1: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
2: \documentclass[11pt,preprint]{aastex}
3:
4: \shorttitle{A Flattened Protostellar Envelope}
5: \shortauthors{Looney et al.}
6:
7: \newcommand{\msun}{\mbox{$M_{\sun}$}}
8: \def\iso#1#2{\mbox{${}^{#2}{\rm #1}$}}
9: \def\fe#1{\iso{Fe}{#1}}
10:
11: \def\pfrac#1#2{\left( \frac{#1}{#2} \right)}
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: \title{A Flattened Protostellar Envelope in Absorption around L1157}
16: \author{Leslie W. Looney\altaffilmark{1}, John J. Tobin\altaffilmark{2}, and Woojin Kwon\altaffilmark{1}}
17:
18: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy,
19: University of Illinois, 1002 W. Green St., Urbana, IL 61801, lwl@uiuc.edu, wkwon@uiuc.edu}
20: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Astronomy, University of Michigan, 500 Church St., Ann Arbor, MI 48108, jjtobin@umich.edu}
21:
22: \begin{abstract}
23:
24: Deep \textit{Spitzer} IRAC images of L1157 reveal many of the details of
25: the outflow and the circumstellar environment of this Class 0 protostar. In IRAC band 4, 8 $\mu$m,
26: there is a flattened structure seen in absorption against the background emission.
27: The structure is perpendicular to the outflow and is extended to a diameter of $\sim$2$\arcmin$.
28: This structure is the first clear detection of
29: a flattened circumstellar envelope or pseudo-disk around a Class 0 protostar.
30: Such a flattened morphology is an expected outcome for many collapse theories that
31: include magnetic fields or rotation.
32: We construct an extinction model
33: for a power-law density profile, but we do not constrain the density power-law index.
34: \end{abstract}
35:
36: \keywords{stars: formation; stars: circumstellar matter;
37: stars: pre-main sequence; infrared: stars}
38:
39: \section{Introduction}
40: \label{dist}
41:
42: The L1157 dark cloud in Cepheus (IRAS 20386+6751) conceals a young
43: protostar, a so-called Class 0 source \citep{andre1993}, which is deeply
44: embedded within a large circumstellar envelope \citep{gueth2003,beltran2004}. L1157 has
45: a large powerful molecular outflow that is the prototype of chemically active outflows
46: \citep{bachiller2001}.
47: Despite the attention that L1157 has received at radio wavelengths,
48: few observations have been made in the near to mid-infrared outside
49: of observations of the outflow in H$_2$ and K-band \citep[e.g.][]{davis1995,cabrit1998}.
50: Only recently have sensitive instruments been available to observe
51: these objects shortward of 10 $\mu$m \citep[e.g.,][]{tobin2007}.
52: The outflow carves cavities in the
53: circumstellar envelope, which allow photons from the embedded central
54: source to escape and scatter off dust in the cavity at NIR wavelengths.
55: The morphology of the scattered light can be used to probe many of the
56: fundamental properties of the source such as opening angle, envelope mass,
57: etc. \citep[e.g.,][]{whitney2003a,whitney2003b,tobin2007,robitaille2007,seale2008}.
58:
59: In this letter, we present new, deep \textit{Spitzer Space Telescope}
60: observations of L1157.
61: The IRAC continuum
62: emission is dominated by molecular line emission in the outflow.
63: Near the source there is a small amount of
64: emission that may be attributed to scattered light and perhaps molecular line emission
65: that is highly excited by the outflow jet. Other than the enormous
66: outflow ($\sim$0.5 pc) to the north and south, the most prominent feature
67: observed is a large, flattened absorption feature
68: at 8.0 $\mu$m and less defined at 5.8 $\mu$m. This absorption feature
69: is a flattened circumstellar envelope observed in silhouette against
70: the Galactic infrared background.
71:
72: The distance to L1157 is important to any physical interpretation, but the
73: distance is highly uncertain. The molecular clouds in Cepheus have three
74: characteristic distances, 200, 300, 450 pc \citep{kun1998}; L1157 has
75: a similar galactic latitude as the 200 pc and 300 pc absorbing clouds.
76: Due to this, we disagree with the current accepted distance of 440
77: pc. This value was based upon a study of NGC 7023 in \citet{viotti1969};
78: L1157 is not in clear association with this cluster. In this letter,
79: we use a distance of 250 pc.
80:
81: \section{Observations}
82:
83: The biggest breakthrough in observing Class 0 sources in scattered
84: light has come with the sensitivity of the Infrared Array Camera
85: (IRAC) \citep{fazio2004} on the \textit{Spitzer Space Telescope}
86: \citep{werner2004}. This enables observers to see through the dust
87: enshrouding a Class 0 source and reveal structures close to the embedded
88: source via scattered light and emission lines. IRAC has channels numbered
89: 1 through 4, corresponding to central wavelengths of 3.6 $\mu$m, 4.5
90: $\mu$m, 5.8 $\mu$m, and 8.0 $\mu$m, respectively.
91:
92: The L1157 cloud was observed with IRAC on 2006 August 13. Observations
93: were carried out using the High Dynamic Range mode with frame times
94: of 30 seconds using a cycled dither pattern of 30 positions and a
95: small scale factor achieving a total integration time of 900 seconds.
96: This observing scheme increases the overall sensitivity to scattered
97: light in the outflow cavity of Class 0 sources \citep[e.g.,][]{tobin2007}.
98: Post-BCD pipeline products (version S14.4.0) were solely used in this letter.
99: A color-composite image, with
100: exaggerated band 4 stretch of the field is shown in Figure \ref{color}.
101: In addition, a greyscale image using only IRAC channel 4, 8 $\mu$m band,
102: is shown in Figure \ref{disk}.
103:
104: \section{Results}
105:
106: \subsection{Flattened Envelope in Absorption}
107:
108: Even a cursory examination of Figures \ref{color} and \ref{disk}
109: reveals a clear absorption feature perpendicular to the outflow.
110: Much like the proplyds in Orion \citep[e.g.,][]{odell1993}, the
111: structure is seen in absorption against a bright background. In our
112: case, the
113: bright and pervasive background emission is from the 8.0 $\mu$m band.
114: There is also a lower level of intrinsic background emission in the 5.8
115: $\mu$m channel, which shows a less prominent absorption feature. However,
116: the level of absorption is too low for a rigorous analysis.
117: If the absorption is due to the opacity of the circumstellar material,
118: we would also expect to see absorption features in the 3.6 and 4.5 $\mu$m,
119: but in those channels, the background radiation field is nearly zero.
120: The most likely explanation is that the background emission is from Polycyclic Aromatic
121: Hydrocarbon (PAH) features, which are strongest in the 5.8 and 8 $\mu$m bands
122: \citep[e.g.,][]{fazio2004}.
123: PAHs are typically fluorescing due to the
124: absorption of ultraviolet photons from the surrounding interstellar radiation field;
125: thus, PAH emission is a ubiquitous feature of the diffuse interstellar
126: medium \citep[e.g.,][]{flagey2006}.
127: So while the proplyds in Orion are seen against the bright nebula
128: emission, L1157 is seen against PAH emission. The L1157 absorption feature
129: is large, $\sim$1-2$\arcmin$ or $\sim$15,000-30,000 AU at a distance of 250 pc
130: (see \S \ref{dist}) and flattened with an axis ratio of $\sim$0.25.
131: Due to the size and lack of any kinematic information,
132: we will call it a flattened envelope or a pseudo-disk, not a circumstellar disk;
133: such flattened density enhancements are expected from many theoretical
134: constructs that include magnetic fields or rotation in the collapse process
135: \citep[e.g.,][]{tsc1984,fiedler1993, galli1993a, galli1993b,
136: hartmann1994, hartmann1996}.
137:
138: The observed extinction is probably
139: dominated by a combination of silicates and ice.
140: The 8.0 $\mu$m channel overlaps
141: with the 9.7 $\mu$m silicate feature in half of the bandpass. However,
142: ice features are present in both the 5.8 and 8.0 $\mu$m channels: the 6.85
143: $\mu$m (CH$_3$OH or NH$^-_4$) and the 9.0 $\mu$m NH$_3$ ice features
144: in the 8.0 $\mu$m channel, and the 6.0 $\mu$m H$_2$O ice feature
145: in the 5.8 $\mu$m channel.
146: The qualitative appearance of the absorption does correlate very well with observations
147: of the dust continuum emission structure seen at $\lambda$~=~1.3~mm \citep{gueth2003},
148: as well as the ammonia emission \citet{bachiller1993}, but as these
149: trace the dense core, this may not be especially surprising.
150:
151: \subsection{Outflow Features}
152:
153: L1157 has one of the most studied and well-developed bipolar outflows.
154: The outflow has an inclination of $\sim$80$\arcdeg$ and a slower
155: blueshifted (southern) lobe than the redshifted (northern) lobe
156: \citep[e.g.][]{gueth1996,bachiller2001}.
157: The S shape morphology
158: and the three peaks at point reflection symmetry seen in CO
159: and SiO emission are well explained by outflow
160: precession with a cone angle of
161: $\sim$15$\arcdeg$ \citep{gueth1996,zhang2000,bachiller2001}.
162:
163: The IRAC data have a remarkable coincidence of emission structure with the molecular outflows,
164: Figure \ref{disk}.
165: We
166: measure the largest separation of peaks as $\sim$15$\arcdeg$ and an angle
167: of the outflow extension in width (``east-west'' direction) as
168: $\sim$35$\arcdeg$. This means that the precession cone has a
169: $\sim$15$\arcdeg$ angle, consistent with previous studies
170: \citep[e.g.][]{zhang2000,bachiller2001}, and that each episodic shock
171: has $\sim$10$\arcdeg$ opening angle. The precession cone angle here
172: indicates the total angle of the cone, and the opening angle represents
173: half of the outflow opening. From the peak positions, the precession
174: period is estimated as $\sim$3050 years, assuming 250 pc distance and
175: 100 km s$^{-1}$ constant outflow velocity from the model of \citet{bachiller2001}.
176:
177: Unlike the extinction structure,
178: the outflow features are commonly shown in all four
179: IRAC bands.
180: The excitation
181: mechanism for the broad energy range of emission is beyond the scope of this letter;
182: it requires spectroscopic observations
183: and detailed modeling to understand level populations in a large energy
184: region. However,
185: we can consider hydrogen recombination lines
186: \citep[the bipolar outflow regions were dissociatively shocked, e.g.,][]{bachiller2001},
187: and molecular hydrogen ro-vibrational and rotational lines (based on the chemical complexity
188: of the outflow).
189: In fact, many of these transitions
190: are in the IRAC bands with some metal ion fine
191: structure lines \citep[e.g.][]{dirk2000,noriega2004,neufeld2006}. The
192: 3.6 $\mu$m band may be dominated by H$_2$ 1-0 O(5,6,7) and 0-0 S(13).
193: IRAC bands 2, 3, and 4 may be dominated by H$_2$ 0-0 S(12,11,10,9),
194: S(8,7,6), and S(5,4), respectively. Some hydrogen recombination lines
195: such as Brackett $\alpha$ in band 2 and ion fine structures such as [Ni II],
196: [Ar II], and [Ar III] in band 4 also may contribute. Finally, PAH
197: emission contributes in bands 3 and 4.
198:
199: \subsection{Optical Depth Measurement and Models}
200:
201: The absorption feature of the flattened envelope structure in L1157
202: provides an excellent opportunity to examine the envelope material
203: by measuring the optical depth along the feature. This is especially true
204: as the L1157 flattened envelope
205: is nearly edge-on, isolated, and
206: surrounded by relatively smooth background emission. The background
207: and associated average uncertainty was measured using the IRAF\footnotemark\ task
208: ``imstat'' in three areas within 90$\arcsec$ from the central
209: source (0.54 $\pm$ 0.04 MJy/sr). The areas were free of stars and not significantly affected by
210: residual absorption from the outer envelope. A constant background
211: may not be entirely realistic, but we did explore the possibility of modeling the background
212: using median filtering in a similar method to \citet{simon2006}. However,
213: using a background model did not improve the analysis.
214:
215: \footnotetext{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories,
216: which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research
217: in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National
218: Science Foundation.}
219:
220: The intensity of the
221: absorption feature was measured perpendicular to the outflow, radially
222: away from the central source. This was done using SAOImage DS9 to measure
223: a ``projection'' of 82 pixels in length and 3 pixels in width.
224: The intensity was taken as the average of the
225: 3 pixels (in width) for a particular position along the projection.
226: To determine the intensity uncertainty, we used the pixel values
227: provided by the uncertainty frame from the \textit{Spitzer} pipeline.
228: Note, that the point spread function of IRAC at 8.0$\mu$m is
229: 1$\farcs$9, and the pixel size is 1$\farcs$2 \citep{fazio2004}.
230:
231: In order to quantitatively compare the absorption to axisymmetric
232: models of circumstellar envelopes, we created a simple model of the
233: opacity through an absorption slice, perpendicular to the outflow.
234: The model consists of an edge-on flattened object, i.e. disk-like,
235: with a radial density profile, $\rho(r) = \rho_0 (r/r_0)^{-p}$,
236: where $r_0$ and $\rho_0$ are the radius and the density one pixel away from
237: the center.
238: Using a Cartesian convention where location along the absorption
239: feature is $x$ and the distance along the line of sight is $y$, one can
240: re-write the density profile along the absorption as $\rho(x,y)= \rho_0
241: ((x^2+y^2)/r^2_0)^{-p/2}$ The opacity is then of the form
242: \begin{equation}
243: \tau(x)~=~2\kappa_\lambda \rho_0 r_0 \int ^{\sqrt{R^2-x^2}}_0 ((x^2+y^2)/r^2_0)^{-p/2}d(y/r_0),
244: \end{equation}
245: where R is the outer radius of the disk and $\kappa_\lambda$ is the dust opacity.
246: This is compared to the
247: observed opacity of $\tau(x) = - ln({\rm intensity(x)/background})$ in the average
248: along the projection. This is an edge-on approximation; the source
249: has an $\sim$80$\arcdeg$ inclination, but as we are averaging over three vertical
250: pixels, the effect is minimized.
251:
252: To fit this model to the data, a grid of models was used for the
253: following variables: the background level (although we measure a background level, we still
254: use a grid of values around the measured value), a constant for $\kappa_\lambda$ and $\rho_0$
255: combined,
256: the outer disk radius ($R$), the location of the structure center in pixels ($X_0$),
257: and the power law dependence
258: ($p$). Note that there are no {\it a priori} assumptions as to the
259: values of $\kappa_\lambda$ or $\rho_0$.
260: This parameter space is then
261: compared to the 8.0 $\mu$m data using a $\chi^2$ likelihood.
262: The pixels close to the central source were not used in the fits, as they contain
263: bright emission from the scattered light close to the protostar, see Figure \ref{fit}.
264:
265: Our model parameter grid used background levels = 0.45 to 0.60 MJy/sr in steps of
266: 0.01, p=0.5 to 3 in steps of 0.5, $R$=18$\arcsec$ to 84$\arcsec$ in steps of 1.2$\arcsec$,
267: $X_0$ was fixed to 0$\arcsec$ or $\pm$1.2$\arcsec$ of the peak of the compact
268: dust emission \citep{beltran2004},
269: and the constant=0.01 to 2.0 in steps of 0.01.
270: The model had nearly 3 million grid points.
271: Using these parameters, the simple model
272: of optical depth successfully fit the data with high
273: confidence levels. Models were considered good fits if the confidence level was $>$90$\%$, i.e.
274: $>$10$\%$ likelihood (see Table \ref{fits}).
275: In general, the fits are not well constrained.
276: The power-law index, $p$, fits range from 0.5 to 2.0, and the outer radius, $R$, was constrained
277: to $\ge$27.6$\arcsec$; however, the maximum is not well
278: constrained as we only modeled $\pm$50$\arcsec$
279: of data.
280: Examples of the ``best fits'' for each acceptable density power-law are shown
281: on the 8.0 $\mu$m data in Figure \ref{fit}.
282:
283: \section{Discussion}
284:
285: The shape of the absorption feature is especially intriguing, as it looks
286: like a disk structure perpendicular to the outflow axis.
287: This is the first clear detection of a flattened envelope or pseudo-disk in
288: a Class 0 object.
289: \cite{galli1993a,galli1993b} have shown that a modest magnetic field structure
290: modifies infall from the initial spherical cloud to form a so-called
291: ``pseudo-disk''; a flat thin structure in the equatorial
292: plane that is not rotationally-supported, thus collapsing.
293: This type of structure is also seen from simple flat sheet models of
294: collapse \citep[e.g.,][]{hartmann1994,hartmann1996}, as well as detailed
295: ambipolar diffusion models \citep[e.g.,][]{fiedler1993}.
296: On the other hand, this structure is large $\sim$15,000-30,000 AU, depending
297: on the background used.
298: That size is somewhat larger than
299: the inner envelope size estimated from interferometric models of the
300: dust continuum \citep{looney2003}. However, the single-dish dust emission
301: \citep{gueth2003} is extended along the same axis as the absorption, which
302: argues that the inner envelope in the equatorial plane
303: either has higher density, and/or different dust opacity properties.
304:
305: Our modeling results show that the properties of the structure, as determined
306: by the absorption model, are consistent with the above theoretical constructs,
307: i.e. flattened envelopes and density profiles.
308: Although we model a range of indexes ranging from p = 0.5 to 3, only
309: the 0.5 to 2 provide acceptable fits at the 90\% confidence level
310: with the vast majority of fits being p=1.5.
311:
312: To better explore the physical meaning the model, we assume
313: dust opacities (dust plus gas)
314: from \citet{lidraine2001} of $\kappa_{8.0\mu m} =5.912~cm^2~g^{-1}$.
315: Although using interstellar dust opacities for $\kappa_\lambda$ is
316: probably incorrect, as Class 0 sources are thought to have already
317: experienced some grain growth \citep[e.g.,][]{looney2003,natta2007},
318: it is still a useful approximation. Using the assumed $\kappa_{8.0\mu
319: m}$, the derived range for the density reference, $\rho_0$, or 1 pixel
320: (1$\farcs$2) from the center of the envelope (i.e. 300 AU at 250 pc)
321: is listed in Table \ref{fits}.
322:
323: In addition, we can estimate the absorbing mass of the flattened envelope component
324: for each ``best fit'' model of Figure \ref{fit} and
325: a height of 3 pixels (the size of the box we averaged over).
326: We assume that the vertical density profile is constant for the mass estimate, even though
327: the observed absorption falls off vertically with scale heights of $\sim$3-4 pixels, using a Gaussian
328: vertical structure.
329: Our mass estimate, listed in Table \ref{fits}, ranges from 0.08 to 0.16 M$_\odot$.
330: Without using any model, we can also estimate the mass required for the observed
331: extinction.
332: We use the above value for $\kappa_{8.0\mu m}$ and a background of 0.54 MJy/sr
333: to calculate the mass necessary for the extinction of all pixels in the central
334: region below 0.458 MJy/sr (577 pixels).
335: The total absorbing mass required for those pixels is 0.19 M$_{\odot}$.
336: It is important to note that this mass is only in the absorbing pseudo-disk,
337: but the mass is comparable to
338: the 140$\arcsec$ extended envelope detected in the millimeter continuum
339: as discussed in \citet{gueth2003} with an estimated mass
340: of 0.7 M$_{\odot}$ at an assumed distance of 250 pc. This implies that although a
341: large fraction of the mass of the envelope is in the flattened structure, most
342: of the mass is more diffuse.
343: Due to the log nature of the mass absorption, the density contrast
344: from the center of the absorption feature to slightly offset from the absorption
345: feature is approximately an order of magnitude.
346: This is more than expected from the numerical models of \cite{galli1993b}, but somewhat
347: consistent with the ambipolar models of \cite{fiedler1993} and the sheet collapse model
348: of \cite{hartmann1996}.
349:
350: As can be seen in Table \ref{fits} and Figure \ref{fit}, these data can not
351: constrain the model density profiles directly;
352: multiple power-laws are allowed. On the other hand,
353: although many theoretical models do suggest a flattened envelope structure, the
354: power-law index in the pseudo-disk is expected to evolve. In that case, we would not
355: expect a single power-law to well describe the envelope density.
356: In fact, the ambipolar models \citep[e.g.][]{tassis2005a,tassis2005b} suggest that
357: the power-law can be episodic in the flattened envelope.
358: Further studies with increased sensitivity need to be compared directly to the
359: theoretical density profiles in the flattened objects to say anything more completely.
360:
361:
362: \acknowledgements
363: We thank F. Gueth for providing the $\lambda$~=~1.3~mm continuum emission map
364: and R. Bachiller for providing the CO 2-1 emission map.
365: This work is based on observations made with the Spitzer Space Telescope,
366: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
367: of Technology under a contract with NASA. Support for this work was
368: provided by NASA.
369: This research has made use of SAOImage DS9, developed by Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
370:
371: \bibliographystyle{apj}
372: \bibliography{ms}
373: \clearpage
374:
375: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccc}
376: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
377: \tablewidth{0pt}
378: \tablecaption{Summary of Acceptable Fits}
379: \tablehead{
380: \colhead{Power law} & \colhead{Background} & \colhead{$R$} &
381: \colhead{Constant} &
382: \colhead{$\rho_0$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Mass\tablenotemark{b}} &
383: \colhead{Max.} & \colhead{Number} \\
384: \colhead{p} & \colhead{(MJy/sr)} & \colhead{($\arcsec$)} &
385: \colhead{($\kappa_\lambda \rho_0 r_0$)} &
386: \colhead{($10^{-18}$ $g/cm^3$)} & \colhead{(M$_\odot$)} &
387: \colhead{prob. (\%)} & \colhead{of fits} \\
388: }
389: \startdata
390: 0.5 & 0.47 - 0.60 & 27.6 - 50.4 & 0.02 - 0.03 & 0.75 - 1.13 & 0.08 & 99.2 & 130 \\
391: 1.0 & 0.46 - 0.60 & 28.8 - 84.0 & 0.06 - 0.13 & 2.26 - 4.90 & 0.16 & 99.9 & 1820 \\
392: 1.5 & 0.46 - 0.60 & 30.0 - 84.0 & 0.26 - 0.56 & 9.80 - 21.11 & 0.14 & 99.9 & 7253 \\
393: 2.0 & 0.47 - 0.51 & 34.8 - 84.0 & 1.04 - 1.63 & 39.20 - 61.43 & 0.15 & 48.3 & 2622 \\
394: \enddata
395: \label{fits}
396: \tablenotetext{a}{Assuming d=250 pc, for other distances multiply by (250/d).}
397: \tablenotetext{b}{The mass is estimated using the ``best-fit'' models from Figure \ref{fit}
398: with d=250 pc. For other distances multiply by (d/250)$^3$.}
399: \end{deluxetable}
400: \clearpage
401:
402: \begin{figure}
403: \special{psfile=f1.eps angle=0 hscale=50 vscale=50 hoffset=100 voffset=-200}
404: \vspace{8cm}
405: \caption{Color IRAC image of the L1157 region with Ch1-blue, Ch2-green, and Ch4-red.
406: The color stretch is slightly exaggerated to emphasize Ch4 (8 $\mu$m band)
407: where the extinction is the largest.}
408: \label{color}
409: \end{figure}
410:
411: \clearpage
412:
413: \begin{figure}
414: \special{psfile=f2.eps angle=-90 hscale=60 vscale=60 hoffset=0 voffset=175}
415: \vspace{8cm}
416: \caption{IRAC band 4 greyscale image of L1157 overlaid with the CO 2-1 emission
417: from \cite{bachiller2001}. The upper-left inset is
418: the same greyscale without the contours.
419: The lower-right inset is a closeup ($\pm$75$\arcsec$) of the absorption structure
420: with contours of 0.042 MJy/sr $\times$ 1, 2, 3, and 4.
421: }
422: \label{disk}
423: \end{figure}
424:
425: \clearpage
426: \begin{figure}
427: \special{psfile=f3.eps angle=-90 hscale=60 vscale=60 hoffset=0 voffset=150}
428: \vspace{8cm}
429: \caption{``Best fit'' examples for the 4 acceptable density power-law indexes on the
430: 8 $\mu$m data. The fit parameters are:
431: (p=0.5) background = 0.5 MJy/sr, constant = 0.02, $X_0$ = -1.2$\arcsec$,
432: and R = 39.6$\arcsec$;
433: (p=1) background = 0.57 MJy/sr, constant = 0.11,
434: X$_0$ = -1.2$\arcsec$, and R = 55.2$\arcsec$; (p=1.5) background = 0.49 MJy/sr,
435: constant = 0.37, X$_0$ = -1.2$\arcsec$,
436: and R = 55.2$\arcsec$; (p=2.0) background = 0.48 MJy/sr, constant = 1.3, X$_0$ = -1.2$\arcsec$,
437: and R = 40.8$\arcsec$.
438: }
439: \label{fit}
440: \end{figure}
441:
442: \end{document}
443:
444: