0811.0612/ms.tex
1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass{emulateapj}
3: 
4: \def\kms{km s$^{-1}$}
5: \def\msun{M$_{\odot}$}
6: 
7: \begin{document}
8: \slugcomment{Accepted to ApJ Letters}
9: 
10: \title{ THE ANISOTROPIC SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF HYPERVELOCITY STARS }
11: 
12: \author{Warren R.\ Brown,
13: 	Margaret J.\ Geller,
14: 	Scott J.\ Kenyon}
15: 
16: \affil{Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden St, Cambridge, MA 02138}
17: \email{ wbrown@cfa.harvard.edu} %, mgeller@cfa.harvard.edu, skenyon@cfa.harvard.edu}
18: 
19: \and    \author{Benjamin C.\ Bromley}
20: \affil{Department of Physics, University of Utah, 115 S 1400 E, Rm 201, Salt Lake City, UT 84112}
21: %\email{bromley@physics.utah.edu}
22: 
23: 
24: \shorttitle{ Anisotropic Distribution of Hypervelocity Stars }
25: \shortauthors{Brown et al.}
26: 
27: \begin{abstract}
28: 
29: 	We study the distribution of angular positions and angular separations of
30: unbound hypervelocity stars (HVSs).  HVSs are spatially anisotropic at the
31: 3-$\sigma$ level.  The spatial anisotropy is significant in Galactic longitude, not
32: in latitude, and the inclusion of lower velocity, possibly bound HVSs reduces the
33: significance of the anisotropy.  We discuss how the observed distribution of HVSs
34: may be linked to their origin.  In the future, measuring the distribution of HVSs in
35: the southern sky will provide additional constraints on the spatial anisotropy and
36: the origin of HVSs.
37: 
38: \end{abstract}
39: 
40: \keywords{
41:         Galaxy: bulge ---
42:         Galaxy: halo ---
43:         Galaxy: kinematics and dynamics ---
44:         Galaxy: structure ---
45: 	stars: early-type
46: }
47: 
48: \section{INTRODUCTION}
49: 
50: 	Unbound HVSs were predicted by \citet{hills88} as the natural consequence of
51: the massive black hole (MBH) in the Galactic center. Following the discovery of the
52: first HVS \citep{brown05}, observers have reported the discovery of at least 16
53: unbound HVSs and evidence for a similar number of bound HVSs ejected by the same
54: mechanism \citep{hirsch05, edelmann05, brown06, brown06b, brown07a, brown07b,
55: brown08c}. Follow-up observations of 4 HVSs establish they are main sequence B stars
56: \citep{fuentes06, bonanos08, przybilla08, przybilla08b, lopezmorales08} like the
57: S-stars orbiting Sgr A$^*$ today \citep{ghez03, eisenhauer05, martins08}.
58: 	Although not all unbound stars are necessarily HVSs -- the massive B star HD
59: 271791 is the first example of an unbound ``hyper-runaway'' ejected from the outer
60: disk \citep{heber08, przybilla08c} -- runaway ejection velocities are limited to
61: $\sim$300~km~s$^{-1}$ for 3 M$_{\sun}$ stars \citep{leonard88, leonard90, leonard91,
62: leonard93, portegies00, davies02, gualandris05}.  Thus the 14 unbound 2.5-4
63: M$_{\sun}$ stars found in the \citet{brown07b, brown08c} targeted surveys are almost
64: certainly HVSs ejected from the Galactic center.
65: 
66: 	Remarkably, 8 of the 14 HVSs in the \citet{brown07b, brown08c} targeted
67: surveys are located in just two constellations, Leo and Sextans, even though the
68: surveys cover $1/5^{\rm th}$ of the sky.  This spatial anisotropy is almost
69: certainly linked to the origin of the HVSs.
70: 
71: 	In \S 2 we show that the observed distribution of HVSs on the sky is
72: anisotropic at the 3-$\sigma$ level.  In \S 3 we discuss plausible explanations for
73: the observed anisotropy of HVSs.
74: 
75: 
76: \section{OBSERVED ANISOTROPY}
77: 
78: \subsection{Sample}
79: 
80: 	We consider the 14 HVSs from the combined surveys of \citet{brown07b,
81: brown08c}.  Our surveys use the MMT telescope to measure radial velocities for stars
82: with the colors of 2.5-4 M$_{\sun}$ stars. Heliocentric velocities are converted to
83: Galactocentric velocities assuming that the local rotation speed is 220 km s$^{-1}$
84: and that the Sun moves at (U,V,W)=(10, 5.2, 7.2) km s$^{-1}$ relative to the local
85: standard of rest \citep{dehnen98}.  The original HVS survey \citep{brown07b} is
86: 100\% complete for stars with $17<g'_0<19.5$ over 7300~deg$^2$ covered by the Sloan
87: Digital Sky Survey Data Release 6.  The new HVS survey \citep{brown08c} is 59\%
88: complete for stars with $19.5<g'_0<20.5$ over the same region of sky.
89: 
90: 	Figure \ref{fig:polar} plots the spatial distribution of stars with observed
91: velocities.  The combined HVS survey contains 693 stars and 14 HVSs in the 7300
92: deg$^2$ Sloan region covering the north Galactic cap. HVS2 \citep{hirsch05} is also
93: located in this region (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:polar}), however it falls outside our
94: color / magnitude criteria. Thus we exclude HVS2 from this analysis.
95: 
96: \subsection{Significant Anisotropy}
97: 
98: 	Figure \ref{fig:gll} plots the cumulative Galactic longitude and latitude
99: distributions of the HVSs and the other survey stars. Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) tests
100: find 0.007 and 0.11 likelihoods that the HVSs are drawn from the same longitude and
101: latitude distributions, respectively, as the survey stars.  Thus the distribution of
102: HVS longitudes appears anisotropic at the 3-$\sigma$ level.
103: 
104: \begin{figure}			% FIGURE 1: POLAR SKY MAP
105:  % \includegraphics[width=4.25in, bb=35 185 575 705]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/Final5/polar.ps}
106:  \plotone{f1.eps}
107:  \caption{ \label{fig:polar}
108: 	Polar projection, in Galactic coordinates, showing the 14 unbound HVSs ({\it
109: stars}) and the 693 other stars ({\it diamonds}) in our HVS survey \citep{brown08c}
110: covering the north Galactic cap.  HVS2, while not part of the survey, is also marked
111: ({\it plus sign}).}
112:  \end{figure}
113: 
114: \begin{figure}			% FIGURE 2: GLON GLAT DISTR
115:  % \includegraphics[width=4.25in, bb=20 435 590 700]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/Final5/gll2.ps}
116:  \plotone{f2.eps}
117:  \caption{ \label{fig:gll}
118: 	Cumulative distributions of Galactic $l$ and $b$ of the 14 HVSs ({\it
119: dashed lines}) and the 693 other stars ({\it solid lines}) in our HVS survey
120: \citep{brown08c}.}
121:  \end{figure}
122: 
123: 
124: 	As a second test, we explore the anisotropy in terms of the distribution of
125: angular separations, $\theta$, of the HVSs compared to the survey stars. Because the
126: new HVS survey is not yet complete, we calculate $\theta$'s for all unique pairs of
127: stars in the new and original surveys separately.  The original survey includes
128: HVS4-HVS10; a K-S test finds a 0.031 likelihood that those HVSs are drawn from the
129: same distribution of $\theta$ as the original survey stars.  The new survey includes
130: HVS1 and HVS11-HVS16; a K-S test finds a $7\times10^{-9}$ likelihood that those HVSs
131: are drawn from the same distribution of $\theta$ as the new survey stars.  Figure
132: \ref{fig:angcor} plots the $\theta$'s of both surveys concatenated together.  The
133: likelihood of the combined set of HVSs is $7\times10^{-8}$; thus the distribution of
134: HVS angular separations differs from the distribution of survey star angular
135: separations at the 5-$\sigma$ level.
136: 
137: 	As a third test, we measure the clustering of HVSs using the two-point
138: angular correlation function $w(\theta)$.  We use a Monte Carlo estimator
139: \citep{landy93} and compare the observed HVSs against 10$^5$ sets randomly drawn
140: from the survey region.  The lower panel of Figure \ref{fig:angcor} plots the
141: resulting $w(\theta)$ in 15$^{\circ}$ bins.  Errorbars are determined by Poisson
142: statistics.  HVSs are clustered at small angular separations $\theta<45^{\circ}$ and
143: missing at large angular separations $\theta>60^{\circ}$ with $\sim$3.5-$\sigma$
144: significance.
145: 
146: 
147: \begin{figure}			% FIGURE 3: SIGNIFICANCE
148:  % \includegraphics[width=4.25in]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/Final5/angcor.ps}
149:  \plotone{f3.eps}
150:  \caption{ \label{fig:angcor}
151: 	Upper panel: cumulative distribution of angular separations, $\theta$.
152: Lower panel: two-point angular correlation function $w(\theta)$ of the HVSs with
153: respect to sets randomly drawn from the survey region. }
154:  \end{figure}
155: 
156: 
157: \subsection{Velocity Dependence}
158: 
159: 	We now consider the spatial anisotropy of lower velocity stars that may also
160: be HVSs.  \citet{brown08c} identify 4 ``possible HVSs,'' stars that are bound in the
161: \citet{kenyon08} potential model but unbound in the \citet{xue08} potential model.  
162: Adding the 4 possible HVSs to the above analysis reduces the significance of the
163: anisotropy to the 2-$\sigma$ level. There are also 8 possibly ``bound HVSs,'' stars
164: with $v_{rf}>+275$ km s$^{-1}$ that are significant outliers from the overall
165: velocity distribution \citep{brown08c}.  Adding the bound HVSs to the above analysis
166: yields an insignificant anisotropy.  Thus lower velocity stars have a more isotropic
167: distribution, a trend noted previously in \citet{brown07a}.
168: 
169: 
170: \subsection{HVS Pairs}
171: 
172: 	There are 3 pairs of unbound HVSs with angular separations less than
173: 3.5$^{\circ}$ (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:polar}): HVS7 \& HVS15 near
174: ($l,b$)=(265$^{\circ}$, 55$^{\circ}$), HVS12 \& HVS13 and HVS12 \& HVS14 near
175: ($l,b$)= (245$^{\circ}$, 52$^{\circ}$).
176: 	Any physical association between the individual HVSs, however, appears
177: unlikely.  HVS7 \& HVS15 are separated by $2.5^{\circ}$ but have velocities and
178: distances that imply a $\sim$70 Myr difference in travel time from the Galactic
179: Center \citep[see Fig.\ 3 of][]{brown08c}.  HVS12 has a 429 km s$^{-1}$ minimum
180: rest-frame velocity very similar to that of HVS13 and HVS14, but it has half the
181: distance of the other two HVSs. Thus none of the HVS pairs share a common ejection
182: event.
183: 
184: 
185: \section{ORIGIN OF THE SPATIAL ANISOTROPY}
186: 
187: 	We observe that the spatial anisotropy of unbound HVSs is statistically 
188: robust, that lower velocity HVSs are systematically more isotropic, and that 
189: apparent close pairs of HVSs are physically unrelated.  Possible explanations for 
190: the observations include:
191: 
192: \vskip 2pt
193: 
194: \noindent {\it Selection Effect.} Previously, we argued that the HVS anisotropy may
195: be a selection effect of our magnitude-limited survey and the Sun's off-center
196: location in the Galaxy \citep{brown07a}.  However, this selection effect can account
197: only for an extra $\sim$10\% HVSs in the anti-center hemisphere, not all of the HVSs
198: in the anti-center hemisphere. Moreover, the observed HVSs cluster around
199: $l=240^{\circ}$, not $l=180^{\circ}$.
200: 
201: \vskip 2pt
202: 
203: \noindent {\it Runaways.} Runaway stars like HD 271791 may contaminate the
204: population of HVSs.  However, we expect runaways ejected from the disk to have an
205: isotropic distribution in Galactic longitude, as demonstrated by the
206: \citet{martin06} Hipparcos-selected sample of runaway B stars.  Moreover, because
207: runaways are systematically ejected at low velocities \citep[e.g.,][]{portegies00},
208: the fastest runaways are those ejected in the direction of Galactic rotation and
209: thus preferentially found at low Galactic latitudes.  Thus the expected distribution
210: of runaway longitudes and latitudes are contrary to the observed distribution of
211: HVSs.
212: 
213: \vskip 2pt
214: 
215: \noindent {\it Large Scale Structure.} The distribution of Local Group dwarf
216: galaxies is anisotropic, possibly due to a tidal origin \citep[e.g.,][]{metz08}.  A
217: tidal debris origin appears supported by the clumping of HVS travel times around
218: 100-200 Myr, however the travel times are simply a product of the HVS's $\sim$500 km
219: s$^{-1}$ velocities and our magnitude-limited survey depth of 50-100 kpc.  HVS
220: travel times are in fact problematic for a tidal debris origin because the times are
221: a significant fraction of the stars' main sequence lifetimes, and multiple
222: (gas-rich) tidal disruption events would be required to explain the full
223: $2\times10^8$ yr span of HVS travel times.  No dwarf galaxy in the Local Group
224: travels with radial velocities comparable to the unbound HVSs; known dwarf galaxy
225: remnants like the Sgr stream \citep{ibata94} are bound.  We thus consider tidal
226: debris an unlikely explanation for the observed set of HVSs \citep[however,
227: see][]{abadi08}.
228: 
229: \vskip 2pt
230: 
231: \noindent {\it Binary Black Hole.} While an equal-mass binary MBH is ruled out in
232: the Galactic Center \citep{reid04}, theorists speculate that the massive star
233: clusters in the Galactic Center form intermediate mass black holes (IMBHs) in their
234: cores.  If such IMBHs exist, dynamical friction causes them to in-spiral into the
235: central MBH, preferentially ejecting HVSs from their orbital planes.  Thus the
236: expected signature of a IMBH in-spiral is a ring of HVSs around the sky
237: \citep{gualandris05, levin06, sesana06}.  \citet{baumgardt06} argue, however, that
238: stellar interactions perturb the orbital plane of an in-spiraling IMBH; the
239: resulting HVS distribution in this scenario may in fact be isotropic.  Moreover, a
240: single IMBH in-spiral event happens on timescales 10-100$\times$ shorter than the
241: observed span of HVS travel times; multiple IMBH in-spiral events are required to
242: explain the observed HVSs.
243: 
244: \vskip 2pt
245: 
246: \noindent {\it Galactic Center Structure.} The Galactic center contains many
247: well-defined structures.  As illustrated in \citet{paumard06}, the molecular gas
248: circum-nuclear disk and the ionized northern arm are roughly aligned with the plane
249: of the Milky Way.  The gaseous minispiral is perpendicular to the plane of the Milky
250: Way.  Notably, the stellar disk 0.1 pc from the MBH is roughly perpendicular to the
251: gaseous components \citep{lu08}.
252: 	The stellar disk contains massive stars \citep{tanner06, paumard06},
253: possibly formed in-situ from a gas accretion disk \citep{genzel03, levin03}.  
254: Dynamical interactions between a pair of stellar disks may scatter stars in towards
255: the MBH, explaining both the S-stars and the HVSs \citep{lockmann08b, perets08c}.  
256: Clearly, the Galactic center contains non-isotropic distributions of stars and gas
257: which may provide a natural source for the observed anisotropy of HVSs ejected from
258: the Galactic center.  However, it is unclear if the observed structures can persist
259: long enough to explain the anisotropic distribution of HVSs.
260: 
261: %\noindent {\it Galactic Potential.} The Galactic potential maps the initial HVS
262: %ejection velocities from the Galactic center to the final velocities observed in 
263: %the outer halo.  HVSs ejected at the highest velocities escape the Galaxy while 
264: %lower velocity ejections remain bound.  Because many HVSs are marginally unbound, 
265: %an anisotropic potential can lead to an observed anisotropic spatial distribution 
266: %of HVSs.  NOW IN SEPARATE PAPER PER THE REFEREE.
267: 
268: 
269: \section{CONCLUSION}
270: 
271: 	Unbound HVSs are spatially anisotropic at the 3-$\sigma$ level.  The 
272: anisotropy is most significant in Galactic longitude, and not in latitude.
273: Lower velocity HVSs are systematically more isotropic, and apparent close
274: pairs of HVSs are physically unrelated.  
275: 
276: 	The observed distribution of HVSs is linked to the origin of the HVSs.  
277: \citet{abadi08} propose a tidal debris explanation, although this appears difficult
278: to reconcile with all the observations.  We investigate other physical models for
279: the anisotropy in a separate paper.  In the future, measuring the distribution of
280: bound and unbound HVSs over the southern sky will allow us to better constrain the
281: anisotropy and the origin of HVSs.
282: 
283: 
284: \acknowledgements
285: 
286: 	This work is based on observations obtained at the MMT Observatory, a joint
287: facility of the Smithsonian Institution and the University of Arizona.  This
288: research makes use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services.  We
289: thank the anonymous referee and Oleg Gnedin for helpful comments.  This work was
290: supported by the Smithsonian Institution.
291: 
292: {\it Facilities:} {MMT (Blue Channel Spectrograph)}
293: 
294: 
295: 	% REFERENCES
296: %\clearpage
297: %\bibliographystyle{/home/wbrown/lib/apj} \bibliography{/home/wbrown/text/RefHS} 
298: \begin{thebibliography}{45}
299: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
300: 
301: \bibitem[{{Abadi} {et~al.}(2008){Abadi}, {Navarro}, \& {Steinmetz}}]{abadi08}
302: {Abadi}, M.~G., {Navarro}, J.~F., \& {Steinmetz}, M. 2008, \apj, submitted
303: 
304: \bibitem[{{Baumgardt} {et~al.}(2006){Baumgardt}, {Gualandris}, \& {Portegies
305:   Zwart}}]{baumgardt06}
306: {Baumgardt}, H., {Gualandris}, A., \& {Portegies Zwart}, S. 2006, \mnras, 372,
307:   174
308: 
309: \bibitem[{{Bonanos} {et~al.}(2008){Bonanos}, {L{\'o}pez-Morales}, {Hunter}, \&
310:   {Ryans}}]{bonanos08}
311: {Bonanos}, A.~Z., {L{\'o}pez-Morales}, M., {Hunter}, I., \& {Ryans}, R.~S.~I.
312:   2008, \apjl, 675, L77
313: 
314: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2008){Brown}, {Geller}, \& {Kenyon}}]{brown08c}
315: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., \& {Kenyon}, S.~J. 2008, \apj, accepted
316: 
317: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2005){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, \&
318:   {Kurtz}}]{brown05}
319: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., {Kenyon}, S.~J., \& {Kurtz}, M.~J. 2005,
320:   \apjl, 622, L33
321: 
322: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2006{\natexlab{a}}){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, \&
323:   {Kurtz}}]{brown06}
324: ---. 2006{\natexlab{a}}, \apjl, 640, L35
325: 
326: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2006{\natexlab{b}}){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, \&
327:   {Kurtz}}]{brown06b}
328: ---. 2006{\natexlab{b}}, \apj, 647, 303
329: 
330: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2007{\natexlab{a}}){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon},
331:   {Kurtz}, \& {Bromley}}]{brown07a}
332: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., {Kenyon}, S.~J., {Kurtz}, M.~J., \& {Bromley},
333:   B.~C. 2007{\natexlab{a}}, \apj, 660, 311
334: 
335: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2007{\natexlab{b}}){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon},
336:   {Kurtz}, \& {Bromley}}]{brown07b}
337: ---. 2007{\natexlab{b}}, \apj, 671, 1708
338: 
339: \bibitem[{{Davies} {et~al.}(2002){Davies}, {King}, \& {Ritter}}]{davies02}
340: {Davies}, M.~B., {King}, A., \& {Ritter}, H. 2002, \mnras, 333, 463
341: 
342: \bibitem[{{Dehnen} \& {Binney}(1998)}]{dehnen98}
343: {Dehnen}, W. \& {Binney}, J.~J. 1998, \mnras, 298, 387
344: 
345: \bibitem[{{Edelmann} {et~al.}(2005){Edelmann}, {Napiwotzki}, {Heber},
346:   {Christlieb}, \& {Reimers}}]{edelmann05}
347: {Edelmann}, H., {Napiwotzki}, R., {Heber}, U., {Christlieb}, N., \& {Reimers},
348:   D. 2005, \apjl, 634, L181
349: 
350: \bibitem[{{Eisenhauer} {et~al.}(2005)}]{eisenhauer05}
351: {Eisenhauer}, F. {et~al.} 2005, \apj, 628, 246
352: 
353: \bibitem[{{Fuentes} {et~al.}(2006){Fuentes}, {Stanek}, {Gaudi}, {McLeod},
354:   {Bogdanov}, {Hartman}, {Hickox}, \& {Holman}}]{fuentes06}
355: {Fuentes}, C.~I., {Stanek}, K.~Z., {Gaudi}, B.~S., {McLeod}, B.~A., {Bogdanov},
356:   S., {Hartman}, J.~D., {Hickox}, R.~C., \& {Holman}, M.~J. 2006, \apjl, 636,
357:   L37
358: 
359: \bibitem[{{Genzel} {et~al.}(2003)}]{genzel03}
360: {Genzel}, R. {et~al.} 2003, \apj, 594, 812
361: 
362: \bibitem[{{Ghez} {et~al.}(2003)}]{ghez03}
363: {Ghez}, A.~M. {et~al.} 2003, \apjl, 586, L127
364: 
365: \bibitem[{{Gualandris} {et~al.}(2005){Gualandris}, {Portegies Zwart}, \&
366:   {Sipior}}]{gualandris05}
367: {Gualandris}, A., {Portegies Zwart}, S.~P., \& {Sipior}, M.~S. 2005, \mnras,
368:   363, 223
369: 
370: \bibitem[{{Heber} {et~al.}(2008){Heber}, {Edelmann}, {Napiwotzki}, {Altmann},
371:   \& {Scholz}}]{heber08}
372: {Heber}, U., {Edelmann}, H., {Napiwotzki}, R., {Altmann}, M., \& {Scholz},
373:   R.-D. 2008, \aap, 483, L21
374: 
375: \bibitem[{{Hills}(1988)}]{hills88}
376: {Hills}, J.~G. 1988, \nat, 331, 687
377: 
378: \bibitem[{{Hirsch} {et~al.}(2005){Hirsch}, {Heber}, {O'Toole}, \&
379:   {Bresolin}}]{hirsch05}
380: {Hirsch}, H.~A., {Heber}, U., {O'Toole}, S.~J., \& {Bresolin}, F. 2005, \aap,
381:   444, L61
382: 
383: \bibitem[{{Ibata} {et~al.}(1994){Ibata}, {Gilmore}, \& {Irwin}}]{ibata94}
384: {Ibata}, R.~A., {Gilmore}, G., \& {Irwin}, M.~J. 1994, \nat, 370, 194
385: 
386: \bibitem[{{Kenyon} {et~al.}(2008){Kenyon}, {Bromley}, {Geller}, \&
387:   {Brown}}]{kenyon08}
388: {Kenyon}, S.~J., {Bromley}, B.~C., {Geller}, M.~J., \& {Brown}, W.~R. 2008,
389:   \apj, 680, 312
390: 
391: \bibitem[{{Landy} \& {Szalay}(1993)}]{landy93}
392: {Landy}, S.~D. \& {Szalay}, A.~S. 1993, \apj, 412, 64
393: 
394: \bibitem[{{Leonard}(1991)}]{leonard91}
395: {Leonard}, P.~J.~T. 1991, \aj, 101, 562
396: 
397: \bibitem[{{Leonard}(1993)}]{leonard93}
398: {Leonard}, P.~J.~T. 1993, in ASP Conf.\ Ser.\ 45, Luminous High-Latitude Stars,
399:   ed. D.~Sasselov, 360
400: 
401: \bibitem[{{Leonard} \& {Duncan}(1988)}]{leonard88}
402: {Leonard}, P.~J.~T. \& {Duncan}, M.~J. 1988, \aj, 96, 222
403: 
404: \bibitem[{{Leonard} \& {Duncan}(1990)}]{leonard90}
405: ---. 1990, \aj, 99, 608
406: 
407: \bibitem[{{Levin}(2006)}]{levin06}
408: {Levin}, Y. 2006, \apj, 653, 1203
409: 
410: \bibitem[{{Levin} \& {Beloborodov}(2003)}]{levin03}
411: {Levin}, Y. \& {Beloborodov}, A.~M. 2003, \apjl, 590, L33
412: 
413: \bibitem[{{L{\"o}ckmann} {et~al.}(2008){L{\"o}ckmann}, {Baumgardt}, \&
414:   {Kroupa}}]{lockmann08b}
415: {L{\"o}ckmann}, U., {Baumgardt}, H., \& {Kroupa}, P. 2008, \apjl, 683, L151
416: 
417: \bibitem[{{L{\'o}pez-Morales} \& {Bonanos}(2008)}]{lopezmorales08}
418: {L{\'o}pez-Morales}, M. \& {Bonanos}, A.~Z. 2008, \apjl, 685, L47
419: 
420: \bibitem[{{Lu} {et~al.}(2008){Lu}, {Ghez}, {Hornstein}, {Morris}, {Becklin}, \&
421:   {Matthews}}]{lu08}
422: {Lu}, J.~R., {Ghez}, A.~M., {Hornstein}, S.~D., {Morris}, M.~R., {Becklin},
423:   E.~E., \& {Matthews}, K. 2008, \apj, accepted
424: 
425: \bibitem[{{Martin}(2006)}]{martin06}
426: {Martin}, J.~C. 2006, \aj, 131, 3047
427: 
428: \bibitem[{{Martins} {et~al.}(2008){Martins}, {Gillessen}, {Eisenhauer},
429:   {Genzel}, {Ott}, \& {Trippe}}]{martins08}
430: {Martins}, F., {Gillessen}, S., {Eisenhauer}, F., {Genzel}, R., {Ott}, T., \&
431:   {Trippe}, S. 2008, \apjl, 672, L119
432: 
433: \bibitem[{{Metz} {et~al.}(2008){Metz}, {Kroupa}, \& {Libeskind}}]{metz08}
434: {Metz}, M., {Kroupa}, P., \& {Libeskind}, N.~I. 2008, \apj, 680, 287
435: 
436: \bibitem[{{Paumard} {et~al.}(2006)}]{paumard06}
437: {Paumard}, T. {et~al.} 2006, \apj, 643, 1011
438: 
439: \bibitem[{{Perets} {et~al.}(2008){Perets}, {Gualandris}, {Merritt}, \&
440:   {Alexander}}]{perets08c}
441: {Perets}, H.~B., {Gualandris}, A., {Merritt}, D., \& {Alexander}, T. 2008,
442:   astro-ph/0807.2340
443: 
444: \bibitem[{{Portegies Zwart}(2000)}]{portegies00}
445: {Portegies Zwart}, S.~F. 2000, \apj, 544, 437
446: 
447: \bibitem[{{Przybilla} {et~al.}(2008{\natexlab{a}}){Przybilla}, {Nieva},
448:   {Heber}, \& {Butler}}]{przybilla08c}
449: {Przybilla}, N., {Nieva}, M.~F., {Heber}, U., \& {Butler}, K.
450:   2008{\natexlab{a}}, \apjl, 684, L103
451: 
452: \bibitem[{{Przybilla} {et~al.}(2008{\natexlab{b}}){Przybilla}, {Nieva},
453:   {Heber}, {Firnstein}, {Butler}, {Napiwotzki}, \& {Edelmann}}]{przybilla08}
454: {Przybilla}, N., {Nieva}, M.~F., {Heber}, U., {Firnstein}, M., {Butler}, K.,
455:   {Napiwotzki}, R., \& {Edelmann}, H. 2008{\natexlab{b}}, \aap, 480, L37
456: 
457: \bibitem[{{Przybilla} {et~al.}(2008{\natexlab{c}}){Przybilla}, {Nieva},
458:   {Tillich}, {Heber}, {Butler}, \& {Brown}}]{przybilla08b}
459: {Przybilla}, N., {Nieva}, M.~F., {Tillich}, A., {Heber}, U., {Butler}, K., \&
460:   {Brown}, W.~R. 2008{\natexlab{c}}, \aap, 488, L51
461: 
462: \bibitem[{{Reid} \& {Brunthaler}(2004)}]{reid04}
463: {Reid}, M.~J. \& {Brunthaler}, A. 2004, \apj, 616, 872
464: 
465: \bibitem[{{Sesana} {et~al.}(2006){Sesana}, {Haardt}, \& {Madau}}]{sesana06}
466: {Sesana}, A., {Haardt}, F., \& {Madau}, P. 2006, \apj, 651, 392
467: 
468: \bibitem[{{Tanner} {et~al.}(2006)}]{tanner06}
469: {Tanner}, A. {et~al.} 2006, \apj, 641, 891
470: 
471: \bibitem[{{Xue} {et~al.}(2008)}]{xue08}
472: {Xue}, X. {et~al.} 2008, \apj, 684, 1143
473: 
474: \end{thebibliography}
475: 
476: 	% FIGURES
477: %\clearpage
478: 
479: \end{document}
480: