1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: %\documentclass{article}
3: \usepackage{emulateapj5,apjfonts}
4: %\usepackage{psfig}
5: \input psfig.tex
6:
7: \newcommand{\kms}{$\rm {km}~\rm s^{-1}$}
8: \newcommand{\Msun}{M_\odot}
9:
10: \begin{document}
11:
12: \title{VLA Limits for Intermediate Mass Black Holes in Three Globular Clusters}
13: \author{F.N. Bash\altaffilmark{1}, K. Gebhardt\altaffilmark{1},
14: W.M. Goss\altaffilmark{2},
15: P.A. Vanden Bout\altaffilmark{3}}
16:
17: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy, University of Texas at
18: Austin 1 University Station C1400, Austin, TX 78712;
19: fnb@astro.as.utexas.edu, gebhardt@astro.as.utexas.edu}
20:
21: \altaffiltext{2}{National Radio Astronomy Observatory, P.O. Box 0,
22: Socorro NM 878701; mgoss@nrao.edu}
23:
24: \altaffiltext{3}{National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont
25: Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903; pvandenb@nrao.edu}
26:
27: \begin{abstract}
28:
29: The observational evidence for central black holes in globular
30: clusters has been argued extensively, and their existence has
31: important consequences for both the formation and evolution of the
32: cluster. Most of the evidence comes from dynamical arguments, but the
33: interpretation is difficult, given the short relaxation times and old
34: ages of the clusters. One of the most robust signatures for the
35: existence of a black hole is radio and/or X-ray emission. We observed
36: three globular clusters, NGC6093 (M80), NGC6266 (M62), and NGC7078
37: (M15), with the VLA in the A and C configuration with a 3-$\sigma$
38: noise of 36, 36 and 25 $\mu$Jy, respectively. We find no
39: statistically-significant evidence for radio emission from the central
40: region for any of the three clusters. NGC6266 shows a 2-$\sigma$
41: detection. It is difficult to infer a mass from these upper limits due
42: to uncertainty about the central gas density, accretion rate, and
43: accretion model.
44:
45: \end{abstract}
46:
47: \keywords{globular clusters}
48:
49: \section{Introduction}
50:
51: Although we do not understand how the nuclei of galaxies form or why
52: they have black holes (BH) at their centers, the correlation between
53: BH mass and bulge velocity dispersion does shed light on their
54: formation and evolutionary histories (Gebhardt et al. 2000a, 2000b:
55: Ferrarese and Merritt 2000). A number of different theories (e.g.,
56: Silk \& Rees 1998; Haehnelt \& Kauffmann 2000; Robertson et al. 2006)
57: predict a BH mass bulge-velocity-dispersion relation, although they
58: predict different slopes and intercepts for this relation.
59: Exploration of the extreme ends of this relationship will help
60: illuminate the underlying physical model, and in this paper we focus
61: on the low mass end. Black holes at the low end of the relations, with
62: masses between 100 and $10^6~\Msun$, are generally referred to as
63: intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs). There is significant evidence
64: that black hole masses from $10^5-10^6~\Msun$ exist from the work of
65: Barth, Greene \& Ho (2005) and Greene \& Ho (2006). To go to yet
66: smaller black hole masses, an extrapolation of the correlation between
67: black hole mass and stellar velocity dispersion suggests studying
68: stellar systems with velocity dispersions of 10--20~\kms. These
69: dispersions are characteristic of globular clusters. Whether the
70: existence of black holes in globular clusters could shed light on the
71: formation and correlations of supermassive black holes is unknown, but
72: clearly it is a possibility. Furthermore, the existence of massive
73: black holes in clusters will have a significant effect on the cluster
74: evolution. Thus, quantifying the demographics of black holes in
75: clusters may be related to how supermassive black holes grow, and will
76: definitely yield useful information about the evolution of
77: clusters.
78:
79: Theoretical work suggests that we might expect IMBHs at the centers of
80: steller systems (Ebisuzaki et al. 2001; Portegies Zwart \& McMillian
81: 2002; Miller \& Hamilton 2002), although it appears to be difficult to
82: make black holes more massive than 100~$\Msun$. Gurkan et al. (2004)
83: suggest that IMBHs may be easy to form through runaway collisions with
84: massive stars. Discoveries of BHs in globular clusters have been
85: claimed --- G1 in M31 (Gebhardt, Rich \& Ho 2002) and M15 (van der
86: Marel et al. 2002; Gerssen et al. 2002). In fact, the M15 claim has
87: been made for the past 30 years, starting with the result of Newell,
88: da Costa \& Norris (1976) and subsequently challenged by Illingworth
89: \& King (1977). The basic issue is being able to distinguish a rise in
90: the central mass-to-light ratio being due to either a black hole or
91: the expected stellar remnants (neutron stars, massive white dwarfs and
92: solar mass black holes). The most recent M15 result has been
93: challenged by Baumgardt et al. (2003a). The result in G1 has also been
94: challenged by Baumgardt et al. (2003b) but Gebhardt, Rich \& Ho (2005)
95: include additional data and analysis that support the black hole
96: interpretation.
97:
98: There has been two further observations which strongly support the
99: existence of a black hole in G1. Trudolyubov \& Priedhorsky (2004)
100: measure X-rays from G1 using the Chandra Observatory, centered to
101: within 2\arcsec\ of the center of G1. Subsequently, Pooley \&
102: Rappaport (2006) suggest the X-ray emmission is from accretion onto a
103: black hole, and Maccarone \& Koerding (2006) point out that if a black
104: hole is present then a 30 $\mu$Jy radio source may be expected. The
105: most significant observation comes from Ulvestad, Greene \& Ho (2007)
106: who find a 28 $\mu$Jy (4.5$\sigma$) emission centered on G1. Other
107: interpretations are a pulsar wind or a planetary nebula. The pulsar
108: wind seems unlikely given the age of G1 and the point-like radio
109: source (an old pulsar would have a large size). A planetary nebula
110: would show optical emission lines which are not seen in the HST or
111: Keck spectra of Gebhardt et al. (2003).
112:
113: Other studies of the existence of black holes in globular clusters have
114: been less compelling. Colpi, Mapelli, \& Possenti (2003) use indirect
115: dynamical arguments to suggest a few hundred solar mass black hole in
116: NGC~6752. McLaughlin et al. (2006) provide an estimate of black hole
117: in 47Tuc of $900\pm900~\Msun$. To date, there are no published
118: upper limits of black hole masses that are significantly below that
119: expected from an extrapolation of the correlation between black hole mass
120: and stellar velocity dispersion.
121:
122: While the dynamical arguements strongly support the black hole
123: interpretation in at least G1, the radio emission provides a clear and
124: obvious result. Unfortunately, it is difficult to predict the radio
125: emission from a given black hole mass. The next step is to explore
126: other globular clusters with a similar setup and deep exposures.
127:
128: \section{Target Sample and Radio Flux Density Predictions}
129:
130: We selected three globular clusters for observation. First, using the
131: stellar velocity dispersion at the center of M15 (NGC7078) suggests a
132: revision of the mass of the BH at the cluster's center to 1000
133: M$_{\sun}$, higher than Maccarone's assumed value of 440 M$_{\sun}$,
134: making M15 a promising candidate. Second, noting that Baumgardt et
135: al. (2004) argue that highly centrally condensed globular clusters, as
136: seen from their luminosity profiles, are unlikely to harbor central
137: IMBHs, we selected two globular clusters with large cores that are
138: more likely to have central BHs. These clusters, NGC6093 and NGC6266,
139: also have large central stellar velocity dispersions.
140:
141: In order to predict radio flux density, the first step is to use an
142: expected black hole mass. The black hole masses can be estimated using
143: an extrapolation of the correlations seen in galaxies, namely either
144: the black hole mass/velocity dispersion or the black hole mass/galaxy
145: bulge luminosity relations.
146:
147: A precise prediction of the expected radio flux densities based the
148: black hole mass is quite uncertain. Merloni et al. (2003) use radio
149: flux densities, X-ray luminosities, and measured black hole masses
150: from both galactic and galaxian black holes to derive a fundamental
151: plane for the three parameters. They argue that using any one
152: parameter to predict another is quite uncertain. Unfortunately, X-ray
153: luminosities do not exist for the three clusters studied
154: here. Furthermore, the Merloni et al. study do not include any black
155: holes with masses from 10 to $10^6$, making any use of the fundamental
156: plane suspect for the three globular clusters. Therefore, instead of
157: directly using expected black hole mass and measured X-ray luminosity
158: to predict the radio flux density, we simply use use the location
159: between the $10^6\Msun$ black holes and the galactic black holes in
160: the fundamental plane. In this region, the expected 5~Ghz radio power
161: ranges from $10^{30}-10^{32}$ ergs/s. Indeed, for the G1 radio
162: emission from Ulvestad, Greene \& Ho (2007) corresponds to $10^{32}$
163: ergs/s, which is consistent with the measured black hole mass of
164: $2\times10^4$ from Gebhardt, Rich, \& Ho (2005). Thus, in order to
165: predict expected flux densities, we adopt this range in radio power
166: and use the known distances of the globular clusters. A significant
167: assumption in these estimates is that the physical conditions are
168: similar; if, for example, the gas density where much lower in globular
169: clusters, the predicted radio power would be much less.
170:
171: Alternatively, Maccarone (2004) estimate expected radio emission based
172: on the expected gas density and the correlation of Merloni et
173: al. (2003). The gas density in the cluster come from the estimate of
174: Freire et al. (2001) who use differences in column densities measured
175: from pulsars in the front and back sides in the globular cluster
176: 47~Tuc. While there is no reason to expect similar gas densities from
177: cluster to cluster, it is the best measure we have of gas density in a
178: cluster and therefore we adopt that value. Maccarone (2004) further
179: assumes that the BH is accreting intra-cluster gas at 0.1 and 1\% of
180: the Bondi accretion rate. He assumes the BH mass to be 0.1\% of the
181: globular cluster mass, which he estimates from the cluster's total
182: luminosity and an assumed mass-to-light ratio, and computes the
183: expected 5 GHz flux density from the vicinity of the central BH for 15
184: globular clusters. Six of the globular clusters in Maccaroni's list
185: lie north of the southern declination limit of the Very Large
186: Array\footnote{The Very Large Array is a facility of the National
187: Radio Astronomy Observatory, operated by Associated Universities,
188: Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the National Science
189: Foundation.} (VLA) and have an estimated 5 GHz flux density of 40 $\mu
190: \rm Jy$ or greater (at 1\% of the Bondi rate). We searched the VLA
191: archive for observations of the centers of these clusters with noise
192: levels low enough to have allowed a detection at Maccarone's predicted
193: levels. No VLA archive data were found which had the required
194: sensitivity.
195:
196: There have been two similar studies to the one presented
197: here. Maccarone et al. (2005) provide upper limits for omega Cen using
198: ATCA observations and for M15 from archival VLA observations. De
199: Rijcke et al. (2006) provide upper limits for 47~Tuc and NGC~6397
200: based on ATCA observations.
201:
202: Table 1 shows the computed flux densities for NGC6266, NGC7078, and
203: NGC6093 at a frequency of 8.6 GHz. We assume a spectral index,
204: $\alpha\ = -0.7$ to provide predicted fluxes at 8.6 GHz, the frequency
205: of our observations. Our BH masses come from the BH/sigma correlation
206: (shown in the second column), and we also report those from Maccarone
207: based on luminosity (the first column).
208:
209: \section{Observations}
210:
211: Source positions, integration times on source, beam dimensions and
212: position angles, and our 3$\sigma$ limits are given in Table 2.
213:
214: We used the position of the center of M15 determined by Noyola \&
215: Gebhardt (2006) using the optical surface brightness profile from the
216: Hubble Space Telescope (HST), which are good to less than 1\arcsec.
217: We observed that position using the VLA for 7.5 hours on October 13,
218: 2004 in the A configuration at 8.6 GHz ($\lambda$ 3.5 cm), where the
219: VLA has its maximum sensitivity. The resulting map has an rms noise
220: level of 8.5 $\mu \rm Jy$/beam and covers $\approx$ 1 arcmin centered
221: on the center of M15. We clearly see the source AC211 reported by
222: Johnston, Kulkarni, and Goss (1991) about 1.5 arcsec northwest of the
223: cluster center at with a peak flux density on our map of 144 $\mu \rm
224: Jy$. We do not detect the other known low mass X-ray binary, M15 X-2
225: (White \& Angelini 2001), even at 1-sigma. The image also contains the
226: planetary nebula K 648, for which we get: R.A. 21:29:59.39,
227: Dec. 12:10:26.46 (J2000). The measured flux density is 4.2 $\pm$ 0.2
228: mJy and the deconvolved size is 1.5 x 0.7 arcsec. We do not see the
229: pulsar PSR 2127+12A or any other point source near the center of M15
230: at or above a level of 25 $\mu \rm Jy$ /beam.
231:
232: The positions of the centers of NGC6093 and NGC6266 also come from
233: Noyola \& Gebhardt (2006) (with a similar accuracy of around
234: 1\arcsec). These clusters were observed on August 11, 20, and 26,
235: 2005 using the VLA in the C configuration at 8.6 GHz. Each map has an
236: rms noise of 12 $\mu \rm Jy$/beam. These maps cover an area of 5.4
237: arcmin centered on each cluster's center. No radio source is seen at
238: or above a level of 36 $\mu \rm Jy$/beam near either cluster's center.
239: In the case of NGC6093 a source is detected 82 arcsec to the SE of the
240: cluster center at R.A. 16:17:05.00, Dec. -22:59:47.3 (J2000) with a
241: flux density of 0.32 $\pm$ 0.05 mJy. The distance from the cluster
242: center makes it unlikely that this source is related to NGC6266. No
243: source is seen convincingly in the image of NGC6266.
244:
245: Figure 1--3 plots the HST optical images (as used in Noyola \&
246: Gebhardt) with the VLA radio contours. None of the three clusters show
247: a significant detection at 8Ghz at the cluster center. However,
248: NGC~6266 (M62) shows about a 2-$\sigma$ peak at the center.
249:
250: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
251: \vskip 10pt \psfig{file=f1.ps,width=9cm,angle=0}
252: %\clearpage
253: %\begin{figure}
254: %\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f1.ps}}
255: \figcaption[f1.ps]{{\it HST} optical image of M15 overlayed with the
256: VLA contours of the central 10\arcsec. Positive 1,2, and 3$\sigma$
257: noise contours (8.5, 17, and 25.5 $\mu$Jy) are shown in green and
258: negative are shown in red. The blue circle marks the center determined
259: from Noyola \& Gebhardt (2006), with a diameter of 0.5\arcsec. North
260: is up and East to the left. The radio source, AC211, is easily seen
261: just north of the center. The other known X-ray source, M15 X-2, is
262: not detected.
263: \label{fig1}}
264: \vskip 10pt
265: %\end{figure}
266: %\vskip 10pt
267: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
268:
269: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
270: \vskip 10pt \psfig{file=f2.ps,width=9cm,angle=0}
271: %\begin{figure}
272: %\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f2.ps}}
273: \figcaption[f2.ps]{{\it HST} optical image of NGC~6093 (M80) overlayed
274: with the VLA contours of the central 10\arcsec. Positive 1,2, and
275: 3$\sigma$ noise contours (12, 24, and 36 $\mu$Jy)are shown in green
276: and negative are shown in red. The blue circle marks the center
277: determined from Noyola \& Gebhardt (2006), with a diameter of
278: 1\arcsec. North is up and East to the left.
279: \label{fig2}}
280: \vskip 10pt
281: %\end{figure}
282: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
283:
284: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
285: \vskip 10pt \psfig{file=f3.ps,width=9cm,angle=0}
286: %\begin{figure}
287: %\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f3.ps}}
288: \figcaption[f3.ps]{{\it HST} optical image of NGC~6266 (M62)
289: overlayed with the VLA contours of the central 10\arcsec. Positive
290: 1,2, and 3$\sigma$ noise contours (12, 24, and 36 $\mu$Jy)are shown in
291: green and negative are shown in red. The blue circle marks the center
292: determined from Noyola \& Gebhardt (2006), with a diameter of
293: 1\arcsec. North is up and East to the left. There is about a
294: 2-$\sigma$ positive 8Ghz signal at the center.
295: \label{fig3}}
296: \vskip 10pt
297: %\end{figure}
298: %\clearpage
299: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
300:
301: \section{Discussion}
302:
303: Failure to detect radio radiation at 8.6 GHz from the centers of three
304: globular clusters does not prove that no globular clusters have IMBHs
305: at their centers. Besides not having a black hole, other
306: interpretations include 1) accretion by the BH could be episodic and
307: we happened to observe the BHs in an ``off-state", 2) the gas density
308: could be much lower compared to galaxies, 3) the radiative efficiency
309: may be lower than assumed (although the assumed efficiencies are
310: already quite low), 4) or the accretion model may not be adequate in
311: general. We would predict, using the relation of Merloni et al. (2003)
312: or using standard accretion models and gas density estimates (as done
313: in Maccarone 2004), that we should have detected radio radiation at
314: 8.6 GHz if accretion is steady and the accretion rate times the Bondi
315: rate is 10$^{-4}\times$ or higher. We would not have been able to
316: detect the flux density predicted by a rate of 10$^{-5}\times$ or
317: less. Ulvestad et al. (2007) estimate the fraction of the Bondi rate
318: of just under 1\% for G1, but it is difficult to interpret due to the
319: unknown radiative efficiency. For galactic black holes, the radiative
320: efficiencies appear to vary greatly with some lower than $10^{-5}$
321: (Lowenstein et al. 2001), although consistent with rates of around
322: 10\% of the Bondi rate.
323:
324: Models which predict 8.6 GHz flux densities from central BHs in
325: globular clusters above about 25 $\mu \rm Jy$/beam can be tested with
326: the VLA currently. The EVLA should produce, for continuum
327: observations, a sensitivity improvement of about a factor of 15,
328: making 8.6 GHz flux densities above about 2$\mu\rm Jy$/beam
329: detectable.
330:
331: \begin{references}
332:
333: \reference{} Barth, A., Greene, J., \& Ho, L.C. 2005, \apjl, 619, L151
334: \reference{} Baumgardt, H., Hut, P., Makino, J., McMillan, S., \&
335: Portegies Zwart, S. 2003a, \apjl, 582, L21
336: \reference{} Baumgardt, H., Makino, J., Hut, P., \& Portegies Zwart,
337: S. 2003b, \apjl, 589, L25
338: \reference{} Colpi, M., Mapelli, M., \& Possenti, A. 2003, \apj, 599, 1260
339: \reference{} De Rijcke, S., Buyle, P., \& Dejonghe, H. 2006, \mnras, 368, 43
340: \reference{} Ebisuzaki, T., et al. 2001, ApJ, 562, L19
341: \reference{} Ferrarese, L., \& Merritt, D. 2000, \apjl, 539, L9
342: \reference{} Freire, P., Kramer, M., Lyne, A., Camilo, F., Manchester, R.
343: \& D'Amico, N. 2001, \apjl, 557, L105
344: \reference{} Gebhardt, K., et al. 2000, \apj, 539, L13
345: \reference{} Gebhardt, K., Rich, R.M.R., \& Ho, L.C. 2002, \apjl, 578, L41
346: \reference{} Gebhardt, K., Rich, R.M.R., \& Ho, L.C. 2005, \apj, 634, 1093
347: \reference{} Greene, J. \& Ho, L.C. 2006, \apjl, 641, L21
348: \reference{} Gurkan, M., Freitag, M. \& Rasio, F. 2004, \apj, 604, 632
349: \reference{} Haehnelt, M.~G., \& Kauffmann, G. 2000, \mnras, 318, L35
350: \reference{} Illingworth, G. \& King, I. 1977, \apjl, 218, L109
351: \reference{} Jonhston, H., Kulkarni, S., \& Goss, W.M. 1991, \apjl, 382, L89
352: \reference{} Lowenstein, M., Mushotsky, R., Angelini, L., Arnaud, K.,
353: \& Quataert, E. 2001, \apjl, 555, L21
354: \reference{} Maccarone, T. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1049
355: \reference{} Maccarone, T. \& Koerding 2006, Astronomy \& Geophysics, 47, 29
356: \reference{} Maccarone, T., Fender, R., \& Tzioumis, A. 2005, Ap\&SS, 300, 247
357: \reference{} McLaughlin, D., Anderson, J., Meylan, G., Gebhardt, K.,
358: Pryor, C., Minniti, D., \& Phinney, S. 2006, \apjs, 166, 249
359: \reference{} Merloni, A., Heinz, S., \& di Matteo, T. 2003, \mnras, 345, 1057
360: \reference{} Miller, M.C., \& Hamilton, D.P. 2002, MNRAS, 330, 232
361: \reference{} Newell, B., Da Costa, G., \& Norris, J. 1976, \apjl, 208, L55
362: \reference{} Noyola, E. \& Gebhardt, K. 2006, \aj, 132, 447
363: \reference{} Pooley, D \& Rappaport, S. 2006, \apjl, 644, L45
364: \reference{} Portegies Zwart, S., \& McMillan, S. 2002, ApJ, 576, 899
365: \reference{} Robertson, B., Hernquist, L., Cox, T., Di Matteo, T., Hopkins, P.,
366: Martini, P., \& Springel, V. 2006, \apj, 641, 90
367: \reference{} Silk, J., \& Rees, M. J. 1998 A\&A, 331, L1
368: \reference{} Trudolyubov, S. \& Priedhorsky, W. 2004, \apj, 616, 821
369: \reference{} Ulvestad, J., Greene, J., \& Ho L.C. 2007, \apjl, 661, 151
370: \reference{} van der Marel, R.P., Gerssen, J., Guhathakurta, R.,
371: Peterson, R., \& Gebhardt, K. 2002, AJ, 124, 3255
372: \reference{} White, N., \& Angelini, L. 2001, \apjl, 561, L101
373:
374: \end{references}
375:
376: \vfill\eject
377:
378: \begin{table}
379: \begin{center}
380: \caption{8.6 GHz Flux Density Values}
381: \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
382: \tableline\tableline
383: %\tablevspace{1pt}
384: Cluster & M$\rm_{BH}$ & M$\rm_{BH}$ & Distance & Flux Density \\
385: \tableline
386: & Maccarone, M$_{\rm sun}$ & this paper, M$_{\rm sun}$ &
387: kpc & $\mu$Jy \\
388: \tableline
389: %\tablevspace{1pt}
390: NGC6093 (M80) & \nodata & 1600 & 8 & $2\times10^3-10^5$\\
391: NGC6266 (M62) & 450 & 3000 & 6 & $3\times10^3-10^5$\\
392: NGC7078 (M15) & 440 & 1000 & 10 & $1\times10^3-10^5$\\
393: \tableline
394: \end{tabular}
395: \end{center}
396: \end{table}
397:
398: \begin{table}
399: \begin{center}
400: \caption{Observations}
401: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
402: \tableline\tableline
403: Cluster & RA & DEC & Integration & Beam; Pos. Ang & 3$\sigma$ Limit\\
404: & J2000 & J2000 & hours & arcseconds; deg & $\mu$Jy \\
405: \tableline
406: NGC6093 & 16:17:05.00 & $-$22:59:47.3 & 7.0 & $3.9\times2.3$; -6 & 36\\
407: NGC6266 & 17:01:12.96 & $-$30:06:46.2 & 7.0 & $4.7\times2.2$; -6 & 36\\
408: NGC7078 & 21:29:58.35 & $+$12:10:01.5 & 6.5 & $0.2\times0.2$; -76 & 25 \\
409: \tableline
410: \end{tabular}
411: \end{center}
412: \end{table}
413:
414: \end{document}
415: