: On 2005 October 19, the $Chandra$ X-ray Observatory performed a
278: 50.1~ks Director's Discretionary Time observation of RT Cru using the
279: HETG \citep{can05} and the ACIS-S detector (ObsId 7186, start time
280: 10:21:12 UT). We requested the DDT observation to attempt to catch
281: RT Cru in the optical bright state that appeared to be associated with
282: hard X-ray emission. We used the HETG instrument because the
283: %low signal-to-noise ratio
284: Swift XRT observation of 2005 August
285: %suggested
286: hinted at several possible emission-line complexes. The data were
287: collected in Timed Exposure mode, in which the CCD chips were read out
288: every 2.54~s. The data were telemetered back to earth in Faint mode,
289: which conveys photon arrival times, event amplitudes, and additional
290: information for evaluating the validity of each event. We reduced the
291: data according to standard procedures using the software package
292: CIAO~3.3\footnote{Chandra Interactive Analysis of Observations (CIAO),
293: http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/.}. We extracted a spectrum from the
294: undispersed light (the zeroth-order spot, which fell on the S3,
295: back-illuminated chip) using a circular extraction region with a
296: radius of 6\arcsec\, centered on the source coordinates: $\alpha =
297: 12$h~34m~43.74s and $\delta =-64^{\circ}$ 33\arcmin 56.0\arcsec. To
298: obtain the background for the zeroth-order light, we extracted photons
299: from a source-free circular region on the same CCD. We grouped the
300: spectrum, which is shown in Fig.~\ref{zero_order}, to have at least 50
301: counts per bin. The average zeroth-order source count rate was 0.11
302: c~s$^{-1}$.
303:
304: For the dispersed light from both of the HETG sets of gratings -- the
305: Medium Energy Grating (MEG) and the High Energy Grating (HEG) -- we
306: extracted spectra from each of the $m=\pm 1$, $\pm 2$, and $\pm 3$
307: orders individually (using the CIAO software tool dmtype2split). To
308: obtain the background for the dispersed light, we extracted counts
309: from rectangular regions on either side of the spectral image. The
310: count rate in the HEG and MEG $m\pm 1$ orders was 0.042 c~s$^{-1}$ and
311: 0.034 c~s$^{-1}$, respectively. Although the dispersed spectral
312: orders contained too few counts to produce a high
313: signal-to-noise-ratio spectrum of lines spanning the full energy range
314: of the instrument, the combined $m = \pm 1$ spectrum (grouped at twice
315: the full width at half maximum of 0.012\AA) provided good-quality data
316: in the region around the Fe K$\alpha$ emission-line complex. We
317: therefore used the the zeroth-order spectrum for continuum fitting and
318: the dispersed ($m= \pm 1$) spectra primarily for analysis of the Fe
319: lines. The HEG and MEG $m =\pm$2 and $\pm 3$ spectra helped confirm
320: the Fe line identifications. For spectral fitting of both the zeroth
321: and higher order photons, we used the standard software packages Xspec
322: \citep{xspec} v12.3.0 and ISIS \citep{isis}. The background
323: contributed less than 1\% of the total extracted dispersed and
324: undispersed light.
325:
326: We generated light curves in the energy bands 0.3--4.0~keV and
327: 4.0--8.0~keV by extracting counts (with CIAO) from a region containing
328: the zeroth-order spot and the $m=\pm 1$ dispersed orders of both the
329: HEG and MEG. Since we estimated there to be only $\sim$70 background
330: counts in this extraction region during the course of the observation
331: (compared to more than 9000 source counts), we did not
332: background-subtract the light curves.
333:
334: At high count rates, two or more photons can arrive close enough
335: together in time that they appear to be a single event. This
336: ``pileup'' phenomenon can cause a spectrum to become distorted and the
337: count rate to be reduced. To confirm that the zeroth order spectrum
338: was not affected by pileup, we divided the number of counts at the
339: peak of the point spread function of the undispersed light by the
340: number of 2.54-s frames in the observation to obtain an upper limit on
341: the number of counts per pixel per frame. The resulting 0.08 counts
342: per pixel per frame is well below the 1 count per pixel per frame
343: where pileup can become important \citep{harris}. Moreover, the
344: average count rate in the zeroth order was significantly less than one
345: count per frame time, indicating that the light curve was not
346: significantly distorted by the saturation that can occur at higher
347: count rates (i.e., higher pileup fractions). The pileup fraction in
348: the higher-order spectrum was negligible.
349:
350: \section{Analysis and Results} \label{sec:results}
351:
352: \subsection{Spectral Analysis}
353:
354: To model the X-ray spectrum, we first consider simple,
355: single-component continuum models. We fitted these models to the
356: binned 0.3 -- 8.0~keV zeroth-order spectrum (above 8.0~keV, the noise
357: rises and the quantum efficiency drops sharply).
358: Absorbed single-component emission models such as a thermal
359: plasma, powerlaw, or blackbody (plus Gaussian lines) do not produce
360: acceptable fits. Even if we include complex absorption, such as an
361: absorber that only partially covers the source, a powerlaw
362: distribution of absorbers \cite[as seen in some magnetic CVs;
363: e.g.,][]{done98}, or a``warm" ionized absorber, single-component
364: emission models still do not produce acceptable fits.
365:
366:
367:
368:
369: Including an additional broad-band emission component improves the
370: fitting results. The spectrum is formally well fitted with a highly
371: absorbed, optically thin thermal plasma (Mekal model in Xspec), plus a
372: moderately absorbed non-thermal powerlaw component. Since there is
373: some degeneracy between the amount of absorption and the powerlaw
374: index, we determine the powerlaw index by fixing the plasma
375: temperature, $T$, and fitting the spectrum above 4~keV, where
376: absorption is relatively unimportant. The resulting photon index is
377: $\Gamma = 1.05_{0.78}^{1.29}$, where $\Gamma$ is given by $dF_{N}/dE =
378: K (E/E_{0})^{-\Gamma}$, $dF_{N}/dE$ is the photon flux density, $E_0$
379: is 1~keV, $K$ is the normalization constant, and the superscripts and
380: subscripts are 90\% confidence upper and lower limits, respectively.
381: The photon index is not sensitive to the value to which we fix $T$.
382: We determined the remaining model parameters by fixing $\Gamma$ to 1.1
383: and letting the other parameters vary. The thermal plasma has $kT =
384: 8.6_{6.1}^{12.4}$~keV and an absorbing column $n_H = 9.3_{7.2}^{12.5}
385: \times 10^{23}\, {\rm cm}^{-2}$. The powerlaw component has an
386: absorbing column of $n_H = 7.3_{6.3}^{8.7} \times 10^{22}\, {\rm
387: cm}^{-2}$ and a normalization $K = 1.2_{0.98}^{2.9}\times
388: 10^{-3}\,{\rm photons}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}\,{\rm s}^{-1}\,{\rm keV}^{-1}$.
389: To obtain an acceptable fit to the line emission, the model required
390: abundances of about 0.3 times solar \cite[using the abundances
391: of][]{abund}. Because of the large column density absorbing the
392: thermal emission in this model, the powerlaw component dominates below
393: approximately 4~keV, and the thermal emission dominates above 4~keV.
394: We also obtained a formally acceptable fit with a highly absorbed
395: powerlaw and a moderately absorbed thermal plasma. In that case, the
396: thermal plasma dominated the low-energy portion of the spectrum, and
397: the powerlaw dominated the high-energy part of the spectrum.
398:
399: Finally, we consider the isobaric cooling-flow model that has worked
400: well for both magnetic and non-magnetic CVs. In this model
401: \cite[Mkcflow;][]{mkcflow}, gas is assumed to radiatively cool from a
402: high post-shock temperature under conditions of constant pressure.
403: Such an isobaric cooling flow has a differential emission-measure
404: distribution that is a flat function of temperature. The gas is also
405: assumed to be optically thin. This cooling flow model provides a good
406: fit to the data. We find that the initial post-shock temperature is
407: quite high. Although our 0.3--8.0~keV spectrum does not allow a
408: high-confidence determination of this parameter, the formal 90\%
409: confidence lower limit for the initial temperature is $kT_{max} =
410: 55$~keV. The minimum cooling-flow temperature is consistent with the
411: smallest value allowed by the Xspec Mkcflow model ($kT_{min} =
412: 80.8$~eV), indicating that the gas does indeed remain optically thin
413: as it cools. Allowing the differential emission measure to have a
414: powerlaw distribution (with the Cemkl model in Xspec) did not improve
415: the fit. As with the two-component continuum model, the cooling-flow
416: model requires significant absorption. The abundances may also be
417: sub-solar \cite[0.3 times solar, using the abundances of][]{abund}.
418: %, although given the large (factor of $\sim 2$) disparity
419: %between different determinations of the standard Solar composition
420: %\citep{abund,grevesse98}, the confidence level of this result is
421: %unclear.
422: The best absorption model consists of both a photoelectric
423: absorber that fully covers the source and another that only partially
424: covers it. Table~\ref{tab1} lists the best-fit parameters for this
425: model, which, as we discuss in \S\ref{sec:disc}, we believe provides
426: the best description of the $Chandra$ spectrum of RT~Cru.
427:
428: In the first-order spectrum, we detect the iron-line complex spanning
429: roughly 6.4 -- 7.0~keV. Fig.~\ref{felines} shows the region around
430: the iron-line complex in the combined MEG and HEG first-order ($m=
431: \pm$1) spectrum. Because of the large absorption and the resulting
432: low count rate at low energies, we are not sensitive to lines such as
433: OVIII ($\sim 19$~\AA) and Ne X ($\sim 12$~\AA) that have been seen in
434: HETG observations of some other accreting WDs
435: \cite[e.g.,][]{pandel,mukai2003}. For the Fe lines, we use a simple
436: powerlaw to establish a continuum level and three Gaussian profiles to
437: fit the Fe K$\alpha$, H-like Fe, and He-like Fe lines,
438: respectively. To avoid the possible introduction of errors from
439: misalignment of the HEG and MEG spectra, we use only the combined HEG
440: first-order ($m = \pm 1$) spectrum for computation of the equivalent
441: widths (EWs). Table~\ref{tab2} lists the line-center energies and
442: EWs. Although we do not have enough counts to use the recombination,
443: intercombination, and forbidden components of the H- or He-like Fe
444: lines as density diagnostics, the observed line strengths and EWs
445: confirm that the source is surrounded by a large amount of neutral
446: material and that the abundances might be slightly sub-solar. The Fe
447: K$\alpha$ EW of 108~eV is consistent with that expected for a source
448: inside a cloud of cold material with the N$_H$ of $\sim$ 10$^{23}$
449: cm$^{-2}$ \citep{inoue}, as we found from the continuum fitting.
450:
451:
452:
453: \subsection{Timing Analysis}
454:
455: Examining
456: %light curves
457: time series binned at 508.208~s and 4065.664~s (i.e., 200
458: and 1600 times the frame time, respectively), we detected significant
459: aperiodic, flickering-type variations on time scales of minutes to
460: hours in the 0.3--4.0~keV emission. Figure~\ref{fig:lcs}
461: %and \ref{fig:biglcs}
462: shows the 508-s
463: %and 4065-s
464: binned time series (light curves)
465: %respectively,
466: in the energy ranges 0.3--4.0~keV and 4.0--8.0~keV. The
467: fractional amplitude of the stochastic variations appears to be
468: largest in the 0.3--4.0~keV energy range. In the 508-s binned
469: 0.3--4.0~keV time series, the ratio of measured fractional rms
470: variation, $s$, to that expected from Poisson fluctuations alone,
471: $s_{exp}$, is 1.96 ($s=36.6$\% and $s_{exp}=18.7$\%). We detect the
472: 0.3--4.0~keV variability with even greater statistical significance in
473: the 4065-s binned time series; the ratio $s/s_{exp}$ in this case is
474: 3.35 ($s=22.1$\% and $s_{exp}=6.6$\%). In the 4.0--8.0~keV energy
475: range, the 508-s binned time series has $s/s_{exp} = 1.36$ (where
476: $s=16.6$\% and $s_{exp}=12.2$\%), and the 4065-s binned time series
477: has $s/s_{exp} = 1.42$ ($s=6.1$\% and $s_{exp}=4.3$\%).
478:
479: We do not detect any periodic flux modulations. We are
480: theoretically sensitive to an oscillation with fractional amplitude:
481: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eqn:sens}
482: A & \approx & 2 \left(C_{tot} \alpha
483: \right)^{-1/2} \left (\ln
484: \left[\frac{1-\delta}{ 1-(1-\epsilon)^{1/n_{freq}}}
485: \right]\right)^{1/2} \\
486: & = & 0.08 \left( \frac{C_{tot}}{9,400} \right)^{-1/2} \left(
487: \frac{\alpha}{0.77} \right)^{-1/2},
488: \end{eqnarray}
489: where $C_{tot}$ is the total number of counts in the observation
490: (ignoring the small number of background counts, which have a
491: negligible effect), $\delta$ and $\epsilon$ are small numbers related
492: to the chance that a noise power in the power spectrum will exceed the
493: detection threshold (both taken to be 0.05), $n_{freq}$ is the number
494: of frequencies searched ($n_{freq} = 1644$), and $\alpha$ has an
495: average value of 0.77 and depends upon the location of the signal
496: frequency in the frequency bin \cite[see,
497: e.g.,][]{vanderklis89,soko99}. We are therefore sensitive to
498: oscillations with fractional amplitudes of $\sim 8$\% in regions of
499: the power spectrum dominated by white noise, which in this case
500: consisted of frequencies greater than $\sim 1.4$~mHz. In this
501: analysis, we binned the time series in 15-s bins (i.e., 6 times the
502: frame time). We were therefore sensitive to oscillations with periods
503: as short as 30~s, and most sensitive to oscillations with periods
504: between 30~s and 12~m.
505:
506: Consistent with the presence of flickering in the light curves, the
507: power spectrum rises at frequencies below 1.4 mHz. At these low
508: frequencies, the power spectrum has a powerlaw index (i.e., slope on a
509: log-log plot) of about $-1$. This ``$1/f$-noise'' at low frequencies
510: reduces our sensitivity to oscillatory signals with periods greater
511: than approximately 12~m. Since we expect the minimum oscillation
512: amplitude to which we are sensitive to increase roughly as the square
513: root of the rising average broadband power as we go to lower
514: frequencies (i.e., longer periods), the oscillation amplitude required
515: for detection increases gradually from $\gtrsim$8\% to $\gtrsim$15\%
516: as we move from periods of 12~m to 1~hr. Taking into account the
517: underlying broadband power, as well as the number of frequency bins
518: searched, we did not detect any statistically significant oscillations
519: in any portion of the power spectrum.
520:
521:
522:
523: %\begin{figure}[t]
524: %\includegraphics[width=8cm]{f4.eps}
525: %\caption{$Chandra$ light curves for RT~Cru, with a bin size of
526: % 4065.66~s. The light curves include the undispersed light as well
527: % as the counts from the HEG and MEG $m=\pm 1$ orders. The top and
528: % bottom panels show the flux as a function of time in the energy
529: % ranges 0.3--4.0~keV and 4.0--8.0~keV, respectively. The 0.3--4.0~keV
530: % emission is clearly variable.}
531: %\label{fig:biglcs}
532: %\end{figure}
533: %\clearpage
534:
535: \section{Discussion} \label{sec:disc}
536:
537: \subsection{Interpretation of the $Chandra$ Observations}
538:
539: To estimate the radius of the accreting compact object, we take the
540: unabsorbed 0.3--8.0~keV X-ray luminosity, $L_X$, to be either
541: approximately equal to, or a rough lower limit to, the emission from
542: an accretion-disk boundary layer (we justify the assumption that the
543: $Chandra$ X-ray emission emanates from a boundary layer in the
544: paragraphs that follow). Comparing this luminosity with that expected
545: from accretion, $(1/2) (G M \dot{M} / R) \gtrsim L_X$,
546: %the upper limit on
547: the radius of the accreting compact object is:
548: \begin{equation}
549: R \lesssim 3.2 \times 10^{8}\, {\rm cm} \left( \frac{M}{1.3 M_\odot} \right)
550: \left( \frac{\dot{M}}{1.8 \times 10^{-9} M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}} \right),
551: \end{equation}
552: where $R$ and $M$ are the radius and mass of the accretor,
553: respectively, and $\dot{M}$ is the rate of accretion through the
554: boundary layer. The radius is that of a WD. The $Chandra$ X-ray
555: spectrum therefore confirms that the compact object
556: %that produced the
557: %powerlaw X-ray spectrum out to more than 60~keV observed by INTEGRAL
558: is a WD.
559:
560: %The timing and spectral properties of the 0.3--8.0~keV emission
561: %detected from RT~Cru with $Chandra$ place strong constraints on the
562: %origin of this light.
563: To determine whether the $Chandra$-band X-ray emission is indeed from
564: an accretion-disk boundary layer, we consider the rapid variability.
565: Rapid flickering typically emanates from an accretion region close to
566: a compact object. Our detection of flickering therefore suggests that
567: the X-ray emission detected from RT~Cru by $Chandra$ is powered by
568: accretion. This accretion could proceed via a wind-fed accretion
569: disk, magnetic accretion columns, or Bondi-Hoyle type direct-impact of
570: the accreting material onto the WD. While the two-component (thermal
571: plasma plus powerlaw) model provides a formally acceptable fit to the
572: data, it is difficult to construct an interpretation of this model
573: that is consistent with the rapid flickering from accretion onto a WD.
574: The isobaric cooling-flow spectral model, on the other hand, 1) provides
575: a good fit to the data, 2) has been successfully applied to both the
576: boundary layer emission from non-magnetic CVs
577: \cite[e.g.,][]{mukai2003,pandel} and the accretion columns of magnetic
578: CVs \cite[e.g.,][]{cropper}, and 3) provides a natural context for the
579: flickering from accretion.
580:
581: Most CVs with X-ray emission as hard as that which INTEGRAL and
582: $Swift$/BAT have detected from RT~Cru have magnetic fields strong
583: enough to channel the accretion flow into accretion columns ($B \sim
584: 10^5$ -- $10^6$~G, where $B$ is the magnetic field strength at the WD
585: surface). Of the 8 CVs detected at energies greater than $\sim
586: 50$~keV with $Swift$/BAT, all but SS Cyg are likely magnetic accretors
587: \citep{barlow06}. In these systems, the hard X-rays come from hot gas
588: behind the stand-off shock in the accretion column. Magnetic CVs
589: typically have X-ray oscillations with pulsation amplitudes of tens of
590: percent at the WD spin period, which is usually less than an hour
591: \citep[][]{war95}. Since typical symbiotic-star accretion rates are
592: higher than typical CV accretion rates, if the WD in RT~Cru was
593: strongly magnetic and in spin equilibrium, the spin period would
594: probably be either comparable to or faster than those in CVs. Given
595: our sensitivity to oscillations with periods less than an hour, we
596: therefore should have detected a spin modulation if RT~Cru was
597: magnetic. In fact, the power spectrum has no statistically
598: significant peaks. We conclude that RT~Cru is probably not a magnetic
599: accretor. We thus favor the picture in which the X-ray emission from
600: RT~Cru detected by $Chandra$ is from a cooling flow in an
601: accretion-disk boundary layer.
602:
603: \subsection{Implications}
604:
605: The parameters of the cooling-flow fit to the boundary-layer emission
606: provide the accretion rate as well as information about the WD. From
607: the normalization parameter of the cooling-flow model, the accretion
608: rate onto the WD is $\dot{M}= 1.8 \times 10^{-9}$
609: M$_{\odot}$~yr$^{-1}\,(d / 2\, {\rm kpc})^2$ (see Table~\ref{tab1}).
610: Since quasi-steady nuclear burning is frequently present on the WD
611: surface, symbiotic stars should have accretion rates that are on
612: average higher than those in CVs. The accretion rate we have found
613: for RT~Cru is consistent with this picture. It is also, however, just
614: low enough that we expect the boundary layer to remain optically thin;
615: \citet{narayan93} find that for a $1\,M_\odot$ WD, the boundary layer
616: remains optically thin for accretion rates below $3 \times 10^{-9}\,
617: M_\odot\, {\rm yr}^{-1}$.
618:
619: The parameters of the cooling-flow fit also indicate that the WD
620: radius is small, suggesting that the WD could be quite massive. Taken
621: at face value, the radius constraint would imply that the WD mass is
622: at least 1.3~$M_\odot$. The high upper cooling-flow temperature,
623: $kT_{max} \ge 55$~keV (see Table~\ref{tab1}), supports the conclusion
624: that the accretor is a massive WD. The relationship between
625: $kT_{max}$ and WD mass is due to the fact that that the Kepler
626: velocity ($v_{\rm K}^2 = G M / R$) is greater in the deep potential
627: well of a more massive WD. Since the boundary-layer material is shock
628: heated, and the initial post-shock temperature ($T_{max}$) is
629: proportional to velocity squared, $T_{max}$ increases with WD mass.
630: Alternatively, if we equate the amount of energy available per
631: particle, $(1/2) \mu m_p v_{\rm K}^2$, where $\mu$ is the mean
632: molecular weight and $m_p$ is the mass of a proton, with the energy
633: released per particle in an isobaric cooling flow, $(5/2) k T_{max}$
634: \citep{pandel}, we see that $ k T_{max} \propto v_{\rm K}^2 \propto
635: GM/R$. Although the determination of $kT_{max}$ from X-ray emission
636: below 8~keV is highly uncertain, we can still ask what such a high
637: $kT_{max}$ would imply if it is confirmed by an instrument with
638: greater high-energy sensitivity (such as SUZAKU). For their sample of
639: 9 non-magnetic CVs, \citet{pandel} found the upper cooling-flow
640: temperature was roughly consistent with the expected $kT_{max} =
641: (3/5)\, kT_{vir}$, where $T_{vir}$ is the virial temperature (defined
642: by $(3/2)kT_{vir} = (1/2) \mu m_p v_{\rm K}^2 $). Using the WD
643: mass-radius relationship of \citet{hkbook}, a maximum cooling-flow
644: temperature of $kT_{max} > 55$~keV implies $M \gtrsim 1.3\,M_\odot$.
645:
646: The high absorbing columns for both the partial-covering and fully
647: covering absorber, as well as the covering factor of $>$0.7 for the
648: partial-covering absorber (see Table~\ref{tab1}), indicate that the
649: X-ray source is highly obscured at this epoch. Since the X-ray
650: emission region is small, the absorber that only partially covers the
651: X-ray source must also be small. A possible source of this partially
652: covering absorber is an accretion structure such as an accretion disk
653: seen almost edge-on \cite[as in OY Car;][]{pandel}. We assume that the
654: fully covering component of the absorption comprises both interstellar
655: absorption (1.1$\times$10$^{22}$cm$^{-2}$ from NASA/IPAC IRSA) and
656: intrinsic absorption. The column density of this absorber is probably
657: high because the WD orbits within the strong, dense stellar wind from
658: the red giant. RT~Cru has an orbital period of $\sim 450$~d
659: (J. Miko{\l}ajewska, {\em private communication}), and therefore a
660: binary separation on the order of an AU. This separation puts the WD
661: well within the dense region of the red-giant wind. Month-time-scale
662: variations in the absorption (not correlated with the orbital period)
663: have been detected by $Swift$ \citep{kennea07}, suggesting that either
664: the red-giant wind is clumpy, that the mass loss rate in the wind of
665: the red giant is variable, or the accretion structure or structures
666: partially blocking the WD boundary layer must be unstable.
667:
668: \subsection{The Nature of RT Cru}
669:
670: As shown by the INTEGRAL detection in 2003-2004 \citep{integral},
671: RT~Cru can at times produce X-ray emission out to greater than 60~keV.
672: From the broad-band flux densities reported by \citet{integral}, the
673: hard X-ray spectrum in 2003 - 2004 appears consistent with a powerlaw
674: with photon index $\Gamma = 2.7$ (energy index $\alpha = 1.7$), and
675: the 16-100~keV luminosity at that time was approximately
676: $10\,L_\odot\,(d/2{\rm kpc})^2$. By 2005, however, the 16-100~keV
677: luminosity had dropped, and the hard X-ray spectrum was closer to
678: thermal \citep{kennea07}. To better appreciate the properties of the
679: unusual accreting WD in RT~Cru, we briefly explore the possible
680: sources of the powerlaw hard X-ray emission observed by INTEGRAL in
681: 2003-2004. In particular, we consider direct synchrotron emission,
682: inverse-Compton (IC) scattering from a thermal distribution of
683: electrons, and IC scattering from a non-thermal distribution of
684: electrons. IC scattering from a non-thermal distribution of electrons
685: turns out to be the most likely option.
686:
687: One way to generate a powerlaw energy spectrum is with synchrotron
688: emission from a powerlaw distribution of relativistic electrons moving
689: in a magnetic field. Most of the synchrotron emission from an
690: electron with Lorentz factor $\gamma$ is emitted at a frequency
691: $\nu_{sync} = (0.3/2 \pi) (3 \sin \alpha / 2) \gamma_{sync}^2 (q B /
692: m_e c)$, where $\alpha$ is the pitch angle, $q$ is the electron
693: charge, $B$ is the magnetic field strength, $m_e$ is the electron
694: mass, and $c$ is the speed of light \citep{rlbook}.
695: Since we did not detect X-ray pulsations from RT Cru, the magnetic
696: field at the surface of the WD is probably not strong enough to
697: disrupt the accretion flow, and therefore less than $\sim 10^4$~G.
698: Thus, even near the
699: surface of the WD,
700: %where the $B$ field could be as high as $\sim 10^4$~G,
701: Lorentz factors $\gamma_{sync}$ of a few times $10^4$ to $10^5$ would
702: be needed to produce significant direct synchrotron emission at
703: 60~keV. We can estimate the maximum Lorentz factor to which electrons
704: will be accelerated by setting the diffusive shock acceleration time
705: scale equal to the synchrotron cooling time scale. Following the
706: approach of \citet{markoff01}, we equate the synchrotron loss rate to
707: a conservative acceleration rate \citep[see][]{jokipii87} to find a
708: maximum Lorentz factor to which electrons can be accelerated of
709: $\gamma_{max} \approx 2700 (B/10^4\,{\rm G})^{-1/2} (\xi /
710: 100)^{-1/2}$, where $\xi$ is the ratio of the diffusive scattering
711: mean free path to the gyroradius. Thus $\gamma_{max}$ is one to two
712: orders of magnitude below $\gamma_{sync}$. Moreover, whereas
713: significant power from a distribution of synchrotron-emitting
714: relativistic electrons would also be expected at energies below
715: 15~keV, the 16-100~keV X-ray luminosity of $\sim 10\,L_\odot$ during
716: 2003 and 2004 is already close to the total energy budget available
717: from accretion. Finally, to generate the X-ray spectral index
718: observed by INTEGRAL from direct synchrotron emission, one would need
719: a distribution of electrons that is much steeper than expected from
720: standard theories of particle acceleration in shocks
721: \citep{ellison90}. It is therefore unlikely that the hard X-ray
722: emission from RT~Cru was due to direct synchrotron emission.
723:
724: As an aside, we note that the production of significant synchrotron
725: emission at radio wavelengths would not require such high Lorentz
726: factors. The ratio of synchrotron power to IC power from an electron
727: is equal to the ratio of the energy density in the magnetic field to
728: energy density in photons \citep{rlbook}. Examining this ratio as a
729: function of distance from the WD, we expect a similar amount of power
730: from direct synchrotron and IC scattering near the surface of the WD,
731: where the B field could be strong ($B \sim 10^4$~G). We therefore
732: suggest that the next time RT~Cru is in a powerlaw hard X-ray state
733: like the one detected by INTEGRAL in 2003-2004, radio observations be
734: performed to look for radio synchrotron emission.
735:
736: Hard X-rays can be produced with much lower Lorentz factors through IC
737: scattering. For photons scattering off of a thermal distribution of
738: electrons, \cite{reynolds03} give a relation between the observed
739: photon index $\Gamma$ and the Compton $y$ parameter, which is related to
740: the factor by which the average photon energy increases. A steep
741: photon index of $\Gamma > 2$ indicates a $y$ parameter less than 1, in
742: which case there is no significant up-scattering. Therefore, since
743: RT~Cru had a steep photon index of $\Gamma \approx 2.7$, scattering
744: off of a thermal distribution of electrons could not have been
745: responsible for the powerlaw hard X-ray emission. Non-thermal,
746: relativistic electrons must have been involved in producing the
747: powerlaw spectrum observed by INTEGRAL. RT~Cru thus contains a white
748: dwarf that can accelerate electrons to relativistic speeds. Three
749: other systems that contain WDs that also generate relativistic
750: electrons are CH~Cyg, RS~Oph, and possibly R~Aqr, all of which have
751: jets \citep{rupen07,obrien06,crocker2001,nichols07}.
752:
753: Assuming now that the powerlaw hard X-ray spectrum was due to IC
754: scattering from a powerlaw distribution of relativistic electrons, we
755: can estimate the location of the scattering electrons. Since the
756: strength of a dipole $B$ field falls like $1/r^3$, whereas the energy
757: density in the photon field only falls like $1/r^2$, IC scattering
758: will dominate as one moves farther from the WD. If we ask how far
759: away from the radiation source the IC region should be to give us an
760: IC cooling time on the order of a year (the approximate duration of
761: the powerlaw hard X-ray state), we find that it should be a few tenths
762: of an AU away. Given the orbital period for this systems, that could
763: put the IC emission region either between the WD and the red giant, as
764: in a colliding-winds region, above the WD disk in a corona, or at the
765: base of a jet. A model consisting of IC scattering off of relativistic
766: electrons in a corona or at the base of a jet reproduces the observed
767: hard X-ray emission well in X-ray binaries \citep{markoff05}. The
768: steep powerlaw index, which is similar to that seen in the steep
769: powerlaw state in microquasars, could be due to a low scattering
770: optical depth \citep{rlbook}.
771:
772: \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
773:
774: We have observed the first symbiotic star with X-ray emission out to
775: greater than 60~keV with the HETG on $Chandra$. The stochastic
776: variability and cooling-flow type spectrum suggest that RT Cru is
777: powered by accretion onto a WD through a disk with an optically thin
778: boundary layer. The accretion rate is near the top of the range for
779: which the boundary layer can remain optically thin. The high initial
780: temperature of the cooling flow, and the high luminosity given the
781: accretion rate from the spectral fit suggest that the WD in RT~Cru
782: could be quite massive. More generally speaking, it would be
783: difficult to get such hard X-ray emission from accretion onto a
784: low-mass WD with a shallow potential well and low Kepler velocity.
785: Given the nature of the powerlaw hard X-ray emission previously
786: observed by INTEGRAL, it therefore appears that the accreting,
787: non-magnetic WD in RT~Cru is able to generate a non-thermal, powerlaw
788: distribution of electrons and very hard X-ray emission through IC
789: scattering. Three other systems in which WDs can accelerate electrons
790: to relativistic speeds \cite[RS~Oph, CH~Cyg, and possibly
791: R~Aqr;][]{rupen07,obrien06,crocker2001,nichols07} all have jets.
792: Radio observations of RT~Cru during the next powerlaw hard X-ray state
793: like that observed by INTEGRAL in 2003 and 2004 could play an
794: important role in diagnosing this system, and determining the extent
795: to which some symbiotic stars might constitute the nanoquasar analog
796: to microquasars \citep{zamanov02}.
797:
798: \acknowledgments
799:
800: We thank the referee, Marina Orio, for comments and suggestions which
801: improved the final quality of this article. We also thank K. Mukai,
802: F. Paerels, T. Maccarone, and A. J. Bird for useful discussions, R. Lopes de
803: Oliveira and D. Huenemoerder for help with the data analysis, and
804: S. Markoff for comments on the manuscript. G.J.M. Luna acknowledges
805: support from CNPq (process 0141805/2003-0) and FAPESP (process
806: 02/08816-5). J.L.S. is supported by an NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics
807: Postdoctoral Fellowship under award AST-0302055. Support for this
808: work was provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
809: through Chandra Award Numbers DD5-6034X and NNX06AI16G issued by the
810: Chandra X-ray Observatory Center, which is operated by the Smithsonian
811: Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf of the National
812: Aeronautics Space Administration under contract NAS8-03060. We
813: acknowledge with thanks the variable star observations from the AAVSO
814: International Database contributed by observers worldwide and used in
815: this research.
816:
817:
818: \begin{thebibliography}{}
819:
820: \bibitem[Arnaud(1996)]{xspec} Arnaud K. A., 1996, Astronomical
821: Data Analysis Software and Systems V, eds. Jacoby G. and Barnes J.,
822: p17, ASP Conf. Series volume 101.
823: \bibitem[Anders \& Grevesse(1989)]{abund} Anders E. \& Grevesse N., 1989,
824: Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 53, 197
825: \bibitem[Barlow et al.(2006)]{barlow06} Barlow, E.~J.,
826: Knigge, C., Bird, A.~J., J Dean, A., Clark, D.~J., Hill,
827: A.~B., Molina, M., \& Sguera, V.\ 2006, \mnras, 372, 224
828: \bibitem[Bird et al.(2007)]{bird2007} Bird, A.~J., et al.\ 2007,
829: \apjs, 170, 175
830: \bibitem[Belczy\'nski et al.(2000)]{belczynski} Belczy\'nski, K.,
831: Mikolajewska,
832: J., Munari, U., Ivison, R. J., Friedjung, M., 2000, A\&AS, 146,407
833: \bibitem[Canizares et al.(2005)]{can05}Canizares, C. et al. 2005, 117, 1144
834: \bibitem[Chakrabarty \& Roche(1997)]{chak97}Chakrabarty, D.,
835: \& Roche, P.\ 1997, \apj, 489, 254
836: \bibitem[Chernyakova et al.(2005)]{integral} Chernyakova M.,
837: Courvoisier T. J., Rodriguez J., Lutovinov A., 2005, {\it The
838: Astronomer's
839: Telegram}, 519,1
840: %\bibitem[Choi et al.(1999)]{choi} Choi C., Dotani T., Agrawal P. C.,
841: % 1999, ApJ,
842: % 525, 399
843: \bibitem[Cieslinski et al.(1994)]{dionisio94} Cieslinski D., Elizalde
844: F., Steiner J. E., 1994, A\&A, 106, 243
845: \bibitem[Crocker et al.(2001)]{crocker2001} Crocker M. M., Davis
846: R. J., Eyres S. P. S., Bode M. F., Taylor A. R., Skopal A.,
847: Kenny H. T., 2001, MNRAS, 326,781
848: \bibitem[Crocker et al.(2002)]{crocker2002} Crocker M. M., Davis
849: R. J., Spencer R. E., Eyres S. P. S., Bode M. F., Skopal A.,
850: 2002, MNRAS, 335, 1100
851: \bibitem[Cropper et al.(1998)]{cropper} Cropper M., Ramsay G., Wu K., 1998,
852: MNRAS, 292, 222
853: \bibitem[Davidsen et al.(1977)]{davidsen77}Davidsen, A., Malina, R.,
854: \& Bowyer, A. 1977, ApJ, 211, 866
855: \bibitem[Done \& Magdziarz(1998)]{done98} Done, C., \&
856: Magdziarz, P.\ 1998, \mnras, 298, 737
857: \bibitem[Ellison et al.(1990)]{ellison90} Ellison, D.~C.,
858: Reynolds, S.~P., \& Jones, F.~C.\ 1990, \apj, 360, 702
859: \bibitem[Galloway et al.(2002)]{galloway02}Galloway, D. K., Sokoloski,
860: J. L., \& Kenyon, S. 2002, ApJ, 580, 1065
861: \bibitem[Houck(2002)]{isis} Houck, J. C.,High Resolution X-ray
862: Spectroscopy with XMM-Newton and Chandra, Proceedings of the
863: international workshop held at the Mullard Space Science
864: Laboratory of University College London, Holmbury St Mary,
865: Dorking, Surrey, UK, October 24 - 25, 2002,
866: Ed. Branduardi-Raymont, G., published electronically and
867: stored on CD., meeting abstract
868: %\bibitem[Grevesse \& Sauval(1998)]{grevesse98} Grevesse, N., \&
869: % Sauval, A.~J.\ 1998, Space Science Reviews, 85, 161
870: \bibitem[Hachisu \& Kato(2001)]{hachisu01} Hachisu, I., \& Kato,
871: M.\ 2001, \apj, 558, 323
872: \bibitem[Hansen \& Kawaler(1994)]{hkbook} Hansen, C.~J., \& Kawaler,
873: S.~D.\ 1994, Stellar Interiors.~ Physical Principles,
874: Structure, and Evolution, XIII, ~ Springer-Verlag Berlin
875: Heidelberg New York
876: \bibitem[Harris et al.(2004)]{harris} Harris D. E., Mossman A. E.,
877: Walker R. C., 2004, ApJ, 615, 161
878: \bibitem[Inoue(1985)]{inoue} Inoue H., 1985, Sp. Sci. Rev., 40, 317
879: \bibitem[Jablonski et al.(1997)]{jabl97} Jablonski, F.~J.,
880: Pereira, M.~G., Braga, J., \& Gneiding, C.~D.\ 1997, \apjl,
881: 482, L171
882: \bibitem[Jokipii(1987)]{jokipii87} Jokipii, J.~R.\ 1987, \apj,
883: 313, 842
884: \bibitem[Jordan et al.(1994)]{jordan94} Jordan S., M\"uerset U. \& Warner K.,
885: 1994, A\& A, 283, 475
886: \bibitem[Karovska et al.(1998)]{karovska98} Karovska, M., Carilli,
887: C. L., Mattei,
888: J. A., 1998, JAVSO, 26,97
889: \bibitem[Karovska et al.(2005)]{karovska2005} Karovska M., Schlegel
890: E., Hack W., Raymond J., Wood B. E., 2005, ApJ, 623,137
891: \bibitem[Kenyon(1986)]{kenyon} Kenyon, S. J., {\it The symbiotic
892: stars}, 1986,
893: Cambridge University Press
894: \bibitem[Kennea et al.(2007)]{kennea07} Kennea, J., Mukai, K., et al. 2007
895: in prep.
896: \bibitem[Luna et al.(2007)]{luna2007} Luna, G. J. M., Sokoloski J. L.,
897: Mukai K., Costa, R. D. D., in prep.
898: \bibitem[Livio(1997)]{livio97} Livio M., 1997, in: Accretion Phenomena
899: and
900: Related Outflows, IAU Colloquium 163, ASP Conf. Series,
901: Vol. 121, D. T.
902: Wickramasinghe, L. Ferrario \& G. V. Bicknell, eds., p. 845
903: \bibitem[Makishima(1986)]{makishima} Makishima, K. 1986, in The Physics
904: of accretion onto Compact Objects, eds. K. O. Mason, M. G. Watson \&
905: N. E. White, Springer Verlag Berlin, p249
906: \bibitem[Markoff et al.(2001)]{markoff01} Markoff, S., Falcke,
907: H., \& Fender, R.\ 2001, \aap, 372, L25
908: \bibitem[Markoff et al.(2005)]{markoff05} Markoff, S., Nowak,
909: M.~A., \& Wilms, J.\ 2005, \apj, 635, 1203
910: \bibitem[Masetti et al.(2002)]{masetti02}Masetti, N., et al. 2002,
911: A\&A, 382, 104
912: \bibitem[Masetti et al.(2005)]{masetti} Masetti, N., Bassani L., Bird
913: A. J., Bazzano A., 2005, {\it The Astronomer's Telegram}, 528
914: \bibitem[Masetti et al.(2006)]{cd57} Masetti N, Bassani L., Dean
915: A. J., Ubertini P., Walter R., 2006, {\it The Astronomer's
916: Telegram}, 715
917: \bibitem[Masetti et al.(2007a)]{masetti07}Masetti, N., et al. 2007,
918: A\&A, 464, 277
919: \bibitem[Masetti et al.(2007b)]{masetti07b} Masetti, N., et al. 2007,
920: A\&A, 470, 331
921: \bibitem[Mushotzky \& Szymkowiak(1988)]{mkcflow} Mushotzky R. F. \&
922: Szymkowiak
923: A. E., 1988, Cooling Flows in Clusters and Galaxies
924: ed. A. C. Fabian, p. 53
925: \bibitem[Mukai et al.(2003)]{mukai2003} Mukai K., Kinkhabwala A., Peterson J.
926: R., Kahn S. M., Paerels F., 2003, ApJ, 586, 77
927: \bibitem[Mukai et al.(2007)]{koji2007} Mukai K., Ishida M.,
928: Kilbourne C., Mori H., Terada Y., Chan K., Soong Y., 2007,
929: PASJ, 59, 177
930: \bibitem[M\"uerset et al.(1997)]{murset97} M\"uerset U., Wolff B.,
931: Jordan S., 1997, A\& A, 319, 201
932: \bibitem[Narayan \& Popham(1993)]{narayan93} Narayan, R., \&
933: Popham, R.\ 1993, \nat, 362, 820
934: \bibitem[Nichols et al.(2007)]{nichols07} Nichols, J.~S., DePasquale,
935: J., Kellogg, E., Anderson, C.~S., Sokoloski, J., \& Pedelty,
936: J.\ 2007, ApJ, 660, 651
937: \bibitem[O'Brien et al.(2006)]{obrien06} O'Brien, T.~J., et al.\
938: 2006, \nat, 442, 279
939: \bibitem[Orio et al.(2007)]{orio} Orio M., Zezas A., Munari U., Siviero A.,
940: Tepedelenlioglu E., 2007, ApJ, 661, 1105
941: \bibitem[Pandel et al.(2005)]{pandel} Pandel D., C\'ordova F. A.,
942: Mason K. O.,
943: Priedhorsky W. C., 2005, ApJ, 626, 396
944: \bibitem[Reynolds \& Nowak(2003)]{reynolds03} Reynolds, C.~S., \&
945: Nowak, M.~A.\ 2003, \physrep, 377, 389
946: \bibitem[Rupen et al.(2007)]{rupen07}Rupen, M. J., Mioduszewski,
947: A. J., \& Sokoloski, J. L. 2007, submitted to ApJ
948: \bibitem[Rybicki \& Lightman(1979)]{rlbook} Rybicki, G.~B., \&
949: Lightman, A.~P.\ 1979, New York, Wiley-Interscience, 1979,
950: p. 179
951: \bibitem[Sokoloski(1999)]{soko99} Sokoloski, J.~L.\ 1999, Ph.D.~Thesis,
952: U.C. Berkeley
953: \bibitem[Sokoloski(2003)]{soko03} Sokoloski, J.~L.\ 2003,
954: Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, 303, 202
955: \bibitem[Sokoloski et al.(2001)]{jeno2001} Sokoloski J. L., Bildsten
956: L., Ho W. C. G.
957: 2001, MNRAS, 326, 553
958: \bibitem[Sokoloski \& Kenyon(2003)]{jeno2003} Sokoloski J., Kenyon S. J., 2003,
959: ApJ, 584, 1021
960: \bibitem[Sokoloski et al.(2006)]{zand} Sokoloski J. L., Kenyon S. J., Espey B.
961: R., Keyes C. D., McCandliss S. R., Kong A. K. H., Aufdenberg
962: J. P., Filippenko
963: A. V., Li W., Brocksopp C., et al., 2006, ApJ, 636,1002
964: \bibitem[Taylor et al.(1986)]{taylor} Taylor A. R., Seaquist E. R., Mattei J.
965: A., 1986, Nature, 319, 38
966: \bibitem[Tueller et al.(2005)]{swift} Tueller J., Gehrels
967: N., Mushotzki R. F., Markwardt C. B., Kennea J. A., Burrows D. N.,
968: Mukai K., Sokoloski J., 2005, {\it The Astronomer's Telegram}, 591
969: \bibitem[Tueller et al.(2005)]{tcrb} Tueller J., Barthelmy S., Burroes
970: D., Falcone A., Gehrels N., Grupe D., Kennea J., Markwardt C. B.,
971: Mushotzky R. F., Skinner G. K., 2005, {\it The Astronomer's
972: Telegram}, 669
973: \bibitem[van Belle et al.(1999)]{vanbelle99} van Belle, G.~T., et
974: al.\ 1999, \aj, 117, 521
975: \bibitem[van der Klis(1989)]{vanderklis89}van der Klis, M. 1989,in
976: Timing Neutron Stars (Kluwer Academic Publishers),
977: \"{O}gelman, H., \& van den Heuval, E. P. J. eds., p27
978: \bibitem[Warner(1995)]{war95}Warner, B. 1995, Cataclysmic Variable Stars
979: (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge)
980: \bibitem[Zamanov \& Marziani(2002)]{zamanov02} Zamanov, R., \&
981: Marziani, P.\ 2002, \apjl, 571, L77
982: \end{thebibliography}
983:
984: \clearpage
985:
986: %\clearpage
987:
988: \begin{deluxetable}{ll}
989: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
990: \tablecolumns{2}
991: \tablewidth{0pt}
992: \tablecaption{Cooling-flow model parameters. \label{tab1}}
993: \tablehead{\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Value (Min, Max)\tablenotemark{a}}}
994: \startdata
995: $\dot{M}$\tablenotemark{b} ($10^{-9}$ M$_{\odot}$~yr$^{-1}$) & 1.8 (1.6, 2.0) \\
996: $kT_{max}$ (keV) & 80 (56,\nodata) \\
997: $n_H$: Full covering (10$^{22}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$) & 8.2 (7.7, 8.8) \\
998: $n_H$: Partial covering (10$^{22}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$) & 65 (52, 78) \\
999: Covering Fraction & 0.74 (0.69, 0.79) \\
1000: Abundance (w.r.t. Solar\tablenotemark{c}) & 0.30 (0.02, 0.45) \\
1001: $F_X$\tablenotemark{d} ($10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & 9.1 (7.5, 10.2) \\
1002: $L_X$\tablenotemark{d} ($10^{34}$ erg s$^{-1}$) & 3.1 (2.4, 3.9) \\
1003: \enddata
1004: \tablenotetext{a}{90\% confidence upper and lower limits.}
1005: \tablenotetext{b}{Accretion rate onto the compact object.}
1006: \tablenotetext{c}{Using solar abundance of \cite{abund}.}
1007: \tablenotetext{d}{$F_X$ is the absorbed 0.3--8.0~keV flux, and $L_X$ is
1008: the unabsorbed 0.3 -- 8.0~keV luminosity ($d=2$~kpc).}
1009: \tablecomments{The model consists of optically thin thermal
1010: emission from an isobaric cooling flow with absorbers that both
1011: fully cover and partially cover the source, plus a Gaussian
1012: line.}
1013: \end{deluxetable}
1014: \clearpage
1015:
1016: %\clearpage
1017: \begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
1018: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1019: \tablecolumns{4}
1020: \tablewidth{0pt}
1021: \tablecaption{Iron lines. \label{tab2}}
1022: \tablehead{
1023: \colhead{} &
1024: \colhead{Fe XXV } &
1025: \colhead{Fe XXVI} &
1026: \colhead{Fe K$\alpha$} % \\
1027: }
1028: \startdata
1029: Line center (keV)\tablenotemark{a}: &
1030: 6.946$^{6.959}_{6.933}$&6.693$^{6.706}_{6.677}$
1031: &6.379$^{6.399}_{6.358}$ \\
1032: EW\tablenotemark{b} (eV): & 72& 60& 108\\
1033: \enddata
1034: \tablenotetext{a}{Super- and subscripts represent 90\% confidence
1035: upper and lower limits, respectively.}
1036: \tablenotetext{b}{Gaussian-fit equivalent widths. EW uncertainties
1037: are on the order of 10--15\%.}
1038: \end{deluxetable}
1039: \clearpage
1040:
1041: %\clearpage
1042: \begin{figure}[ht]
1043: \includegraphics[width=6cm,angle=-90]{f1.eps}
1044: \caption{Undispersed (zeroth order) spectrum. The top panel shows the
1045: spectrum with the absorbed, isobaric cooling-flow model
1046: over-plotted. The bottom panel shows residuals with respect to this
1047: model (in units of $\chi^2$, where $\chi^2$ is shorthand for the
1048: difference between the data and the model, squared, divided by the
1049: variance, with the sign of the difference between the data and the
1050: model).
1051: }
1052: \label{zero_order}
1053: \end{figure}
1054:
1055: \begin{figure}[ht]
1056: \includegraphics*[width=6cm, angle=-90]{f2.eps}
1057: \caption{The iron-line complex from the combined HEG and MEG
1058: first-order ($m = \pm$1) spectrum. The best fit model of a powerlaw plus
1059: three Gaussian emission lines is over-plotted. The bottom panel
1060: shows the residuals, in the same units as Fig.~\ref{zero_order}.}
1061: \label{felines}
1062: \end{figure}
1063: %\clearpage
1064:
1065: \clearpage
1066: \begin{figure}[t]
1067: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f3.eps}
1068: \caption{$Chandra$ light curves for RT~Cru, with a bin size of
1069: 508.28~s. The light curves include the undispersed light as well as
1070: the counts from the HEG and MEG $m=\pm 1$ orders. The top and
1071: bottom panels show the flux as a function of time in the energy
1072: ranges 0.3--4.0~keV and 4.0--8.0~keV, respectively. The
1073: 0.3--4.0~keV emission is clearly variable on time scales of minutes to hours.}
1074: \label{fig:lcs}
1075: \end{figure}
1076:
1077: \end{document}
1078: