1: %% The command below calls the preprint style
2: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
3: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
4: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
5: %%
6:
7: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
8:
9: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
10:
11: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
12:
13:
14: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
15:
16: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
17:
18: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
19: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
20: %% use the longabstract style option.
21:
22: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
23:
24: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
25: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
26: %% the \begin{document} command.
27: %%
28:
29: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
30:
31: \slugcomment{Accepted for Publication in ApJ April 8 2008}
32:
33: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
34: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
35: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
36: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
37: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
38: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
39:
40: \shorttitle{HN Peg B: A Test of Models of the Transition}
41: \shortauthors{Leggett et al.}
42:
43: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
44: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
45:
46: \newcommand\teff{\mbox{$T_\mathrm{eff}$}}
47: \newcommand\fsed{\mbox{$f_\mathrm{sed}$}}
48: \newcommand\logg{\mbox{$\log g$}}
49: \newcommand\obj{2MASS 2144$+$1446}
50: %\newcommand\ref{SDSS 1254$-$0122}
51: \newcommand{\Ks}{\mbox{$K_S$}}
52: \newcommand{\sciencebin}{\hbox{HN~Peg~B}}
53: \newcommand{\degs}{\mbox{$^{\circ}$}}
54: \newcommand{\etal}{et al.}
55: \newcommand{\eg}{e.g.}
56: \newcommand{\ie}{i.e.}
57:
58: \begin{document}
59:
60:
61: \title{HN Peg B: A Test of Models of \\
62: the L to T Dwarf Transition
63: }
64:
65: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
66: %% author and affiliation information.
67: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
68: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
69: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
70: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
71:
72: \author{S. K. Leggett\altaffilmark{1}}
73: \email{sleggett@gemini.edu}
74:
75: \author{D. Saumon\altaffilmark{2}}
76:
77: \author{Loic Albert\altaffilmark{3}}
78:
79: \author{Michael. C. Cushing\altaffilmark{4}}
80:
81: \author{Michael C. Liu\altaffilmark{4,5}}
82:
83: \author{K. L. Luhman\altaffilmark{6}}
84:
85: \author{M. S. Marley\altaffilmark{7}}
86:
87: \author{J. Davy Kirkpatrick\altaffilmark{8}}
88:
89: \author{Thomas L. Roellig\altaffilmark{7}}
90:
91: \and
92:
93: \author{K. N. Allers\altaffilmark{4}}
94:
95:
96:
97: \altaffiltext{1}{Gemini Observatory, Northern Operations Center, 670
98: N. A'ohoku Place, Hilo, HI 96720}
99:
100: \altaffiltext{2}{Los Alamos National Laboratory, PO Box 1663, MS F663, Los Alamos, NM 87545}
101:
102: \altaffiltext{3}{Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Corporation,
103: 65-1238 Mamalahoa Highway, Kamuela, HI 96743}
104:
105: \altaffiltext{4}{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawai'i, 2680
106: Woodlawn Drive, Honolulu, HI 96822}
107:
108:
109: \altaffiltext{5}{Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellow}
110:
111: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State University,
112: University Park, PA 16802}
113:
114: \altaffiltext{7}{NASA Ames Research Center, Mail Stop 245-3, Moffett
115: Field, CA 94035}
116:
117: \altaffiltext{8}{IPAC, California Institute of Technology, Mail Code
118: 100-22, 770 South Wilson Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91125}
119:
120: \altaffiltext{9}{Some of the data presented herein were obtained at the
121: W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership
122: among the California Institute of Technology, the University of
123: California, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The
124: Observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the
125: W.M. Keck Foundation. Some data were also obtained at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT)
126: which is operated by the National Research Council of Canada, the Institut
127: National des Sciences de l'Univers of the Centre National de la Recherche
128: Scientifique of France, and the University of Hawaii.}
129:
130:
131: \begin{abstract}
132:
133: Luhman and collaborators recently discovered an early-T dwarf companion to the G0 dwarf
134: star HN Peg, using $Spitzer$ Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) images.
135: Companionship was established on the basis
136: of the common proper motion inferred from 1998 Two Micron All Sky Survey images
137: and the 2004 IRAC images. In this paper we present new near-infrared imaging data
138: which confirms the common proper motion of the system. We also present new 3 - 4 $\mu$m
139: spectroscopy of HN Peg B, which provides tighter constraints on both the bolometric
140: luminosity determination and the comparison to synthetic spectra.
141: New adaptive optics imaging data are also presented,
142: which shows the T dwarf to be unresolved, providing
143: limits on the multiplicity of the object. We use the age, distance and luminosity of the
144: solar-metallicity T dwarf to determine its effective temperature and gravity, and
145: compare synthetic spectra with these values, and a
146: range of grain properties and vertical mixing, to the observed 0.8 - 4.0 $\mu$m
147: spectra and mid-infrared photometry.
148: We find that models with temperature and gravity appropriate for the older end of
149: the age range of the system (0.5~Gyr) can do a reasonable job of fitting the data,
150: but only if the photospheric condensate cloud deck is thin, and if there is significant vertical mixing in the atmosphere.
151: Dwarfs such as HN Peg B, with well-determined metallicity, radius, gravity and temperature
152: will allow development of dynamical atmosphere models,
153: leading to the solution of the puzzle of the L to T dwarf transition.
154:
155:
156:
157: \end{abstract}
158:
159: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
160: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
161: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
162: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
163:
164: \keywords{
165: stars: low-mass, brown dwarfs --- stars: individual (HN Peg, HN Peg B, 2MASS J21442847+1446077)
166: %%SDSS J125453.90-012247.4)
167: --- binaries: visual}
168:
169:
170: \section{Introduction}
171:
172: Detailed studies of brown dwarf companions to main sequence stars
173: contribute significantly to our understanding of these fascinating
174: objects (e.g., Gl 229B, Gl 570D, HD 3651; Marley et al. 1996;
175: Geballe et al. 2001; Saumon et
176: al. 2000, 2006; Liu et al. 2007). This is because the primary star, if
177: well-studied, immediately gives us the brown dwarf's distance, chemical
178: composition and, most importantly (since brown dwarfs cool with time),
179: constrains its age. Therefore the
180: discovery of two T dwarfs with spectral types of T2.5 and T7.5 as
181: companions to the nearby stars HN Peg (G0 V, 18.4 pc) and HD 3651 (K0 V,
182: 11.1 pc), respectively, by Luhman et al. (2007, hereafter L07; HD 3651 B was
183: independently discovered by Mugrauer et al. 2006) is an
184: exciting and important result. Companionship of the T dwarfs was confirmed using
185: proper motions determined from Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS;
186: Skrutskie et al. 2006) and \textit{Spitzer Space Telescope} (Werner et
187: al. 2004) Infrared Array Camera (IRAC; Fazio et al. 2004) images
188: separated by roughly 6 years.
189:
190: In this paper we present new observational data for one of the L07 T
191: dwarfs, the proposed companion to HN Peg, HN Peg B (or 2MASS
192: J21442847$+$1446077). The G0~V primary,
193: HN Peg (HD 206860), is a BY Draconis variable, where the variability has
194: been interpreted as due to spots on the surface, and the 24.9 day period
195: as the rotation period of the star (Blanco, Catalano \& Marilli 1979).
196: It is relatively young, with an age of $0.3 \pm 0.2$ Gyr (L07, see also \S 5 below),
197: and has a debris disk with a radius determined from the 70~$\mu$m flux excess
198: of $\sim$7~AU (Trilling et al. 2008).
199: The proposed companion is $43\farcs 2$ away from the primary, which
200: translates to 795~AU at the distance of the primary. Recent multiplicity
201: studies suggest that the frequency of brown dwarf companions at wide
202: separations is low (e.g. Kraus et al. 2008), however the statistical
203: significance of these findings is not well constrained due to the small sample sizes. This system
204: adds one more wide-separation G star and brown dwarf pair to such studies.
205:
206: Here we use the new observational data to confirm that the early-T
207: dwarf is indeed a companion to HN Peg, to investigate its multiplicity,
208: and to refine the determination of its luminosity.
209: The luminosity allows us to constrain the temperature and gravity
210: of the dwarf from the known age and distance of the solar-metallicity system.
211: Having determined the temperature and gravity, we compare the red,
212: near-infrared and 3--4~$\mu$m spectra, as well as the
213: IRAC 4--8~$\mu$m photometry, to synthetic spectra and photometry and present
214: the results of the model comparisons. We find that the models can reproduce the
215: data quite well, and hence bring us closer to resolving the puzzle of
216: this poorly understood phase of brown dwarf evolution: the transition
217: from the dusty, red in the near-infrared,
218: L dwarfs, to the clear atmosphere, blue in the near-infrared, T dwarfs
219: (e.g. Burgasser et al. 2002, Knapp et al. 2004).
220:
221:
222: \section{New Observations}
223:
224: \subsection{Near-Infrared Imaging}
225:
226: \subsubsection{WIRCam Imaging}
227:
228: $J$-band imaging was conducted with WIRCam at CFHT (Puget et al. 2004)
229: at three different epochs (2006 September 13, 2007 May 7
230: and 2007 July 12, UT) using a 9-point dithering pattern of 60$\arcsec$ amplitude.
231: HN Peg was positioned in the corner of the North-East detector, about 85$\arcsec$
232: off the center of the mosaic. The total integration time was 9 minutes
233: for the first two epochs and 17 minutes for the last. Images were preprocessed
234: and sky subtracted at CFHT with the I`iwi pipeline\footnote{
235: http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/Instruments/Imaging/WIRCam/} and
236: median-stacked using the Terapix software suite (sextractor - Bertin \& Arnouts
237: (1996), scamp - Bertin (2006) and swarp\footnote{
238: http://terapix.iap.fr}). The internal
239: astrometry at each epoch is better than 40 milli-arcsec $rms$ and the image
240: quality on the resulting stacks is 0$\farcs$76, 1$\farcs$02 and 0$\farcs$81 for the three
241: respective epochs. Using the 2MASS
242: point-source catalogue to fix the astrometry of each reduced image
243: implies $rms$ errors of 0$\farcs$25 and this is the uncertainty that we
244: adopt for the coordinates of HN Peg B derived from these data.
245:
246: \subsubsection{SOFI Imaging}
247:
248: Through a search of the data archive for the European Southern Observatory,
249: we found publicly available images of HN~Peg that were obtained with the
250: SOFI near-infrared camera on the 3.5~m New Technology Telescope at La Silla
251: Observatory. These data were collected on the night of 2006 June 15
252: through program 077.C-0704. The instrument contained one $1024\times1024$
253: HgCdTe Hawaii array with a plate scale of $0\farcs288$~pixel$^{-1}$.
254: Ten dithered 60~second exposures of HN~Peg were obtained through an $H$-band
255: filter. After these images were flat-fielded, registered, and combined,
256: the resulting image exhibited a FWHM near $1\arcsec$ for point sources.
257: We determined the plate solution of the combined image using coordinates
258: measured by 2MASS for sources which were well-detected but unsaturated, and not
259: obviously multiple. The $rms$ errors in the astrometry is 0$\farcs$19.
260:
261:
262: \subsubsection{NSFCAM2 Imaging}
263:
264: $K$-band images were obtained of HN Peg B on 2007 September 27
265: (UT) using NSFCAM2 (Shure et al. 1994) at the NASA Infrared Telescope
266: Facility (IRTF). Twelve 60-second dithered frames were obtained, on a
267: non-photometric night, with seeing around FWHM 0$\farcs$8 at $K$. The
268: camera field of view is 80$''$$\times$80$''$ and the pixel scale is
269: 0$\farcs$04/pixel. Three well-detected stars with 2MASS near-infrared
270: magnitudes of 14--15 (i.e. not HN Peg or HN Peg B) were
271: included in five of these frames and these were used to define the
272: astrometry. The uncertainty in these coordinates is estimated to be $0\farcs 1$
273: from the standard deviation of the values derived from the five frames, and is
274: similar to the $rms$ error in the astrometric calibration of each frame.
275:
276:
277: \subsection{3.5 $\mu$m Spectroscopy}
278:
279: We acquired spectra from 2.96 to 4.07~$\mu$m of HN Peg B using
280: the Near-InfraRed Imager and spectrograph (NIRI, Hodapp et al. 2003) on
281: the Gemini North Telescope. The 3 to 4~$\mu$m wavelength region includes
282: both the $\nu_3$ fundamental absorption band of CH$_4$ at 3.3~$\mu$m and
283: a bright flux peak around 4~$\mu$m. This spectral region is therefore
284: useful for defining the overall shape of the spectral energy
285: distribution and for measuring the bolometric luminosity.
286:
287: Over the course of four nights (2007 July 26 and 30, August 1 and 5, UT)
288: we obtained a total of 4.67 hours of data, consisting of 280 60-seconds
289: exposures, each made up of 30 coadds of 2-second integrations (short
290: integration times are necessary due to the high and variable $L$-band
291: background). The $L$-grism was used with the $L$ order-sorting filter.
292: The nights were required to be photometric with good image quality, to
293: maximize the flux through NIRI's 6-pixel (0$\farcs$72) slit. The
294: spectral resolving power provided by this configuration is $R \equiv
295: \lambda/\Delta \lambda \approx$460.
296:
297: The F0V star HD 194822 or the A1V star HD217186 were used as
298: calibrators. The science target and calibrators were observed using
299: $\pm$3$''$ offsets along the slit in an ABBA pattern. Flat fields were
300: obtained using the Gemini calibration unit, and bad pixel masks were
301: derived from dark frames. Wavelength calibration was achieved using
302: telluric and intrinsic spectral features in the calibration stars. IRAF
303: routines were used to mask bad pixels, flat field each frame, subtract
304: pairs of frames, and produce one to five stacked images for each night,
305: each of which contained a positive and negative spectrum and represented
306: 20--40 minutes of observation. Figaro routines were used to
307: extract the spectra, wavelength calibrate and flux calibrate using the
308: telluric standards. The final absolute flux calibration was achieved
309: using the \textit{Spitzer} IRAC 3.6~$\mu$m photometry given by L07 using
310: the technique given in Cushing et al. (2006). Finally the spectrum was
311: rebinned so that each pixel corresponds to a single resolution element.
312: The signal-to-noise ratio ranges from 5 at the blue end of the spectrum
313: (where there is little flux) to 15--20, at the brighter red end. The
314: spectrum is presented later, in \S 4.
315:
316: \subsection{Keck Laser Guide Star Adaptive Optics Imaging}
317:
318: The G0 primary, HN Peg, has been the target of radial velocity monitoring,
319: but there is no evidence of planets orbiting the star
320: (Fischer \& Valenti 2005; K$\bar{\rm o}$nig et al. 2006).
321: Hence the system seems to be composed of the star and its
322: brown dwarf companion, with a separation of 795~AU.
323:
324: We searched for companions to HN Peg B on 2006 October 14
325: using the laser guide star adaptive optics (LGS AO) system
326: (van Dam et al. 2006, Wizinowich et~al. 2006)
327: of the 10-meter Keck II Telescope on Mauna Kea, Hawaii.
328: Conditions were photometric with
329: variable seeing. We used the facility infrared camera NIRC2 with its narrow
330: field-of-view camera, which produces an image scale of
331: $9.963\pm0.011$~mas/pixel (Pravdo et al. 2006)
332: and a $10\farcs 2 \times 10\farcs 2$ field of view.
333: The LGS provided the wavefront reference source
334: (equivalent to a $V\approx9.6$~mag star) for AO correction,
335: with the exception of tip-tilt motion.
336: Tip-tilt aberrations and quasi-static changes in the image of
337: the LGS were measured
338: contemporaneously with a lower-bandwidth wavefront sensor
339: monitoring the $R=12.7$~mag field star USNO-B1.0~214428+14465
340: (Monet et al. 2003), located 44\arcsec\ away from HN Peg B.
341: Technical difficulties with this second wavefront sensor led to
342: somewhat degraded image quality in the inner $\approx 0\farcs 3$
343: radius compared to typical data.
344:
345: We obtained a series of dithered images, offsetting the telescope by a
346: few arcseconds, with a total integration time of 420~seconds. We used
347: the $K$-band filter from the Mauna Kea Observatories (MKO) filter
348: consortium (Simons \& Tokunaga 2002; Tokunaga et al. 2002).
349: The images were reduced
350: in a standard fashion. We constructed flat fields from the
351: differences of images of the telescope dome interior with and without
352: continuum lamp illumination. Master sky frame were created from
353: the median average of the bias-subtracted, flat-fielded images and
354: subtracted from the individual images. Images were registered and
355: stacked to form a final mosaic, with a full-width at half-maximum of
356: $0\farcs 06$ and a Strehl ratio of 0.34. No companions were clearly
357: detected in a $6\arcsec \times 6\arcsec$ region, corresponding to 110~AU,
358: centered on HN Peg B.
359:
360: We determined limits on any companions by first convolving
361: the final mosaic with an analytical representation of the PSF's radial
362: profile, modeled as the sum of multiple gaussians. We then measured
363: the standard deviation in concentric annuli centered on HN Peg B,
364: normalized by the peak flux of the targets, and took
365: 10$\sigma$ as the flux ratio limits for any companions. These limits
366: were verified with implantation of fake companions into the image
367: using translated and scaled versions of the science target. Inside
368: about $0\farcs 25$ in radius, the complex structure of the PSF is the
369: main noise source. From about 0.25--1.0\arcsec, the noise primarily
370: arises from shot noise of the PSF halo and at larger separations from
371: both shot noise of the sky emission and detector read noise.
372:
373: Figure 1 presents the companion detection limits. We use
374: the Liu et al. (2006) polynomial fits for $K$-band absolute
375: magnitude as a function of spectral type to convert the brightness limits into
376: spectral types for field ultracool dwarfs.
377: Evolutionary models calculated by one of us (DS), using cloud-free atmospheres,
378: were used to convert the $K$ limits into \teff\ and mass, given the age range of
379: 0.1--0.5~Gyr for the HN Peg system.
380: The observations show that there is no companion warmer than $\sim$ 500~K or
381: more massive than $\sim$ 10 M$_{Jupiter}$ at 0$\farcs$3 to 6$\arcsec$,
382: or 5.5 to 110~AU from HN Peg B. The luminosity of the system rules out the
383: presence a similar-mass companion (\S 5 and \S 6),
384: i.e. a companion with mass $>$ 10--20 M$_{Jupiter}$ or \teff\ $\gtrsim$ 1000~K.
385: Thus any companion to HN Peg B must be less massive than $\sim$ 10 M$_{Jupiter}$
386: and cooler than 500--700~K (depending on the exact age of the system).
387:
388: Recent high-spatial resolution imaging of brown dwarfs has found that the binary frequency amongst T2 -
389: T4.5 dwarfs is unusually high, with most early-T dwarfs consisting of a similar mass, but very different color,
390: pair, made up of a
391: late-L or very early-T and a mid- to late-T dwarf (e.g. Burgasser et al. 2006b, Liu et al. 2006).
392: This finding is appealing as it reduces the $J$-band brightening seen for early-T dwarfs, making the
393: L to T transition easier to model. HN Peg B appears to be one of the rare T2.5 dwarfs which is not
394: composed of a similar-mass pair of dwarfs.
395:
396:
397:
398:
399: \section{Astrometry of the HN Peg System}
400:
401:
402: \subsection{Proper Motion Determination}
403:
404: We used the WIRCam, SOFI and NSFCAM2 imaging data described above,
405: as well as the $Spitzer$ IRAC images obtained for the L07 program on 2004 July 10,
406: to determine accurate coordinates for the proposed
407: companion to HN Peg at multiple epochs. The results are given in Table 1.
408: In all cases the dwarf was well-detected and
409: 2MASS stars were used to refine the coordinate systems.
410:
411: In the case of the IRAC data, coordinates could be determined from the four IRAC
412: channels to 0$\farcs$1$-$0$\farcs$22 in Right Ascension and
413: 0$\farcs$1$-$0$\farcs$14 in Declination. The uncertainty in these
414: coordinates is estimated from the standard deviation of the
415: values derived from the four frames, and is similar to the $rms$ error in the astrometric
416: calibration of each frame.
417:
418: Figure 2 shows the difference between the 2004-, 2006- and 2007-epoch
419: measurements of the Right Ascension and Declination of the dwarf,
420: and the values that it would have were it a companion to HN
421: Peg. The 1998 2MASS coordinates provide the initial values. We adopt a
422: proper motion for HN Peg of $231.2\pm 1.0$~mas/yr in Right Ascension and
423: $-113.6\pm 0.40$~mas/yr in Declination, based on a weighted average of
424: the Hipparcos (Perryman et al. 1997) and PPM-North (Roeser \& Bastian
425: 1988) catalogs. The errors in the values plotted are the combined uncertainties
426: in our astrometric measurements, the 2MASS reference
427: system, and the proper motion of HN Peg.
428:
429: The NSFCAM2 astrometry differs in Right Ascension by
430: $\sim 0\farcs 3$ from the WIRCam results, and also disagrees with other available data.
431: The NSFCAM2 field is known to suffer from distortion at the $0\farcs 1$ level
432: \footnote{http://irtfweb.ifa.hawaii.edu/\~nsfcam2/Distortion\%20Analysis.html}.
433: It appears that this distortion, combined with the small number of stars used to
434: define the astrometry, leads us to underestimate the error on this measurement.
435:
436: The proper motion of the T dwarf in Declination is small and is
437: consistent with that of HN Peg along this axis.
438: While the agreement in Right Ascension is not as good as that in
439: Declination, the values are consistent with
440: companionship within the measurement errors, with the exception of the NSFCAM2 value.
441: Given the low probability of detecting a field T dwarf (see the following section), we interpret this
442: level of agreement as confirmation of companionship.
443:
444: \subsection{Probability of Detecting a Background T Dwarf}
445:
446: The probability of L07 discovering a background T dwarf near HN Peg is
447: low, although finite. Metchev et al. (2008) determine the space density of
448: T0--T8 dwarfs to be 7.2$\times$10$^{-3}$ pc$^{-3}$. The L07 study required a
449: good detection in all four IRAC bands, limiting the detection of early T
450: dwarfs to around 30~pc (and later T dwarfs to smaller distances).
451: The number of T dwarfs within a 30~pc volume is 810,
452: using the Metchev et al. density value. The field of view of IRAC is
453: 5.2 arcminutes and thus each star observed by L07 samples 27.04
454: arcmin$^2$ or 1.82$\times$10$^{-7}$ of the celestial sphere. The L07
455: sample size is 121 targets so we would expect to find $<$0.018 field T
456: dwarfs in this survey, as the 30~pc distance is an upper limit.
457: Assuming Poisson statistics, the probability of detecting one field
458: T dwarf given an expectation rate of $<$0.018 is $<$2\%.
459: However the probability of finding such a field T dwarf with
460: a similar proper motion to HN Peg (as described in the previous section) is negligibly small.
461:
462:
463:
464: \section{The Spectral Energy Distribution and Luminosity of HN Peg B}
465:
466: L07 determined the spectral type of HN Peg B to be T2.5$\pm$0.5
467: by comparing its near-infrared spectrum to the T dwarf spectral
468: templates presented by Burgasser et al. (2006a). Using the L07 spectrum,
469: we computed the values of the spectral indices
470: defined in Burgasser et al. and find spectral types ranging from T2 to
471: T4.5, with an average of T3$\pm$1 (a significant range in type is not
472: uncommon for L to T transition dwarfs, see for example Table 9 in Knapp
473: et al. 2004). This spectral type is in good agreement with the spectral
474: type derived by the direct comparison technique.
475:
476: Figure 3 shows the 0.8$-$4.1~$\mu$m spectrum of the Burgasser et al. T2
477: spectral standard SDSS J125453.90-012247.4 (hereafter SDSS 1254$-$0122)
478: from Cushing et al. (2005), and that for HN Peg B.
479: The spectra have been scaled to demonstrate the similarity between their
480: spectral energy distributions (SEDs). Comparing the scaling factor to that derived
481: from the trigonometric parallaxes measured for SDSS 1254$-$0122 and HN Peg
482: (Dahn et al. 2002, Perryman et al 1997) shows that
483: SDSS 1254$-$0122 is brighter than HN Peg B by a factor of 1.55.
484: It has been suggested that SDSS 1254$-$0122 is multiple,
485: based on its absolute magnitude (Burgasser et al. 2006b;
486: Liu et al. 2006), although it remains unresolved by the \textit{Hubble Space
487: Telescope} (Burgasser et al. 2006b).
488: The fact that HN Peg B is not brighter than SDSS 1254$-$0122 supports the
489: conclusion derived from the AO imaging of the dwarf, that
490: HN Peg B does not have a close companion with similar mass.
491: Compared to the T2 dwarf SDSS 1254$-$0122,
492: HN Peg B has slightly stronger H$_2$O absorption at 1.1~$\mu$m, slightly stronger
493: CH$_4$ at 1.6~$\mu$m, and is brighter at 4~$\mu$m, supporting the slightly later type
494: of T2.5--T3.
495:
496: We have determined the bolometric flux at Earth of HN Peg B
497: by integrating the observed $0.8-4\,\mu$m spectrum and adding the contribution of
498: longer wavelengths using a synthetic spectrum.
499: Initially we chose a synthetic spectrum with \teff\ $=$ 1400~K, the temperature of
500: SDSS 1254$-$0122 (Golimowski et al. 2004), due to the similarity in the SED.
501: The model flux was scaled by the observed IRAC fluxes of HN Peg B.
502: After deriving the luminosity in this way, evolutionary models were used
503: to constrain the \teff\ and \logg\ (see the following section),
504: and the luminosity was rederived using the long-wavelength flux of a cooler
505: \teff\ $=$ 1115~K model, as indicated by the evolutionary model.
506: The difference in the measured luminosity is
507: 3.5\%, less than the uncertainty in the measurement, and the change in the \teff\
508: derived from the luminosity would be $<$5~K; we have not rederived the \teff\
509: and \logg\ .
510:
511: The value derived for the luminosity at the Earth, using the cooler model long-wavelength
512: extension, is $1.66 \times 10^{-15}\,$W/m$^2$ with an estimated
513: uncertainty of 5\%. Adopting the HN Peg distance of 18.4 $\pm$ 0.2 pc
514: (Perryman et al 1997) implies a luminosity given by
515: $\log L/L_\odot=-4.76\pm 0.02$, in agreement with the value found by L07 of $-4.77\pm 0.03$.
516:
517:
518: \section{Age, Metallicity, Temperature and Gravity of HN Peg B}
519:
520: L07 consider the Li, rotational, and chromospheric properties of HN Peg A to determine an age
521: for the HN Peg system of $0.3 \pm 0.2$ Gyr. This agrees with the recently derived
522: gyrochronology age of 0.24 $\pm$ 0.03 Gyr (Barnes 2007).
523: The system has solar metallicity: Valenti \& Fischer (2005) report [m/H]$= -0.01 \pm 0.03$ for HN Peg A.
524:
525: Evolutionary models calculated by one of us (DS), show that a T dwarf aged 0.1 to 0.5 Gyr, with
526: our measured luminosity, has \teff\ K, \logg\ , radius $R/R_{\odot}$ and mass of
527: 1015~K, 4.22, 0.134, 12 M$_{Jupiter}$ at the
528: younger age and 1115~K, 4.81, 0.101, 28 M$_{Jupiter}$ at the older age.
529: These values are summarised in Table 2, and are consistent with the Burrows
530: et al (1997) and Baraffe et al (2003) evolutionary sequences shown in Figures 10 and 11 of L07,
531: although the temperature is slightly lower than that adopted by L07 of 1130~K.
532:
533: As also noted in L07, a temperature of $\sim$1065~K is significantly cooler than that of the
534: typical
535: field T2--T3 dwarf, which has \teff\ $\sim$ 1200--1400~K (Golimowski et al. 2004).
536: Cushing et al. (2008) determine \teff$=$1200--1400~K for the very spectrally similar
537: T2 reference dwarf SDSS J1254$-$0122 (Figure 3), from model analyses of the observed spectra,
538: in agreement with the value determined from luminosity
539: arguments by Golimowski et al. (2004) of 1425$\pm175$~K.
540: However, for HN Peg B to be as hot as 1200~K, its age would need to be
541: $\sim$1~Gyr, in violation of the Li, rotation and chromospheric activity constraints (L07).
542: The young L7.5 dwarf HD 203030 B (Metchev \& Hillenbrand 2006) also has an apparently low
543: temperature (of 1200~K), and it has been suggested that
544: the temperature of the L to T dwarf transition may be gravity dependent.
545: Benchmark transition dwarfs such as HN Peg B, with well determined
546: age and metallicity, are clearly important for studies of the properties that
547: control the L to T dwarf transition.
548:
549: In the following section we explore the fits of synthetic spectra and photometry
550: to the HN Peg B data, and investigate how well our current atmospheric models can do, given the
551: tight constraints on temperature, gravity and radius that the evolutionary
552: sequences provide. Note that if HN Peg B consists of an unresolved pair of identical
553: dwarfs, then the luminosity is halved and \teff\ becomes $\sim$900~K, for the age of the system.
554: The comparison to the spectra below shows that our models do not support such a
555: low temperature, consistent with the dwarf being single, or being composed of a
556: significantly unequal-mass system, in agreement with the conclusions reached in \S 2.3 above.
557:
558:
559: \section{Model Comparisons}
560:
561:
562: The model atmospheres used here self-consistently
563: include the formation of condensate clouds (Marley et al. 2002, 2007, and in
564: preparation). The parameter \fsed\ is a measure of the efficiency of
565: condensate sedimentation relative to turbulent mixing (Ackerman \& Marley
566: 2001). Larger values of \fsed\ imply larger particles sizes, greater
567: sedimentation efficiency, and thus thinner condensate clouds.
568: Generally, \fsed\ $=$ 2 reproduces the colors and spectra of L dwarfs well, and
569: \fsed\ $=$ 4 or cloud-free models reproduce the colors and spectra of
570: later T dwarfs well (e.g. Knapp et al. 2004, Cushing et al. 2008).
571:
572: The models also include vertical transport in the atmosphere, which affects
573: the chemical abundance of species involving C, N and O. The extremely
574: stable CO and N$_2$ molecules can be dredged from deep layers into the photosphere,
575: enhancing the abundances of these species, and decreasing the abundance
576: of CH$_4$, H$_2$O and NH$_3$ (e.g. Fegley \& Lodders 1996,
577: Saumon et al. 2003 and 2007, Hubeny \& Burrows 2007).
578: This mechanism is parameterized in our models by a diffusion coefficient $K_{zz}$
579: cm$^2$s$^{-1}$. The larger $K_{zz}$, the greater the enhancement of CO and
580: N$_2$ over CH$_4$ and NH$_3$. For T dwarfs, the effect is significant
581: in the mid-infrared, where the 3~$\mu$m CH$_4$ absorption band is weakened,
582: the 4.5~$\mu$m CO absorption band is strengthened, and the
583: 11~$\mu$m NH$_3$ absorption band is weakened (e.g. Leggett et al. 2007).
584: Values of $\log K_{zz} = 2$ to 6,
585: corresponding to mixing time scales of $\sim$ 1~h to $\sim 10$ yr in the
586: atmosphere, appear to be required to reproduce the observations of T dwarfs.
587:
588:
589: \subsection{0.8--4.1~$\mu$m Spectra}
590:
591: Figure 4 shows the observed 0.8--4.1~$\mu$m spectrum of HN Peg B compared to
592: various model spectra.
593: We treat the sedimentation and diffusion parameters
594: \fsed\ and $K_{zz}$ as independent parameters, although when full hydrodynamic
595: models can be calculated the grain sedimentation and replenishment will most
596: likely be found to be intimately connected with the vertical transport of gas
597: through the atmosphere. Here we use models with \fsed\ $=$ 1, 2, 3, 3.5 and 4, and with
598: $K_{zz} = 0$(equilibrium), $10^2$, $10^4$ and $10^6$ (cm$^2$s$^{-1}$), and values of \teff\ / \logg\
599: for each end of the allowed age range, 1015/4.22 and 1115/4.81 (\S 5).
600:
601: In all cases we find the spectra generated by the hotter temperature and higher
602: gravity models do a better job of reproducing the data than the lower temperature
603: and gravity models. Thus the age of the system appears to be at the older end of the
604: allowed range, close to 0.5~Gyr. The best fitting model has \teff\ $=$ 1115~K,
605: \logg\ $=$ 4.81, \fsed\ $=$ 3.5 and $K_{zz} = 10^4$ cm$^2$s$^{-1}$ (red line in Figure 4).
606: The cloud decks in this dwarf must therefore be relatively thin.
607: Figure 4 also shows that significant vertical
608: mixing in the atmosphere is required to reproduce
609: the observed depth of the 3~$\mu$m CH$_4$ feature.
610:
611: \subsection{4--8~$\mu$m Photometry}
612:
613: Figure 5 compares the observed IRAC absolute magnitudes of HN Peg B to those calculated
614: by our models. The models match the data quite well, except for the 4.49~$\mu$m band,
615: where the discrepancy is $\sim$0.4 magnitudes. This is puzzling, given how well the model
616: reproduces the 3--4~$\mu$m spectrum (Figure 4), and the 5.73~$\mu$m magnitude. At these
617: wavelengths the flux emerges from above the condensate clouds, and so our modelling of the cloud decks
618: is not the source of the error. The problem either lies in the temperature-pressure profile
619: --- the region around 0.5 to 1.0 bar appears to be too hot --- or in an opacity source that is missing or too weak in the models.
620:
621: Nevertheless, the modelled photometry reproduces the data quite well, and supports the
622: conclusions drawn from the comparison to the shorter-wavelength spectrum ---
623: high sedimentation, thinner cloud deck are required, as well as significant vertical mixing.
624: The best fitting model for the
625: 0.8--4$\mu$m spectrum is also the best choice to fit the IRAC photometry: \teff\ $=$ 1115~K, \logg\ $=$ 4.81, \fsed\ $=$ 3.5 and $K_{zz} = 10^4$ cm$^2$s$^{-1}$.
626:
627:
628: \section{Conclusions}
629:
630: The discovery by L07 of an early-T dwarf companion to a solar-like star offers an important testbed
631: for models of the complex and poorly understood transition from the dusty L dwarfs to the clear T dwarfs.
632: The new imaging data presented here improves the determination of the proper motion of this T dwarf,
633: and confirms that the brown dwarf has common proper motion with
634: the star, and hence is indeed a companion.
635:
636: Our new high spatial-resolution imaging data,
637: together with the model comparisons to the 0.8--4.1~$\mu$m spectra, shows
638: that the dwarf is most likely single, although it is possible that a much fainter, undetected,
639: $< 10$ M$_{Jupiter}$ brown dwarf lies within 100 AU of the early-T dwarf.
640:
641: Comparison of the observed and synthetic spectra generated by our models indicates that
642: the HN Peg system is at the older end of the allowed age range, with an age $\sim$0.5~Gyr.
643: Together with the measured
644: luminosity, this implies that HN Peg B has \teff\ $=$ 1115~K, \logg\ $=$ 4.8, radius 0.10
645: R$_{\odot}$, and mass 28 M$_{Jupiter}$.
646:
647: Comparison of the observed and synthetic 0.8--8.0~$\mu$m photometry and spectra also indicates that the
648: condensate cloud decks in the photosphere of this T dwarf must be relatively thin, as we determine
649: \fsed\ $= 3.5$. Vertical mixing appears to be significant, as implied by the relative
650: weakness of the 3~$\mu$m CH$_4$ absorption band, which we fit with $K_{zz} = 10^4$ cm$^2$s$^{-1}$.
651: In the future, objects like this, with well-determined age, radius, mass, gravity and temperature,
652: should allow development and testing of dynamical atmosphere models
653: that use a more physical approach to treat clouds and mixing. In the longer term, such models should
654: provide the solution to the puzzle of the L to T dwarf transition.
655:
656:
657: \acknowledgments
658:
659: This work uses observations obtained at the
660: Gemini Observatory through Program GN-2007B-Q-22. Gemini Observatory is
661: operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy,
662: Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the NSF on behalf of the Gemini
663: partnership: the National Science Foundation (United States), the
664: Science and Technology Facilities Council (United Kingdom), the National
665: Research Council (Canada), CONICYT (Chile), the Australian Research
666: Council (Australia), CNPq (Brazil) and CONICET (Argentina).
667: We are very grateful to John Rayner for the NSFCAM2 observations.
668: We would also like to thank the observers and queue coordinators who carried service
669: observations at CFHT (programs 06BD94, 07AD98 and 07AD84).
670: We gratefully acknowledge the Keck LGS AO team for their exceptional
671: efforts in bringing the LGS AO system to fruition. It is a pleasure
672: to thank Randy Campbell, Jim Lyke, Cindy Wilburn, Joel Aycock, and the
673: Keck Observatory staff for assistance with the observations.
674: This work is based and supported (in part) on
675: observations made with the \textit{Spitzer Space Telescope}, which is
676: operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
677: Technology under a contract with NASA.
678: This publication makes use of data from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which
679: is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared
680: Processing and Analysis Center, and funded by the National Aeronautics
681: and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation, the SIMBAD
682: database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France, and NASA's Astrophysics
683: Data System Bibliographic Services.
684: SKL's research is supported by Gemini Observatory.
685: MCL and KLA acknowledge support for this work from NSF grants AST-0407441 and
686: AST-0507833 and an Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship.
687: %
688:
689:
690: %% See the AASTeX Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX
691: %% for information on obtaining the facility keywords.
692:
693:
694: {\it Facilities:} \facility{Gemini:Gillett (NIRI)}, \facility{IRTF (SpeX)}, \facility{CFHT ()},
695: \facility{Keck II Telescope (LGS AO, NIRC2)}
696:
697:
698: \begin{thebibliography}{}
699:
700: \bibitem[Ackerman \& Marley (2001)] {AM01} Ackerman, A. S. \& Marley, M. S. 2001,
701: \apj, 556, 872
702:
703: %\bibitem[Allen et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...625..385A} Allen, P.~R., Koerner,
704: %D.~W., Reid, I.~N., \& Trilling, D.~E.\ 2005, \apj, 625, 385
705:
706: \bibitem[Baraffe et al. (2003)]{bar} Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Barman, T. S., Allard, F. \&
707: Hauschildt, P. H. 2003, A\&A, 402, 701
708:
709: \bibitem[Barnes (2007)]{gyro}Barnes, S. A. 2007, \apj, 669, 1167
710:
711: \bibitem[Bertin \& Arnouts (1996)]{wircam1}
712: Bertin, E. \& Arnouts, S. 1996, A\&AS, 117, 393
713:
714: \bibitem[Bertin (2006)]{wircam2}
715: Bertin, E., 2006, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, ASPCS,
716: Vol 351, p. 112.
717:
718: \bibitem[Blanco, Catalano \& Marilli (1979)]{hnpeg}
719: Blanco, C., Catalano, S. \& Marilli, E. 1979, \aaps, 36, 297
720:
721: \bibitem[Burgasser et al.(2002)]{bur02} Burgasser, A.~J., Marley, M. S.,
722: Ackerman, A. S., Saumon, D., Lodders, K., Dahn, C. C., Harris, H. C. \&
723: Kirkpatrick, J.~D. 2002, \apj, 571, L151
724:
725: %\bibitem[Burgasser et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...604..827B} Burgasser, A.~J.,
726: %Kirkpatrick, J.~D., McGovern, M.~R., McLean, I.~S., Prato, L., \& Reid,
727: %I.~N.\ 2004, \apj, 604, 827
728:
729: %\bibitem[Burgasser (2004)]{bur04} Burgasser, A. J. 2004, \apjs, 155, 191
730:
731: \bibitem[Burgasser et al. (2006a)]{bur06a} Burgasser, A. J., Geballe,
732: T. R., Leggett, S. K., Kirkpatrick, J. D. \& Golimowski,
733: D. A. 2006a, \apj, 637, 1067
734:
735:
736: \bibitem[Burgasser et al.(2006b)]{bur06b} Burgasser, A.~J., Kirkpatrick,
737: J.~D., Cruz, K.~L., Reid, I.~N., Leggett, S.~K., Liebert, J., Burrows,
738: A., \& Brown, M.~E.\ 2006b, \apjs, 166, 585
739:
740: \bibitem[Burrows et al. (1997)] {bu97} Burrows A. et al. 1997,
741: \apj, 491, 856
742:
743: %\bibitem[Burrows et al. (2001)] {bu01} Burrows A., Hubbard W. B., Lunine,
744: %J. I. \& Liebert, J. 2001, Reviews
745: %of Modern Physics, 73, 719
746:
747:
748: \bibitem[Cushing et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...623.1115C} Cushing, M.~C., Rayner,
749: J.~T., \& Vacca, W.~D.\ 2005, \apj, 623, 1115
750:
751:
752: \bibitem[Cushing et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...648..614C} Cushing, M.~C., et
753: al.\ 2006, \apj, 648, 614
754:
755: \bibitem[Cushing et al. (2008))]{cush} Cushing, M. C., Marley, M. S.,
756: Saumon. D., Kelly, B. C., Vacca, W. D., Rayner, J. T., Freedman,
757: R. S., Lodders, K. \& Roellig, T. L. 2008, \apj, in press
758:
759:
760: \bibitem[Dahn et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....124.1170D} Dahn, C.~C., et al.\ 2002,
761: \aj, 124, 1170
762:
763: %\bibitem[Eggen (1998)]{Eggen}Eggen, O. J. 1998, \aj, 115, 2397
764:
765: \bibitem[Fazio et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154...10F} Fazio, G.~G., et al.\
766: 2004, \apjs, 154, 10
767:
768:
769: \bibitem[Fegley \& Lodders (1996)]{Feg}
770: Fegley, B. Jr. \& Lodders, K. 1996, \apj, 472, L37
771:
772: \bibitem[Fischer \& Valenti (2005)]{Fis}
773: Fischer, D. A., \& Valenti, J. 2005, \apj, 622, 1102
774:
775: \bibitem[Geballe et al.(2001)]{Geb01} Geballe, T.~R.,
776: Saumon, D., Leggett, S.~K., Knapp, G.~R., Marley, M.~S., \& Lodders,
777: K.\ 2001, \apj, 556, 373
778:
779: %\bibitem[Gehrels(1986)]{1986ApJ...303..336G} Gehrels, N.\ 1986, \apj, 303,
780: %336
781:
782: \bibitem[Golimowski et al. (2004)] {gol04} Golimowski D. A. et al. 2004,
783: \aj, 127, 3516
784:
785: \bibitem[Hodapp et al. (2003)] {} Hodapp, K. W., et al. 2003, \pasp, 115,
786: 1388
787:
788: \bibitem[Hubeny \& Burrows (2007)] {hb}
789: Hubeny, I. \& Burrows, A. 2007, \apj,669, 1248
790:
791: \bibitem[Knapp et al. (2004)] {kna04} Knapp, G. R. et al. 2004, \aj,
792: 127, 3553
793:
794: \bibitem[K$\bar{\rm o}$nig et al. (2006)]{konig} K$\bar{\rm o}$nig, B., Guenther, E. W., Esposito, M.
795: \& Hatzes, A. 2006, \mnras, 365, 1050
796:
797: \bibitem[Kraus et al. (2008)] {kra} Kraus, A. L., Ireland, M. J., Martinache, F.
798: \& Lloyd, J. P. 2008, \apj, in press
799:
800: \bibitem[Leggett et al. (2007)] {leg07} Leggett, S. K., Saumon, D., Marley, M. S.,
801: Geballe, T. R., Golimowski, D. A., Stephens, D. S. \& Fan, X. 2007, \apj, 655, 1079
802:
803: \bibitem[Liu et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...647.1393L} Liu, M.~C., Leggett,
804: S.~K., Golimowski, D.~A., Chiu, K., Fan, X., Geballe, T.~R.,
805: Schneider, D.~P., \& Brinkmann, J.\ 2006, \apj, 647, 1393
806:
807: \bibitem[Liu et al.(2007)]{Liu07} Liu, M.~C., Leggett,
808: S.~K., \& Chiu, K.\ 2007, \apj, 660, 1507
809:
810: \bibitem[Luhman et al. (2007)]{lu07} Luhman, K. L. et al., 2007, \apj,
811: 654, 570, L07
812:
813: \bibitem[Marley et al.(1996)]{mm229b}
814: Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Guillot, T., Freedman, R. S., Hubbard, W. B.,
815: Burrows, A. \& Lunine, J. I. 1996, Science, 272, 1919
816:
817: \bibitem[Marley et al.(2002)]{2002ApJ...568..335M} Marley, M.~S.,
818: Seager, S., Saumon, D., Lodders, K., Ackerman, A.~S., Freedman, R.~S.,
819: \& Fan, X.\ 2002, \apj, 568, 335
820:
821: \bibitem[Metchev \& Hillenbrand (2006)]{MH} Metchev, S. \& Hillenbrand,
822: L. A. 2006, \apj, 651, 1166
823:
824: \bibitem[Metchev et al.(2008)]{Met} Metchev, S. Kirkpatrick, J. D., Berriman, G. B.
825: \& Looper, D. 2008, \apj, in press
826:
827: \bibitem[Monet et~al. (2003)]{2003AJ....125..984M}
828: Monet, D.~G. et~al. 2003, \aj, 125, 984
829:
830: \bibitem[Mugrauer et al. (2006)]{hd3651}Mugrauer, M., Seifahrt, A.,
831: Neuh$\ddot{\rm a}$user, R. \& Mazeh, T. 2006, \mnras, 373, L31
832:
833: \bibitem[Perryman et al.\ 1997]{hip}Perryman, M.~A.~C., et al. 1997,
834: \aap, 323, L49
835:
836:
837: \bibitem[Pravdo et~al.(2006)]{Pravdo}
838: Pravdo, S.~H., Shaklan, S.~B., Wiktorowicz, S.~J., Kulkarni, S., Lloyd,
839: J.~P., Martinache, F., Tuthill, P.~G., \& Ireland, M.~J. 2006, \apj,
840: 649, 389
841:
842: \bibitem[Puget et al. (2004)]{wircam3}
843: Puget, P. et al. 2004,
844: %, Stadler, E., Doyon, R., Gigan, P., Thibault, S., Luppino, G.,
845: %Barrick, G., Benedict, T., Forveille, T., Rambold, W., Thomas, J., Vermeulen,
846: %T., Ward, J., Beuzit, J.-L., Feautrier, P., Magnard, Y., Mella, G., Preis, O.,
847: %Vallee, P., Wang, S.-Y., Lin, C.-J., Hall, D. N., Hodapp, K. W., 2004,
848: Proceedings of the SPIE, Volume 5492, pp. 978-987
849:
850:
851: %\bibitem[Rayner et al.(2003)]{2003PASP..115..362R} Rayner, J.~T.,
852: % Toomey, D.~W., Onaka, P.~M., Denault, A.~J., Stahlberger, W.~E.,
853: % Vacca, W.~D., Cushing, M.~C., \& Wang, S.\ 2003, \pasp, 115, 362
854:
855: \bibitem[Roeser \& Bastian(1988)]{PPM}
856: Roeser, S. \& Bastian, U.\ 1988, \aaps, 74, 449
857:
858: \bibitem[Saumon et al.(2000)]{Sau00} Saumon, D., Geballe,
859: T.~R., Leggett, S.~K., Marley, M.~S., Freedman, R.~S., Lodders, K.,
860: Fegley, B., Jr., \& Sengupta, S.~K.\ 2000, \apj, 541, 374
861:
862: \bibitem[Saumon et al.(2003)]{Sau03}
863: Saumon, D., Marley, M. S., Lodders, K. \& Freedman, R. S. 2003, in
864: IAU Symp. 211, Brown Dwarfs, ed. E.L. Mart\'{i}n (San Franciso:ASP), 345
865:
866:
867: \bibitem[Saumon et al.(2006)]{Sau06} Saumon, D., Marley,
868: M.~S., Cushing, M.~C., Leggett, S.~K., Roellig, T.~L., Lodders, K., \&
869: Freedman, R.~S.\ 2006, \apj, 647, 552
870:
871: \bibitem[Saumon et al.(2007)]{Sau07} Saumon, D., et al.
872: \ 2006, \apj, 656, 1136
873:
874: \bibitem[Shure et al.(1994)]{1994SPIE.2198..614S} Shure, M.~A., Toomey,
875: D.~W., Rayner, J.~T., Onaka, P.~M., \& Denault, A.~J.\ 1994,
876: \procspie, 2198, 614
877:
878:
879: \bibitem[Simons \& Tokunaga(2002)]{mkofilters1}
880: Simons, D.~A. \& {Tokunaga}, A. 2002, \pasp, 114, 169
881:
882: \bibitem[Skrutskie et al.(2006)]{2006AJ....131.1163S} Skrutskie, M.~F.,
883: et al.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 1163
884:
885: %\bibitem[Tinney et al. (2003)] {ti03} Tinney, C. G.,Burgasser, A. J. \&
886: % Kirkpatrick, J. D. 2003, \aj, 126, 975
887:
888:
889: \bibitem[Tokunaga et~al.(2002)]{mkofilters2}
890: Tokunaga, A.~T., Simons, D.~A., \& Vacca, W.~D. 2002, \pasp, 114, 180
891:
892:
893: \bibitem[Trilling et al. (2008)] {tr08}
894: Trilling, D. E. et al., 2008, \apj, in press.
895:
896: \bibitem[Werner et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154....1W} Werner, M.~W., et
897: al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 1
898:
899: \bibitem[Valenti \& Fischer(2005)]{2005ApJS..159..141V} Valenti, J.~A.,
900: \& Fischer, D.~A.\ 2005, \apjs, 159, 141
901:
902: \bibitem[van Dam et~al.(2006)]{2006PASP..118..310V}
903: van Dam, M.~A. et~al. 2006, \pasp, 118, 310
904:
905: \bibitem[Vrba et al. (2004)] {vrb04} Vrba, F. J. et al. 2004, \aj, 127, 2948
906:
907:
908: \bibitem[Wizinowich et~al.(2006)]{2006PASP..118..297W}
909: Wizinowich, P.~L. et~al. 2006, \pasp, 118, 297
910:
911:
912:
913: \end{thebibliography}
914:
915:
916: \clearpage
917:
918:
919: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrl}
920: \tablecaption{Astrometry for HN Peg B (2MASS~J21442847$+$1446077)}
921: \tablehead{
922: \colhead{Epoch} & \colhead{Right Ascension} & \colhead{$\sigma$(RA)} &
923: \colhead{Declination} & \colhead{$\sigma$(Dec.)} & \colhead{Survey or}\\
924: \colhead{Year} & \colhead{HH:MM:SS.SSS} & \colhead{arcsec} & \colhead{DD:MM:SS.SS}
925: & \colhead{arcsec} & \colhead{Instrument}\\
926: }
927: \startdata
928: 1998.734 & 21:44:28.472 & 0.07 & $+$14:46:07.80 & 0.07 & 2MASS \\
929: 2004.441 & 21:44:28.548 & 0.22 & $+$14:46:07.06 & 0.14 & IRAC \\
930: 2006.540 & 21:44:28.595 & 0.19 & $+$14:46:06.86 & 0.19 & SOFI \\
931: 2006.699 & 21:44:28.582 & 0.25 & $+$14:46:06.81 & 0.25 & WIRCam \\
932: 2007.348 & 21:44:28.601 & 0.25 & $+$14:46:06.73 & 0.25 & WIRCam \\
933: 2007.529 & 21:44:28.599 & 0.25 & $+$14:46:06.73 & 0.25 & WIRCam \\
934: 2007.742 & 21:44:28.581 & 0.10 & $+$14:46:06.79 & 0.10 & NSFCAM2 \\
935: \enddata
936: \end{deluxetable}
937:
938:
939:
940: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrr}
941: \tablewidth{200pt}
942: \tablecaption{Luminosity-Constrained Parameters for HN Peg B}
943: \tablehead{
944: \colhead{Age} & \colhead{\teff\ } & \colhead{\logg\ } &
945: \colhead{Radius } & \colhead{Mass } \\
946: \colhead{Gyr} & \colhead{K} & \colhead{} &
947: \colhead{$R_{\odot}$} & \colhead{$M_J$} \\
948: }
949: \startdata
950: 0.1 & 1015 & 4.22 & 0.134 & 12\\
951: 0.5 & 1115 & 4.81 & 0.101 & 28\\
952: \enddata
953: \end{deluxetable}
954:
955: \clearpage
956:
957: \begin{figure}
958: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.60]{f1.ps}
959: \caption{Limits on multiplicity of HN Peg B, derived from our adaptive optics imaging. Spectral types corresponding to the $K$ magnitude
960: of a companion to HN Peg B are shown along the right axis, and effective temperatures and masses of any companion are shown
961: along the dotted lines, for ages 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 Gyr.
962: \label{fig1}}
963: \end{figure}
964:
965: \clearpage
966:
967:
968: \begin{figure}
969: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.60]{f2.ps}
970: \caption{The difference between the positions of the proposed companion to HN Peg at various
971: epochs, and its 1998.7 2MASS position, updated assuming common proper motion
972: with HN Peg. The astrometry derives from images obtained with IRAC (2004.4), SOFI
973: (2006.5), WIRCam (2006.7, 2007.3, 2007.5) and NSFCAM2 (2007.7).
974: \label{fig2}}
975: \end{figure}
976:
977: \clearpage
978:
979: \begin{figure}
980: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.60]{f3.ps}
981: \caption{Observed spectra for the T2 template SDSS J1254$-$0122
982: (red, Cushing et al. 2005) and HN Peg B (black, L07 and this
983: work).
984: \label{fig3}}
985: \end{figure}
986:
987: \clearpage
988:
989: \begin{figure}
990: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.60]{f4.ps}
991: \caption{The observed spectrum of HN Peg B (heavy black line) is
992: compared to synthetic spectra with various \teff\ , gravity, sedimentation
993: efficiency \fsed\ and vertical mixing diffusion coefficient $K_{zz}$
994: parameters, as indicated in the legends.
995: The model fluxes have been scaled to flux at the Earth using the known distance to
996: HN Peg and the HN Peg B radii calculated by evolutionary models.
997: The top panel shows our
998: best-fitting model (red line) together with a similar model with
999: thicker cloud decks (brown line). The bottom panel shows the
1000: best-fitting cooler model (blue line), together with a warmer model
1001: spectrum demonstrating the effect of less vertical transport
1002: (green line, compare to brown line in top panel).
1003: \label{fig4}}
1004: \end{figure}
1005:
1006: \clearpage
1007:
1008: \begin{figure}
1009: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.60]{f5.ps}
1010: \caption{The absolute IRAC magnitudes for HN Peg B (range indicated by
1011: horizontal black lines), compared to synthetic photometry from our models
1012: as a function of vertical mixing diffusion coefficient $K_{zz}$.
1013: For ease of plotting $K_{zz}=0$ has been plotted as log~$K_{zz}=0$.
1014: The model values cluster in pairs of 1015~K (cyan to dark blue to grey) and 1115~K
1015: (pink to dark red to brown), with sedimentation parameter \fsed\ $=$ 1, 2, 3 and 4
1016: from left to right for the [3.55] panel, and top to bottom in the other panels.
1017: \label{fig5}}
1018: \end{figure}
1019:
1020:
1021: \end{document}
1022:
1023: