1: %\documentclass{aastex}
2: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4:
5: \shortauthors{Kilic et al.}
6: \shorttitle{White Dwarf GD362}
7: \begin{document}
8: %\title{A Parallax Distance for the Possibly Massive White Dwarf GD362\altaffilmark{1}}
9: \title{Direct Distance Measurement to the Dusty White Dwarf GD 362\altaffilmark{1}}
10:
11: \author{Mukremin Kilic\altaffilmark{2,3}, John R. Thorstensen\altaffilmark{4}, and D. Koester\altaffilmark{5}}
12:
13: \altaffiltext{1}{Based on observations obtained at the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT (MDM) Observatory, operated by
14: Dartmouth College, Ohio State University, Columbia University,
15: the University of Michigan, and Ohio University.}
16:
17: \altaffiltext{2}{Spitzer Fellow, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138;\\ mkilic@cfa.harvard.edu}
18:
19: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Astronomy, The Ohio State University, 140 West 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210}
20:
21: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Dartmouth College, 6127 Wilder Laboratory, Hanover,
22: NH 03755; john.thorstensen@dartmouth.edu}
23:
24: \altaffiltext{5}{Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik und Astrophysik, University of Kiel, 24098 Kiel, Germany}
25:
26:
27: \begin{abstract}
28:
29: We present trigonometric parallax observations of GD 362 obtained over seven epochs using
30: the MDM 2.4m Hiltner Telescope. The existence of a dust disk around this possibly massive white
31: dwarf makes it an interesting target for parallax observations. The measured parallax for GD 362
32: places it at a distance of $50.6^{+3.5}_{-3.1}$ pc, which implies that its radius and mass are
33: $\approx 0.0106R_\odot$ and $0.71M_\odot$, respectively.
34: GD 362 is not as massive as initially thought (1.2$M_\odot$).
35: Our results are entirely consistent with the distance and
36: mass estimates (52.2 pc and 0.73$M_\odot$)
37: by Zuckerman et al., who demonstrated that GD 362 has a helium
38: dominated atmosphere. Dropping GD 362 from the list of massive white dwarfs, there are no white dwarfs with
39: $M>0.9M_{\odot}$ that are known to host circumstellar dust disks.
40:
41: \end{abstract}
42:
43: \keywords{stars: individual (GD 362, WD 1729+371) -- white dwarfs}
44:
45: \section{Introduction}
46:
47: \citet{gianninas04} reported the discovery of the most massive (1.2$M_{\odot}$), hydrogen- and metal-rich DAZ white dwarf
48: ever found; GD362 (WD 1729+371). In addition to Balmer lines, they detected \ion{Ca}{1}, \ion{Ca}{2}, \ion{Mg}{1}, and \ion{Fe}{1} lines in
49: the optical spectra of this star with estimated $T_{\rm eff}=$ 9740 K and $\log$ g = 9.1. They measured nearly-solar abundances
50: for these metals. The discovery of infrared excess \citep{kilic05,becklin05} and a silicate emission feature at
51: $\approx 10~\mu$m \citep{jura07} demonstrated that GD 362 hosts a circumstellar dust disk and the metals are likely to be
52: accreted from this disk.
53:
54: The discovery of debris disks around other normal mass white dwarfs \citep[$M<0.8M_\odot$,][]{kilic06,kilic07,vonhippel07,
55: jura07,farihi08a}
56: and the lack of disks around massive white dwarfs with $M>1M_\odot$
57: \citep{hansen06} showed that, if GD 362 is as massive as 1.2$M_{\odot}$, it is unique. \citet{garcia07} proposed
58: to explain the high mass of GD 362 by a merger of two lower mass white dwarfs, a rare event in our Galaxy
59: \citep[see also][]{livio92,livio05}.
60: They also suggested that the merger scenario is able to explain the observed photospheric composition of metals and
61: the infrared excess of the surrounding debris disk.
62:
63: A caveat in the model atmosphere analysis, and therefore surface gravity and mass determinations, of GD 362 is the presence of helium.
64: Helium lines become invisible below $\approx$ 11,000 K, and weak lines can only be seen if helium is present in significant amounts.
65: \citet{garcia07} found that the Balmer line profiles in the optical spectrum of GD 362 are equally well reproduced
66: even if there is a significant amount of helium in the atmosphere. No helium lines were visible in the low resolution spectrum
67: of \citet{gianninas04}. However, a high resolution and high signal-to-noise spectrum of GD 362 obtained by \citet{zuckerman07}
68: revealed a helium absorption line at 5876 \AA, demonstrating that helium is present in significant amounts.
69: A detailed model atmosphere analysis of this spectrum implied that GD 362 has $T_{\rm eff}=$ 10,540 $\pm$ 200 K, $\log$ g = 8.24
70: $\pm$ 0.04, $\log$ [He/H] = 1.14 $\pm$ 0.10, and $M=0.73M_\odot$; GD 362 may not be unique (in terms of its mass) after all.
71:
72: The high mass measurement for GD 362 implies a distance of 22-26 pc \citep{gianninas04}, whereas the lower mass solution found
73: by \citet{zuckerman07} implies twice the distance. Discriminating between these two solutions requires parallax observations.
74: In this Letter, we present trigonometric parallax observations of GD 362. Our observations and reduction procedures are discussed
75: in \S 2, while the observed parallax and its implications are discussed in \S 3 and \S 4.
76:
77: \section{Parallax Observations and Reductions}
78:
79: Our parallax images are from the 2.4m Hiltner reflector at MDM Observatory
80: on Kitt Peak, Arizona. We used a total of 117 images taken on seven observing
81: runs spanning two seasons; Table 1 summarizes the observations.
82: The instrumentation, observing protocols, and reduction
83: techniques used were very similar to those described in \citet{thor03} and
84: \citet{thor08}. We used a 2048$^2$ SITe CCD detector at the f7.5 focus;
85: each 24 $\mu$m pixel subtended $0''.275$. At each epoch we took many exposures
86: in the Kron-Cousins $I$-band, as near to the meridian as we could to minimize
87: differential color refraction (DCR) effects \citep{monet92}. There were
88: some differences from the earlier work, namely (1) we used a 4-inch
89: filter, which allowed us to use the full imaging area of the detector; and
90: (2) the chip was oriented with the columns east-west rather than north-south.
91: The parallax reduction and analysis pipeline was unchanged from the previous work.
92: In the GD362 field, we measured 83 stars, and used 43 of them to define the
93: reference frame.
94:
95: Standardized magnitudes and colors are used in the parallax analysis,
96: to correct for DCR effects and also to estimate the correction from relative
97: to absolute parallax \citep{thor03}. We took images of GD362 in $V$ (as well
98: as the $I$ used for astrometry) on two observing runs (2008 June and September),
99: and calibrated the instrumental magnitudes from these images with numerous
100: observations of \citet{landolt92} standard star fields
101: from the same runs. The photometry of the GD362 field from the
102: two runs agreed within a few hundredths of a magnitude in $V$ and $V-I$.
103:
104: To arrive at a final distance estimate we use procedures detailed in
105: \citet{thor03}. For GD362, we measure a proper motion of $\mu=211.8 \pm 2.0$ mas (milli-arcsec) yr$^{-1}$
106: with an angle $\theta= 173.5^o \pm 0.4^o$,
107: and we find a relative parallax and formal error of $19.0 \pm 0.7$ mas.
108: Our proper motion measurement is relative to the chosen reference
109: stars, and is not reduced to an absolute reference frame. Corrections to absolute proper
110: motions are generally of order $<$ 10 mas yr$^{-1}$ \citep{lepine05}, and our measurement is
111: consistent with $\mu=224.2 \pm 7.8$ mas yr$^{-1}$ found by \citet{salim03}.
112: Figure 1 displays the trajectory of GD 362 on the sky, and the same trajectory
113: with proper motion component taken out. This figure shows that our observations cover
114: a large range of parallax factor for GD 362, and the parallax is well constrained.
115: Using the scatter observed among the parallaxes of comparably bright field
116: stars located near the program star we estimate an external error of 1.3 mas.
117: The magnitudes and colors of the reference stars yield a correction
118: to absolute parallax of 0.9 mas. Combining these gives an
119: absolute parallax and external uncertainty $\pi_{\rm abs} =
120: 19.9 \pm 1.3$ mas, corresponding to
121: $50.3^{+3.5}_{-3.1}$ pc. The parallax accuracy is good enough that
122: further corrections have only a small effect on the distance.
123: Nonetheless, the full Bayesian formalism described in \citet{thor03}
124: adjusts this slightly, to $50.6^{+3.5}_{-3.1}$ pc. This formalism
125: includes (1) the Lutz-Kelker correction \citep{lutzkelker}, which
126: increase the inferred distance to 51.0 pc, and (2) prior information
127: from the proper motion and very liberal limits on the luminosity,
128: which work to decrease the distance slightly.
129:
130: \section{Results}
131:
132: Our parallax measurement shows that GD 362 is further away, and therefore more luminous and less massive, than predicted
133: from the pure hydrogen atmosphere fits by \citet{gianninas04}. We now compare our result to the distance implied by
134: the model atmosphere fits by \citet{zuckerman07}.
135:
136: GD 362 is included in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Data Release 6 imaging area. We converted the SDSS photometry
137: into the AB system using the offsets given in \citet{eisenstein06}. GD 362 has $u=16.25,~g=16.02,~r=16.18,~i=16.30$,
138: and $z=16.47$ AB mag. Using the $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log$ g, and mass measurements from \citet{zuckerman07} and the model atmospheres
139: from \citet{koester05}, we estimate the theoretical colors for GD 362 and use these to constrain the solid angle $\pi (R/D)^2$,
140: which relates the flux at the surface of the star to that received at Earth. The mass radius relation of \citet{wood92}
141: gives a radius of 0.0109 $R_\odot$ for a 0.73 $M_\odot$ white dwarf with thin hydrogen layers (thin layers because GD 362 is
142: helium-rich). Using this radius, the distance for the model atmosphere fit parameters presented in \citet{zuckerman07} is
143: 52.2 pc, entirely consistent with our parallax observations.
144:
145: Instead, if we use our parallax measurement directly to constrain the radius of the star, we can use the surface gravity and the
146: radius to constrain the mass. Replacing the distance in the solid angle $\pi (R/D)^2$ with 50.6 pc, we find a radius of
147: 7.357 $\times 10^8$ cm, or 0.0106 $R_\odot$ for GD 362. Using the surface gravity of $\log$ g = 8.24, we estimate a mass
148: of 0.71 $M_\odot$. Again this mass estimate is entirely consistent with the mass estimate of 0.73 $\pm$ 0.02
149: $M_\odot$ by \citet{zuckerman07}.
150:
151: \section{Discussion}
152:
153: GD 362 is only slightly more massive than the average mass for the field DA \citep[0.60 $\pm$ 0.13 $M_\odot$][]{liebert05} and
154: DB \citep[0.60 $\pm$ 0.07 $M_\odot$][]{voss07} white dwarfs. Therefore, there is no evidence of and no need to invoke a binary
155: merger scenario to explain this star and its surrounding debris disk. The photospheric abundances of metals in GD 362 are also
156: several orders of magnitude different from the nucleosynthetic predictions of a merger event \citep{zuckerman07}.
157: Dropping GD 362 from the list of massive stars, there are no known white dwarfs with $M>0.9M_\odot$ that host dust disks. However,
158: massive stars comprise only about 15\% of the local white dwarf population \citep{liebert05}, and only a small number of these
159: stars have been searched for excess infrared radiation from dust disks. A large survey of massive white dwarfs will be useful
160: to constrain the fraction with debris disks.
161:
162: Using the initial-final mass relations by \citet{dobbie06, williams07, kalirai08}, we estimate the progenitor
163: of GD 362 to be a $3.0-3.3M_\odot$ star. The main sequence lifetime of a solar-metallicity $3.0 M_\odot$ star is 320 - 650 Myr,
164: depending on the assumptions on convecting overshooting (M. H. Pinsonneault 2008, priv. comm.). The white dwarf cooling age of GD 362
165: is $\approx$ 700-800 Myr, therefore the total main sequence plus white dwarf age of GD 362 is 1 - 1.5 Gyr.
166: Using the proper motion and distance, we estimate that GD 362 has a tangential velocity of 51 km s$^{-1}$. Including the
167: radial velocity measurement from \citet[][after subtracting the gravitational redshift component]{zuckerman07}, we estimate
168: that GD 362 has U, V, and W velocities of 57.7, 0.5, and $-$5.3 km s$^{-1}$, respectively. These velocities are
169: consistent with thin disk membership. GD 362 seems just like all the other known white dwarfs with debris disks \citep{kilic08},
170: except that it has a mixed H/He atmosphere, and it has more metals than the rest of them.
171:
172: \citet{jura07} modelled the mid-infrared spectral energy distribution of GD 362 with a flat disk between 12 and 50 stellar radii
173: and warped disk between 50 and 70 stellar radii. Using our radius estimate of 0.0106 $R_\odot$, we can convert these numbers into
174: observables. The dust disk lies between 0.13 and 0.74 $R_\odot$. In addition, based on a distance of 25 pc, the mass of circumstellar
175: dust was estimated to be 3 $\times 10^{17}$ g. Since the real distance to GD 362 is about twice as large, the actual dust mass is four
176: times higher, or $\approx 1.2 \times 10^{18}$ g. Of course, this is only a tiny fraction of the metals \citep[$\geq10^{22}$ g,][]{zuckerman07}
177: present in the convective envelope of the star.
178:
179: \section{Conclusions}
180:
181: We obtained trigonometric parallax observations of GD 362 over seven epochs separated by 1.3 years. Our direct distance measurement of
182: $50.6^{+3.5}_{-3.1}$ pc is incompatible with GD 362 being as massive as 1.2$M_\odot$. Using the parallax to constrain the radius
183: and the mass, we find that GD 362 has a mass $\approx$ 0.71 $M_\odot$. The model atmosphere analysis presented in \citet{zuckerman07}
184: demonstrated that GD 362 has significant amounts of helium in its photosphere and it has $M=0.73\pm 0.02 M_\odot$.
185: Our parallax observations confirm their result.
186:
187: \acknowledgements
188: MK is grateful to the Ohio State University Astronomy Department, and especially to K. Stanek,
189: for large amounts of time allocated on the MDM 2.4m Telescope. Support for this work was provided by NASA
190: through the Spitzer Space Telescope Fellowship Program, under an award from Caltech. JRT acknowledges support
191: from the National Science Foundation through grants AST-0307413 and AST-0708810. We thank the MDM Observatory
192: staff for their excellent support, and J. Subasavage for a quick and constructive referee report.
193:
194:
195: \begin{thebibliography}
196:
197: \bibitem[Becklin et al.(2005)]{becklin05} Becklin, E. E., Farihi, J., Jura, M., Song, I., Weinberger, A. J., \& Zuckerman, B.\ 2005, \apjl, 632, L119
198:
199: \bibitem[Dobbie et al.(2006)]{dobbie06} Dobbie, P.~D., et al.\ 2006, \mnras, 369, 383
200:
201: \bibitem[Eisenstein et al.(2006)]{eisenstein06} Eisenstein, D. J., et al.\ 2006, \apjs, 167, 40
202:
203: \bibitem[Farihi et al.(2008)]{farihi08a} Farihi, J., Zuckerman, B., \& Becklin, E. E.\ 2008, \apj, 674, 431
204:
205: \bibitem[Garc{\'{\i}}a-Berro et al.(2007)]{garcia07} Garc{\'{\i}}a-Berro, E., Lor{\'e}n-Aguilar, P., Pedemonte, A.~G., Isern, J., Bergeron, P., Dufour, P., \& Brassard, P.\ 2007, \apjl, 661, L179
206:
207: \bibitem[Gianninas et al. (2004)]{gianninas04} Gianninas, A., Dufour, P., \& Bergeron, P. 2004, ApJL, 617, 57
208:
209: \bibitem[Hansen et al.(2006)]{hansen06} Hansen, B. M. S., Kulkarni, S., \& Wiktorowicz, S.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 1106
210:
211: \bibitem[Jura et al.(2007)]{jura07} Jura, M., Farihi, J., \& Zuckerman, B.\ 2007, \apj, 663, 1285
212:
213: \bibitem[Kalirai et al.(2008)]{kalirai08} Kalirai, J. S., Hansen, B. M. S., Kelson, D. D., Reitzel, D. B., Rich, R. M., \& Richer, H. B.\ 2008, \apj, 676, 594
214:
215: \bibitem[Kilic et al. (2005)]{kilic05} Kilic, M., von Hippel, T., Leggett, S. K., \& Winget, D. E. 2005, \apj, 632, 115
216:
217: \bibitem[Kilic et al. (2006)]{kilic06} Kilic, M., von Hippel, T., Leggett, S. K., \& Winget, D. E. 2006, \apj, 646, 474
218:
219: \bibitem[Kilic \& Redfield(2007)]{kilic07} Kilic, M., \& Redfield, S.\ 2007, \apj, 660, 641
220:
221: \bibitem[Kilic et al. (2008)]{kilic08} Kilic, M., Farihi, J., Nitta, A., \& Leggett, S. K. 2008, \aj, 136, 111
222:
223: \bibitem[Koester et al.(2005)]{koester05} Koester, D., Rollenhagen, K., Napiwotzki, R., Voss, B., Christlieb, N., Homeier, D., \& Reimers, D.\ 2005, \aap, 432, 1025
224:
225: \bibitem[Landolt(1992)]{landolt92} Landolt, A. U. 1992, AJ, 104, 340
226:
227: \bibitem[L{\'e}pine \& Shara(2005)]{lepine05} L{\'e}pine, S., \& Shara, M.~M.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 1483
228:
229: \bibitem[Liebert et al.(2005)]{liebert05} Liebert, J., Bergeron, P., \& Holberg, J.B. 2005, \apjs, 156, 47
230:
231: \bibitem[Livio et al.(1992)]{livio92} Livio, M., Pringle, J. E., \& Saffer, R. A.\ 1992, \mnras, 257, 15P
232:
233: \bibitem[Livio et al.(2005)]{livio05} Livio, M., Pringle, J. E., \& Wood, K.\ 2005, \apjl, 632, L37
234:
235: \bibitem[Lutz \& Kelker(1973)]{lutzkelker} Lutz, T.~E.~\& Kelker,
236: D.~H.\ 1973, \pasp, 85, 573
237:
238: \bibitem[Monet et al.(1992)]{monet92} Monet, D.~G., Dahn,
239: C.~C., Vrba, F.~J., Harris, H.~C., Pier, J.~R., Luginbuhl, C.~B., \& Ables,
240: H.~D.\ 1992, \aj, 103, 638
241:
242: \bibitem[Salim \& Gould (2003)]{salim03} Salim, S. \& Gould, A., 2003, \apj, 582, 1011
243:
244: \bibitem[Thorstensen(2003)]{thor03} Thorstensen, J.~R.\ 2003,
245: \aj, 126, 3017
246:
247: \bibitem[Thorstensen et al.(2008)]{thor08} Thorstensen, J.~R., L\'epine, S.
248: \& Shara, M.\ 2008, \aj, in press.
249:
250: \bibitem[von Hippel et al.(2007)]{vonhippel07} von Hippel, T., Kuchner, M. J., Kilic, M., Mullally, F., \& Reach, W. T.\ 2007, \apj, 662, 544
251:
252: \bibitem[Voss et al.(2007)]{voss07} Voss, B., Koester, D., Napiwotzki, R., Christlieb, N., \& Reimers, D.\ 2007, \aap, 470, 1079
253:
254: \bibitem[Williams(2007)]{williams07} Williams, K. A.\ 2007, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, 372, 85
255:
256: \bibitem[Wood(1992)]{wood92} Wood, M.~A.\ 1992, \apj, 386, 539
257:
258: \bibitem[Zuckerman et al.(2007)]{zuckerman07} Zuckerman, B., Koester, D., Melis, C., Hansen, B. M., \& Jura, M.\ 2007, \apj, 671, 872
259:
260:
261: \end{thebibliography}
262:
263: \clearpage
264:
265: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrrr}
266: \tablewidth{0pt}
267: \tablecolumns{6}
268: \tablecaption{Journal of Observations}
269: \tablehead{
270: \colhead{Mean Date} &
271: \colhead{$N$} &
272: \colhead{First HA} &
273: \colhead{Last HA} &
274: \colhead{$p_X$} &
275: \colhead{$p_Y$} \\
276: }
277: \startdata
278: 2007 May 27 & 27 & $+$0:17 & $+$2:01 & $0.31$ & $0.83$ \\
279: 2007 Jul 4 & 15 & $+$0:09 & $+$1:04 & $-0.32$ & $0.84$ \\
280: 2007 Sep 26 & 7 & $+$1:36 & $+$1:59 & $-0.99$ & $-0.12$ \\
281: 2008 Mar 30 & 8 & $-$0:06 & $+$0:13 & $0.96$ & $0.21$ \\
282: 2008 May 14 & 42 & $+$0:17 & $+$1:34 & $0.50$ & $0.75$ \\
283: 2008 Jun 23 & 4 & $+$0:36 & $+$0:48 & $-0.15$ & $0.87$ \\
284: 2008 Sep 6 & 14 & $+$0:38 & $+$1:29 & $-0.99$ & $0.17$ \\
285: \enddata
286: \tablecomments{Summary of the parallax observations. Columns 1 and
287: 2 give the mean date of the observing run and the number of parallax images
288: used in the analysis. Columns 3 and 4 give the easternmost and westernmost
289: hour angles of the images used from that run, in hours and minutes.
290: Columns 5 and 6 give the
291: mean parallax factors in $X$ (eastward) and $Y$ (northward).}
292: \end{deluxetable}
293:
294: \clearpage
295: \begin{figure}
296: \hspace*{-0.5in}
297: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.7]{f1.ps}
298: \caption{Left panel: The trajectory of GD 362 on the
299: sky. Right panel: The same trajectory with the proper motion taken
300: out. The tip of each arrow is the position from a single image, and
301: the tail is the computed location based on the fitted trajectory including
302: zero point, proper motion, and parallax.}
303: \end{figure}
304:
305: \end{document}
306: