1: %
2: % editiert & rechtschreibgeprueft, DS, 7.9.07
3: %
4: %%%%%%%%%%%%%% Referenzen AH 27.8.
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Tabelle 4 vor Referenzen???, auf 5 Seiten bringen! AH 27.8.
6: \documentclass[mathleft]{an}
7: \usepackage{graphicx}
8: \usepackage{times}
9: \overfullrule5pt
10: \sloppy
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \Pagespan{10}{}% Document's page range.
14: \Yearpublication{2008}%
15: \Yearsubmission{2007}%
16: \Month{7}%
17: \Volume{329}%
18: \Issue{1}%
19: \DOI{10.1002/asna.200710827}
20: \title{On the distance to the Ophiuchus
21: star-forming region}
22:
23: \author{E.E. Mamajek\inst{}\thanks{Corresponding author:
24: emamajek@cfa.harvard.edu}}
25: \titlerunning{On the distance to the Ophiuchus
26: star-forming region}
27: \authorrunning{E.E. Mamajek}
28: \institute{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
29: 60 Garden St., MS-42, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA}
30:
31: \received{2007 Jun 6}
32: \accepted{2007 Jul 30}
33: \publonline{2007 Dec 28}
34:
35: \keywords{
36: astrometry --
37: ISM: kinematics and dynamics --
38: ISM: clouds --
39: reflection nebulae --
40: open clusters and associations: individual (Sco OB2, Ophiuchus)}
41:
42: \abstract{The Ophiuchus molecular cloud complex has produced in Lynds
43: 1688 the richest known embedded cluster within $\sim$300 pc of the
44: Sun. Unfortunately, distance estimates to the Oph complex vary by
45: nearly $\sim$40\% ($\sim$120--165 pc). Here I calculate a new
46: independent distance estimate of 135\,$\pm$\,8 pc to this benchmark
47: star-forming region based on Hipparcos trigonometric parallaxes to
48: stars illuminating reflection nebulosity in close proximity to Lynds
49: 1688. Combining this value with recent distance estimates from
50: reddening studies suggests a consensus distance of 139\,$\pm$\,6 pc
51: (4\% error), situating it within $\sim$11\,pc of the centroid of the
52: $\sim$5 Myr old Upper Sco OB subgroup of Sco OB2 (145 pc). The
53: velocity vectors for Oph and Upper Sco are statistically
54: indistinguishable within $\sim$1\,km\,s$^{-1}$ in each vector
55: component. Both Oph and Upper Sco have negligible motion
56: ($<$1\,km\,s$^{-1}$) in the Galactic vertical direction with respect
57: to the Local Standard of Rest, which is inconsistent with the young
58: stellar groups having formed via the high velocity cloud impact
59: scenario.}
60:
61: \maketitle
62:
63: \section{Introduction}
64:
65: The Ophiuchus cloud complex, and more specifically the Lynds 1688 dark
66: cloud, contains the richest embedded cluster within 300 pc of the Sun
67: (Allen et al. 2002; Lada \& Lada 2003; Porras et al. 2003). Ophiuchus
68: continues to be critical to our astrophysical understanding of many
69: aspects of star formation and early stellar evolution (see review by
70: Wilking, Gagne, \& Allen, in press), including prestellar cloud clumps
71: (e.g. Motte et al. 1998), the Class O protostellar stage (e.g. Andre
72: et al. 1993), the dynamics of Class I protostars (e.g. Covey et
73: al. 2006), substellar objects and substellar binaries (e.g. Luhman et
74: al. 2007), the initial mass function (e.g. Luhman \& Rieke 1999), and
75: X-ray emission in T Tauri stars (e.g. Montmerle et al. 1983), among
76: other topics.
77:
78: Surprisingly the distance to the complex is not well constrained, with
79: modern estimates from reddening studies ranging between 120--150 pc
80: (Knude \& Hog 1998), 125\,$\pm$\,25 pc (de Geus et al. 1989), and
81: 165\,$\pm$\,20 pc (Chini 1981). A distance estimate to the Oph region
82: is notably lacking from the studies of Hipparcos distances to nearby
83: star-forming regions by Wichmann et al. (1998) and Bertout
84: (1999). While arguments have been made that the Oph cloud is
85: co-distant with the Upper Sco subgroup of Sco OB2 (145\,$\pm$\,2 pc;
86: de Zeeuw et al. 1999), it is possible that the group could be in front
87: of or behind this OB subgroup. Here I estimate a distance to the
88: Ophiuchus star-forming region via Hipparcos parallaxes to stars
89: illuminating reflection nebulosity in the immediate vicinity of the
90: Oph clouds. Using the improved distance and a new estimate of the mean
91: proper motion for the Oph stellar group, I show that the motions of
92: Oph and Upper Sco are currently indistinguishable.
93:
94: \section{Analysis}
95:
96: \subsection{Distance}
97:
98: I queried the Merged Catalogue of Reflection Nebulae (Magakian 2003)
99: for nebulae within 5$^{\circ}$ in the region of the LDN 1688 cloud,
100: with the radius chosen to generously sample much of the region where
101: molecular gas is traced in $^{13}$CO maps (Nozawa et al. 1991). I
102: identified six reflection nebulosities with at least one bright star
103: illuminating the structure (vdB 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, and DG
104: 137). The clustered nature of these nebulae are obvious in Fig. 3 of
105: Magakian (2003), and the rarity of such nebulae at high galactic
106: latitude argue strongly for their association with the dense gas in
107: the Oph complex (only $\sim$4\% of the nebulae in the Magakian catalog
108: are at Galactic latitude $b> 15^{\circ}$). The Hipparcos
109: parallaxes (Perryman et al. 1997) for the stars flagged as
110: illuminating the nebulae (and their companions) are listed in Table
111: \ref{table:parallax}.
112:
113: I also queried the Hipparcos catalog with the list of 312 candidate
114: members of the Oph cloud provided in the review of Wilking et al. (in
115: press). The only Oph member with a Hipparcos parallax from the Wilking
116: et al. list is the well-known object HIP 80462 (SR 1), which also
117: illuminates a reflection nebula. One other object from the Wilking et
118: al. list had a Hipparcos parallax (HIP 80685 = HD 148352), but its
119: proper motion and parallax are very large, so I do not consider the
120: object further in the distance calculation.
121:
122: \begin{table}
123: % \centering%%%
124: \caption{Hipparcos parallaxes of stars associated with reflection nebulae in Oph
125: region.}
126: \label{table:parallax}
127: \begin{tabular}{llllc}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
128: HD & HIP & Alias & Nebula & $\pi$ (mas)\\
129: \noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
130: 147165 & 80112 & $\sigma$ Sco & vdB 104 & 4.44\,$\pm$\,0.81 \\
131: 147702 & 80377 & SAO 184364 & DG 137 & 4.73\,$\pm$\,1.34 \\
132: 147888 & 80461 & $\rho$ Oph DE & vdB 106 & 7.33\,$\pm$\,1.37 \\
133: 147889 & 80462 & SR 1 & vdB 105 & 7.36\,$\pm$\,1.19 \\
134: 147933 & 80473 & $\rho$ Oph AB & vdB 106 & 8.27\,$\pm$\,1.18 \\
135: 147932 & 80474 & $\rho$ Oph C & vdB 106 & 7.76\,$\pm$\,0.96 \\
136: 148478 & 80763 & $\alpha$ Sco & vdB 107 & 5.40\,$\pm$\,1.68 \\
137: 148605 & 80815 & 22 Sco & vdB 108 & 8.30\,$\pm$\,0.84 \\[0.5mm]
138: \hline
139: \end{tabular}
140: \end{table}
141:
142: The eight trigonometric parallax values listed in Table
143: \ref{table:parallax} are consistent with a weighted mean estimate of
144: $\pi$ = 6.75\, $\pm$\, 0.38 mas, but with a high reduced $\chi^2$
145: value ($\chi^2$/$\nu$ = 17.7/7 = 2.5). Omitting the most deviant
146: outlier ($\sigma$ Sco) reduces the $\chi^2$ significantly
147: ($\chi^2$/$\nu$ = 8.0/6 = 1.3) to a value consistent with the range of
148: expected $\chi^2$ for a good fit (Stuart \& Ord 2005,
149: Chapt. 16.3). Clipping the next most deviant parallax has negligible effect
150: ($\sim$0.7$\sigma$ level) on the final value. The weighted mean
151: parallax for the remaining seven stars is $\pi$ = 7.41 \,$\pm$\,
152: 0.43 mas, consistent with a distance of 135.0$^{+8.4}_{-7.4}$ pc (6\%
153: error).
154:
155: In Table \ref{table:distances}, I compare the new distance estimate to
156: previously published values. I combine the new estimate with the
157: previously published independent values to derive a weighted mean
158: distance. For Knude \& Hog (1998), I assume that their range of
159: plausible values (120--150 pc) are consistent with a normal
160: distribution at 135\,$\pm$\,15 pc. The published distances are
161: self-consistent ($\chi^2$/$\nu$ = 3.7/3 = 1.2), and lead to a weighted
162: mean distance of 139\,$\pm$\,6 pc (4\% error). I adopt this as the
163: best available distance to the Oph star-forming region.
164:
165: \begin{table}
166: % \centering%%%
167: \caption{Distance estimates to Oph.}
168: \label{table:distances}
169: \begin{tabular}{ll}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
170: Reference & Dist. (pc)\\
171: \noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
172: Chini 1981 & 165\,$\pm$\,20 pc\\
173: de Geus, de Zeeuw \& Lub 1989 & 125\,$\pm$\,25 pc\\
174: Knude \& Hog 1998 & 120-150 pc\\
175: This study & 135$^{+8}_{-7}$ pc\\
176: \noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
177: Mean & 139\,$\pm$\,6 pc\\[0.5mm]
178: \hline
179: \end{tabular}
180: \end{table}
181:
182: \subsection{Proper motion}
183:
184: To calculate the velocity vector of the Oph group, one also needs an
185: estimate of the group's mean proper motion. Candidate members of the
186: Oph cloud are generally optically faint and not well represented in
187: the {Hipparcos} catalog (Perryman et al. 1997), and those that
188: appear in the Pre-Main Sequence Stars Proper Motion Catalog (Ducourant
189: et al. 2005) typically have large uncertainties ($\sim$10
190: mas\,yr$^{-1}$). The candidate Oph members are, however, sufficiently
191: represented in astrometric catalogs of fainter stars (Tycho-2, UCAC2,
192: SPM2.0) that one can estimate the mean proper motion of the stellar
193: group in LDN 1688. I queried the 312 candidate Oph cloud members from
194: Wilking et al. with entries in the Tycho-2 catalog (H{\o}g et
195: al. 2000, 4 matches), UCAC2 catalog (Zacharias et al. 2004, 12
196: matches), and SPM-2.0 catalog (Platais et al. 2007, 35 matches). The
197: proper motions and astrometric aliases for these Oph candidate members
198: are listed in Table \ref{table:proper_motions}.
199:
200: Through cross-referencing entries in the UCAC2 and SPM2.0 catalogs
201: with those in the Tycho-2 catalog (all matches within 2$^{\circ}$ of
202: the center of the Oph stellar group), I find that UCAC2 and SPM2.0
203: proper motions are consistent with being on the Tycho-2 system within
204: $<$1 mas\,yr$^{-1}$ (where Tycho-2 is tied to the inertial ICRS at the
205: $\sim$0.25 mas\,yr$^{-1}$ level; H{\o}g et al. 2000). Among the 53
206: stars with a counterpart in one of the astrometric catalogs, the
207: proper motion with the smallest uncertainty was selected. Calculation
208: of the mean proper motion (and its uncertainty) for the group were
209: made using three estimators which are fairly insensitive to outlying
210: points, including the true median (Gott et al. 2001) and the clipped
211: mean using Chauvenet's criterion (Bevington \& Robinson 1992). The
212: proper motions were also run through a custom-made clipping routine
213: which iteratively clips the most discrepant outliers until a mean
214: value is found that gives a $\chi^2$ sufficiently low to be considered
215: a good fit considering the degrees of freedom (Stuart \& Ord
216: 2005). For the clipping routine, an internal velocity dispersion of
217: 1.5 mas\,yr$^{-1}$ was assumed, appropriate for 1\,km\,s$^{-1}$
218: (typical for young clusters) at $d$ = 139 pc. I justify the clipping
219: of the data outliers on the grounds that our parent sample may contain
220: interlopers unrelated to the Oph cloud (e.g. HD 148352) and probable
221: cloud members whose motions are likely perturbed due to binarity
222: (e.g. SR 1). The three estimators converge on a mean proper motion of
223: ($\mu_{\alpha {\rm cos}\,\delta}, \mu_{\delta}$ = --10, --27
224: mas\,yr$^{-1}$). The statistical error in each component of this
225: estimate is $\sim$1.5 mas\,yr$^{-1}$, and the estimated systematic
226: errors are $\sim$1 mas\,yr$^{-1}$ (for the UCAC2 and SPM catalogs, on
227: which this analysis is heavily dependent), so I conservatively assign
228: a total uncertainty in the mean proper motion of 2 mas\,yr$^{-1}$. The
229: mean proper motion of the Oph cloud members is remarkably close to the
230: median value for 120 members of the adjacent Upper Sco group:
231: ($\mu_{\alpha {\rm cos}\,\delta}, \mu_{\delta}$ = --11, --24
232: mas\,yr$^{-1}$, de Zeeuw et al. 1999).
233:
234: An investigation of the kinematics of individual candidate group
235: members is beyond the focus of this study, but one should note that
236: some Oph candidates have large proper motions clearly inconsistent
237: with group membership (especially HD 148352, [GY92] 165, and [GY92]
238: 280). The {Hipparcos} astrometry and photometry of the high
239: proper motion star HD 148352 are consistent with it being an
240: unreddened foreground F dwarf, unrelated to the Oph cloud. The 2MASS
241: and SPM photometry of the high proper motion star [GY92] 165 are
242: consistent with it being an unreddened foreground late-K dwarf, rather
243: than a member of the Oph cloud. The high proper motion star [GY92] 280
244: has 2MASS photometry consistent with an unreddened early-M
245: dwarf. Indeed Wilking et al. (2005) classify the star as an M2
246: ``dwarf?'' and Strom et al. (1995) classify it as ``foreground'', so
247: we confirm its interloper status based on its proper motion. Neither
248: [GY92] 165 \& 280 have been detected in deep X-ray images, again
249: supporting their status as old interlopers. All three should be
250: rejected from Oph membership lists. Two stars with accurate proper
251: motions that were consistently clipped (SR 2 \& 9) are likely to be
252: bona fide Oph members whose photocentric motion is perturbed by their
253: binarity.
254:
255: \subsection{Space velocity and position}
256:
257: I calculate the Galactic space motion vector for the members of the
258: Oph cloud using the best estimate of the distance (139\,$\pm$\,6 pc),
259: proper motion ($\mu_{\alpha {\rm cos}\,\delta}, \mu_{\delta}$ =
260: --10\,$\pm$\,2, --27\,$\pm$\,2 mas\,yr$^{-1}$), the median position of
261: the Wilking et al. cloud members ($\alpha, \delta$ = 246.78$^{\circ}$,
262: --24.48$^{\circ}$), and the median RV for Oph pre-MS stars
263: (--6.3\,$\pm$\,0.3 km\,s$^{-1}$ Prato 2007; Guenther et al. 2007;
264: Kurosawa, Harris \& Littlefair 2007; James et al. 2006). The
265: Galactic space motion vector (velocities with respect to the Sun, no
266: correction for Galactic rotation) is ($U, V, W$ = --6.2, --17.1, --8.3
267: km\,s$^{-1}$) with errors in the velocity components of (1.0, 1.3, 1.3
268: km\,s$^{-1}$). Given that the Sun's peculiar motion in the Z direction
269: with respect to the Local Standard of Rest (LSR) is +7.2\,$\pm$\,0.4
270: km\,s$^{-1}$ (Dehnen \& Binney 1998), I find that Oph is statistically
271: consistent with having negligible vertical motion with respect to the
272: LSR ($\Delta W$ = --1.2\,$\pm$\,1.3 km\,s$^{-1}$).
273:
274: From Monte Carlo simulations that sample the uncertainties in the best
275: estimates for the distances and centroid positions for Oph and the
276: Upper Sco OB subgroup of Sco OB2 (145 pc; de Zeeuw et al. 1999), I
277: find that the group centroids are only 11\,$\pm$\,3 pc in separation,
278: with Oph slightly in the foreground. The centroid position of the Oph
279: cloud population, in Galactic coordinates ($X$ towards Galactic
280: center, $Y$ in direction of Galactic rotation, $Z$ towards the North
281: Galactic Pole) is ($X, Y, Z$ = 132, --16, 40 pc). The median position
282: of the Upper Sco population (de Zeeuw et al. 1999) is ($X, Y, Z$ =
283: 135, --21, +49 pc). The properties of the Oph stellar group are
284: summarized in Table \ref{table:properties}. The relative positions
285: agree with de Geus's (1992) picture where the $\rho$ Oph cloud is
286: situated in the foreground of the slightly more distant Upper Sco OB
287: subgroup.
288:
289: The massive stars in Upper Sco have often been cited as the agent
290: responsible for triggering the star-formation in the Oph cloud
291: (e.g. de Geus 1992; Preibisch et al. 2002), so it is of interest to
292: models of triggered star-formation what the bulk velocity of the Oph
293: cloud membership is with respect to the Upper Sco subgroup. Although
294: the Upper Sco subgroup is well-studied, surprisingly there is an
295: uncomfortably large range of Galactic space motion velocity estimates
296: in the recent literature (de Zeeuw et al. 1999; de Bruijne 1999;
297: Madsen et al. 2002). Thus far the velocity estimates of the centroid
298: motion for Upper Sco are critically dependent on the location of the
299: convergent point and the tangential velocity for estimating the
300: Galactic velocity components. However, for an {\it expanding}
301: subgroup, the convergent point analysis will give the velocity of a
302: group member participating in the linear expansion at the position of
303: the Sun (e.g. Brown et al. 1997; Mamajek 2005), which is not the
304: quantity that interests us here. That the published velocity vectors
305: for the Sco-Cen subgroups inferred from convergent point analysis
306: alone (i.e. ignoring radial velocity data; e.g. Madsen et al. 2002)
307: are probably in error is demonstrated by the fact that the vectors
308: predict radial velocities that are systematically off of the mean
309: observed RV by several km\,s$^{-1}$. Including an estimate of the
310: group radial velocity in the analysis gives a more accurate estimate
311: of a group's bulk motion, independent of the effects of any
312: expansion. To estimate the bulk motion of Upper Sco I calculate the
313: velocity vector using the median position, distance, proper motion,
314: and radial velocity for the 120 Upper Sco members from de Zeeuw et
315: al. (1999). This leads to a space velocity of ($U, V, W$ = --5.2,
316: --16.6, --7.3 km\,s$^{-1}$), with component errors of only $\sim$0.3
317: km\,s$^{-1}$. As with Oph, Upper Sco demonstrates negligible motion in
318: the vertical direction with respect to the LSR ($\Delta W$ =
319: --0.1\,$\pm$\,0.5 km\,s$^{-1}$). Their relative motion (in the sense
320: Oph minus Upper Sco) is then ($\Delta U$, $\Delta V$, $\Delta W$) =
321: (--1.0, --0.6, --1.1) $\pm$ (1.0, 1.3, 1.3) km\,s$^{-1}$. Hence, Oph
322: is moving at a negligible 1.6\,$\pm$\,2.1 km\,s$^{-1}$ with respect to
323: the Upper Sco population. {\it These results show that the velocities
324: of Oph and Upper Sco are statistically indistinguishable at the
325: $\sim$km\,s$^{-1}$ level, and that both groups have negligible
326: vertical motion with respect to the LSR}.
327:
328: \begin{table}
329: % \centering%%%
330: \caption{Properties of the Lynds 1688 group.}
331: \label{table:properties}
332: \begin{tabular}{lc}
333: \hline\noalign{\smallskip}
334: Property & Value\\
335: \noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
336: Distance & 139\,$\pm$\,6 pc\\
337: Distance Modulus & 5.72\,$\pm$\,0.09 mag\\
338: $\overline{\mu_{\alpha {\rm cos}\delta}}$ & --10\,$\pm$\,2 mas\,yr$^{-1}$\\
339: $\overline{\mu_{\delta}}$ & --27\,$\pm$\,2 mas\,yr$^{-1}$\\
340: Radial Velocity & --6.3\,$\pm$\,0.3 km\,s$^{-1}$\\
341: Position (ICRS) & 246\fdg78, --24\fdg48\\
342: Position (Galactic) & 353\fdg11, +16\fdg74\\
343: Position ($X,Y,Z$) & 132, --16, 40 pc\\
344: Velocity ($U,V,W$) & --6.2, --17.1, --8.3 km\,s$^{-1}$\\[0.5mm]
345: \hline
346: \end{tabular}
347: \end{table}
348:
349:
350: \begin{table}
351: % \centering%%%
352: \caption{Proper motions of candidate Oph members.}
353: \label{table:proper_motions}
354: \resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
355: \begin{tabular}{llrr}
356: \hline\noalign{\smallskip}
357: Name & Astrometric & $\mu_{\alpha {\rm cos}\,\delta}$~~ & $\mu_{\delta}$~~~~~~~\\[0.6mm]
358: & Alias & (mas\,yr$^{-1}$) & (mas\,yr$^{-1}$)\\
359: \noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
360: BKLT J162643-241112* & U 22028257 & --8.2\,$\pm$\,7.8 & --23.2\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
361: DoAr 21* & S 57602749 & --20.5\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --21.0\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
362: DoAr 24* & S 57602752 & --7.6\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --26.3\,$\pm$\,3.7\\
363: DoAr 24E* & S 57602750 & --6.8\,$\pm$\,3.7 & --29.4\,$\pm$\,3.8\\
364: DoAr 25 & U 21797656 & --10.4\,$\pm$\,5.0 & --23.2\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
365: DoAr 25* & S 57602745 & --12.9\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --27.4\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
366: DoAR 32* & S 57603012 & --5.8\,$\pm$\,4.2 & --22.9\,$\pm$\,4.2\\
367: DoAR 33* & S 57603011 & --9.1\,$\pm$\,3.8 & --27.2\,$\pm$\,3.8\\
368: HD 148352 & S 57603135 & --52.6\,$\pm$\,3.3 & --64.7\,$\pm$\,3.4\\
369: HD 148352 & T 6799 930 1 & --49.9\,$\pm$\,1.5 & --63.1\,$\pm$\,1.5\\
370: HD 148352* & H 80685 & --52.3\,$\pm$\,0.9 & --64.2\,$\pm$\,0.7\\
371: ROX 2* & S 57602512 & --10.5\,$\pm$\,5.3 & --37.9\,$\pm$\,5.3\\
372: ROX 3* & S 57602744 & --13.0\,$\pm$\,5.9 & --28.0\,$\pm$\,6.1\\
373: ROX 4* & S 57602746 & --5.6\,$\pm$\,4.7 & --18.7\,$\pm$\,4.7\\
374: ROX 7* & S 57602748 & --33.0\,$\pm$\,6.9 & --13.0\,$\pm$\,6.9\\
375: ROX 16* & S 57602906 & --17.1\,$\pm$\,6.0 & --26.6\,$\pm$\,6.0\\
376: ROX 31 & S 57603002 & --9.9\,$\pm$\,7.0 & --27.5\,$\pm$\,7.0\\
377: ROX 31* & U 21797684 & --12.0\,$\pm$\,5.3 & --17.1\,$\pm$\,5.3\\
378: RX J1624.9-2459* & U 21797634 & --10.2\,$\pm$\,5.3 & --1.9\,$\pm$\,5.5\\
379: SR 1 & H 80462 & --2.3\,$\pm$\,1.4 & --25.5\,$\pm$\,1.0\\
380: SR 1 & S 57602509 & --3.1\,$\pm$\,3.5 & --27.0\,$\pm$\,3.5\\
381: SR 1* & T 6798 539 1 & --1.4\,$\pm$\,0.9 & --25.0\,$\pm$\,1.0\\
382: SR 2 & S 57602510 & --18.5\,$\pm$\,3.1 & --25.2\,$\pm$\,3.3\\
383: SR 2 & T 6798 544 1 & --20.2\,$\pm$\,2.4 & --27.4\,$\pm$\,2.2\\
384: SR 2* & U 22028253 & --20.5\,$\pm$\,1.9 & --26.2\,$\pm$\,1.4\\
385: SR 3 & U 21797645 & --9.7\,$\pm$\,9.8 & --33.9\,$\pm$\,5.3\\
386: SR 3* & S 57602747 & --14.3\,$\pm$\,3.8 & --29.0\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
387: SR 4 & S 57602751 & --14.5\,$\pm$\,6.3 & --27.8\,$\pm$\,6.3\\
388: SR 4* & U 22028255 & --14.1\,$\pm$\,5.1 & --17.7\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
389: SR 8* & S 57602506 & --7.5\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --26.7\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
390: SR 9 & S 57603009 & --13.3\,$\pm$\,3.3 & --30.6\,$\pm$\,3.7\\
391: SR 9 & T 6794 513 1 & --10.5\,$\pm$\,3.2 & --32.3\,$\pm$\,3.0\\
392: SR 9* & U 22028258 & --15.5\,$\pm$\,1.5 & --33.5\,$\pm$\,1.5\\
393: SR 10* & S 57603007 & --9.0\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --26.6\,$\pm$\,3.7\\
394: SR 12* & S 57603001 & --9.8\,$\pm$\,7.5 & --30.8\,$\pm$\,6.0\\
395: SR 13* & S 57603136 & --9.6\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --28.5\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
396: SR 20* & S 57603138 & --8.2\,$\pm$\,3.7 & --27.8\,$\pm$\,3.7\\
397: SR 21* & S 57602905 & --7.3\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --33.0\,$\pm$\,3.7\\
398: SR 22 & S 57602508 & --10.4\,$\pm$\,6.1 & --24.0\,$\pm$\,6.1\\
399: SR 22* & U 22028254 & --5.2\,$\pm$\,5.5 & --25.4\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
400: SR 24* & S 57602902 & --4.9\,$\pm$\,6.2 & --23.4\,$\pm$\,6.2\\
401: WSB 28* & S 57602753 & --18.5\,$\pm$\,7.2 & --22.9\,$\pm$\,7.2\\
402: WSB 40* & S 57602907 & --21.5\,$\pm$\,6.8 & --19.5\,$\pm$\,6.8\\
403: WSB 45* & S 57602897 & --0.5\,$\pm$\,7.0 & --36.8\,$\pm$\,7.0\\
404: WSB 46 & U 21797671 & --12.0\,$\pm$\,5.3 & --25.1\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
405: WSB 46* & S 57602896 & --12.6\,$\pm$\,4.4 & --30.8\,$\pm$\,4.4\\
406: WSB 48* & S 57602997 & --11.2\,$\pm$\,6.8 & --31.4\,$\pm$\,6.8\\
407: WSB 49* & U 21797676 & --7.7\,$\pm$\,5.2 & --22.0\,$\pm$\,5.1\\
408: $[$GY92$]$ 112 & S 57602904 & --3.3\,$\pm$\,7.6 & --42.2\,$\pm$\,7.6\\
409: $[$GY92$]$ 112* & U 21797666 & 1.9\,$\pm$\,5.2 & --18.3\,$\pm$\,5.0\\
410: $[$GY92$]$ 165* & S 57602901 & 51.8\,$\pm$\,3.6 & --60.9\,$\pm$\,3.6\\
411: $[$GY92$]$ 280* & S 57603003 & 78.3\,$\pm$\,7.3 & --56.8\,$\pm$\,7.3\\
412: $[$GY92$]$ 372* & S 57603008 & --8.5\,$\pm$\,4.4 & --31.4\,$\pm$\,4.4\\[0.5mm]
413: \hline
414: \end{tabular}
415: }
416: \\[1.5mm]
417: Notes: ``*'' flags the proper motion with smallest uncertainty for
418: each star. ``H'' is HIP, ``U'' is UCAC2, ``S'' is SPM2.0, ``T'' is
419: Tycho-2. ``SR'' appears in SIMBAD as ``Em* SR''.
420: \end{table}
421:
422:
423:
424: \section{Discussion}
425:
426: Our independent distance to Oph (135 \,$\pm$\, 8 pc) is comfortably
427: within the range of previous distance estimates (120--166 pc). The
428: distance to Oph is very similar to that of other star-forming clouds
429: in its vicinity, including the neighboring Pipe Nebula $\sim$35\,pc to
430: the east ($d$ = 130$^{+13}_{-20}$ pc, Lombardi et al. 2006), the Lupus
431: cloud complex $\sim$35\,pc to the west ($d$ = 140\,$\pm$\,20 pc;
432: Hughes et al. 1993), and the Corona Australis complex $\sim$80\,pc to
433: the south ($d$ = 129\,$\pm$\,11 pc; Casey et al. 1998). These
434: clouds are also in close proximity to the Upper Sco and Upper Cen-Lup
435: OB subgroups (both at $d$ $\simeq$ 140\,pc, with ages $\sim$5 and
436: $\sim$15 Myr, respectively), suggesting that these star-forming clouds
437: and the Sco-Cen OB association formed from the same large-scale
438: process.
439:
440: The similarity in velocities between the $\sim$5 Myr Upper Sco members
441: and the newly formed Oph members suggests that Upper Sco and Oph
442: formed from gas with roughly the same bulk motion. The kinematic data
443: can be used to discount the high velocity cloud (HVC) impact model for
444: forming Ophiuchus. Lepine \& Duvert (1994) proposed that the Oph cloud
445: (and the entire Sco-Cen complex) was formed as the result of a HVC
446: impact, where the progenitor HVC impacted the Galactic plane at
447: $\sim$250 km\,s$^{-1}$. In order to explain the distribution of
448: positions and ages of young stars in the Oph-Sco-Cen region, the Oph
449: cloud (representing the dense, shocked layer in the collision) was
450: predicted to be falling towards the Galactic plane from a maximum
451: height of $Z$ $\simeq$ +100\,pc (where it would have negligible
452: vertical motion). However, both Oph and Upper Sco appear to have
453: negligible motion in the $Z$ direction with respect to the LSR at
454: their current locations. The scenario also predicts that the
455: velocities of young stars formed in the HVC impact should have
456: significantly different velocities as the shocked layer is decelerated
457: and the motions of the newly-formed stars are dominated by the
458: Galactic potential rather than the motions of the gas. The similarity
459: of the vertical motions of Oph and Upper Sco (within $\sim$1
460: km\,s$^{-1}$ of each other and the LSR) appear to also be inconsistent
461: with this prediction.
462:
463: The kinematic data and star-formation history of the Oph and Upper Sco
464: region give us some clue regarding the nature of the two older
465: ($\sim$15 Myr), and more distended Sco-Cen subgroups: Upper Cen-Lup
466: (UCL) and Lower Cen-Cru (LCC). Although larger and older than Upper
467: Sco, UCL and LCC have similar velocity dispersions as Upper Sco
468: ($\sim$1 km\,s$^{-1}$, de Bruijne 1999; Mamajek, Meyer \& Liebert
469: 2002). Despite the km\,s$^{-1}$-level coherence in the motions of its
470: members, LCC shows some evidence of an age spread with the northern
471: part of the group having mean age $\sim$17 Myr, while the southern
472: part (the Southern Cross) has mean age $\sim$12 Myr (Preibisch \&
473: Mamajek, in press). One can imagine that Upper Sco ($\sim$5 Myr age)
474: and Oph ($<$2 Myr) may evolve into a LCC-like configuration in
475: $\sim$10 Myr time, after the newly formed massive stars have cleared
476: the Oph region of its star-forming molecular gas. If the Oph young
477: stellar population is unbound after its molecular gas is dispersed,
478: then a future observer of the Sco-Oph region (say $\sim$10 Myr in the
479: future) with kinematic information of $\sim$km\,s$^{-1}$ accuracy
480: would have difficulty disentangling the members of Oph and Upper Sco
481: by any kinematic criteria. Following our observations of the Oph and
482: Upper Sco regions, it seems possible that UCL and LCC are each
483: comprised of the unbound remnants of multiple embedded clusters with
484: similar bulk motions (within $\sim$1\, km\,s$^{-1}$) that formed over
485: a $<$10 Myr span, rather than the remnants of two large embedded
486: clusters that formed in single bursts.
487:
488: The Oph cloud is being impacted by the Upper Sco bubble of atomic
489: hydrogen and molecular gas, presumably the remnants of the proto-Upper
490: Sco molecular cloud (de Geus 1992). If one hypothesizes that Oph
491: represents a long-lived remnant clump of the proto-Upper Sco cloud,
492: then it has apparently inherited $<$2 km\,s$^{-1}$ of relative
493: velocity from the expansion of the Upper Sco bubble. The kinematic
494: data are also inconsistent with the idea that the Upper Sco stars
495: formed from the {\it contemporary} Oph clouds, and ``migrated'' to
496: their current positions. The data are consistent with the idea that
497: the Oph cloud complex and Upper Sco proto-cloud formed from the same
498: large scale process, which endowed them with similar velocities and
499: positions in close proximity ($\sim$10 pc), but that conditions for
500: star-formation in Upper Sco were ripe (and then soon extinguished)
501: $\sim$5 Myr before that in Oph.
502:
503:
504:
505: \acknowledgements
506:
507: EM is supported by a Clay Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Smithsonian
508: Astrophysical Observatory.
509:
510: \begin{thebibliography}{}
511:
512: \bibitem[Allen et al.(2002)]{Allen02} Allen, L.E., et al.: 2002,
513: \apj 566, 993
514:
515: \bibitem[Andre et al.\ (1993)]{Andre93} Andre, P., et al.: 1993, ApJ
516: 406, 122
517:
518: \bibitem[Bertout et al.\ (1999)]{Bertout99} Bertout, C., Robichon, N.,
519: Arenou, F.: 1999, A\&A 352, 574
520:
521: \bibitem[Bevington \& Robinson(1992)]{Bevington92} Bevington, P.R.,
522: Robinson, D.K.: 1992, {\it Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the
523: Physical Sciences}, McGraw-Hill, New York
524:
525: \bibitem[de Bruijne(1999)]{de Bruijne99} de Bruijne, J.H.J.: 1999,
526: MNRAS 310, 585
527:
528: \bibitem[Casey et al.(1998)]{Casey98} Casey, B.W., et al.: 1998, AJ
529: 115, 1617
530:
531: \bibitem[Chini(1981)]{Chini81} Chini, R.: 1981, A\&A 99, 346
532:
533: \bibitem[Cohen(1995)]{Cohen95} Cohen, M.: 1995, ApJ 444, 874
534:
535: \bibitem[Covey et al.(2006)]{Covey06} Covey, K.R., et al.: 2006, AJ
536: 131, 512
537:
538: \bibitem[Dehnen \& Binney(1998)]{Dehnen98} Dehnen, W., Binney,
539: J.J.: 1998, MNRAS 298, 387
540:
541: \bibitem[de Geus (1992)]{deGeus92} de Geus, E.J.: 1992, A\&A 262, 258
542:
543: \bibitem[de Geus et al.(1989)]{deGeus89} de Geus, E.J., de Zeeuw,
544: P.T., Lub, J.: 1989, A\&A 216, 44
545:
546: \newpage
547: \bibitem[Gott et al.(2001)]{Gott01} Gott, J.R.I., et al.: 2001, ApJ
548: 549, 1
549:
550: \bibitem[Guenther et al.(2007)]{Guenther07} Guenther, E.W., et al.:
551: 2007, A\&A 467, 1147
552:
553: \bibitem[H{\o}g et al.(2000)]{Hog00} H{\o}g, E., et al.: 2000, A\&A
554: 355, L27
555:
556: \bibitem[Hughes et al.(1993)]{Hughes93} Hughes, J., Hartigan, P.,
557: Clampitt, L.: 1993, \aj 105, 571
558:
559: \bibitem[King et al.(1990)]{King90} King, I., Gilmore, G., van der
560: Kruit, P.C.: 1990, {\it The Milky Way As a Galaxy}, University
561: Science Books
562:
563: %\newpage
564: \bibitem[Knude \& Hog(1998)]{Knude98} Knude, J., H{\o}g, E.: 1998,
565: A\&A 338, 897
566:
567: \bibitem[Kroupa(2001)]{Kroupa01} Kroupa, P.: 2001, \mnras 322, 231
568:
569: \bibitem[Lada \& Lada(2003)]{Lada03} Lada, C.J., Lada, E.A.:
570: 2003, \araa 41, 57
571:
572: \bibitem[Lepine \& Duvert(1994)]{Lepine94} Lepine, J.R.D.,
573: Duvert, G.: 1994, A\&A 286, 60
574:
575: \bibitem[Lombardi et al.(2006)]{Lombardi06} Lombardi, M., Alves, J.,
576: Lada, C.J.: 2006, A\&A 454, 781
577:
578: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2007)]{Luhman07} Luhman, K.L., et al.: 2007,
579: ApJ 659, 1629
580:
581: \bibitem[Luhman \& Rieke(1999)]{Luhman99} Luhman, K.L., Rieke,
582: G.H.: 1999, ApJ 525, 440
583:
584: \bibitem[Madsen et al.(2002)]{Madsen02} Madsen, S., Dravins, D.,
585: Lindegren, L.: 2002, A\&A 381, 446
586:
587: \bibitem[Magakian(2003)]{Magakian03} Magakian, T.Y.: 2003, A\&A 399,
588: 141
589:
590: \bibitem[Mamajek(2005)]{Mamajek00} Mamajek, E.E.: 2005, ApJ 634,
591: 1385
592:
593: \bibitem[Mamajek, Meyer, \& Liebert(2002)]{Mamajek02} Mamajek, E.E.,
594: Meyer, M.R., Liebert, J.: 2002, \aj 124, 1670
595:
596: \bibitem[Montmerle et al.(1983)]{Montmerle83} Montmerle, T., et al.:
597: 1983, ApJ 269, 182
598:
599: \bibitem[Motte et al.(1998)]{Motte98} Motte, F., Andre, P., Neri,
600: R.: 1998, A\&A 336, 150
601:
602: \bibitem[Nozawa et al.\ (1991)]{Nozawa91} Nozawa, S., et al.: 1991,
603: ApJS 77, 647
604:
605: \bibitem[Perryman et al.\ (1997)]{Perryman97} Perryman, M.A.C., et
606: al.: 1997, A\&A 323, L49
607:
608: \bibitem[Platais et al.\ (1998)]{Platais98} Platais, I., et al.: 1998,
609: \aj 116, 2556
610:
611: \bibitem[Porras et al.(2003)]{Porras03} Porras, A., et al.: 2003, \aj
612: 126, 1916
613:
614: \bibitem[Preibisch et al.(2002)]{Preibisch02} Preibisch, T., et al.:
615: 2002, AJ 124, 404
616:
617: \bibitem[Preibisch \& Mamajek(2007)]{Preibisch07} Preibisch, T., Mamajek,
618: E.: 2007, in: B. Reipurth (ed.), {\it Handbook of Low Mass Star Forming Regions Vol. II: The Southern Sky},
619: in press
620:
621: \bibitem[Stuart \& Ord\ (2005)]{Stuart05} Stuart, A., Ord, K.:
622: 2005, {\it Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics, Sixth Edition,
623: Vol. 1: Distribution Theory}, Oxford University Press Inc.
624:
625: \bibitem[Wichmann et al. (1998)]{Wichmann98} Wichmann, R., et al.:
626: 1998, MNRAS 301, L39
627:
628: \bibitem[Wilking, Gagne, \& Allen (2007)]{Wilking07} Wilking, B.A.,
629: Gagne, M., Allen, L.E.: 2007, in: B. Reipurth (ed.), {\it Handbook of Low Mass Star
630: Forming Regions Vol II: The Southern Sky}, in press
631:
632: \bibitem[Zacharias et al.(2004)]{Zacharias04} Zacharias, N., et al.:
633: 2004, AJ 127, 3043
634:
635: \bibitem[de Zeeuw et al.(1999)]{deZeeuw99} de Zeeuw, P.T., et al.:
636: 1999, AJ 117, 354
637:
638: \end{thebibliography}
639:
640: \section{Note Added In Proof}
641: Floor van Leeuwen (2007, {\it Hipparcos, the New Reduction of the Raw
642: Data}, Springer) has recently published revised trigonometric
643: parallaxes from the Hipparcos data for the stars in Table 1.
644: Repeating the calculation in \S2.1 using the new parallaxes results in
645: a mean parallax of $\pi$ = 7.62\, $\pm$\, 0.15 mas (131 \,$\pm$\, 3 pc
646: ; distance modulus = 5.59\, $\pm$\, 0.04 mag). Rejecting $\sigma$ Sco
647: (HIP 80112) again improves the solution from $\chi^2/\nu$ = 32.3/7 to
648: 6.7/6 (= 1.1). The revised distance of 131\, $\pm$\, 3 pc (2\%\,
649: error) is probably the best available derived from Hipparcos data. The
650: revised mean velocity vector for the Oph group is ($U, V, W$ = --6.2,
651: --16.1, --8.0 km\,s$^{-1}$) with errors in the velocity components of
652: (0.9, 1.1, 1.2 km\,s$^{-1}$). This makes its relative motion with
653: respect to Upper Sco slightly smaller (1.3\, $\pm$ 1.9
654: km\,s$^{-1}$). The slight shift in distance has negligible impact on
655: both the quantitative and qualitative conclusions of this study.
656:
657:
658: \end{document}
659:
660:
661: