1: %%First Version of the paper is finished on 2007, Sep. 10.
2: %%2nd Version revised by QZLiu on Sep. 18, 2007.
3: %%3rd Version revised by JZYan on Sep. 24, 2007.
4: %%4th version revised by PH on Jan. 15, 2008.
5: %%5th version revised by JZYan on Jan. 24, 2008.
6: %%6th version revised by PH on Jan. 28, 2008.
7: %%7th version revised by JZYan and PH in May 26, 2008 after referee rep.
8: %%8th last version revised by JZYan on Jun. 25, 2008 after referee rep.
9: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
10: %%
11: %% Modified 2005 December 5
12: %%
13: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
14: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
15: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
16: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
17: %% any data that comes before this command.
18:
19: %% The command below calls the preprint style
20: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
21: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
22: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
23: %%
24: %\documentclass[10pt,preprint2]{aastex}
25: \documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
26: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
27: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
28: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
29: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
30: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
31: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
32: %% use the longabstract style option.
33: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
34: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
35: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
36: %% the \begin{document} command.
37: %%
38: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
39: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
40: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
41: %% for information.
42: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
43: \newcommand{\myemail}{skywalker@galaxy.far.far.away}
44: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
45:
46:
47: \slugcomment{V7@200806025}
48: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
49: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
50: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
51: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
52: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
53: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
54:
55: \shorttitle{Cyg X-1} \shortauthors{Yan, Liu and Hadrava}
56:
57: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
58: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
59:
60: \begin{document}
61: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
62: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
63: %% you desire.
64: \title{Optical Spectroscopic Observations of Cyg X-1=HDE 226868}
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: \author{Jingzhi Yan\altaffilmark{1}, Qingzhong Liu\altaffilmark{1} and Petr Hadrava\altaffilmark{2}}
72: \altaffiltext{1}{Purple Mountain Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing , China; {\sf
73: jzyan@pmo.ac.cn, qzliu@pmo.ac.cn}} \altaffiltext{2}{Astronomical~Institute, Academy~of~Sciences,
74: Bo\v{c}n\'{\i}~II~1401, CZ-14131~Prague, Czech~Republic; {\sf had@sunstel.asu.cas.cz}}
75: %\affil{Purple Mountain Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing
76: %210008, China\\}
77: %
78: %
79: %\email{jzyan@pmo.ac.cn}
80: %\email{qzliu@pmo.ac.cn}
81: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
82: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
83: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
84: %% affiliation.
85:
86: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
87: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
88: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
89: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
90: %% editorial office after submission.
91:
92:
93:
94: \begin{abstract}
95: We present the results of the spectroscopic observations of
96: HDE\,226868, the optical counterpart to the black hole X-ray binary
97: Cyg X-1, from 2001 to 2006. We analyze the variabilities of the two
98: components in the complex H$\alpha$ line: one P-Cygni shaped
99: component which follows the motion of the supergiant and another
100: emission component moving with an antiphase orbital motion relative
101: to the supergiant, which is attributed to a focused-stellar wind.
102: The results of KOREL disentangling of our spectra indicate that the
103: focused stellar wind is responsible for the major part of the
104: variability of the H$\alpha$ emission line. The emission of the
105: supergiant component had a small difference between the low/hard and
106: high/soft states, while the focused wind component became strong in
107: the low/hard state and weak in the high/soft state. The wind is
108: nearly undisturbed by the X-ray photoionization during the low/hard
109: state. However, during the high/soft state, the X-rays from the
110: compact object could decelerate the line-driven wind and result in a
111: high mass accretion rate, due to the effect of the X-ray
112: photoionization. The X-ray illuminating could also change the
113: temperature profile of the stellar wind and increase its
114: temperature, and thus decrease the H$\alpha$ emissivity of the wind,
115: which could explain the H$\alpha$ variabilities of Cyg X-1 during
116: different X-ray states.
117:
118:
119: \end{abstract}
120: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
121: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
122: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
123: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
124:
125: \keywords{Stars: Binaries: Spectroscopic, Stars: Early-Type, stars: individual (HDE 226868, Cygnus
126: X-1), Stars: Winds, Outflows, X-Rays: Binaries}
127:
128: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
129: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
130: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
131: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
132: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
133: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
134: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
135: %% each reference.
136:
137:
138:
139: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
140: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
141: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
142: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
143: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
144: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
145: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
146: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
147: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers
148: %%
149: %% Note that for sources with brackets in their names, e.g. [WEG2004] 14h-090,
150: %% the brackets must be escaped with backslashes when used in the first
151: %% square-bracket argument, for instance, \object[\[WEG2004\] 14h-090]{90}).
152: %% Otherwise, LaTeX will issue an error.
153:
154:
155:
156: \section{INTRODUCTION}
157: Cygnus X-1 was first discovered during a rocket flight observation
158: in 1964 \citep{bowyer65} and its optical counterpart was identified
159: with the supergiant star HDE 226868 \citep{bolton72, webster72}. A
160: 5.6d orbital period was found in the optical spectroscopic
161: observations \citep{gies82} and the dynamical determination of the
162: binary components provided evidence for the existence of a black
163: hole in Cyg X-1. As the black hole X-ray binary, which was first
164: found in our Galaxy, Cyg X-1 has been extensively studied from radio
165: to $\gamma$-rays during recent decades. Even though the mass
166: function is precisely known (see \citet{gies2003}), the masses of
167: the donor star and the black hole are not so well constrained due to
168: the poorly known inclination and the evolutionary status of the
169: supergiant. Using the inclination of $i=35^\circ$, \citet{herrero95}
170: estimated the masses of the supergiant and the black hole at 17.8
171: $M_\odot$ and 10.1 $M_\odot$, respectively.
172:
173:
174: HDE 226868 was classified as an O9.7 Iab supergiant star
175: \citep{walborn73}, which shows H$\alpha$ and He {\small II}
176: $\lambda$4686 in emission. Although the supergiant nearly fills the
177: Roche lobe, the accretion is mainly via the strong stellar wind from
178: the donor star \citep{gies86a, gies2003}. The variabilities of the
179: optical lines \citep{gies86b,ninkov87} on the spectrum of HDE 226868
180: indicate that the distribution of the stellar wind deviates from a
181: spherical geometry and that an enhanced wind flow exists (``focused
182: stellar wind," suggested by \citet{friend82}) in the direction of
183: the compact object. The focused stellar wind is also revealed by the
184: High-Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer aboard the Chandra
185: X-Ray Observatory \citep{miller2005}.
186:
187:
188: The most recent ephemeris of the 5.6d orbital period has been given
189: by \citet{lasala98}, \citet{brocksopp99b}, and \citet{gies2003}
190: according to their optical spectroscopic observations. In addition,
191: the 5.6d orbital period is also found in the $UBVJHK$ photometry,
192: X-ray and radio data of Cyg X-1 \citep{brocksopp99a}. Cyg X-1 also
193: shows the superorbital modulation, on a time-scale much longer than
194: the orbital period. A 294d period was first reported by
195: \citet{priedhorsky83} in X-rays and then by \citet{kemp83} in the
196: optical. Another $\sim$ 150d period was found by different authors
197: \citep{brocksopp99a,lachowicz2006} in X-ray and radio data. This
198: $\sim$ 150 d period may be caused by the precession of the accretion
199: disk around the compact object \citep{wijers99}.
200:
201: A relativistic radio jet with a velocity larger than $\sim$ 0.6$c$ was detected by
202: \citet{stirling2001} in their radio observations of Cyg X-1, and therefore Cyg X-1 joins the group
203: of the Galactic microquasar. Microquasar is an X-ray binary with a pair of relativistic radio jets,
204: which is similar to the radio jets found in the active galactic nuclei (see \citet{mirabel99} for a
205: review). The jet remnant of Cyg X-1 is resolved in radio \citep{gallo2005} and optical
206: \citep{russell2007} observations.
207:
208:
209: Many observational characteristics of the canonical stellar black
210: hole candidate Cyg X-1 are considered evidence that a black hole
211: exisits, similar to other X-ray binary systems. These observational
212: features include the ultra-soft spectra, the high-energy power-law
213: tail above 20 keV, the spectral/temporal transition from the
214: high/soft state to the low/hard state and the X-ray millisecond
215: variability (see \citet{tanaka95}; \citet{mcclintock2006};
216: \citet{remillard2006}). Most of the time Cyg X-1 is in a low/hard
217: state and in some years it can transit from the low/hard state to
218: the high/soft state, which can continue from several weeks to
219: several months \citep{zhang97,brocksopp99a}. Occasionally, Cyg X-1
220: enters an intermediate state when it fails to make a transition from
221: the low/hard state to the high/soft state
222: \citep{belloni96,malzac2006}. The radio and X-ray emission has an
223: anticorrelation and when the binary enters the high/soft state, the
224: radio emission will be decreased \citep{pooley2001}. Most
225: researchers believe the transition state is caused by the physical
226: changes of the gas around the black hole (see \citet{remillard2006}
227: and references therein). The physical changes in the accretion disk
228: are initially related to the mass loss from the supergiant
229: companion. However, the X-ray radiation of the disk influences the
230: ionization and temperature of the wind and thus also its radiation
231: and dynamics.
232:
233:
234:
235: Using the method of tomographic separation\footnote{ This method of
236: decomposition of observed spectra into unknown spectra of two
237: components should be distinguished from the methods of Doppler
238: tomography in which the phase-locked line-profile variations are
239: fitted by projections of smooth distribution of delta-function
240: profiles in velocity space corotating with the orbital motion.}
241: \citep{bagnuolo91}, \citet{sowers98} showed that the H$\alpha$
242: profiles of Cyg X-1 observed in seasons 1985 and 1986 can be well
243: fitted as a superposition of a P-Cyg profile corresponding to the
244: (approximately spherical) stellar wind of the supergiant and a wide
245: emission peak radiated by the focused stellar wind, which moves in a
246: slightly shifted anti-phase with respect to the orbital Doppler
247: shift of the former component. Using the method of Fourier
248: disentangling \citep{hadrava95,hadrava97,hadrava04} we have proved
249: the same behavior in the spectra obtained at Ond\v{r}ejov
250: Observatory in summer 2003 shortly before, during and shortly after
251: one high/soft-state episode of Cyg X-1 \citep{hadrava07}.
252:
253:
254:
255: In this article, we present our optical spectroscopic observations
256: of Cyg X-1 from 2001 to 2006. The preliminary results have been
257: introduced in a previous article \citep{yan2005}. Here we will make
258: a further analysis of the H$\alpha$ line profiles. Our present data
259: are confined to about one week in each season, meaning they are
260: concentrated into only slightly more than one orbital period. This
261: enables us to compare the solutions of disentangling in different
262: X-ray states, minimizing the possible influence of long-term
263: variations in the structure of the focused stellar wind.
264:
265:
266:
267:
268:
269: In the following section, the properties of our data are described.
270: The method and results of the disentangling are given in Section 3.
271: Next, the correspondence of our observational results with the
272: standard model of this classical X-ray binary is studied in Section
273: 4. Finally, the conclusions are summarized in Section 5.
274:
275:
276:
277:
278: \section{OBSERVATIONS}
279: We obtained the spectra of HDE 226868 with the 2.16m telescope at
280: Xinglong Station of National Astronomical Observatories, China
281: (NAOC), from 2001 to 2006. The optical spectroscopy with an
282: intermediate resolution of 1.22\,{\AA} pixel$^{-1}$ was made with a
283: CCD grating spectrograph at the Cassegrain focus of the telescope.
284: We took the red spectra covering from 5500 to 6700\,{\AA} and blue
285: spectra covering from 4300 to 5500\,{\AA} at different times.
286: Sometimes low-resolution spectra (covering from 4300 to 6700\,{\AA})
287: were also obtained. The journal of our observations is summarized in
288: Table~\ref{table}, including observational date, UT Middle, exposure
289: time, Julian date, wavelength range, and spectral resolution.
290: Orbital phase ($\phi$) is also given in Table~\ref{table} and the
291: ephemeris of the inferior conjunction of the companion star is
292: adopted from Gies et al. (2003),
293: $$2,451,730.449+5.599829E\; .$$
294: All spectroscopic data were reduced with the IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by NOAO, which is
295: operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperation with
296: the National Science Foundation.} package. They were bias-subtracted and flat-field corrected, and
297: had cosmic rays removed. Helium-argon spectra were taken in order to obtain the pixel-wavelength
298: relations. To improve this relation, we also used the diffuse interstellar bands (DIBs) 6614 and
299: 6379 {\AA} observed in the spectra.
300:
301:
302: The higher resolution red spectra obtained from 2001 to 2006 are
303: shown in Figure~\ref{figure:group}. The corresponding observational
304: dates and orbital phases calculated according to the above given
305: ephemeris are written on the left and right sides of each spectrum,
306: respectively. The spike on the left part of the spectrum on 2002
307: October 26 may be caused by a cosmic hot point and the dips on the
308: spectra of 2004 September 21 are caused by bad pixels on the CCD.
309: Most of the H$\alpha$ lines show a double-peaked profile with a
310: central absorption. Single-peaked H$\alpha$ lines are observed in
311: our spectra of 2003 October 14 ($\phi$=0.67), 2005 October 24
312: ($\phi$=0.004) and 2006 September 29 ($\phi$=0.72). Obvious P-Cygni
313: H$\alpha$ lines are observed in our spectra in some phases only in
314: 2004 (Figure~\ref{figure:group}(c)).
315:
316:
317: For a comparison, we have also used the spectra obtained with the
318: 700mm camera of the Coud\'{e} spectrograph at the 2.05m telescope of
319: the Ond\v{r}ejov observatory (the Astronomical Institute of the
320: Czech Academy of Sciences). These spectra covering the region
321: 6260--6760 {\AA} with a resolution of approximately
322: 0.25\,{\AA}\,pixel$^{-1}$ are included in a study by
323: \citet{gies2008}, to which we refer for details.
324:
325:
326:
327:
328:
329: \section{ANALYSIS AND RESULTS}
330: \subsection{The Equivalent Width Evolution of H$\alpha$ and the X-ray Activity}
331: The equivalent width (EW) of the complex H$\alpha$ line (emission
332: and absorption) has been measured selecting a continuum point on
333: each side of the line and integrating the flux relative to the
334: straight line between the two points using the procedures available
335: in IRAF. The measurements were repeated five times for each spectrum
336: and the error estimated from the distribution of values obtained.
337: The typical error for H$\alpha$ measurements is within 10\%. This
338: error arises due to the subjective selection of the continuum. The
339: results of H$\alpha$ EWs are listed in Table~\ref{table}.
340:
341:
342: The top panel of Figure~\ref{figure:ew} shows the variability of the H$\alpha$ EW from 2001 to 2006
343: as a function of time. In addition to the data obtained in our observational program, the combined
344: data sets of \citet{gies2003} and \citet{tarasov2003} are also included in the figure. For a
345: comparison, the middle panel of Figure~\ref{figure:ew} gives the RXTE/ASM one-day averaged counter
346: rate in the 1.5-12 keV band and the hardness ratio (HR1) of the soft X-ray radiation, (3-5
347: keV)/(1.5-3 keV) is plotted in the bottom panel. The arrows in this panel correspond to the
348: starting date of each observational run.
349:
350:
351:
352: Figure~\ref{figure:ew} shows that our 2001 and 2004 observational
353: runs were done in a high/soft state while 2003, 2005, and 2006
354: observational runs in a low/hard state. The observations in 2002
355: were during a transitional state from high/soft to low/hard. The EW
356: of H$\alpha$ is relatively low in the high/soft state and strong in
357: the low/hard state. This phenomenon has been discussed in detail by
358: \citet{gies2003} and \citet{tarasov2003}. While the H$\alpha$ in our
359: spectra of 2001 nearly lost its emission signature, the emission
360: level of H$\alpha$ in the 2006 observations is the strongest among
361: our six observational runs. Because the season 2001 is poorly
362: covered by observations, we chose the observational runs 2004 and
363: 2006 to represent the high/soft and low/hard states, respectively,
364: in our study of line-profile variability.
365:
366:
367:
368: \subsection{The Profile Variability of H$\alpha$ Emission Line}
369: The top panel of Figure~\ref{figure:2006} shows the H$\alpha$
370: profiles during our 2006 observational run. The exposures are
371: depicted in ascending order according to the orbital phase. The
372: observational date and orbital phase are marked on the left and
373: right sides of each spectrum, respectively. We have recalibrated the
374: wavelength scale of each spectrum according to the position of the
375: DIB 6614\,{\AA}. It can be seen from this figure that, for most of
376: the time, the H$\alpha$ of Cyg X-1 has a double-peaked profile, one
377: peak formed in the supergiant and the other in the focused stellar
378: wind between the system components \citep{sowers98,gies2003}. As in
379: many other supergiants, its intrinsic H$\alpha$ emission is due to
380: the powerful stellar wind \citep{puls96} and it forms the
381: red-shifted emission wing of the P-Cygni line profile that follows
382: the orbital motion of the star. In some phases (e.g., 0.720, which
383: is close to one extreme of the radial velocities), this emission
384: merges with the emission of the focused wind moving almost in an
385: anti-phase and they form a single bright peak. In some other phases,
386: the emission of the focused wind can fill the absorption part of the
387: P-Cygni component formed in the supergiant. Thus we can detect a
388: characteristic P-Cygni H$\alpha$ line in the spectrum of Cyg X-1
389: only in some phases of the high/soft state, when the focused-wind
390: emission is weak. The bottom panel of Figure~\ref{figure:2006} shows
391: a gray-scale map of the H$\alpha$ profiles in 2006.
392:
393:
394: Following \citet{sowers98}, \citet{gies2003} used the tomographic
395: separation algorithm to decompose the H$\alpha$ line profile into
396: the two components for chosen combinations of the radial velocity
397: semiamplitude $K_{em}$ and phase shift $\phi$ of the focused wind
398: (orbital parameters of the supergiant being fixed from nonemission
399: lines). Minimizing the residuals in the two-parameter space, they
400: found that the focused wind component has a maximum radial velocity
401: $K_{em}=218\pm$30\,km\,s$^{-1}$ near the orbital phase
402: $\phi_0=0.79\pm$0.04. The radial velocity curves of the two
403: components are plotted in Figure~\ref{figure:radial}. The positions
404: of the focused-wind component of the H$\alpha$ line based on this
405: solution are also marked by ticks in Figure~\ref{figure:group}.
406:
407:
408:
409: \subsection{Disentangling the H$\alpha$ Line Profile}
410:
411: The methods of disentangling fit the observed spectra as a
412: superposition of several components with simultaneously optimized
413: orbital parameters (and/or some other free parameters). Usually, the
414: emission-line objects are variable on a time scale shorter than the
415: orbital period. This creates problems for disentangling, tomographic
416: separation, Doppler imaging or any other similar method that
417: requires observations spanning a time interval at least of this
418: order (unless the variability is properly involved in the model of
419: component spectra). However, there is always a chance that such
420: methods can reveal a mean behavior of the object treating the rapid
421: variability as a noise.
422:
423:
424:
425: The results by \citet{sowers98} and \citet{gies2003} indicate that
426: this assumption can work well in the case of Cyg X-1. To decompose
427: the spectra of the supergiant and the focused stellar wind, we thus
428: use the KOREL code \citep{hadrava04} for Fourier disentangling
429: \citep{hadrava95}, which enables us to take into account and to
430: resolve instantaneous changes in strength of lines of each component
431: \citep{hadrava97}. In the preliminary results for the Ond\v{r}ejov
432: data \citep{hadrava07} the He\,I line at 6678\,{\AA} has been
433: disentangled into a weak telluric contribution and a pure absorption
434: line of the supergiant, which confirms within the observational
435: errors the orbital parameters, found by classical measurements
436: (e.g., $K_{1}=71.9$\,km\,s$^{-1}$ compared to $75.6\pm.7$ by
437: \citet{gies2003}, or $73.0\pm.7$ by \citet{gies2008}). The H$\alpha$
438: line has been disentangled into three components corresponding to
439: the supergiant, the focused wind, and the telluric water vapor
440: lines, which are relatively strong in some Ond\v{r}ejov spectra.
441: Because, unlike the orbital velocities of the supergiant and the
442: black hole, the mean velocity of the focused stellar wind is not
443: perpendicular to the line joining the components of the binary, the
444: option of KOREL to disentangle up to five components in a
445: hierarchical structure has been used to identify the focused wind
446: with a component of a second close pair corotating with the
447: supergiant-black hole pair with identical period but with a shifted
448: phase. The results showed the P-Cyg profile moving with the
449: supergiant and a broad emission peak of the focused wind. The
450: orbital parameters of the P-Cyg profile converged in the
451: disentangling to values consistent with the He-line solution (e.g.,
452: $K_{1}=71.3$\,km\,s$^{-1}$). The variations of its strength were
453: relatively small (of the order of 0.1); moreover the EW of this
454: component is also small, because the red emission wing nearly
455: compensates the blue absorption wing. For the broad emission
456: component we found a semiamplitude of $K_{em}=60.8$\,km\,s$^{-1}$,
457: which agrees better with the value 68\,km\,s$^{-1}$ by
458: \citet{sowers98} rather than the value obtained by \citet{gies2003};
459: compare their figures 5 and 6, respctively. The broad minima of the
460: spectra residuals in the parameter space are due to the large width
461: and the variability of the focused-wind emission component, and the
462: position of the deepest point may be influenced by long-term changes
463: in the circumstellar matter as well as by the random sampling by the
464: observations. The line-strength factor derived by disentangling of
465: the Ond\v{r}ejov spectra for the focused wind is significantly
466: higher for this component (reaching a value around +1 at the initial
467: and final low/hard H$\alpha$ emitting states). Because the absolute
468: value of EW of the focused wind (which is negative) is higher, the
469: variability of this component is responsible for the major part of
470: the enhancement of the H$\alpha$ emission in the low/hard state. In
471: the disentangling of the Ond\v{r}ejov data, a small part of the
472: H$\alpha$ emission appeared in the telluric spectrum, which was left
473: arbitrary to test the behavior of the solution. Because the annual
474: changes of the heliocentric radial velocity corrections are
475: appreciably smaller compared with the amplitudes of both the
476: supergiant and the focused-wind disentangled components, this part
477: of the emission belongs to circumstellar matter which is in the mean
478: at rest with respect to the center of mass of the binary system.
479:
480:
481:
482: In disentangling the NAOC spectra we struggled with two instrumental
483: obstacles. One was the smaller spectral resolution and the other was
484: the unreliability of the dispersion curve, probably caused by
485: insufficient stiffness of the Cassegrain spectrograph. Due to the
486: former, no telluric lines can be seen in these spectra. Fortunately,
487: it seems that they are not as strong as they are in some
488: Ond\v{r}ejov spectra, in which they can be distinguished even after
489: a smoothing. Consequently, they do not need to be disentangled to
490: clean the stellar spectra, but at the same time they cannot be used
491: to check or improve the wavelength scale, as described by
492: \citet{hadrava06}. We thus tried to use the above-mentioned DIBs
493: 6614 and 6379 {\AA} for this purpose. We measured their positions in
494: the Ond\v{r}ejov spectra first to find their mean central
495: wavelengths in Cyg X-1 and then in the NAOC spectra to get the same
496: values by a linear transformation of the wavelength scale in each of
497: these spectra. For the measurement we used a single-component
498: disentangling by KOREL in the option of free radial velocities in
499: each exposure (e.g., \citet{hadrava04}). This procedure improved the
500: wavelength scale to some extent, yet a solution of the He\,I line
501: 6678\,{\AA} made in order to check the reliability of the improved
502: wavelength scale revealed errors in some exposures up to about
503: 60\,km\,s$^{-1}$ and similarly the disentangling of H$\alpha$ did
504: not provide satisfactory results. The insufficient precision of the
505: results may be caused by the weakness of the DIB 6379\,{\AA}, which
506: was still measurable in the Ond\v{r}ejov data, but too shallow and
507: wide in the lower-resolution data from the NAOC.
508:
509:
510:
511: We thus chose an alternative way to disentangle the H$\alpha$
512: profiles in spite of unreliable wavelength scale. First we
513: disentangled both seasons 2004 and 2006 together with the
514: Ond\v{r}ejov data for the three components (the supergiant, the
515: focused wind and the telluric lines) in the option of free
516: velocities. The velocities and line strengths were kept fixed for
517: the Ond\v{r}ejov exposures from their previous standard solution.
518: This solution was thus used as a template to which radial velocities
519: and line strengths of each NAOC exposure were adjusted. The line
520: strengths were also converged by the simplex method (instead of
521: direct least squares which would also change the Ond\v{r}ejov
522: values) for the first two components in these exposures and
523: prescribed to a large negative value for the telluric component to
524: diminish it in the NAOC exposures. (The difference in spectral
525: resolution of these two data sets proved to be unessential in these
526: wide profiles.) The results of this solution were used as the
527: initial approximation for two component solutions (without the
528: telluric lines) of free radial velocities and line strengths (now by
529: the direct calculation) independently for both seasons 2004 and 2006
530: without the other data. These solutions thus cannot yield correct
531: radial velocity curves for each component and proper wavelengths of
532: the disentangled spectra, but they give correct differences between
533: the radial velocities of the two components, their line profiles,
534: and the line strengths.
535:
536:
537:
538: The disentangled H$\alpha$ profiles and the fit of the input spectra
539: for our 2004 and 2006 observations are plotted by the standard
540: graphical KOREL output in Figure~\ref{figure:korelnew} at the left
541: and right panels, respectively. These spectra span from 6540\,{\AA}
542: to about 6596\,{\AA}; however, the shift of each profile up to
543: several {\AA} is uncertain due to the above-explained problems. It
544: can be seen (at the upper 7 and 11 curves, respectively.) that the
545: agreement of the fit with the observation is quite good (some
546: differences appear for the fifth and sixth exposures from the top in
547: the right panel only, i.e. for 2006 September 28).
548:
549:
550: The bottom two curves show the disentangled P-Cyg profile of the
551: supergiant (the higher of these two curves) and the mean
552: disentangled emission profile of the focused stellar wind (the very
553: bottom curve) in each season. The tops of the emission wings of the
554: P-Cyg profiles are 1.06 and 1.09 of the level of continuum in 2004
555: and 2006, resp. This indicates a 50\% increase above the continuum
556: in the low/hard state in 2006; however, this result deserves a
557: confirmation by more extensive observations, because the small
558: change representing 3\% of the continuum may be influenced only by
559: uncertainties of the continuum intensity (e.g., due to differences
560: in phase sampling). In any case, this change in the P-Cyg component
561: is negligible in comparison with the overall enhancement of
562: H$\alpha$ emission in the low/hard state. The absorption wing is
563: shallower in 2004 than in 2006 with the deepest point at levels 0.93
564: in 2004 and 0.83 in 2006. It also can be seen that the decrease of
565: the emission intensity toward the higher velocities is somewhat
566: slower in 2006 and similarly the depth of absorption is more
567: pronounced for higher velocities in the 2006 low/hard state. The EW
568: 0.54\,{\AA} of the absorption part of the P-Cyg profile in 2004 is
569: canceled (with precision almost 10$^{-3}$\,{\AA}) by EW
570: --0.54\,{\AA} of the emission part of the profile. In 2006, the EW
571: of P-Cyg absorption is +1.910\,{\AA} and emission --1.916\,{\AA}.
572: Note that these EWs refer to the disentangled mean seasonal profile,
573: for which the noise is decreased and continuum is fitted to an
574: extended spectral region. Consequently, their errors are smaller
575: than those given in Table~\ref{table} for individual exposures
576: (which are in the mean $\pm 0.03$\,{\AA} and $\pm 0.05$\,{\AA} in
577: 2004 and 2006, respectively.). The continua of disentangled
578: components may suffer from some complementary distortions induced by
579: errors in rectification of the input spectra. The number of
580: significant digits given here is to show that emission and
581: absorption EWs of the P-Cyg component cancel each other out in both
582: states within the precision of our data.
583:
584:
585: More remarkable difference is found between the disentangled
586: profiles of the emission of the focused wind: its maximum is 0.056
587: in 2004, and 0.265 in 2006 in the units of the continuum level of
588: the supergiant (a possible continuum of the focused wind cannot be
589: disentangled, but it must be negligible compared with the continuum
590: of the supergiant). Similarly, the mean EWs of the focused-wind
591: emission are --0.33\,{\AA} in 2004 and --1.78\,{\AA} in 2006.
592:
593: The line-strength factors, like the EWs, seem to show some
594: phase-locked variations, which could reveal the geometry of the
595: system (i.e., the distribution of the focused stellar wind in the
596: space between the components) and eventually also the anisotropy of
597: the deeper layers of the stellar wind in the upper atmosphere of the
598: supergiant. However, the amplitude of these changes is comparable to
599: the observational scatter and the phase coverage of our data is not
600: yet sufficient, so we postpone this problem to our next study.
601:
602: Our results generally confirm that it is the contribution of the
603: focused wind, and not the P-Cyg profile formed in the root of the
604: supergiant's wind, that is responsible for the major part of the
605: H$\alpha$ emission enhancement in the low/hard state compared with
606: the high/soft state. The physics of this process will be discussed
607: quantitatively in the following section.
608:
609:
610:
611:
612:
613:
614:
615: \section{DISCUSSIONS}
616: \subsection{The X-ray Excited Wind Model}
617:
618: The wind from isolated O and B stars is accelerated to a speed of
619: approximately three times the escape velocity from the surface of
620: the star by the force arising from the absorption and scattering of
621: the photospheric continuum radiation in the ultraviolet resonance
622: lines of abundant ions in the wind \citep{castor75}. The radiation
623: driving force produces a velocity profile of
624: \begin{equation}
625: v(r)=v_{\infty}(1.0-R_*/r)^{\beta}
626: \end{equation}
627: in a steady state, where $v(r)$ is the wind velocity at a distance
628: of $r$ from the center of the star, $v_{\infty}$ is the terminal
629: velocity of the stellar wind, $R_*$ is the radius of the supergiant,
630: and $\beta$$\approx$0.8 \citep{friend86,pauldrach86}. The
631: gravitational effect of the compact companion in a massive X-ray
632: binary system induces a stream of enhanced wind (focused stellar
633: wind) in the line from the supergiant to the compact object. The
634: level of the density enhancement in the focused wind is less than a
635: factor of 2 as derived by \citet{haberl89}, while \citet{blondin91}
636: thought that the density in the focused wind was 20-30 times the
637: ambient wind density. The presence of the focused wind in the
638: massive X-ray binary could greatly enhance the mass accretion rate
639: of the compact object in the system. Meanwhile, the X-ray radiation
640: from the compact object can strongly influence the dynamics of the
641: wind via X-ray heating and photoionization
642: \citep{blondin90,blondin91}.
643:
644:
645: The acceleration of the wind can be inhibited by the X-ray
646: photoionization which can enhance the degree of ionization in the
647: stellar wind. Thus, the deceleration of the wind due to the
648: photoionization will greatly enhance the mass accretion of the
649: compact object, which is a sensitive function of the wind velocity
650: law, $\dot{M}_{acc}$$\propto$$v^{-4}$, and lead back to a higher
651: X-ray luminosity. The temperature and ionization state of the
652: stellar wind depend only on the ``ionization parameter"
653: \citep{kallman82},
654: \begin{equation}
655: \xi=L_x/n_pr_x^2,
656: \end{equation}
657: where $L_x$ is the X-ray luminosity of the compact object, $n_p$ is
658: the proton number density of the wind, and $r_x$ is the distance to
659: the X-ray source. When $\xi$$\geq$10$^2$ ergs cm s$^{-1}$, the
660: stellar wind will be strongly affected by X-ray ionization and when
661: $\xi$$\geq$10$^3$ ergs cm s$^{-1}$, X-ray heating will affect the
662: dynamics of the wind \citep{blondin90}. To estimate the ionization
663: parameter, let us suppose the wind of the supergiant to be
664: spherically symmetric with a constant mass-loss rate,
665: $\dot{M}$=4$\pi$$r^2$$\mu$$m_p$$n_p(r)$$v(r)$, where $\mu$ is the
666: mean atomic weight and $m_p$ is the mass of the proton. Then the
667: ionization parameter in terms of the position and the stellar wind
668: parameter can be derived \citep{sako99},
669: \begin{equation}
670: \xi(r,r_x)=4.3\times10^2\frac{(L_x)_{36}(v_{\infty})_8}{\dot{M}_{-7}}(\frac{r}{r_x})^2(1-\frac{R_*}{r})^{\beta},
671: \label{equation:ionization}
672: \end{equation}
673: where $(L_x)_{36}$ is the X-ray luminosity in a unit of $10^{36}$ ergs s$^{-1}$, $(v_{\infty})_8$
674: is the terminal velocity in a unit of 10$^8$ cm s$^{-1}$, and $M_{-7}$ is the mass loss of the
675: supergiant in a unit of 10$^{-7}$ $M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$.
676:
677:
678:
679: Using the transformation formulae of \citet{zdziarski2002}, we can
680: convert the RXTE/ASM one-day averaged counts in three bands (1.5-3,
681: 3-5, and 5-12 keV) to the energy units. Adopting a distance of 2.5
682: kpc \citep{ninkov87} to the source, we can get the X-ray luminosity
683: of Cyg X-1 in different X-ray states. The mass-loss rate of the O9.7
684: supergiant is calculated by the formulae given by \citet{howarth89},
685: $\dot{M}$=2.0$\times$10$^{-6}$M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$. All parameters
686: of Cyg X-1 are listed in Table~\ref{parameter}. The ionization
687: parameters during our 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2006 observational runs
688: are calculated according to Equation~(\ref{equation:ionization}) for
689: two distances $r_x$=21$R_{\odot}$ and 23$R_{\odot}$ from the black
690: hole and they are listed in Table~\ref{ionization}. We also plot the
691: contours of constant $\xi$ ($\xi$=10$^2$) for Cyg X-1 in different
692: X-ray states in Figure~\ref{figure:contour}, where the coordinate
693: origin is in the center of the supergiant, the thick circle is the
694: surface of the supergiant, and the intersection of the two black
695: dashed lines is the boundary of the supergiant's Roche lobe.
696:
697:
698:
699: \subsection{The Mass Accretion Rate in Different X-Ray States}
700: The X-ray activity of the compact object is closely related to the
701: mass accretion rate onto it. Since the supergiant component of Cyg
702: X-1 has a negligible change in the H$\alpha$ line between the
703: low/hard and high/soft X-ray states, as discussed in the previous
704: section, the mass-loss rate from the supergiant does not have an
705: obvious change between these two types of X-ray states. One possible
706: factor causing the enhancement of the mass accretion rate during the
707: high/soft state may be the X-rays from the compact object.
708: Figure~\ref{figure:contour} indicates that the ionization parameter
709: $\xi$ has a value of about 100\,ergs\,cm\,s$^{-1}$ at the position
710: of $r_{x}$=21$R_{\odot}$ (in the line from the compact object to the
711: supergiant) during the high/soft state, while it only has a value of
712: 11\,ergs\,cm\,s$^{-1}$ during the low/hard state. Consequently, the
713: focused wind may be photoionized by the X-ray during the high/soft
714: state, which leads to the decrease of the radiative pressure exerted
715: in lines by the supergiant's own radiation, and hence also the
716: velocity of the gas will be decreased. The slower wind velocity will
717: greatly enhance the mass accretion of the compact object and a high
718: X-ray luminosity will be observed during the high/soft state. During
719: the low/hard state, the X-ray radiation is not strong enough to
720: affect the focused wind, hence Cyg X-1 has a relatively low-mass
721: accretion rate.
722:
723:
724:
725: A related question we should discuss is which kind of mechanism causes Cyg X-1 to transit from the
726: low/hard state to the high/soft state. \citet{done2002} suggested that the disk instability
727: mechanism (DIM; \citet{lasota2001}) triggered the X-ray outburst and then the X-ray irradiation
728: photoionized the hydrogen in the wind of the primary and enhanced the mass accretion onto the
729: compact object. The occurrence of the X-ray outburst does not have any periodicity and it may
730: happen at any instant in the course of time. The duration of the outburst may be connected with the
731: interaction between the X-rays from the compact object and the wind of the supergiant. In general,
732: it can keep several weeks or even several months (see Figure~\ref{figure:ew}).
733:
734:
735:
736: \subsection{The X-Ray Irradiation Effects on the H$\alpha$ Emission}
737: X-ray heating could affect the dynamics of the wind from the
738: supergiant. According to the plane-parallel model by \citet{wu2001},
739: a temperature-inversion layer will be formed in the stellar wind
740: under the X-ray illumination. The temperature profile of the
741: temperature-inversion layer is determined by the soft and hard X-ray
742: irradiation. A strong temperature-inversion layer can be formed
743: provided that the incident X-rays are soft and their angle of
744: incidence is approaching grazing incidence. The more penetrating
745: hard X-rays tend to heat up the deeper layers of the stellar wind.
746:
747:
748: During the high/soft state, the increased soft X-ray heating will
749: increase the temperature of the ambient wind gas and then decrease
750: the H$\alpha$ emissivity, which is proportional to $T^{-1.2}$
751: \citep{richards98}. The X-ray heating is more effective in the
752: position near the X-ray source so the focused wind component in the
753: Cyg X-1 is more easily affected by the X-ray radiation from the
754: compact object. Thus, the focused-wind component in the H$\alpha$
755: line becomes weak during the X-ray high/soft state. During the
756: low/hard state, the temperature profile of the focused wind is
757: undisturbed by the X-ray irradiation and thus it has a strong
758: emission in the H$\alpha$ line. Compared with the focused wind, the
759: supergiant is farther from the X-ray source and its spherical wind
760: is rarely influenced by the X-ray heating. However, when the X-ray
761: luminosity is very high, the wind near the supergiant also can be
762: affected (see Figure~\ref{figure:contour}). For the high/soft state
763: during our 2004 observational run the outer parts of the supergiant
764: stellar wind were more ionized and thus unable to absorb and re-emit
765: in H$\alpha$. The terminal velocity of the wind also was smaller.
766: For the low/hard state during our 2006 observational run, the soft
767: X-rays from the compact object have almost no influence on the
768: supergiant stellar wind. This could explain the small differences
769: between the shapes of disentangled profiles in the two states in
770: Figure~\ref{figure:korelnew}. When the soft X-ray flux was very
771: strong, the wind near the supergiant could also be influenced by the
772: X-ray photoionization. Thus the system might lose its emission
773: feature both in the supergiant and the focused-wind components. This
774: scenario is consistent with the weak emission H$\alpha$ line in our
775: 2001 spectra (on the bottom of Figure~\ref{figure:group}(a)).
776:
777: During our 2004 observation, Cyg X-1 was also in a high/soft state,
778: but the X-ray intensity was not so strong as that in our 2001
779: observations. Therefore, the focused-wind component in the H$\alpha$
780: line was at a lower emission level, while the supergiant component
781: had a small change relative to the case in the low/hard state. Then
782: we could observe an obvious P-Cygni H$\alpha$ profile during our
783: 2004 observations. The spectra of \citet{gies2003} and
784: \citet{tarasov2003} also indicate that the P-Cygni H$\alpha$ profile
785: often appeared in the X-ray high/soft state. During the low/hard
786: state, we rarely observed the P-Cygni structure in the complex
787: H$\alpha$ line of Cyg X-1, because the focused-wind H$\alpha$
788: component is strong enough to fill the absorption part of the
789: P-Cygni line formed in the wind of the supergiant.
790:
791:
792:
793: \subsection{The X-ray Flare During Our 2006 Observations}
794:
795: The H$\alpha$ EWs in our 2006 observational run are stronger than
796: those in other runs (see Figure~\ref{figure:ew}).
797: Figure~\ref{figure:group}(d) shows that the focused-wind component
798: in our 2006 H$\alpha$ spectra becomes very strong while the
799: supergiant component is still in its normal emission level. Since
800: the supergiant component did not have a significant change during
801: our 2006 observations, it is inappropriate to explain the enhanced
802: emission in the focused-wind H$\alpha$ component using the increased
803: mass-loss rate from the supergiant. Figure~\ref{figure:ew} indicates
804: that there is a small X-ray flare around the 2006 observational run.
805: This X-ray flare was also detected by Swift/BAT in the 15-20 keV
806: high-energy band. This phenomenon has been reported by
807: \citet{albert2007}. Figure~\ref{figure:flare} shows the H$\alpha$ EW
808: evolution during our 2006 observations and the light curves of the
809: flare detected by RXTE/ASM and Swift/BAT, respectively. The dashed
810: lines correspond to the beginning and the ending times of our 2006
811: observations.
812:
813:
814: This flare differs from the X-ray outburst during the high/soft
815: state. It has a relatively low X-ray flux and a hard X-ray spectrum.
816: The TeV emission also was detected during the flare by
817: \citet{albert2007} and they suggested that the flare was caused by
818: the interaction between the jet and the stellar wind. Our
819: observations were carried out on the decline phase of this flare.
820: The weak soft X-ray emission during the flare is insufficient to
821: form a prominent temperature-inversion layer in the focused-wind of
822: Cyg X-1 and therefore a strong focused wind H$\alpha$ component was
823: observed. However, the hard X-ray component during the flare could
824: heat up the deeper layer of the focused wind and an extra H$\alpha$
825: emission could be detected during our spectroscopic observations.
826: This can explain the strongest H$\alpha$ emission during our 2006
827: observations.
828:
829:
830:
831: Another similar strong H$\alpha$ line with an EW of --2.315\,{\AA}
832: was also observed by \citet{tarasov2003} on MJD 5,0941.5449, when a
833: small X-ray flare (low/hard state) was also detected by RXTE/ASM in
834: the 1.5-12 keV band (see the inset in the top panel of
835: Figure~\ref{figure:flare}).
836:
837:
838:
839:
840:
841: \section{CONCLUSIONS}
842:
843: We present and analyze our optical spectroscopic observations of Cyg
844: X-1 from 2001 to 2006. Combined with the RXTE/ASM X-ray
845: observations, we make the following findings about this classical
846: galactic black hole X-ray binary:
847: \begin{enumerate}
848: \item We confirm that the H$\alpha$ line shows two components:
849: a P-Cygni profile moving with the radial velocity curve of the
850: supergiant and a focused stellar wind component that moves with an
851: approximately anti-phase orbital motion relative to the supergiant.
852: The superposition of the two components forms the complex H$\alpha$
853: profiles.
854:
855: \item The results of KOREL disentangling the H$\alpha$ spectra during our 2004 and 2006
856: observations indicate that the focused-stellar wind is responsible
857: for the major part of the H$\alpha$ variability between different
858: X-ray states. The focused wind component becomes strong during the
859: X-ray low/hard state and weak during the high/soft state. The
860: photoionization and heating of the X-ray photons from the compact
861: object may affect the ionization state and dynamics of the wind from
862: the supergiant. During the high/soft state, the X-ray
863: photoionization could decelerate the gas in the focused stellar wind
864: and result in an increasing mass accretion rate. During the low/hard
865: state, the X-ray is not strong enough to influence the wind
866: ionization state and the compact object has a low-mass accretion
867: rate. The X-ray illumination can form a temperature-inversion layer
868: in the stellar wind. During the high/soft state, the soft X-rays
869: acting onto the focused stellar wind could increase its temperature
870: greatly and thus decrease the H$\alpha$ emissivity. This could
871: explain the variability of the focused-wind component in H$\alpha$
872: during different X-ray states. The strong soft X-ray emission during
873: the high/soft state could also ionize the outer parts of the
874: supergiant winds and render it unable to absorb and re-emit in
875: H$\alpha$. This scenario is consistent with the small differences
876: between the shapes of disentangled P-Cygni components in the 2004
877: and 2006 spectra. During our 2001 observations, the wind near the
878: supergiant was also affected by the strong X-ray emission and an
879: extremely weak H$\alpha$ line was observed.
880:
881: \item The H$\alpha$ lines in our 2006 observations are very strong.
882: We interpret this as the result of the low irradiation of the focused wind by the X-ray photons.
883: % formed in the interaction between the jet and the ambient wind.
884: The weak incident soft X-rays during the flare could not disturb the temperature profile of the
885: focused stellar wind, while the hard X-rays could heat up the deep layer of the wind and an extra
886: H$\alpha$ emission could be observed.
887:
888: \end{enumerate}
889:
890:
891:
892:
893:
894: \acknowledgements J.Z.Y. is grateful to Min Fang for his help in
895: plotting Figure~\ref{figure:2006} and Figure~\ref{figure:contour}.
896: This research is partially supported by the National Natural Science
897: Foundation of China under grants 10433030 and 10673032. The work of
898: PH has been done in the framework of the Center for Theoretical
899: Astrophysics (ref.~LC06014) with a support of grant GA\v{C}R
900: 202/06/0041. The authors appreciate valuable comments by the
901: referee.
902:
903:
904: \begin{thebibliography}{}
905: %\bibitem[Abbott(1982)]{abbott82}
906: %Abbott, D. C. 1982, ApJ, 259, 282
907: \bibitem[Albert et al.(2007)]{albert2007}
908: Albert, J., Aliu, E., Anderhub, H. et al. 2007, ApJ, 665 L51
909: \bibitem[Bagnuolo \& Gies(1991)]{bagnuolo91}
910: Bagnuolo, W. R., Jr., \& Gies, D. R. 1991, ApJ, 376, 266
911:
912: \bibitem[Belloni et al.(1996)]{belloni96}
913: Belloni, T., M\'{e}ndez, M., van der Klis, M. et al. 1996, ApJ, 472, L107
914:
915: \bibitem[Blondin et al.(1990)]{blondin90}
916: Blondin, J. M., Kallman, T. R., Fryxell, B. A., Taam, R. E. 1990, ApJ, 356, 591
917:
918: \bibitem[Blondin et al.(1991)]{blondin91}
919: Blondin, J. M., Stevens, I. R., Kallman, T. R. 1991, ApJ, 371, 684
920:
921: \bibitem[Bolton(1972)]{bolton72}
922: Bolton, C. T. 1972, Nature, 235, 271
923:
924: \bibitem[Bowyer et al.(1965)]{bowyer65}
925: Bowyer, S., Byram, E. T., Chubb, T. A., Friedman, H. 1965, Sci, 147, 394
926:
927: \bibitem[Brocksopp et al.(1999a)]{brocksopp99a}
928: Brocksopp, C., Fender, R. P., Larionov, V. et al. 1999a, MNRAS, 309,
929: 1063
930:
931: \bibitem[Brocksopp et al.(1999b)]{brocksopp99b}
932: Brocksopp, C., Tarasov, A. E., Lyuty, V. M., \& Roche, P. 1999b, A\&A, 343, 861
933:
934:
935:
936: \bibitem[Castor, Abbott \& Klein(1975)]{castor75}
937: Castor, J. I., Abbott, D. C., Klein, R. I. 1975, ApJ, 195, 157
938:
939: \bibitem[Done(2002)]{done2002}
940: Done, C. 2002, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 360, 1967
941:
942: \bibitem[Friend \& Abbott(1986)]{friend86}
943: Friend, D. B. \& Abbott, D. C. 1986, ApJ, 311, 701
944:
945: \bibitem[Friend \& Castor(1982)]{friend82}
946: Friend, D. B. \& Castor, J. I. 1982, ApJ, 261, 293
947:
948: \bibitem[Gallo et al.(2005)]{gallo2005}
949: Gallo, E., Fender, R., Kaiser, C. et al. 2005, Nature, 436, 819
950:
951: \bibitem[Gies \& Bolton(1982)]{gies82}
952: Gies, D. R. \& Bolton, C. T. 1982, ApJ, 260, 240
953:
954: \bibitem[Gies \& Bolton(1986a)]{gies86a}
955: Gies, D. R. \& Bolton, C. T. 1986a, ApJ, 304, 371
956:
957: \bibitem[Gies \& Bolton(1986b)]{gies86b}
958: Gies, D. R. \& Bolton, C. T. 1986b, ApJ, 304, 389
959:
960: \bibitem[Gies et al.(2003)]{gies2003}
961: Gies, D. R., Bolton, C. T., Thomson, J. R. et al. 2003, ApJ, 583, 424
962:
963: \bibitem[Gies et al.(2008)]{gies2008}
964: Gies, D. R., Bolton, C. T., Blake, R. M. et al. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1237
965:
966: \bibitem[Haberl et al.(1989)]{haberl89}
967: Haberl, F., White, N. E., Kallman, T. R. 1989, ApJ, 343, 409
968:
969: \bibitem[Hadrava(1995)]{hadrava95}
970: Hadrava, P. 1995, A\&AS, 114, 393
971:
972: \bibitem[Hadrava(1997)]{hadrava97}
973: Hadrava, P. 1997, A\&AS, 122, 581
974:
975: \bibitem[Hadrava(2004)]{hadrava04}
976: Hadrava, P. 2004, Publ. Astron. Inst. ASCR, 92, 15
977:
978: \bibitem[Hadrava(2006)]{hadrava06}
979: Hadrava, P. 2006, A\&AS, 448, 1149
980:
981: \bibitem[Hadrava(2007)]{hadrava07}
982: Hadrava, P. 2007, in Proceedings of RAGtime 8/9: Workshops on black holes and neutron stars, ed. S.
983: Hled\'{\i}k \& Z. Stuchl\'{\i}k (Opava, Czech Republic: Silesian Univ.), 73 (arXiv:0710.0758)
984:
985: \bibitem[Herrero et al.(1995)]{herrero95}
986: Herrero, A., Kudritzki, R. P., Gabler, R. et al. 1995, A\&A, 297, 556
987:
988: \bibitem[Howarth \& Prinja(1989)]{howarth89}
989: Howarth, I. D. \& Prinja, R. K. 1989, ApJS, 69. 527
990:
991: \bibitem[Iorio(2007)]{iorio2007}
992: Iorio, L. 2007, arXiv:0707.3525
993:
994: \bibitem[Kallman \& McCray(1982)]{kallman82}
995: Kallman, T. R. \& McCray, R. 1982, ApJS, 50, 263
996:
997: \bibitem[Kemp et al.(1983)]{kemp83}
998: Kemp, J. C., Barbour, M. S., Henson, G. D. et al. 1983, ApJ, 271, 65L
999:
1000: \bibitem[Lachowicz et al.(2006)]{lachowicz2006}
1001: Lachowicz, P., Zdziarski, A. A., Schwarzenberg-Czerny, A. et al. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 1025L
1002:
1003: \bibitem[LaSala et al.(1998)]{lasala98}
1004: LaSala, J., Charles, P. A., Smith, R. A. D., Bauciska-Church, M., \& Church, M. J. 1998, MNRAS,
1005: 301, 285
1006:
1007: \bibitem[Lasota(2001)]{lasota2001}
1008: Lasota, J. P. 2001, New Astro. Rev., 45, 449
1009:
1010: \bibitem[Malzac et al.(2006)]{malzac2006}
1011: Malzac, J., Petrucci, P. O., Jourdain, E. et al. 2006, A\&A, 448, 1125
1012:
1013: \bibitem[McClintock \& Remillard(2006)]{mcclintock2006}
1014: McClintock, J. E. \& Remillard, R. A. 2006, in Compact Stellar X-ray Sources,
1015: ed. W. H. G. Lewin, M. van der Klis %, pp. 157-214.
1016: (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 157 (astro-ph/0306213)
1017:
1018:
1019: \bibitem[Miller et al.(2005)]{miller2005}
1020: Miller, J. M., Wojdowski, P., Schulz, N. S. et al. 2005, ApJ, 620, 398
1021:
1022: \bibitem[Mirabel \& Rodr\'{i}guez(1999)]{mirabel99}
1023: Mirabel, I. F. \& Rodr\'{i}guez, L. F. 1999, ARA\&A, 37, 409
1024:
1025: \bibitem[Ninkov et al.(1987)]{ninkov87}
1026: Ninkov, Z., Walker, G. A. H. \& Yang, S. 1987, ApJ, 321, 438
1027:
1028: \bibitem[Pauldrach et al.(1986)]{pauldrach86}
1029: Pauldrach, A., Puls, J., Kudritzki, R. P. 1986, A\&A, 164, 86
1030:
1031: \bibitem[Pooley(2001)]{pooley2001}
1032: Pooley, G. 2001, IAUC, 7729, 3
1033:
1034: \bibitem[Priedhorsky et al.(1983)]{priedhorsky83}
1035: Priedhorsky, W. C., Terrell, J. \& Holt, S. S. 1983, ApJ, 270, 233
1036:
1037: \bibitem[Puls et al.(1996)]{puls96}
1038: Puls, J., Kudritzki, R.-P., Herrero, A. et al. 1996, A\&A, 305, 171
1039:
1040: \bibitem[Remillard \& McClintock(2006)]{remillard2006}
1041: Remillard, R. A. \& McClintock, J. E. 2006, ARA\&A, 44, 49
1042:
1043: \bibitem[Richards \& Ratliff(1998)]{richards98}
1044: Richards, M. T. \& Ratliff, M. A. 1998, ApJ, 565, 447
1045:
1046: \bibitem[Russell et al.(2007)]{russell2007}
1047: Russell, D. M., Fender, R. P., Gallo, E. \& Kaiser, C.R. 2007, MNRAS, 376, 1341
1048:
1049: \bibitem[Sako et al.(1999)]{sako99}
1050: Sako, M., Liedahl, D. A., Kahn, S. M. \& Paerels, F. 1999, ApJ, 525, 921
1051:
1052: \bibitem[Shaposhnikov \& Titarchuk(2007)]{shaposhnikov2007}
1053: Shaposhnikov, N. \& Titarchuk, L. 2007 ApJ, 663, 445
1054:
1055: \bibitem[Sowers et al.(1998)]{sowers98}
1056: Sowers, J. W., Gies, D. R., Bagnuolo, W. G. et al. 1998, ApJ, 506, 424
1057:
1058: \bibitem[Stirling et al.(2001)]{stirling2001}
1059: Stirling, A. M., Spencer, R. E., de la Force, C.J. et al. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 1273
1060:
1061: \bibitem[Tanaka \& Lewin(1995)]{tanaka95}
1062: Tanaka Y. \& Lewin W.H.G. 1995, in X-ray Binaries, ed. W. H. G. Lewin,
1063: J. van Paradijs, E. P. J. van den Heuvel %, pp. 126-74.
1064: (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 126
1065:
1066: \bibitem[Tarasov et al.(2003)]{tarasov2003}
1067: Tarasov, A. E., Brocksopp, C., Lyuty, V. M. 2003, A\&A, 402, 237
1068:
1069:
1070:
1071: \bibitem[Walborn(1973)]{walborn73}
1072: Walborn, N. R. 1973, ApJ, 179, L123
1073:
1074: \bibitem[Webster \& Murdin(1972)]{webster72}
1075: Webster, B. L. \& Murdin, P. 1972, Nature, 235, 37
1076:
1077: \bibitem[Wijers \& Pringle(1999)]{wijers99}
1078: Wijers, R. A. M. J. \& Pringle, J. E. 1999, MNRAS, 308, 207
1079:
1080: \bibitem[Wu et al.(2001)]{wu2001}
1081: Wu, K., Soria, R., Hunstead, R. W., Johnston, H. M. 2001, MNRAS, 320, 177
1082:
1083: \bibitem[Yan, Liu \& Hang(2005)]{yan2005}
1084: Yan, J. Z., Liu, Q. Z. \& Hang, H. R. 2005, ChJAA, 5S, 247
1085:
1086: \bibitem[Zdziarski et al.(2002)]{zdziarski2002}
1087: Zdziarski, A. A., Poutanen, J., Paciesas, W. S., Wen, L. Q. 2002, ApJ, 578, 357
1088:
1089: \bibitem[Zhang et al.(1997)]{zhang97}
1090: Zhang, S. N., Cui, W, Harmon, B. A. et al. 1997, ApJ, 477, L95
1091:
1092: \bibitem[Zi\'{o}{\l}kowski(2005)]{ziolkowski2005}
1093: Zi\'{o}{\l}kowski, J. 2005, MNRAS, 358, 851
1094:
1095: \end{thebibliography}
1096:
1097:
1098:
1099:
1100:
1101: \begin{center}
1102: \begin{figure}[ht]
1103: \centering
1104: \includegraphics[bb=17 17 282 217, width=8cm]{f1a.eps}%
1105: \includegraphics[bb=17 17 274 207, width=8cm]{f1b.eps}
1106: \includegraphics[bb=17 17 274 207, width=8cm]{f1c.eps}%
1107: \includegraphics[bb=17 17 274 207, width=8cm]{f1d.eps}
1108: \caption{Spectra including H$\alpha$ and He {\small I} $\lambda$6678
1109: lines during six years' observations. The observational dates and
1110: orbital phases are given in the left and right sides of each
1111: spectrum, respectively: (a) H$\alpha$ spectra in 2001 and 2002, (b)
1112: H$\alpha$ spectra in 2003 and 2005, (c) H$\alpha$ spectra in 2004,
1113: and (d) H$\alpha$ spectra in 2006. When the H$\alpha$ shows a
1114: double-peaked profile, the focused-wind component is marked by a
1115: tick in the figure.} \label{figure:group}
1116: \end{figure}
1117: \end{center}
1118:
1119:
1120:
1121:
1122: \clearpage
1123: \begin{center}
1124: \begin{figure}[ht]
1125: \centering
1126: \includegraphics[bb=11 11 213 283, width=10cm]{f2.eps}
1127: \caption{(a) H$\alpha$ EWs during six-year observations (filled
1128: circles). Data from \citet{gies2003} (open circles) and
1129: \citet{tarasov2003} (open triangles) are shown. (b) The
1130: one-day-averaged RXTE/ASM count rates of Cyg X-1 in 1.5-12 keV. (c)
1131: The hardness ratio in the soft X-ray band of RXTE/ASM, (3-5
1132: keV)/(1.5-3 keV). The arrows on the bottom of the panel correspond
1133: to the starting time of each observational run. } \label{figure:ew}
1134: \end{figure}
1135: \end{center}
1136:
1137:
1138:
1139:
1140:
1141: \begin{center}
1142: \begin{figure}[ht]
1143: \centering
1144: \includegraphics[bb=58 32 387 386, width=8cm]{f3.eps}
1145: \caption{Top: H$\alpha$ profiles during the 2006 observations,
1146: arranged in ascending order according to the orbital phase. The
1147: observational dates and orbital phases are given on each side of the
1148: H$\alpha$, respectively. All spectra have had the continuum level
1149: normalized and offset vertically to allow direct comparison. Bottom:
1150: the gray-scale map of the H$\alpha$ spectra in 2006. The y-axis
1151: corresponds to the orbital phase and the gray intensity is scaled
1152: between 0.986 (white) and 1.17 (black).} \label{figure:2006}
1153: \end{figure}
1154: \end{center}
1155:
1156:
1157:
1158:
1159:
1160: \begin{center}
1161: \begin{figure}[ht]
1162: \centering
1163: \includegraphics[bb=25 15 288 270, width=8cm]{f4.eps}
1164: \caption{Radial velocity curves of the supergiant (solid line) and
1165: focused-wind (dotted line)
1166: components in the H$\alpha$ line adopted from \citet{gies2003}. The two components have a comparative
1167: velocity around orbital phases $\phi$=0.03 and 0.53. } \label{figure:radial}
1168: \end{figure}
1169: \end{center}
1170:
1171:
1172:
1173:
1174:
1175: \begin{center}
1176: \begin{figure}[ht]
1177: \centering
1178: \includegraphics[bb= -10 -10 510 510, width=8cm]{f5a.ps}%{sc.eps}%
1179: \includegraphics[bb= -10 -10 510 510, width=8cm]{f5b.ps}%{fc.eps}
1180: \caption{Disentangled H$\alpha$ lines observed in high/soft state in
1181: the 2004 (left panel) and low/hard state in 2006 (right panel). The
1182: upper 7 lines (left panel) or 11 lines (right panel) indicate the
1183: input spectra ordered in running time from the top. These profiles
1184: are superimposed with their reconstruction as the sum of
1185: disentangled components, which are shown by the two bottom curves.
1186: The very bottom lines correspond to the emission of the focused
1187: stellar wind, which is obviously higher in 2006 than in 2004. The
1188: lines second from the bottom display the P-Cyg profiles of the
1189: supergiant. The maxima of their emission wings are practically equal
1190: in both states. } \label{figure:korelnew}
1191: \end{figure}
1192: \end{center}
1193:
1194:
1195:
1196:
1197:
1198: \begin{center}
1199: \begin{figure}[ht]
1200: \centering
1201: \includegraphics[bb=88 9 377 288, width=10cm]{f6.eps}
1202: \caption{Contours of $\xi$=10$^2$ for Cyg X-1 in different X-ray
1203: states. The coordinate origin is at the center of the supergiant and
1204: the thick circle represents the surface of the supergiant. The
1205: intersection of the two black dashed lines is the boundary of the
1206: supergiant's Roche lobe. The solid, dashed, dot-dashed, and
1207: dot-dot-dashed lines are the contour lines when the X-ray luminosity
1208: $(L_X)_{36}$ equals 14.28 (2001), 11.47 (2004), 1.46 (2003), and
1209: 2.04 (2006), respectively.} \label{figure:contour}
1210: \end{figure}
1211: \end{center}
1212:
1213:
1214:
1215:
1216:
1217: \begin{center}
1218: \begin{figure}[ht]
1219: \centering
1220: \includegraphics[bb=11 11 213 283, width=10cm]{f7.eps}
1221: \caption{The top panel shows the H$\alpha$ EWs during the 2006
1222: observations. An X-ray flare was detected by Swift/BAT (15-50 keV)
1223: (middle) and RXTE/ASM (1.5-12 keV) (bottom) around our observations.
1224: The dashed lines correspond to the starting and ending times of the
1225: 2006 observations. The inset in the top panel is another X-ray flare
1226: detected by RXTE/ASM (1.5-12 keV) around MJD 50,941.5449 (the
1227: position of the arrow), when a strong H$\alpha$ emission
1228: (--2.315\,{\AA}) was observed by \citet{tarasov2003}.}
1229: \label{figure:flare}
1230: \end{figure}
1231: \end{center}
1232:
1233:
1234:
1235:
1236:
1237: \clearpage
1238:
1239:
1240:
1241: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}
1242: \tablecolumns{9} \tablecaption{Summary of the spectroscopic observations of HDE 226868.}
1243: \tablewidth{0pc}
1244: \tablehead{\colhead{Date}&\colhead{UT} & \colhead{Exposure} &\colhead{Julian} & \colhead{Wavelength} & \colhead{Spectral} &\colhead{Orbital} & \colhead{H$\alpha$}\\
1245: \colhead{}&\colhead{Middle} & \colhead{Time} &\colhead{Date} & \colhead{Range} & \colhead{Resolution} &\colhead{Phase} & \colhead{EW}\\
1246: \colhead{}&\colhead{(hh:mm:ss)} & \colhead{(s)} &\colhead{} & \colhead{(\AA)} &
1247: \colhead{\AA~pixel$^{-1}$} &\colhead{} & \colhead{(-\AA)}} \startdata
1248: 20010925 & 11:10:26 & 300 & 2452177.9656 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.916 & 0.33$\pm$0.02 \\
1249: 20010927 & 12:06:13 & 400 & 2452180.0043 & 4300-5500 & 1.22 & 0.280 & -- \\
1250: 20010930 & 13:59:44 & 300 & 2452183.0832 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.830 & 0.11$\pm$0.01 \\
1251: 20011001 & 14:35:41 & 300 & 2452184.1081 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.013 & 0.80$\pm$0.02 \\
1252: 20021022 & 12:01:07 & 300 & 2452570.0008 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.925 & 1.11$\pm$0.14 \\
1253: 20021022 & 12:11:09 & 800 & 2452570.0077 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.926 & 1.24$\pm$0.09 \\
1254: 20021023 & 11:53:21 & 500 & 2452570.9954 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.102 & 1.10$\pm$0.11 \\
1255: 20021024 & 10:50:35 & 600 & 2452571.9518 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.273 & 1.19$\pm$0.08 \\
1256: 20021026 & 12:01:53 & 500 & 2452574.0013 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.639 & 1.04$\pm$0.05 \\
1257: 20021027 & 11:39:28 & 500 & 2452574.9857 & 4300-5500 & 1.22 & 0.815 & -- \\
1258: 20021028 & 11:23:20 & 500 & 2452575.9745 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.991 & 0.85$\pm$0.11 \\
1259: 20031014 & 11:44:08 & 300 & 2452926.9890 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.674 & 1.36$\pm$0.04 \\
1260: 20031014 & 11:53:48 & 800 & 2452926.9957 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.676 & 1.54$\pm$0.04 \\
1261: 20031014 & 12:09:23 & 1000 & 2452927.0065 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.678 & 1.30$\pm$0.04 \\
1262: 20031015 & 11:48:38 & 300 & 2452927.9921 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.854 & 1.22$\pm$0.03 \\
1263: 20031015 & 11:56:49 & 500 & 2452927.9978 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.855 & 1.21$\pm$0.07 \\
1264: 20031015 & 12:05:49 & 500 & 2452928.0040 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.856 & 1.14$\pm$0.04 \\
1265: 20031016 & 11:44:54 & 20 & 2452928.9895 & 4300-6700 & 2.44 & 0.032 & 1.13$\pm$0.06 \\
1266: 20031016 & 11:46:34 & 100 & 2452928.9907 & 4300-6700 & 2.44 & 0.032 & 1.01$\pm$0.02 \\
1267: 20031016 & 11:48:20 & 50 & 2452928.9919 & 4300-6700 & 2.44 & 0.032 & 1.02$\pm$0.02 \\
1268: 20040921 & 14:53:34 & 900 & 2453270.1205 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.950 & 0.72$\pm$0.08 \\
1269: 20040921 & 15:09:20 & 900 & 2453270.1315 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.952 & 0.63$\pm$0.06 \\
1270: 20040922 & 14:43:41 & 900 & 2453271.1137 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.127 & 0.80$\pm$0.04 \\
1271: 20040923 & 11:35:11 & 600 & 2453271.9828 & 4300-6700 & 1.22 & 0.282 & 0.86$\pm$0.01 \\
1272: 20040925 & 13:55:31 & 1000 & 2453274.0802 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.657 & 0.44$\pm$0.01 \\
1273: 20040925 & 14:13:04 & 1000 & 2453274.0924 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.659 & 0.40$\pm$0.03 \\
1274: 20040926 & 13:31:28 & 1000 & 2453275.0635 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.832 & 0.28$\pm$0.01 \\
1275: 20040926 & 13:49:02 & 1000 & 2453275.0757 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.835 & 0.25$\pm$0.01 \\
1276: 20051021 & 13:30:33 & 900 & 2453665.0629 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.477 & 1.27$\pm$0.04 \\
1277: 20051023 & 11:31:50 & 100 & 2453666.9804 & 4300-6700 & 2.44 & 0.820 & 1.53$\pm$0.06 \\
1278: 20051023 & 11:34:05 & 100 & 2453666.9820 & 4300-6700 & 2.44 & 0.820 & 1.54$\pm$0.01 \\
1279: 20051024 & 12:17:10 & 900 & 2453668.0119 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.004 & 1.04$\pm$0.02 \\
1280: 20051024 & 12:32:50 & 900 & 2453668.0228 & 5550-6750 & 1.22 & 0.006 & 1.08$\pm$0.02 \\
1281: 20051027 & 12:56:50 & 600 & 2453671.0395 & 4300-5500 & 1.22 & 0.545 & -- \\
1282: 20060926 & 14:05:43 & 1200 & 2454005.0873 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.198 & 1.75$\pm$0.07 \\
1283: 20060926 & 14:27:18 & 1200 & 2454005.1023 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.200 & 1.79$\pm$0.06 \\
1284: 20060927 & 13:26:20 & 1200 & 2454006.0600 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.372 & 1.71$\pm$0.02 \\
1285: 20060927 & 14:05:07 & 1200 & 2454006.0869 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.376 & 1.74$\pm$0.07 \\
1286: 20060928 & 12:24:02 & 1200 & 2454007.0167 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.542 & 1.63$\pm$0.09 \\
1287: 20060928 & 13:25:46 & 1200 & 2454007.0596 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.550 & 1.76$\pm$0.08 \\
1288: 20060929 & 12:19:54 & 1200 & 2454008.0138 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.720 & 1.96$\pm$0.03 \\
1289: 20060930 & 13:28:44 & 1200 & 2454009.0616 & 3850-5050 & 1.02 & 0.908 & -- \\
1290: 20061001 & 12:04:59 & 600 & 2454010.0035 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.076 & 1.69$\pm$0.02 \\
1291: 20061001 & 15:09:09 & 600 & 2454010.1314 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.099 & 1.56$\pm$0.03 \\
1292: 20061002 & 12:09:59 & 600 & 2454011.0069 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.255 & 1.95$\pm$0.04 \\
1293: 20061002 & 14:35:00 & 600 & 2454011.1076 & 5550-6750 & 1.02 & 0.273 & 1.96$\pm$0.03 \\
1294: \enddata
1295: \tablenotetext{Note} {The ephemeris is adopted from Gies et al. (2003). } \label{table}
1296: \end{deluxetable}
1297:
1298:
1299:
1300:
1301:
1302: \begin{table*}[t]
1303: \caption{Parameters of Cyg X-1}
1304: \begin{tabular}{ccc} \hline \hline
1305: Parameter & Value & Reference\\ \hline
1306: $M_*$ & 24$\pm$5 $M_{\odot}$ & \citet{iorio2007}\\
1307: $M_x$ & 8.7$\pm$0.8 $M_{\odot}$ & \citet{shaposhnikov2007}\\
1308: q=$M_x$/$M_*$ & 0.36$\pm$0.05 & \citet{gies2003}\\
1309: $a$ & 42$\pm$9 $R_{\odot}$ & \citet{iorio2007}\\
1310: $i$ & 48.0$\pm$6.8$^{\circ}$ & \citet{iorio2007}\\
1311: Roche lobe size & $r_m$=21$\pm$6 $R_{\odot}$ &\citet{iorio2007}\\
1312: $V_{\infty}$ & 1700 km s$^{-1}$ & -\\
1313: $T_*$ & 40,000K & -\\
1314: $d$ & 2.5 kpc & \citet{ninkov87} \\
1315: $L_{opt}/L_{\odot}$ & 5.59$\times$10$^{5}$ & \citet{ziolkowski2005}\\
1316: $\dot{M}_w$ & 2.0$\times$10$^{-6}$$M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ & \citet{howarth89}\\
1317: $R_*$ & 18 $R_{\odot}$ & -\\ \hline \hline
1318: \end{tabular}
1319: \label{parameter}
1320: \end{table*}
1321:
1322:
1323:
1324:
1325:
1326: \begin{table*}[t]
1327: \caption{Ionization parameters in different X-ray states}
1328: \begin{tabular}{ccccc} \hline \hline
1329: Observational & X-ray & X-ray luminosity & $\xi$($r_x$=21$R_{\odot}$) & $\xi$($r_x$=23$R_{\odot}$) \\
1330: Run & State & (10$^{36}$ ergs s$^{-1}$) & (ergs cm s$^{-1}$)& (ergs cm s$^{-1}$)\\ \hline
1331: 2001 & High/Soft & 14.28 & 110.04 & 40.89 \\
1332: 2003 & Low/Hard & 1.46 & 11.25 & 4.18 \\
1333: 2004 & High/Soft & 11.47 & 88.38 & 32.84 \\
1334: 2006 & Low/Hard & 2.04 & 15.72 & 5.84 \\ \hline \hline
1335: \end{tabular}
1336: \label{ionization}
1337: \end{table*}
1338:
1339:
1340: \end{document}
1341:
1342:
1343:
1344: %%
1345: