1: %\documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
2: %\documentstyle[aasms4]{aastex}
3: %\documentstyle[/home/warning/lah/TEX/stylefiles/emulateapj,times]{article}
4: \documentstyle[emulateapj,times]{article}
5:
6: \widowpenalty 10000
7: \clubpenalty 10000
8:
9: %\received{}
10: %\accepted{}
11: %\journalid{}{}
12: %\articleid{}{}
13: %\shortauthors{Skrutskie, Hillenbrand, Carpenter}
14: %\shorttitle{BN is Periodic}
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \def\insertplot#1#2#3#4#5#6#7{
19: \vskip 10pt\nobreak\hbox to \hsize{\hss\dimen0=#3in\hbox to #6\dimen0{%
20: \dimen0=#2in\vbox to #6\dimen0{\vss
21: \special{ps::[begin]
22: /PGPLOT save def /showpage {} def
23: initmatrix
24: currentpoint translate
25: #6 dup scale
26: #7 1 eq {-90 rotate -8.15 72 mul -0.25 72 mul translate} if
27: #4 72 mul neg #5 72 mul neg translate
28: }
29: \special{ps: plotfile #1}
30: \special{ps::[end]
31: PGPLOT restore
32: }
33: }\hss}\hss}\vskip 10pt}
34:
35: \slugcomment{\centerline{\bf \hfil accepted by ApJL; 10/24/00}}
36:
37: \title{Periodic Photometric Variability in the Becklin-Neugebauer Object}
38:
39: \author{Lynne A. Hillenbrand and John M. Carpenter}
40: \affil{California Institute of Technology,
41: Department of Astronomy, MS 105-24, \\ Pasadena, CA 91125;
42: email: lah@astro.caltech.edu, jmc@astro.caltech.edu}
43:
44: \author{M.F. Skrutskie}
45: \affil{University of Massachusetts, Department of Astronomy, \\
46: Amherst, MA 01003; email: skrutski@north.astro.umass.edu}
47:
48:
49: \begin{abstract}
50:
51: The Becklin-Neugebauer (BN) object in the Orion Nebula Cluster (ONC)
52: is a well-studied optically invisible, infrared-bright young stellar
53: object, thought to be an intermediate-mass protostar.
54: We report here that BN exhibited nearly-sinusoidal periodic variability
55: at the near-infrared H- and K$_s$-bands during a one month observing campaign
56: in 2000 March/April. The period was 8.28 days and the peak-to-peak amplitude
57: $\sim$0.2 mag. Plausible mechanisms for producing the observed variability
58: characteristics are explored.
59: %with rotational modulation of the lightcurve emerging as a preferred explanation.
60:
61: \end{abstract}
62:
63: \keywords{infrared: stars --- stars: individual (BN) --- stars: pre-main sequence --- stars: variables -\clearpage}
64:
65: \section{Introduction}
66:
67: The BN object was revealed during early raster scanning of the Orion Nebula
68: region at 2$\micron$, and immediately recognized as
69: a candidate protostellar object (Becklin \& Neugebauer 1967).
70: BN is the brightest at near-infrared wavelengths of a group
71: of $\sim$20 intermediate- and high-mass young stars and protostars in OMC-1.
72: These objects were discovered at mid-infrared (Rieke, Low, \& Kleinman 1973;
73: Downes et al. 1981; Lonsdale et al. 1982; Dougados et al. 1993;
74: Gezari, Backman, \& Werner 1998), radio (Churchwell et al. 1987; Felli et al. 1993;
75: Menten \& Reid 1995), and x-ray (Garmire et al. 2000) wavelengths.
76: The total luminosity emanating from the embedded cluster
77: is $\sim$10$^5 L_{\odot}$. In addition to its luminous
78: point sources, the BN region is also notable as the source of the spectacular
79: H$_2$ ``fingers'' or ``bullets'' (Allen \& Burton 1993) which extend
80: several arcminutes to the northwest and southeast.
81:
82: BN itself is extinguished by A$_V$ = 17 mag and has luminosity
83: 2500 L$_{\odot}$ (Gezari et al.) corresponding to
84: a main sequence B3-B4 star. It was the first of a still small class
85: of young, mostly luminous, stars with the 2$\micron$ CO bandheads in emission
86: (Scoville et al. 1979, 1983). These $\Delta\nu$=2 transitions are thought to
87: arise from collisional or shock excitation in a hot, dense region,
88: perhaps the inner part of a circumstellar disk or wind.
89: BN also has relatively strong H$_2$ (Scoville et al. 1983) and weak
90: Hu, Pf, and Br hydrogen recombination lines (e.g. Bunn, Hoare, \& Drew 1995).
91: Broad absorptions at
92: 3.3$\micron$ and 10$\micron$ are due to circumstellar ice and dust
93: (Gillett \& Forrest 1973).
94:
95: \section{Photometric Monitoring Observations}
96:
97: Time series photometry at J, H, and K$_s$
98: %photometric system %(Carpenter 2001)
99: was acquired using the 2MASS southern telescope at Cerro Tololo
100: during gaps in right ascension not otherwise utilized near
101: completion of the 2MASS survey.
102: As described in Carpenter, Hillenbrand \& Skrutskie (2001), 29 sets of
103: photometry were obtained over an area
104: $<\sim0.84^\circ\times6.0^\circ$
105: centered on the Trapezium region of the ONC.
106: Observations were conducted on nearly
107: a nightly basis between 2000, March 4 and April 8 with BN
108: observed on 28 of these nights.
109: In addition to these specially scheduled observations,
110: BN was observed twice during normal
111: 2MASS survey operations on 1998, March 19 and 2000, February 6.
112:
113: As detailed in the 2MASS Explanatory Supplement (Cutri et al. 2000),
114: the image data consist of doubly-correlated
115: differences of two NICMOS readouts separated by the 1.3s
116: frame integration time. The first readout occurs
117: 51ms after reset and independently provides a short
118: integration to recover unsaturated images of bright
119: (5-9 mag) stars. Each position on the sky is observed 6 times
120: in this manner as the telescope scans in declination.
121: For BN, the photometric measurements at K$_s$-band are derived from the 51ms
122: integrations since the source saturates in the 1.3s images.
123: Magnitudes are obtained
124: using aperture photometry with an aperture radius of 4$''$ and a sky annulus
125: extending radially from 24$''$-30$''$. The final magnitude is the mean of the
126: six aperture magnitudes, and the photometric uncertainty is the standard
127: deviation of the mean of the six measurements. At H-band, BN is faint enough
128: that the magnitudes normally would be estimated with Point
129: Spread Function (PSF) fitting on the 1.3s images. However,
130: since BN is located on an extended plateau of bright nebulosity,
131: the PSF fit converged for only 1 of the 28 sets of
132: observations. Therefore, we report aperture magnitudes at H-band as well,
133: computed with an aperture radius of 4$''$ and a sky annulus
134: extending radially from 14$''$-20$''$. BN was not measured reliably at J-band.
135:
136: Except for the time series aspect, the dataset, as produced by IPAC,
137: is identical in format to that produced for the 2MASS survey itself,
138: containing position, photometry, photometry error, and photometric quality
139: flags. To improve the photometric accuracy within the time series data
140: a grid of bright, isolated stars with low night-to-night variations
141: was defined over the full $\sim0.84^\circ\times6.0^\circ$ survey region and
142: used as internal standards to adjust the nominal
143: 2MASS calibration zero points on a nightly basis. Typical zero point
144: corrections were $<$ 0.015 mag. The details of this procedure and all other
145: processing and analysis steps are described in Carpenter et al.
146: %The BN object is star 8470 in that study.
147:
148:
149: \section{Variability Characteristics of BN}
150:
151: \begin{figure*}[tbp]
152: %\epsscale{0.8}
153: %\plotone{fig1.ps}
154: \insertplot{fig1.ps}{7.8}{8.4}{0.0}{0.8}{0.5}{0}
155: %\epsscale{1.00}
156: \caption{
157: Lightcurves in K$_s$-band, H-band, and H-K$_s$ color for BN
158: as seen by the 2MASS southern telescope in 2000 March/April.
159: Dotted line is the mean magnitude over this time interval. The first
160: two data points were taken during normal 2MASS survey operations
161: and are disjoint from the rest of the data stream.
162: }
163: \label{fig:fig1}
164: \end{figure*}
165:
166: For all of our $\sim$18,000 point sources, we looked
167: for photometric variability by comparing the observed
168: brightness changes in time to those expected according to the formal
169: photometric uncertainties. To quantify the likelihood that variability
170: occurred within the timespan of the observations
171: we employed both a $\chi^2$ technique and
172: a method developed by Welch \& Stetson (1993) and Stetson (1996)
173: which looks for correlated variability between multiple photometric bands.
174:
175: The BN measurements exhibited $\chi{_\nu}^2(K{_s})$ = 21, $\chi{_\nu}^2(H)$ = 13,
176: and a Stetson-J variability index of 3.1
177: (where we have considered values of $\chi_\nu^2 > 1.5$ and Stetson-J $>$ 0.55
178: in Carpenter et al. to identify variables). Lightcurves
179: appear in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1} and the data in Table 1.
180: The mean magnitudes of BN during the 2000 March/April time period were
181: H = 8.87 and K$_s$ = 5.04. The error-weighted root-mean-squared
182: of the measurements, which are proportional to the variability amplitudes,
183: were 0.06 mag at H and 0.04 mag at K$_s$ compared to typical photometric
184: uncertainties of $<$0.02 mag. The observed peak-to-peak amplitudes,
185: neglecting errors in the photometry,
186: were 0.26 at H, 0.17 at K$_s$, and 0.13 at H-K$_s$.
187:
188: \begin{figure*}[tbp]
189: %\epsscale{0.8}
190: %\plotone{fig2.ps}
191: \insertplot{fig2.ps}{7.8}{8.4}{0.0}{0.8}{0.5}{0}
192: %\epsscale{1.00}
193: \caption{
194: Periodogram for H- and K$_s$-band data. The most significant peak at 8.28 days
195: has a false alarm probability in the Lomb-Scargle formalism of $<$0.1\%.
196: }
197: \label{fig:fig2}
198: \end{figure*}
199:
200: For BN the lightcurve is clearly periodic, and application of the
201: Lomb-Scargle algorithm from Press et al. (1992) yields a period of
202: 8.28 days at both H and K$_s$ (analyzed separately)
203: with false alarm probabilities (FAP) of $<$0.1\%.
204: The error in this period according to the Kovacs (1981) formula for frequency
205: shifts in fourier analyses, is 0.05 days.
206: We show the periodograms in Figure~\ref{fig:fig2} and the phased lightcurves
207: in Figure~\ref{fig:fig3}. The H-K$_s$ color may also be periodic with the
208: same oscillation as the H and K$_s$ fluxes; however,
209: this period is not significant
210: (FAP = 38\%). Color variations are such that H-K$_s$ is redder
211: when the star is fainter, in the proportions expected from a standard
212: extinction law.
213:
214: Returning to Figure~\ref{fig:fig1}, in addition to the periodicity,
215: there is a brightening of the magnitudes by $\sim$0.1 mag at H and
216: $\sim$0.05 mag at K$_s$ over the first three cycles of the period which is
217: more apparent once the sinusoidal behavior is subtracted. Yet the faintest
218: point at the end of the third cycle and the last two points in the data stream
219: at the end of the fourth cycle are all too faint to support that this
220: apparent rise is a long term behavior.
221: Further, the 2000 February and 1998 March flux levels indicate that
222: this recent brightening trend did not originate much before the beginning
223: of the 2000 March/April time series.
224:
225: \begin{figure*}[tbp]
226: %\epsscale{0.8}
227: %\plotone{fig3.ps}
228: \insertplot{fig3.ps}{7.8}{8.4}{0.0}{1.0}{0.48}{0}
229: %\epsscale{1.0}
230: \caption{
231: K$_s$-band, H-band, and H-K$_s$ lightcurves phased with a period
232: of 8.28 days. Two full phases are shown.
233: }
234: \label{fig:fig3}
235: \end{figure*}
236:
237: \section{Interpretation and Discussion}
238:
239: Given the protostellar nature of BN, it is worth considering the physical
240: origin of the 1.6-2.2$\mu$m flux
241: (the shortest wavelengths at which BN has been detected).
242: Assuming the B3-B4 spectral type and 17 mag of visual extinction
243: from Gezari et al., the H-band magnitude matches within a few tenths
244: that predicted for a reddened stellar photosphere.
245: We take this as minor evidence that the H-band photometric variability
246: may arise close to the photosphere. At K$_s$-band, however, the (de-reddened)
247: magnitude is almost 4 mag above the predicted photosphere. The hot
248: dust and/or gas producing the 2.2$\mu$m excess must subtend an area
249: larger than that predicted by a standard blackbody disk
250: or shell model since all close-in grains are destroyed by stellar heating.
251: Accretional heating is one way to do this. That the K$_s$-band magnitude is
252: dominated by circumstellar flux suggests, alternately, that the variability may
253: occur in the dust envelope. Despite these differences between
254: H and K$_s$ in the ratio of non-photospheric to photospheric flux,
255: the observed periods are the same with the ratio of period amplitudes
256: consistent with reddening.
257:
258: Periodic variable stars
259: have been studied optically in the ONC region
260: by Herbst et al. (2000, and references therein), Stassun et al. (1999), and
261: Rebull (2001). Almost all stars identified as periodic in these unbiased
262: studies have been low mass, $<2 M_\odot$. Only one
263: periodic variable earlier than mid-G has been found, JW660 with a mid-B
264: spectral type and a mass $\sim 6 M_\odot$ (Hillenbrand 1997).
265: The period of 6.15 days reported by Mandel \& Herbst (1991) has,
266: perhaps notably, not been found again
267: in subsequent observing seasons (Herbst et al. 2000).
268: BN, by contrast, is a B3-B4 star with a mass $\sim 6-8 M_\odot$ (and a maximum
269: mass of 20 M$_\odot$ if the B0 spectral type inferred from HII region
270: characteristics is adopted). It is the most massive periodic variable
271: detected thus far in the Orion region. The next brightest stars
272: having significant periods in Carpenter et al. are $>$2.2 mag
273: fainter at K$_s$ with spectral types K0 and later.
274:
275: BN's periodic variability could be due to a number of well-recognized
276: phenomena, although none of the following explanations
277: seems totally satisfactory.
278:
279: Periodic variability in young stars is usually interpreted in terms of
280: long-lived nonuniformities in photospheric structure, i.e. spots that are either
281: cooler or hotter the stellar effective temperature. These spots
282: rotate with the star and modulate the lightcurve as they pass through
283: the line of sight of the observer.
284: Interpreted as stellar rotation, the 8.28 day period implies an equatorial
285: velocity of $\sim$30 kms$^{-1}$ which is on the slow tail
286: for rotation of intermediate- and high-mass young stars
287: in the ONC (Wolff, Strom, \& Hillenbrand 2001). It is not generally
288: accepted that massive stars like BN have the surface magnetic structures
289: required for production of cool spots. However, given that BN is
290: a protostar, accretion may produce surface shocks perhaps also requiring
291: magnetic fields in the form of ordered magnetic dipoles which lead to
292: hot spots as material from the circumstellar environment falls in along them.
293:
294: Considered independently,
295: the variability amplitudes at H and K$_s$ can be well-modelled by spots
296: with $\Delta$T$\approx$15,000 K from the photosphere and $\sim$15-20\%
297: coverage, or $\Delta$T$\approx$5,000 K and $\sim$50\% coverage, as examples.
298: However, neither cool nor hot spots are capable of producing the small
299: H-K$_s$ color amplitude since the effect of adding a spot
300: is essentially colorless in the near-infrared given the early B photosphere
301: ($<$0.02 mag for $\Delta$T$<$20,000 K and coverage $<$50\%).
302: If spot-modulated rotation is the cause of the observed photometric
303: periodicity, the phase and the amplitude both should change
304: on timescales of months to years as the spot structure varies.
305: Although the 2000 February data point
306: phases well with the period derived for the 2000 March/April time series,
307: the 1998 March data point does not; however, this could be due simply
308: to accumulation of period error over the longer time baseline.
309:
310: %We now consider that the periodic behavior of BN may have an origin
311: %other than rotational modulation of the lightcurve.
312:
313: Pulsating behavior leads to short periods (0.1-0.3 day) in radial modes
314: and to only slightly longer periods ($<$1 day) in non-radial modes
315: (e.g. $\beta$Cep stars in the
316: early B range and 53 Per type stars and others at late B types).
317: %There are various theories for the physics
318: %behind pulsating behavior on these timescales (e.g. opacity fluctuations, the
319: %coupling of convective modes with envelope g-modes, etc.) and the
320: %periods are known to be stable on timescales up to decades.
321: Both the amplitude
322: and the near-sinusoidal shape of BN's lightcurve are consistent with certain
323: types of pulsational behavior, but the period is too long.
324: Longer period variability ($\sim$2-30 days) in massive stars is often explained
325: in terms of winds, with some mechanisms requiring binary systems.
326: The radio spectral index of BN is $\alpha=0.8\pm0.2$ from 2-6 cm
327: (Felli et al. 1993), consistent with thermal emission from an
328: ionized stellar wind.
329: %No evidence for radio continuum variability
330: %was found at the 20\% level of measurement accuracy.
331:
332: The observed period and mass estimate for BN imply an orbital radius
333: of $\sim$0.15 AU for any hypothetical low-mass companion.
334: If an outflow/wind from a companion was colliding with
335: the outflow/wind from BN, pulsating behavior within the interaction
336: region might be identified via
337: x-rays (e.g. Ishibashi et al. 2000 for Eta Car). BN was seen in heavily
338: absorbed x-rays by Chandra (Garmire et al. 2000). However, the Chandra
339: position was 1.1" northwest ($\sim$500 AU) of the near-infrared position,
340: whereas all other x-ray/optical-infrared matches were within 0.5".
341: Garmire et al. attribute the offset, if real, to physics associated
342: with outflow phenomena interacting with stationary, dense cloud material;
343: no binary system is required.
344: %Unfortunately an x-ray
345: %lightcurve exists over only $\sim$5\% of the infrared period.
346:
347: Another scenario to consider is an eclipsing binary.
348: BN's lightcurve does not seem consistent with
349: a fully eclipsing system given its low amplitude and nearly sinusoidal nature.
350: A partial eclipse situation with a near-equal mass/size companion,
351: a small orbital separation ($\sim$10 R$_*$), and a reasonable inclination
352: ($\sim40^\circ$) would match the gross shape, period, and amplitude
353: of the phased lightcurves.
354: In the near-equal mass situation, the true orbital period would be double
355: that derived naively from observations since a single revolution
356: produces two minima and two maxima. However, eclipses should exhibit
357: the same amplitude in all bands (modulo limb darkening), which is not
358: what is observed for BN unless the companion has the same radius but the colors
359: of a much cooler star. Interestingly, Scoville et al. (1983) and others have
360: suggested the possibility of wide binarity for BN to explain its large
361: radial velocity relative to other ONC stars and to the ambient cloud.
362: %however, the inferred period is $>$30 years, much longer than that found here.
363:
364: A further possibility is periodic occultation by asymmetry
365: in a circumstellar disk at the 0.15 AU orbital radius implied by the period.
366: High column density, partially grey, orbiting material could produce
367: the shape of the lightcurve as well as the color and magnitude amplitudes.
368: It is interesting in this context to note that
369: Biscaya et al. (1997) claimed time variability in BN's 2$\mu$m CO bandhead
370: emission lines, and that no emission is present in the spectrum of
371: Penston et al. (1971). The CO lines are formed in the dense, hot circumstellar
372: environment and their time variability may have the same
373: physical origin as the continuum variability found by us.
374:
375: %Biscaya et al. (1997) claimed that the CO bandhead is time variable in BN,
376: %reporting an increase by a factor of 3 in equivalent width from spectra
377: %taken several years earlier and then a decrease by 50\%
378: %in a third spectrum taken a few months later. Scoville et al. (1979)
379: %presented spectra obtained on three different nights with some hints
380: %of variations (though they do not obviously exceed the signal-to-noise).
381: %No emission is present in the 2.0-2.45$\micron$ spectrum of Penston et al. (1971).
382: %%Is there any connection between the near-infrared continuum variability observed
383: %%here and the 2$\micron$ CO emission strength variability?
384: %Although it is
385: %not known whether the CO emission, or the near-infrared recombination lines
386: %for that matter, vary with any periodicity, these lines are not strong enough
387: %in BN to affect the continuum flux level at $>$1\%. Furthermore, line emission
388: %variability in the K$_s$-band does not explain the H-band continuum variability.
389: %Nevertheless, an indirect but physical connection may exist between
390: %the continuum and any line variability.
391: %The most popular explanation for the origin of 2$\micron$ CO $\Delta\nu=2 emission is
392: %in the inner disk (e.g. Calvet et al 1991; Najita et al 1996) or inner wind (e.g. Carr 1989;
393: %Chandler et al 1993, 1995). An alternate explanation is that the CO emission
394: %originates in material infalling from the disk towards the star along magnetic
395: %accretion columns (e.g. Martin, 1997). Although not usually considered in the
396: %case of massive young stars, the magnetospheric accretion model for the CO emission
397: %has the attraction that it also predicts periodic photometric variability due to
398: %the rotation of magnetic hot spots across the surface of the star.
399:
400: Finally, we note that there may be historical precedent for photometric
401: variability in BN, as detailed in Table 2. One must be cautious
402: in interpreting this ensemble of early near-infrared measurements
403: as indicative of large scale flux variations, however. The
404: observational complexities of working in
405: the Orion region combined with a variety of aperture sizes
406: may explain entirely the apparent differences in photometry.
407:
408: \section{Summary}
409:
410: We have found photometric modulation in H- and K$_s$-band lightcurves for
411: BN consistent with periodic behavior. During 2000 March/April
412: the period was 8.28 days with a Lomb-Scargle
413: false alarm probability of $<$0.1\%. The amplitude of the nearly-sinusoidal
414: lightcurve was $\sim$0.2 mag peak-to-peak ($\sim$0.05 mag root-mean-squared).
415: The origin of the periodicity is not immediately
416: obvious. Modulation of the lightcurve due to rotation of inhomogeneities in
417: either the photosphere or the inner circumstellar dust distribution
418: is the least complicated model.
419: Further multiwavelength photometric as well as emission-line profile monitoring
420: can probe period persistence, phase stability, and physical origins for
421: the periodic behavior.
422:
423: \acknowledgements
424:
425: This publication makes use of data products from 2MASS,
426: which is funded by NASA and NSF and
427: is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and
428: the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center at Caltech.
429: Science data and information services were provided by IRSA at IPAC.
430: The authors would like to thank the 2MASS Observatory Staff
431: and Data Management Team for acquiring and pipeline processing
432: the special survey observations used in this investigation.
433: We thank Nick Scoville, Bill Herbst, Michael Meyer, and Roc Cutri
434: for comments on drafts of this manuscript. We also thank Gerry Neugebauer
435: for communicating previously unpublished data on BN.
436:
437: %This publication makes use of data products from
438: %the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS),
439: %which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and
440: %the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC), funded by the National
441: %Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Science Foundation
442: %(NSF).
443: %This publication makes use of the science data and information services
444: %provided by the Infrared Science Archive at the Infrared Processing and
445: %Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National
446: %Aeronautics and Space Administration.
447: %The authors would like to thank the 2MASS Observatory Staff
448: %and Data Management Team for acquiring and pipeline processing
449: %the special survey observations used in this investigation.
450: %We thank Nick Scoville, Bill Herbst, and Michael Meyer
451: %for comments on drafts of this manuscript. We also thank Gerry Neugebauer
452: %for communicating previously unpublished data on BN.
453:
454: \begin{references}
455: \reference{} Allen, D.A. \& Burton, M.G. 1993 Nature 363, 54
456: \reference{} Becklin, E.E. \& Neugebauer, G. 1967 ApJ 147, 799
457: \reference{} Biscaya, A.M., Rieke, G.H., Narayanan, G., Luhman, K.L. \& Young, E.T. 1997 ApJ 491, 359
458: \reference{} Bunn, J.C., Hoare, M.G. \& Drew, J.E. 1995 MNRAS 272, 346
459: %\reference{} Carpenter, J.M. 2001, submitted?
460: \reference{} Carpenter, J.M., Hillenbrand, L.A., \& Skrutskie, M.F. 2001, in preparation
461: \reference{} Churchwell, E., Felli, M., Wood, D.O.S., \& Massi, M. 1987 ApJ 321, 516
462: \reference{} Cutri, R., Skrutskie, M.F., Van Dyk, S. et al. 2000,
463: 2MASS Second Incremental Release Explanatory Supplement
464: \[http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/2mass/releases/docs.html\]
465: \reference{} Dougados, C., Lena, P., Ridgway, S.T., Christou, J.C., \& Probst, R.G. 1993, ApJ 406, 112
466: \reference{} Downes, D., Genzel, R., Becklin, E.E., \& Wynn-Williams, C.G. 1981, ApJ 244, 869
467: \reference{} Felli, M., Taylor, G.B., Catarzi, M., Churchwell, E., \& Kurtz, S. 1993 A\&AS 101. 127
468: \reference{} Garmire, G, Feigelson, E.D., Broos, P., Hillenbrand, L., Pravdo, S.H., Townsley, L.K., Tsuboi, Y. 2000 AJ 120, 1426
469: \reference{} Gezari, D.Y., Backman, D.E., \& Werner, M.W. 1998 ApJ 509, 283
470: \reference{} Gillett, F.C. \& Forrest, W.J. 1973, ApJ 179, 483
471: \reference{} Herbst, W., Rhode, K.L., Hillenbrand, L.A., \& Curran, G. 2000 AJ 119, 261
472: \reference{} Hillenbrand, L.A., 1997, AJ, 113, 1733
473: \reference{} Hillenbrand, L.A. \& Carpenter 2000, ApJ, 540, 236
474: \reference{} Hyland, A.R., Allen, D.A., Barnes, P.J., \& Ward, M.J. 1984, MNRAS 206, 465
475: \reference{} Kovacs, G. 1981 ApSS 78, 175
476: \reference{} Lonsdale, C.J., Becklin, E.E., Lee, T.J., \& Stewart, J.M. 1982 AJ 87, 1819
477: \reference{} Low, F.J., Johnson, H.L., Kleinmann, D.E., Latham, A.S., \& Geisel, S.L. 1970 ApJ 160, 531
478: \reference{} Mandel, G.N., \& Herbst, W. 1991, ApJL, 383, 75
479: \reference{} Menten, K.M. \& Reid, M.J. 1995 ApJ 445, 157
480: \reference{} Minchin, N.R., Hough, J.H., McCall, A., Burton, M.G., McCaughrean, M.J., Aspin, C., Bailey, J.A., Axon, D.J., \& Sato, S. 1991, MNRAS 248, 715
481: \reference{} Neugebauer, G. 2000, private communication
482: \reference{} Penston, M.V., Allen, D.A., \& Hyland, A.R. 1971 ApJL 170, 33
483: \reference{} Penston, M.V., 1973 ApJ 183, 505
484: %\reference{} Plambeck, R.L., Wright, M.C.H., Mundy, L.G., \& Looney, L.W. 1995 ApJ 455, 189
485: \reference{} Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., \& Flannery, B.P. 1992, Numerical Recipes in C Second Edition (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
486: \reference{} Rebull, L.M. 2001, ApJ submitted
487: \reference{} Rieke, G.H., Low, F.J., \& Kleinmann, D.E. 1973, ApJ 186, L7
488: \reference{} Scoville, N.Z., Hall, D.N.B., Kleinmann, S.G. \& Ridgway, S.T. 1979, ApJL 232, 121
489: \reference{} Scoville, N.Z., Kleinmann, S.G., Hall, D.N.B., \& Ridgway, S.T. 1983, ApJ 275, 201
490: \reference{} Stassun, K.G., Mathieu, R.D., Mazeh, T. \& Vrba, F.J. 1999 AJ 117, 2941
491: \reference{} Stetson, P.B. 1996 PASP 108, 851
492: \reference{} Welch, D.L. \& Stetson, P.B., 1993 AJ 105, 1813
493: \reference{} Wolff, S.C., Strom, S.E., \& Hillenbrand, L.A., in preparation
494: \end{references}
495:
496: \begin{table*}
497: \caption{Time Series Photometry for the BN Object}
498: \begin{tabular}{rrrrr}
499: \noalign{\smallskip}
500: \hline\hline
501: Julian Date & H & K$_s$ & err(H)& err(K$_s$) \\
502: & [mag] & [mag] & [mag] & [mag] \\
503: \hline
504: 2450891.509 & 8.949 &5.087 &0.028& 0.004 \\
505: 2451580.546 & 8.865 &5.094 &0.018& 0.011 \\
506: 2451607.526 & 8.892 &5.121 &0.023& 0.014 \\
507: 2451608.520 & 8.934 &5.111 &0.027& 0.010 \\
508: 2451609.520 & 8.936 &5.081 &0.026& 0.012 \\
509: 2451610.519 & 8.819 &5.017 &0.017& 0.003 \\
510: 2451612.553 & 8.813 &5.003 &0.027& 0.021 \\
511: 2451614.516 & 8.855 &5.017 &0.019& 0.010 \\
512: 2451615.515 & 8.904 &5.079 &0.022& 0.012 \\
513: 2451616.514 & 8.949 &5.103 &0.017& 0.012 \\
514: 2451617.514 & 8.943 &5.098 &0.017& 0.013 \\
515: 2451618.513 & 8.869 &5.040 &0.020& 0.021 \\
516: 2451619.511 & 8.837 &4.998 &0.021& 0.025 \\
517: 2451621.510 & 8.768 &4.996 &0.017& 0.009 \\
518: 2451622.512 & 8.818 &5.008 &0.026& 0.014 \\
519: 2451623.509 & 8.872 &5.039 &0.014& 0.020 \\
520: 2451624.507 & 8.886 &5.082 &0.022& 0.010 \\
521: 2451625.507 & 8.904 &5.084 &0.021& 0.013 \\
522: 2451626.506 & 8.891 &5.051 &0.019& 0.014 \\
523: 2451627.505 & 8.811 &5.015 &0.010& 0.017 \\
524: 2451628.499 & 8.757 &4.967 &0.020& 0.018 \\
525: 2451629.498 & 8.778 &4.956 &0.032& 0.016 \\
526: 2451630.498 & 8.778 &4.990 &0.017& 0.009 \\
527: 2451631.497 & 8.842 &5.062 &0.022& 0.011 \\
528: 2451633.491 & 8.947 &5.125 &0.022& 0.009 \\
529: 2451634.490 & 8.886 &5.060 &0.022& 0.011 \\
530: 2451635.489 & 8.850 &5.002 &0.009& 0.007 \\
531: 2451639.485 & 8.819 &4.996 &0.017& 0.007 \\
532: 2451640.480 & 8.906 &5.110 &0.020& 0.015 \\
533: 2451641.479 & 8.947 &5.114 &0.009& 0.013 \\
534: \hline
535: \hline
536: \end{tabular}
537: \end{table*}
538:
539: \begin{table*}
540: \caption{Historical Photometry for the BN Object}
541: \begin{tabular}{cccllcc}
542: \noalign{\smallskip}
543: \hline\hline
544: Reference &Observation Date &Aperture Size & H & K & err(H)& err(K)\\
545: & [UT] & [arcsec] &[mag] & [mag]&[mag] & [mag]\\
546: \hline
547: Becklin \& Neugebauer (1967) &1965, January&13 &9.8 &5.2 & ? & ? \\
548: Neugebauer (2000) &1968, September 15&?&9.19&4.88&0.10&0.07\\
549: Low et al. (1970) & ? &? &9.60&4.87 & ? & ? \\
550: Neugebauer (2000) &1969, December 8&? &8.57&4.72 &0.15&0.15\\
551: Penston (1973) &1971, March 9&15 &8.48&4.5 &0.13& ?\\
552: Neugebauer (2000) &1974, September 21&7&9.45&4.76&0.10&0.10\\
553: Lonsdale et al. (1982) &1980, February&3.5 &9.2 &5.1 &$<$0.3&$<$0.3\\
554: Neugebauer (2000) &1981, March 14&6&9.39&4.93&0.06&0.04\\
555: Hyland et al. (1984) &1982 or 1983 &4 &-- &5.5 &-- &$<$0.01\\
556: Minchin et al. (1991) &1988, January&6 &9.8 &5.4 &0.1&0.1\\
557: This Paper &1998, March 19&8 &8.95&5.09 &0.03&$<$0.01 \\
558: Hillenbrand \& Carpenter (2000)&1999, February 9&1.8&9.36&-- &$<$0.01&-- \\
559: This Paper, mean over time series&2000, March/April&8 &8.87&5.04 &$<$0.03 &$<$0.02 \\
560:
561: \hline
562: \hline
563: \end{tabular}
564: \end{table*}
565:
566: \clearpage
567:
568: %\begin{figure*}[tbp]
569: %%\epsscale{0.8}
570: %%\plotone{fig1.ps}
571: %%\epsscale{1.00}
572: %\caption{
573: %Lightcurves in K$_s$-band, H-band, and H-K$_s$ color for BN
574: %as seen by the 2MASS southern telescope in 2000 March/April.
575: %Dotted line is the mean magnitude over this time interval. The first
576: %two data points were taken during normal 2MASS survey operations
577: %and are disjoint from the rest of the data stream.
578: %}
579: %\label{fig:fig1}
580: %\end{figure*}
581: %
582: %\begin{figure*}[tbp]
583: %%\epsscale{0.8}
584: %%\plotone{fig2.ps}
585: %%\epsscale{1.00}
586: %\caption{
587: %Periodogram for H- and K$_s$-band data. The most significant peak at 8.28 days
588: %has a false alarm probability in the Lomb-Scargle formalism of $<$0.1\%.
589: %}
590: %\label{fig:fig2}
591: %\end{figure*}
592: %
593: %\begin{figure*}[tbp]
594: %%\plotone{fig3.ps}
595: %\caption{
596: %K$_s$-band, H-band, and H-K$_s$ lightcurves phased with a period
597: %of 8.28 days. Two full phases are shown.
598: %}
599: %\label{fig:fig3}
600: %\end{figure*}
601:
602:
603:
604: \end{document}
605: