1: \documentclass{article}

2: \oddsidemargin +0.5cm

3: \evensidemargin -2.mm

4: \topmargin=-2cm

5: \textheight 24.0cm

6: \textwidth 16.5cm

7: \usepackage{graphicx}

8: 

9: \begin{document}

10: \rm

11: \let\sc=\sf

12: 

13: \LARGE

14: \begin{center}

15: {\bf The Disk Wind in the Young Binaries and the Origin

16: of the Cyclic Activity of Young Stars}

17: 

18: \vspace{1cm}

19: 

20: \Large

21: {\bf V.P.\,Grinin$^{1,2,3}$, L.V.\,Tambovtseva$^1$, N.Ya.\,Sotnikova$^2$}

22: \end{center}

23: %

24: 

25: \vspace{5mm}

26: \large

27: 

28: 1 - Main Astronomical Observatory Pulkovo, 196140, St. Petersburg, Russia

29: 

30: 2 - The Sobolev Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg University, Russia

31: 

32: 3 - Crimean Astrophysical Observatory, Crimea, Nauchny, Ukraine\\

33: %

34: %

35: \\

36: \begin{abstract}

37: \large

38: \hspace{-5mm} We present results of numerical modeling of

39: the cyclic brightness modulation in the young binary systems with

40: the eccentric orbits and low-mass secondary components. It is

41: suggested that the system components accrete the matter from the

42: remnant of the protostellar cloud and, according to the current

43: models, the low-mass companion is the main accretor. Brightness

44: variations of the primary is due to the periodical extinction

45: variations on the line-of-sight caused by the disk wind of the

46: secondary and a common envelope it produces. A matter distribution

47: in the envelope has been calculated in the ballistic approach.

48: 

49: When calculating the optical effects due to the dust component of

50: the disk wind, we adopt the dust to gas mass ratio 1:100 as in the

51: interstellar medium and the optical parameters of the

52: circumstellar dust typical for the young stars. Calculations

53: showed that in the young binaries with the elliptic orbits

54: theoretical light curves demonstrated the more variety of shapes

55: comparing with the case of the circular orbits. In this case

56: parameters of the photometric minima (their depth, duration and

57: the shape of light curves) depend not only on the disk wind

58: parameters and an inclination of the binary orbit to the

59: line-of-sight but also on the longitude of the periastron. A

60: modulation of the scattered radiation of the common envelope with

61: a phase of the orbital period has been investigated in the single

62: scattering approach. It is shown that an amplitude of the

63: modulation is maximal when the system is seen edge-on and has also

64: a non-zero value in the binaries observed pole-on. Possible

65: applications of the theory to the young stellar objects are

66: discussed. In particular, an attention is payed to a resemblance

67: of the light curves in some models with light curves of the

68: objects suspected as candidates to FUORs.

69: 

70: \end{abstract}

71: 

72: \clearpage

73: \section{Introduction}

74: Photometric observations of the last years show that among young

75: stars one can find the eclipsing systems with a rather long

76: lasting eclipses. For example, in the binary system GW Ori (P =

77: 242$^d$, Mathieu et al. 1991) where the primary is a T Tauri star

78: (TTS), a duration of the eclipses is about 1/10 of the period

79: (Shevchenko et al. 1998). The duration of the eclipses of the weak

80: T Tauri star (WTTS) KH 15D (P = 48.36$^d$, Kearns and Herbst 1998;

81: Hamilton et al. 2001; Herbst et al. 2002) is even more: one third

82: of the period. In the binary HD 200775, whose period is about of 3

83: years (Pogodin et al. 2004) and where the main component is the

84: Herbig Ae/Be star, the duration of the eclipses is comparable with

85: the orbital period (Ismailov 2003). Not long ago one more WTTS H

86: 187 with the eclipse of 3.6 years has been discovered in the young

87: cluster IC 348 (Cohen et al. 2003). To date only one eclipse has

88: been observed completely. Therefore, the period of this system is

89: estimated rather approximately and according to Cohen et al. is

90: about of 4 years. An interpretation of such eclipses by classical

91: models developed for the eclipsing binaries, where either the

92: secondary itself or the gas and dust envelope filling in its Roshe

93: lobe is "an obscuring body", leads to the serious contradictions

94: with the physics of the young stars; in some cases such an

95: interpretation is impossible in principle as in the case of KH 15D

96: and H 187, since during such long lasting eclipses the gas and

97: dust envelope around the secondary must have sizes comparable with

98: the radius of the orbit. Such envelopes are unstable and are

99: quickly to destroy due to the tidal perturbations.

100: 

101: Recently it was shown (Grinin and Tambovtseva 2002 (Paper I)) that

102: in the young binaries which still continue to accrete the matter

103: from the remnants of the protostellar cloud, a rather unusual

104: mechanism of eclipses can occur where the role of "the obscuring

105: body" belongs to the disk wind of the secondary component, namely,

106: to its dusty component. Because of an extended structure of the

107: disk wind, the eclipses evoked by it can be very prolonged. Unlike

108: the classical models of the eclipsing binaries, where the eclipses

109: occur only when the line-of-sight lies in the orbit plane or

110: deviates from the latter at a small angle, the eclipses by the

111: disk wind are possible even at the large inclination angles. The

112: more the inclination angle the longer can be the eclipses. This

113: allows us to suppose that a number of the eclipsing binaries among

114: the young pairs has to be i) larger in comparison with the

115: binaries of the Main Sequence, and ii) the number of the eclipsing

116: systems with the long eclipses has to be larger among the young

117: pairs.

118: 

119: In connection with this, it is interesting to continue a study of

120: the optical effects caused by the disk wind in the young binaries.

121: In the present paper which is continuation of the Paper I we give

122: the results of the numerical simulation of the cyclic phenomena

123: due to the disk wind of the low mass secondary during its motion

124: on the orbit. We investigate a dependence of the theoretical light

125: curves on the disk wind parameters as well as parameters of the

126: binary including its orientation in the space. Unlike Paper I

127: where a solution of such a problem has been obtained for the

128: systems with the circular orbits, here we consider a common case

129: of the binaries with the elliptic orbits.

130: 

131: \clearpage

132: \section{The problem}

133: 

134: As in Paper I, we assume the model of the young binary proposed by

135: Artymowizc and Lubow (1996) (AL96) as the basic one, and restrict

136: ourselves to the case when the mass of the secondary companion is

137: much less than that of the primary\footnote{According to the

138: statistics of the Main-Sequence binaries (Duquennoy and Mayor

139: 1991; Mazeh et al. 2000) such mass component ratios are typical

140: for the systems with periods $P \ge 3$ yrs but they can be also

141: found in the systems with shorter periods. In particular, it could

142: be systems with the substellar companions whose number rapidly

143: grows owing to the continuing research programmes (Mayor and Urdy

144: 2000).}. In the center of such a system a cavity almost free of

145: the matter is formed under the effect of the periodic

146: gravitational perturbation (Fig. 1). Its typical size depends on

147: the eccentricity $e$ and the mass ratio of the components $q =

148: m_2/m_1$ and is approximately equal to $(2-3)\cdot a$ where $a$ is

149: a large semi-axis of the orbit of the secondary (Artymowizc and

150: Lubow 1994).

151: 

152: The components of the binary accrete the matter from the remnants

153: of the protostellar cloud which forms so-called circumbinary (CB)

154: disk. In this case , the accretion rate onto the low mass

155: component can substantially exceed the accretion rate onto the

156: primary(Artymowizc and Lubow 1994, Bate and Bonnel 1997; Rozyczka

157: and Laughlin 1997). Since the process of the disk accretion is

158: accompanied with the matter outflow from the accretion disk (the

159: disk wind) then at such conditions, the low mass companion becomes

160: a powerful source of the matter which it ejects up (and down) the

161: CB disk plane during its motion along the orbit. Calculations

162: showed that the dust presented in the wind\footnote {As Safier

163: (1993) showed, due to collisions of the dust particles with gas

164: atoms in the accretion disk, the former are carried away by the

165: latter and are present approximately in the same proportion in the

166: disk wind.} can originate the long lasting eclipses of the primary

167: (Paper I) and could be (at the certain conditions) the source of

168: the thermal radiation whose luminosity in the near infrared region

169: of the spectrum can be comparable with that of the CB disk itself

170: (Grinin 2002).

171: 

172: \subsection{A structure of the CB-disk}

173: As an example, a structure of the CB-disk of the young binary with

174: the low mass component is shown on Fig. 1. We calculated the

175: matter distribution in the disk in the hydrodynamical approach by

176: SPH (smoothed particle hydrodynamics) method using a scheme close

177: to that described by Hernquist and Katz (1989) but with a constant

178: smoothing length of the hydrodynamical parameters.

179: \begin{figure*}

180: \vspace{-1.cm}

181: \hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[width=20cm]{FIG1.EPS}

182: \vspace{-9cm} \caption{A matter distribution in the CB-disk of the

183: young binary obtained with SPH-method; the view "edge-on" in the

184: projection on $XZ$ plane (the upper panel), the cross-section of

185: the CB-disk in the same plane (the middle panel) and the view

186: "pole-on" (the bottom). The co-ordinates $X, Y, Z$ are expressed

187: in the units of the large semi-axis of the secondary's orbit. The

188: model parameters are $e=0.5$, mass ratio $q = 0.22$}

189: \end{figure*}

190: In the projection on the sky plane one can see two streams of the

191: matter from the CB disk feeding the accretion disks around the

192: components of the system. In the CB disk itself the wave densities

193: caused by the periodical gravitational perturbations are seen.

194: Such a matter distribution in the CB disk agrees well with results

195: obtained by AL96.

196: 

197: A special feature of the binaries with the elliptic orbits is a

198: global asymmetry in the azimuthal distribution of the CB disk

199: matter that is clearly seen both pole-on and edge-on as well as in

200: the cross-section (Fig. 1). As it was shown by Artymowizc and

201: Lubow (2000), the asymmetric CB disk precesses slowly with a

202: precession period significantly exceeding the orbital one. In the

203: cross-section (Fig. 1, middle panel) CB disk resembles a classical

204: accretion disk around a single young star in which a main part of

205: the matter is concentrated in the geometrically thin equatorial

206: layer with a thickness $H \ll r$.

207: 

208: One of the manifestation of the CB disk global asymmetry mentioned

209: above is a dependence of its geometrical thickness $H$ not only on

210: the distance from the center $r$ but also on the azimuth. For this

211: reason, the precession of the CB disk has to originate a long

212: lasting periodical variations of the extinction in the young

213: binaries observed nearly edge-on when the line-of-sight is tangent

214: to "the surface" of the disk. It is also obviously, that the

215: global asymmetry of the CB disk is one of the sources of the

216: intrinsic polarization of the young binaries.

217: 

218: \section{Formation of the common envelope}

219: The disk wind of the secondary essentially modifies the model of

220: the young binary: during the orbital motion of the secondary it

221: creates a rather complex in its structure asymmetric common

222: envelope (Fig. 2) which partially dissipates in the surrounding

223: space but partially can be captured by the main component. As a

224: result, a dust appears above (and under) the binary system's plane

225: giving an additional extinction on the line-of-sight.

226: \begin{figure*}

227: \vspace{-0.5cm}

228: \hspace{1cm} \includegraphics[width=20cm]{FIG2.EPS}

229: \vspace{-15cm} \caption{The matter distribution in the common

230: envelope of the young binary created by the disk wind of the

231: secondary in the projection on the $XZ$-plane (top) and on the

232: equatorial $(XY)$ plane (bottom). The secondary is at the point

233: with the coordinates $X = 1, Y = 0$. The coordinates of the

234: primary in the $XY$-plane are equal to (0,0). All coordinates are

235: expresses in the units of the large semi-axis of the secondary's

236: orbit. The model parameters are $V_w = 3, U_w = 0.5, e = 0.5$ (see

237: Section 3.2)}.

238: \end{figure*}

239: 

240: \subsection{Inertial properties of the accretion disks}

241: A special feature of the binaries with the elliptic orbits is that

242: the accretion rate onto the system components undergone a strong

243: modulation with a period equaled to the orbital one (AL96).

244: Moreover, in the binaries with elongated orbits ($e \ge 0.3$) a

245: modulation amplitude can be so large that the accretion rate in

246: the apastron and in the periastron can differ by ten and more

247: times (AL96; Rozyczka and Laughflin 1997). The dependence of the

248: accretion rate $\dot M_a$ on the orbital period phase can lead to

249: that the mass loss rate in the disk wind $\dot M_w$ can be also a

250: periodic function of time. Nevertheless, due to an inertia of the

251: accretion disk, the modulation amplitude of $\dot M_w$ depends on

252: the ratio between the orbital period $P$ and the hydrodynamical

253: time $t_g$. The latter is a characteristic time of the accretion

254: disk dissipation without any feeding. If it is less compared to

255: the orbital period $P$ then the accretion disk has a time to react

256: to the changes on its outer boundary caused by the changes in the

257: accretion rate. In this case $\dot M_w \propto \dot M_a$. In the

258: opposite case, a reaction of the disk to the changes of $\dot M_a$

259: can be strongly smoothed.

260: 

261: According to Shakura and Sunyaev (1973)

262: \begin{equation}

263: t_g = R^2/\nu

264: \end{equation}

265: 

266: Here $R$ is the outer radius of the accretion disk, $\nu$ is a

267: coefficient of the turbulent viscosity: $\nu = \alpha \,v_s\,H$,

268: where $H$ is a geometrical thickness of the disk, $v_s$ is a sound

269: speed and $\alpha$ is a dimensionless parameter depending on the

270: mechanism of the generation of turbulence in the accretion disk.

271: Taking into account that $v_s/v_\phi \approx H/R$ where $v_\phi$

272: is a Keplerian velocity on the outer boundary of the disk and

273: expressing $t_g$ in the units of the orbital period we obtain

274: \begin{equation}

275: t_g = (2\pi \alpha)^{-1} (R/H)^2 (t_{rot}/P)\,,

276: \end{equation}

277: where $t_{rot}$ is a Keplerian period at the outer boundary of the

278: disk of the low mass companion.

279: 

280: The expression (1) one can rewrite in the form

281: \begin{equation}

282: t_g = (2\pi \alpha)^{-1} (R/H)^2 q^{-1/2} (R/a)^{3/2}\,

283: \end{equation}

284: where $a$ is the large semi-axis of the secondary, $q =

285: m_2/m_1$ is the mass ratio of the components.

286: 

287: According to Artymowizc and Lubow (1994), if the mass ratio $q

288: \approx 0.1$ the outer radius of the secondary accretion disk

289: $R \approx 0.1\,a$. Assuming a "standard" relation

290: for the accretion disks $H\,/R$ = 0.05 and $R$ = 0.1\,$a$, we

291: obtain from Eq. (3) $t_g \approx 6.5\,\alpha^{-1}$.

292: 

293: In the modern models (see the review by Stone et al. 2000 and the

294: references therein) the values of $\alpha$ are ranging from 0.005

295: to 0.5. Assuming the value $\alpha = 0.5$ to estimate the lower

296: limit of $t_g$, we obtain $t_g \ge 13$.

297: 

298: Hence it follows, that even in the models with the high efficiency

299: of the angular momentum transfer a typical hydrodynamical time of

300: the accretion disk substantially exceeds the orbital period. From

301: this one can conclude that the disk wind forming mainly in the

302: central part of the disk is in no time "to feel" the changes of

303: the accretion rate at its outer boundary. However, observations of

304: the young binaries with the eccentric orbits testifies (see e.g.

305: Pogodin et al. 2004) that there is a modulation of some parameters

306: of the emission line $H_\alpha$ with the phase of the orbital

307: period such as an equivalent width of the line and parameters of

308: its profile. This means, that physical conditions in the central

309: part of the accretion disk where this line is formed undergone the

310: periodical variations connected with the orbital motion of the

311: system components. This variations can be caused by the tidal

312: perturbations and spiral shock waves forming in the accretion

313: disks of the binaries (Sawada et al. 1986a,b; Bisikalo et al.

314: 1995; Makita et al. 2000). As a result, the disk wind can be

315: strengthened near the orbit periastron. Therefore, further

316: together with the conservative model where $\dot M_w = const$, we

317: also consider the model of the binary where the disk wind is

318: strengthening when the system components are approaching each

319: other. For simplicity we investigated the case when the mass loss

320: rate is proportional to the accretion rate.

321: 

322: \subsection{Parameters of the disk wind}

323: We remind briefly the main characteristics of the disk winds in

324: the young stars. The numerical modeling by Goodson et al. (1999)

325: shows that the bulk of the matter (up to 80\%) is concentrated in

326: the low velocity component of the wind and ejected from the

327: accretion disk in the angle range $\omega \approx 40 ^\circ -

328: 60^\circ$ where $\omega$ is the angle between the vector of the

329: radial velocity of the wind and the symmetry axis of the disk.

330: Near the accretion disk, the disk matter has not only the radial

331: velocity component $V_w$ but also the azimuthal one $U_w$. At the

332: large distances from the accretion disk the latter decreases due

333: to the angular momentum conservation law and the radial velocity

334: becomes the dominant component. Further, putting the kinematic

335: wind parameters, we shall mean the velocity components $V_w$ and

336: $U_w$ as those which the wind fragments have after completing the

337: acceleration phase when the wind motion occurs inertly. Hartigan

338: et al. (1995) and Hirth et al. (1997) estimated a typical low

339: velocity component of the wind from the observations of the

340: forbidden lines in the spectra of TTSs: few tens kilometers per

341: second at the distances $\ge$ 1 AU.

342: 

343: Taking into account all mentioned above, we assume that all wind

344: particles are ejected with the same radial velocities $V_w$

345: isotropically in the angle range $40^\circ  \le \omega \le

346: 60^\circ$. It is supposed that the disk wind possesses a mirror

347: symmetry relatively to the orbit plane. Since the radius of the

348: accretion disk of the secondary is less compared to the large

349: semi-axis then, for simplification of calculations we adopt that

350: the matter outflows from the point source whose coordinates

351: coincide with those of the secondary, and the mass center of the

352: system coincides with the primary location. The disk wind of the

353: primary was not taking into consideration when modeling because

354: the accretion rate onto this component is much less than that onto

355: the secondary according to the problem condition.

356: 

357: It is also suggested that in the coordinate system of the

358: secondary the disk wind has an axial symmetry. This condition is

359: fulfilled in those cases when one can neglect the tidal

360: perturbations due to the main companion. Since the radius of the

361: accretion disk of the secondary is less compared to the radius of

362: the tidal interaction and the main contribution to the disk wind

363: is given by the internal layers of the accretion disk, such a

364: suggestion seems quite reasonable. An exclusion are binaries with

365: a very large eccentricity. In such systems the outer radius of the

366: secondary accretion disk at the orbit periastron can turn out less

367: than the radius of the tidal interaction; as a result, the part of

368: the matter from this disk can be captured by the primary at the

369: moment of the maximal approach. At these conditions one can expect

370: strong deviations from the azimuthal symmetry in the disk wind.

371: 

372: \section{Method of calculation}

373: As in Paper I we suppose that the disk wind consists of the weakly

374: interacting fragments which are treated as independent (probe)

375: particles. When going to the coordinate system of the primary the

376: velocity vector of the particle {\bf V}$_w$ + {\bf U}$_w$ is

377: summed with the velocity vector of the secondary orbital motion

378: {\bf V}$_k$. As a result the disk wind becomes anisotropic:

379: \begin{equation}

380: {\bf V}_0 = {\bf V}_w  + {\bf U}_w + {\bf V}_k.\,

381: \end{equation}

382: In this case the part of the matter (ejected in the directions

383: opposite to that of the orbital motion of the secondary)

384: can get the velocity less than the escape one and can be captured

385: by the main component.

386: 

387: The calculation of the trajectories of the particles motion in the

388: gravitational field of the primary\footnote{Masses of the

389: circumstellar (CS) disks of the young stars usually do not exceed

390: 0.1\, $M_{\odot}$ (see, e.g. Natta et al. 2000) and their

391: self-gravity can be neglected.} was carried out in the ballistic

392: approach. The particle velocity $\bf V_0$ determined by Eq. (4)

393: and its coordinates at the moment of ejection are put as initial

394: conditions in calculation of its trajectory. In the computing

395: process an orbit of the secondary was divided by $n$ fragments in

396: such a way that its motion along each part of the orbit took the

397: same time $\Delta t = P/n$. We put $n$ = 72 or 180 (that in the

398: case of the circular orbit corresponded to the orbit step equal to

399: 5$^\circ$ or 2$^\circ$ correspondingly). The same algorithm of the

400: common envelope modeling as in Paper I has been used. Model

401: simulations of the disk wind was carried out via ejection of the

402: probe particles on each step isotropically within the range of

403: solid angles mentioned above into the upper and lower semi-space.

404: 

405: Thus, the model parameters of the problem are:

406: \begin{itemize}

407: \item an eccentricity of the orbit $e$; for model simulations it

408: is adopted $e$ = 0.5; \item the radial $V_w$ and azimuthal $U_w$

409: velocity components of the disk wind of the secondary (the

410: Keplerian velocity of the secondary in the periastron is assumed

411: to be equal to the unity: $V_k = 1$); \item the mass loss rate

412: from the accretion disk of the secondary $\dot M_w$.

413: \end{itemize}

414: 

415: In calculations of the optical characteristics of the dust

416: component in the disk wind we adopted the same dust to gas ratio

417: as in the interstellar medium 1:100. For simplicity we consider a

418: mono-dispersed graphite and silicate mixture of the dust particles

419: whose chemical composition is analogous to that in the

420: interstellar medium (Mathis et al. 1977). We used so-called

421: astrosilicate in our calculations. The radius of the particles $s=

422: 0.1\mu$m, the average density is equal to 3 g cm$^{-3}$. The

423: optical characteristics of such particles were calculated with the

424: Mie theory in Paper I.

425: 

426: \section{Results}

427: We calculated a series of the common envelope models for the

428: different phases of the orbital period with the help of the method

429: described above. As an example, one of them is presented in Fig.

430: 2. In the binaries with the elliptic orbits a concentration of the

431: particles on the line-of-sight in the direction towards the

432: primary (hereafter we shall call this parameter as a column

433: density of the probe particles $N$) depends not only on the phase

434: of the orbital period $\phi$ and an inclination of the orbit plane

435: to the line-of-sight $\theta$ but also on an orientation of the

436: orbit relatively to an observer. Fig 3. shows four variants of the

437: orientation of the secondary's orbit relatively to the observer

438: for which the column densities $N$ were calculated as a function

439: of $\phi$ as well as corresponded optical depths $\tau$.

440: \begin{figure*}

441: \hspace{3cm}

442: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{FIG3.EPS}

443: \caption{The orbit of the

444: low mass secondary companion of the binary with an eccentricity $e

445: = 0.5$. Arrows point out the four different directions to the

446: observer for which the phase dependence of the column density in

447: Fig. 4 and the light curves in Figs. 5-7 have been calculated.}

448: \end{figure*}

449: A transition from $N$ to the column density of the real particles

450: $N_d$ was fulfilled using re-scaling when the ratio of the total

451: number of the dust particles ejected by the wind over one

452: revolution to the corresponded number of the probe particles was

453: taking into consideration (see Paper I for details). Also we took

454: into account a difference in the cross-sections of the columns:

455: the column density of the probe particles was calculated per the

456: section $\sigma$ (see below), while that of the dust grains $N_d$

457: was normalized to the cross-section of 1 cm$^2$.

458: 

459: As an example, Fig. 4 demonstrates a dependence of $N$ on $\phi$

460: for one of the model considered. The integer values of the phase

461: correspond to the moments when the secondary passes the

462: periastron. Calculations were made for the different angles of the

463: inclination of the orbit plane $\theta$ and the different

464: orientations of the orbit relatively to the observer. The

465: cross-section of the column $\sigma$ was adopted to be equal to

466: 0.1\,$a$\, x\, 0.2$\,a$, where $a$ is the large semi-axis of the

467: secondary's orbit. The test calculations showed that for less

468: values of $\sigma$ the statistic fluctuations increased because of

469: the low number of the probe particles in the column while for

470: larger values of $\sigma$ smoothing of the details on the light

471: curves took place.

472: \begin{figure*}

473: \vspace{-1.1cm}

474: \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=14cm]{FIG4.EPS}

475: \caption{A dependence of the column density of the probe particles

476: $N$ on the phase of the orbital period $\phi$ in the model with

477: $V_w = 1, U_w = 0, e = 0.5$ for four orientations of the binary

478: system relatively to the observer. The angle $\theta$ between the

479: line-of-sight and the equatorial plane of the system is given on

480: the right side.}

481: \end{figure*}

482: 

483: \subsection{Amplitudes and shapes of the light curves}

484: As in Paper I, when calculating a dilution of the light of the

485: binary due to the variations of the extinction on the

486: line-of-sight, we adopted that the main source of the radiation

487: was the main component which was treated as a point source. The

488: radiation flux from it decreases when going through the dust

489: component of the disk wind by $e^{-\tau}$ times. When $\tau \gg

490: 1$, that means a strong dilution of the direct radiation of the

491: primary, the radiation flux is determined by the scattered

492: radiation of the CS dust included that of the CS and CB disks as

493: well as the common envelope. Taking this into account we can write

494: 

495: \begin{equation}

496: F_{obs} = \frac{L_*}{4 \pi D^2}\, e^{-\tau} + F_{sc}\,,

497: \end{equation}

498: where $D$ is a distance from the observer.

499: 

500: As a rule, a scattered light gives only a weak deposit to the

501: direct radiation of the young star and its main function is to

502: restrict the amplitude of the minima in those cases when the

503: direct radiation of the star is strongly diluted due to the

504: absorbtion in the CS medium. Such limiting functions of the

505: scattered radiation of the CS disks of the young stars are the

506: well known phenomenon in the case of UX Ori type stars whose

507: brightness undergoes strong decreases due to the variable CS

508: extinction (Grinin 1988).

509: 

510: In Figs. 5-7 a series of the light curves calculated for the

511: different models is presented. For simplicity it is adopted that

512: the flux of the scattered radiation does not depend on the phase

513: of the orbital period and is equal to 0.1\,$F_*$. Calculations are

514: made for the wavelength 5500\AA \hspace{0.3mm}  centered to the

515: V-band.

516: 

517: Like in the models with the circular orbits (Paper I), the light

518: curves in Figs. 5-7 have an asymmetric two-component shape caused

519: by a conic structure of the disk wind. At some system orientations

520: the two-component shape of the minima is not revealed due to the

521: low resolution because of the column cross-section $\sigma$

522: adopted in calculation of $N(\phi)$. Since the stellar disk of the

523: main companion has finite sizes, a similar smoothing of the light

524: curves can also occur in the real situations.

525: \begin{figure*}

526: \vspace{-1.5cm} \hspace{1cm}

527: \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=13cm]{FIG5.EPS}

528: \caption{Theoretical light curves of the main system component for

529: the orbit orientations shown in Fig. 3. Model parameters are $e =

530: 0.5, V_w = 1, U_w = 0$, the mass loss rate of the disk wind of the

531: secondary $\dot{M_w}=10^{-8} M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (solid line) and

532: $3 \cdot 10^{-9} M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (dashed line). The angle

533: $\theta$ between the line-of-sight and the plane of the double

534: system is given on the right side.}

535: \end{figure*}

536: 

537: One sees from Figs. 5-7 that at the same other conditions, the

538: longest minima take place in the systems whose eclipses are

539: happened at the moment of passing the apastron by the secondary,

540: and to the contrary, the shortest eclipses has to be observed

541: from the side of the periastron. It is easy to show that a

542: ratio of the eclipse durations at these opposite orientations of

543: the binary is

544: 

545: \begin{equation} \Delta t_a/\Delta t_p = (1+e)/(1-e)\,.

546: \end{equation}

547: Hence it follows, that when $e$ = 0.5 durations of eclipses differ

548: by 3 times.

549: 

550: In the most models considered at the orbit orientation $b$ (Fig.

551: 3) (when an eclipse occurs after a passage of the periastron), the

552: light curve is characterized by the steep descent and a slow

553: ascent while in the same models but in the position $d$ (when an

554: eclipse occurs before a passage of the periastron) the result is

555: the opposite: a decrease of the brightness is slower compared to

556: its increase.

557: 

558: At the small inclination angles of the orbit a duration of the

559: eclipses is less compared to the period of the orbital motion. An

560: exception are the systems oriented with the apastron to the

561: observer (the variant $c$ in Figs. 5-7): in such cases, even under

562: a small $\theta$ an eclipse can last for a rather long time. With

563: increase of the orbit inclination a duration of the eclipses

564: increases and for $\theta \ge 30^\circ$ can be compared with the

565: system period.

566: 

567: As it is seen from Fig. 5, in the models with the low velocities

568: of the disk wind one can see a weaker minimum preceding the main

569: one. A similar feature is also present in the models with circular

570: orbits. As shown in Paper I, its origin is caused by the wind

571: particles ejected during the previous passage of the secondary

572: component on the orbit and captured by the main component. In the

573: models with the high mass loss rate ($\dot M_w \ge 10^{-7}

574: M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$) and the large inclination angles of the

575: orbit a boundary between the main minimum and its predecessor

576: vanishes resulting the more extended two-component structure of the minima.

577: In the models with larger wind velocity (Fig. 6) a

578: portion of the matter captured by the primary decreases resulting

579: only one main minimum on the light curves.

580: \begin{figure*}

581: \vspace{-1.5cm}

582:   \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=15cm]{FIG6.EPS}

583:   \vspace{-2cm}

584:   \caption{The light curves for the model with parameters: $V_w = 2,

585:   U_w = 0, e=0.5$ with the mass loss rate $\dot M_w = 3 \cdot 10^{-9}

586:   M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (dashed line), $\dot M_w = 3 \cdot 10^{-8} M_\odot$

587:   yr$^{-1}$ (solid line) and $\dot M_w = 10^{-7} M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$

588:   (dots). The angle $\theta = 20^\circ$. Top: $40 \le \alpha \le 60^\circ$,

589:   bottom: $\alpha = 45^\circ$}

590:   \end{figure*}

591: 

592: Calculations show that taking into account a rotation of the disk

593: wind yields a more rapid expansion of the wind in the horizontal

594: directions in comparison with the models where $U_w = 0$. As a

595: result, the depth of the minima decreases but their duration

596: increases (Grinin and Tambovtseva 2003). The minima parameters and

597: their shape depend also on the geometry of the disk wind. Fig. 6

598: demonstrates results of calculations for two models differing only

599: with open angle of the wind; in one case it is the same as in Fig.

600: 5 ($40 \le \alpha \le 60^\circ$), in another case it is

601: 45$^\circ$. It is seen that in the last case the minima are

602: shorter and have a more symmetric shape.

603: 

604: We remind that all model presented above are calculated in

605: suggestion of a constant mass loss rate. For comparison we also

606: considered the models with a variable mass loss rate: $\dot M_w

607: \propto \dot M_a$ in which a dependence of $\dot M_a$ on $\phi$

608: has been taken from AL96. Calculations showed (Fig. 7) that in the

609: models with the variable $\dot M_w$ an amplitude of the minima

610: depended on the orientation of the orbit of the secondary

611: relatively to the observer that is quite natural: it was maximal

612: in the systems whose periastron was between the observer and the

613: primary (the variant $a$ in Fig. 3) and minimal in the case of the

614: opposite orbit orientation (the variant $c$ in Fig. 3). As for a

615: shape of the light curves, the difference between these two models

616: is not so essential.

617: \begin{figure*}

618: \vspace{-2cm}

619:   \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=15cm]{FIG7.EPS}

620:   \vspace{-2cm}

621:   \caption{Light curves for the model with a variable mass loss

622:   rate ($\dot M_w \propto \dot M_a$). The solid line corresponds

623:   to $\dot M_w = 3\cdot 10^{-8} M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ in the

624:   periastron and the dashed line to $\dot M_w = 3\cdot 10^{-9}

625:   M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ in the periastron. The model parameters are

626:   $V_w = 2, U_w = 0, e = 0.5$. The angle $\theta$ between the

627:   line-of-site and the double system plane is given on the right

628:   side.}

629:   \end{figure*}

630: 

631: \subsection{Modulation of the scattered radiation with the phase of the

632: orbital period} When calculating light curves, we adopted for

633: simplicity that an intensity of the scattered radiation did not

634: depend on the phase of the orbital period. Such a situation is

635: possible if the CB disk is a main source of the scattered

636: radiation. In our case the part of the scattered radiation

637: originates from the disk wind of the secondary and the common

638: envelope created by it, and this part undergoes a periodical

639: modulation. Let us consider a simple example that demonstrates how

640: the phase dependence of the scattered radiation can influence the

641: light curves of the binary.

642: 

643: For this purpose, the intensity of the scattered radiation for two

644: of models considered has been calculated in a single scattering

645: approach. (An analysis showed that this approach was valid for the

646: mayor part of the common envelope at $\dot M_w \le 10^{-8}

647: M_{\odot}$\, per year). The flux of the scattered radiation in

648: this approach is

649: \begin{equation} F_{sc} = \frac{L_*}{4\pi D^2}\, \pi

650: s^2\,Q_{sc}\, \int_{V}{n({\bf r})} \,r^{-2}\, f(\gamma)\,e^{-{\bf \tau}_1-{\bf

651: \tau}_2}\,d {\bf r}

652: \end{equation}

653: Here ${n(\bf r)}$ is a concentration of the particles at the point

654: ${\bf r}$, $Q_{sc}$ is a scattering efficiency factor of the dust

655: grain, $s$ is its radius, $\tau_{1}$ is an optical depth between

656: the point ${\bf r}$ and the primary, ${\tau_{2}}$ is an optical

657: depth between the point ${\bf r}$ and the observer. The

658: integration in Eq. (7) is carried out over all volume $V$ of the

659: common envelope.

660: 

661: As in the previous section, we assume that the dust consists of

662: the mixture with equal amounts of the graphite and astrosilicate

663: particles with the radius $s = 0.1 \mu$m. A scattering process is

664: described with the Henyey-Greenstein phase function

665: \begin{equation}

666: f(\gamma) = \frac{1}{4\,\pi}\frac{1-g^2}{(1+g^2-2g\,\cos{\gamma})^{3/2}}

667: \end{equation}

668: where $\gamma$ is a scattering angle, the asymmetry factor $g$ is

669: assumed to be equal to 0.5.

670: 

671: Fig. 8a demonstrates the results of calculations for the two

672: system orientations: almost edge-on ($\theta = 5^\circ$) and

673: pole-on. In both cases an integer value of the phase $\phi$

674: corresponds to the moment of the periastron passage by the

675: low-mass companion. In the first case the periastron is between

676: the primary and the observer. It is seen that the flux of the

677: scattered radiation $F_{sc}$ reaches its maximum namely in this

678: phase. When observing the system edge-on, this takes place due to

679: the forward elongated scattering phase function. When observing

680: the system pole-on, a maximum of $F_{sc}$ is reached due to that a

681: dilution coefficient weighted over all envelope is maximal at the

682: moment of the periastron passage by the low-mass companion.

683: 

684: One can see from Fig. 8a that a dependence of $F_{sc}$ on the

685: orbital period phase is asymmetric and characterized with a steep

686: growth when the secondary approaches the periastron and a slower

687: decrease when the secondary moves away from it. Calculations show

688: that a degree of asymmetry depends both on the value of the

689: dimensionless velocity of the disk wind $V_w$ and on the

690: eccentricity of the orbit $e$ and its inclination to the

691: line-of-sight. In the model considered above (Fig. 8a) a maximal

692: asymmetry of $F_{sc}$ is reached if the system is observed

693: pole-on.

694: 

695: The functions $F_{sc}$ of $\phi$ given in Fig. 8a were calculated

696: for the model with $\dot M_w = const $. In the models with $\dot

697: M_w \propto \dot M_a$ a total picture is qualitatively the same.

698: As earlier, a maximum of the scattered radiation is reached in the

699: periastron of the orbit and has even larger amplitude.

700: \clearpage

701: \begin{figure*}

702: %\vspace{-4cm}

703: \hspace{-2cm}\includegraphics[width=18cm]{FIG8.EPS}\\

704: \vspace{-2cm}

705:   \caption{a: An example of the phase dependence of the scattered

706:   radiation flux for two system orientations $\theta = 5^\circ$

707:   (solid line) and $\theta = 90^\circ$ (dashed line). The model parameters

708:   are $V_w = 1, U_w = 0, e = 0.5$;

709:   b: The model of the eclipse of the

710:   main companion in the binary system with the account of the phase

711:   dependence of the scattered radiation for the same

712:   model: in the periastron (left) and apastron (right). The dots

713:   indicate to the light curves without the scattered

714:   radiation. The dashed line shows a behavior of the scattered light

715:   flux with phase.}

716:   \end{figure*}

717: 

718: If to use the values of $F_{sc}$ obtained above in Eq. (5), then

719: asymmetric low-amplitude brightening appears on the light curve on

720: going and/or outgoing the star from the minimum (Fig. 8b). A

721: similar details are observed from time to time on the light curves

722: of some eclipsing young objects (see, e.g. G\"urtler et al. 1999;

723: Herbst et al. 2002) and can occur due to scattering the radiation

724: of the primary by those dust particles who have a forward

725: scattering phase function. It is also obviously that taking into

726: account a phase dependence of the scattered light one can expect a

727: brightness increase in the central part of the deep minima whose

728: amplitude is restricted from below to a scattering radiation.

729: 

730: \subsection{FUOR-like light curves}

731: As calculations showed, in the models with the large mass loss

732: rate a common envelope formed by the disk wind of the secondary

733: can be so powerful that during a substantial part of the orbital

734: cycle the main component can be obscured from an observer. In such

735: cases the light curve looks like a series of the subsequent

736: flares; the latter, in fact, represents a short time intervals

737: corresponding to the minimal values of the extinction on the

738: line-of-sight (Fig. 9).

739: 

740: This result can be interesting in connection with the debates on

741: the nature of FUORs (see Herbig et al. 2003 and

742: the literature cited there). According to Hartmann and Kenyon

743: (1985) the outbursts of these objects are caused by the repeated

744: "outbursts" of the accretion rate onto the young stars resulting

745: an increase of the luminosity of the accretion disk that is

746: associated with the FUOR flare.

747: \begin{figure*}

748:   % Requires \usepackage{graphicx}

749:   \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=14cm]{FIG9.EPS}

750:   \vspace{-6cm}

751:   \caption{The light curves for the mass loss rate $\dot M_w=10^{-7}

752:   M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ in the model with parameters $V_w = 3, U_w = 0.5,

753: e = 0.5$ and $\theta = 20^\circ$}

754: \end{figure*}

755: According to another hypothesis (Herbig et al. 2003), the FUORs

756: outbursts are caused by the changes in the star luminosity. Both

757: hypotheses are not free of difficulties. Therefore, as an

758: alternation, it is interesting to consider a possibility to

759: interpret the light curves of some FUOR-like objects on the base

760: of the young binary model, in which the primary (a star of a high

761: luminosity) is periodically screened by the gas and dust common

762: envelope formed by the disk wind of the secondary.

763: 

764: \section{Discussion}

765: Thus, the theoretical light curves of the young binaries in which

766: the eclipses of the main component are caused by the disk wind of

767: the secondary companion are characterized with a large variety of

768: the shapes, and in many cases absolutely do not resemble the

769: classical light curves observed in the usual eclipsing binaries.

770: If the mass loss rate by the accretion disk of the secondary $\dot

771: M_w \ge 3\,10^{-8}$, the eclipses can be observed even if its

772: orbital plane is strongly inclined to the line-of-sight. The

773: duration of such eclipses can be compared with a period of the

774: orbital motion. Taking into consideration this fact as well as a

775: large number of the double and multiple systems among the young

776: stars (see the review by Mathieu et al. 2000), one can expect an

777: existence of the large-scaled cyclic brightness variability in

778: many young stars. Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose, that

779: several young eclipsing systems with the long lasting eclipses

780: discovered not long ago is, in fact, a rather wide-spread

781: population of the young stars whose number will be rapidly

782: increase with an accumulation of the photometric data on the young

783: clusters. We suppose that the UX Ori type stars also belong to

784: such eclipsing systems; the cyclic activity of these stars have

785: been interpreted in assumption of their binarity by Grinin et al.

786: (1998), Rostopchina et al. (1999) and Bertout (2000).

787: 

788: There is one more feature in the model of eclipse considered here

789: which is necessary to take into account for an analysis of the

790: continuous photometric observations of the young stars. As

791: mentioned in Section 2, in the binaries with the eccentric orbits

792: the CB disk is characterized with the global asymmetry and slowly

793: precesses. Observations of such systems under a small inclination

794: to their equatorial plane have to reveal slow (secular) variations

795: of the extinction and, hence, the brightness of the primary.

796: Theoretically a situation is possible, when a direct radiation of

797: the companions will be completely blocked by the CB disk during

798: some time. In addition, under the effects of the tidal

799: interactions with the CB disk, the orbits of the companions also

800: have to precess slowly. This means, that in the models of eclipses

801: considered a slow transition from the variant of the eclipse $a$

802: to $d$ (Figs. 5 - 7) has to take place implying slow changes in

803: the parameters of minima: their depth, duration and shape.

804: 

805: Possibly, the exotic eclipsing system KH 15D mentioned in

806: Introduction belongs to such objects; its binarity has been

807: revealed recently by Johnson et al. (2004) on the base of the

808: variations of the radial velocity of the main component and

809: estimated eccentricity (0.68 $\le e \le$ 0.80). An analysis of the

810: archive photographic observational data (Johnson and Winn 2004)

811: showed that the brightness of KH 15D was slowly decreasing during

812: the last 40 years (see also Barsunova et al. 2004 on this topic).

813: The duration of eclipses (Herbst et al. 2002) and their depth

814: (Johnson and Winn 2004) were also slowly changing. According to

815: the data of the Harvard collection of the photographic

816: observations the duration of the KH 15D eclipses in the beginning

817: of the last century was essentially less than at the present time

818: (Winn et al. 2003). All these features can be explained with the

819: disk wind eclipse model at the condition that the orbit of the

820: secondary is highly elongated and precesses.

821: 

822: Another possible application of the model considered can be

823: connected with an interpretation of the large scale photomertic

824: activity of some candidates to FUORs. An analysis of the published

825: photometry of such objects as V1515 Cyg (Hartmann et al. 1993) and

826: Z CMa (van den Ancker et al. 2004) shows that their light curves

827: look like the theoretical ones presented in Figs. 5-7. Keeping

828: this in mind and that some FUORs are members of the double

829: systems, one can consider a possibility of the substantial (in

830: amplitudes) variations of their brightness due to the cyclic

831: variations of the extinction on the line-of-sight as reliable and

832: worth of further investigations\footnote{Note, that Bonnel and

833: Bastien (1992) discussed the role of the FUORs binarity in

834: connection with a possibility of the periodic increase of the

835: accretion rate onto the main companion initiated the flares to

836: their opinion.}

837: 

838: As we saw above, a dependence of the scattered radiation on the

839: phase of the orbital cycle can lead to appearance of the fine

840: details on the light curves: a small brightness increase when

841: ongoing and/or outgoing the minimum. More essential, however, the

842: circumstance that the motion of the densest part of the common

843: envelope on the orbit has to evoke a periodical modulation both of

844: the intrinsic polarization of the young binary and its infrared

845: excess. And this modulation can be observed at any orientation of

846: the binary relatively to the observer. This gives a possibility to

847: reveal close binaries whose orbit planes are close to the sky

848: plane and which are hardly discovered for this reason.

849: 

850: At last, it should be noted that one of the assumption made for

851: calculation simplifying was about a negligible influence of the

852: primary disk wind on the common envelope structure. Such an

853: approach was valid in the model of binary considered above since

854: the secondary was the principle accretor and, therefore, the main

855: source of the matter forming the common envelope. However, even at

856: this condition, the role of the primary disk wind can be essential

857: when investigating the cycle activity of the binary at the other

858: wavelengths, and first of all, in the X-ray. Really, as estimates

859: show, a collision of the two disk winds even with rather modest

860: mass loss rates of about of 10$^{-9}M_\odot$ and the velocity of

861: 100 km/s is equivalent to the energy release of order of 3$\cdot

862: 10^{30}$ erg/s. It is comparable with the X-ray luminosity of many

863: young stars (see the review by Glassgold et al. 2000) and has to

864: be taken into account in interpretation of the X-ray radiation of

865: the young objects.

866: 

867: \section{Conclusion}

868: The results presented above show that the behavior of the optical

869: characteristics of the young binaries with the eccentric orbits

870: strongly depend on that how two main processes are connected: an

871: accretion of the matter from the CB disk onto the system

872: components and a matter outflow from the accretion disks

873: surrounding them. Therefore, one of the clue task in the physics

874: of the young binaries is a self-consistent solution of the problem

875: when both of these processes are tightly connected. In particular,

876: it would be important to investigate the role of the tidal

877: interactions in the formation of the disk winds of the system

878: companions and determine a phase dependence of the mass loss rate

879: from the accretion disk of the secondary component. \\

880: \\

881: The authors are thankful to P. Artymowizc for the useful

882: discussion of the problems touched in the paper as well as to S.A.

883: Lamzin who read the manuscript and made valuable comments. The

884: work has been supported by grant INTAS 03-51-6311, grant of the

885: Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Non-stationary

886: phenomena in Astronomy" and grant of Scientific School

887: 1088.2003.2.

888: 

889: %\clearpage

890: \Large

891: \begin{center}

892: {\bf References}

893: \end{center}

894: \normalsize

895: %

896: Artymowicz P., Lubow S.H., 1994, ApJ {\bf 421}, 651\\

897: Artymowicz P., Lubow S.H., 1996, ApJ {\bf 467}, L77\\

898: Barsunova O. Yu., Grinin V. P. and Sergeev S., 2004, in preparation\\

899: Bate M.R., Bonnell I.A., 1997, MNRAS, {\bf 285}, 33\\

900: Bertout C., 2000, A\&A , {\bf 363}, 984\\

901: Bisikalo D.B., Boyarchuk A.A, Kuznetsov O.A. et al. 1995,

902: Astronomy Reports {\bf 72}, 190\\

903: Cohen R.E., Herbst W., Willams E.C., 2003, astro-ph/0308484\\

904: Dequennoy A., Mayor M., 1991, A\&A, {\bf 248}, 485\\

905: Glassgold A.E., Feigelson E.D., Montmerle T., 2000, in "Protostars

906: and Planets IV", Eds. V. Mannings, A.P. Boss and S.S. Russel,

907: (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson), p.429\\

908: Goodson A.P., B\"ohm K.-H., Winglee R., 1999, ApJ {\bf 524}, 142\\

909: Grinin V.P., 1988, Astronomy Let. {\bf 14}, 65\\

910: Grinin V.P. 2002, Astronomy Rep. {\bf 46}, 380\\

911: Grinin V.P., Tambovtseva L.V. 2002, Astronomy Let. {\bf 28}, 601\\

912: Grinin V.P., Tambovtseva L.V., Proc. "Towards Other Earths:

913: DARWIN/TFP and Search for Extrasolar Terrestrial Planets", 2003,

914: Heidelberg, Germany, Eds. M. Fridlund, T. Henning, ESA SP-539, p.

915: 429\\

916: Grinin V.P., Rostopchina A.N., Shakhovskoi D.N., 1998, Astron.

917: Reports, {\bf 24}, 802 \\

918: G\"urtler J., Friedemann C., Reimann H.-G., et al. ), 1999,

919: Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. {\bf 140}, 293\\

920: Hamilton, C.M., Herbst W., Shih C., Ferro A.J., 2001, ApJ {\bf 554}, L201\\

921: Hartigan P., Edwards S.E., Ghandour L., 1995, ApJ {\bf 436}, 125\\

922: Hartmann L., Kenyon S.J., 1985, ApJ {\bf 299}, 462\\

923: Hartmann L., Kenyon S., Hartigan P., 1993, in {\it Protostars and

924: Planets} III, Eds. E.H.Levy and J.I.Lunine, (Univ. Arizona Press,

925: Tucson) p. 497\\

926: Herbig G.H., Petrov P.P. Duemmler R., 2003, ApJ, {\bf 595}, 348\\

927: Herbst W., Hamilton C.M., Vrba F., et al., 2002, PASP, {\bf 114},

928: 1167\\

929: Hernquist L., Kats H., 1989, ApJSS, {\bf 70}, 419,\\

930: Hirth G.A., Mundt R., Solf J., 1997, Astron. Astrophys. Suppl.

931: {\bf 126}, 437\\

932: Ismailov N.Z., 2003, Astron. Rep. {\bf 47}, 206\\

933: Johnson J.A., Marcy G.W., Hamilton C.M. et al., 2004, Astro-ph 0403099\\

934: Johnson J.A., Winn J.N., 2004, Astro-ph 0312428\\

935: Kearns K.M., Herbst W., 1998, AJ {\bf 116}, 261\\

936: Lubow S.H., Artymowicz P., 2000, in {\it Protostars and Planets

937: IV}, Eds. by V. Mannings, A.P. Boss and S.S. Russel, (Univ.

938: Arizona Press,

939: Tucson) p. 731\\

940: Makita M., Miyawaki K., \& Matsuda T., 2000, MNRAS, {\bf 316} 906\\

941: Mathieu R.D., Adams F.C., Latham D.W., 1991, AJ, {\bf 101}, 2184\\

942: Mathieu R.D., Ghez A.M., Jensen E.K.N., Simon M., 2000, {\it

943: Protostars and Planets} IV, Ed. by V.Mannings, A.Boss,

944: S.S.Russell, (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson),

945: p. 559\\

946: Mathis J.S., Rumpl W., Nordsieck K.H., 1977, ApJ {\bf 217}, 425\\

947: Mayor M., Urdy S., 2000, in {\it Disk, Planetezimals, and

948: Planets}, Eds. F.Garzon et al. ASP Conf. {\bf 219}, 441\\

949: Mazeh T., Goldberg D., Dequennoy A., Mayor M., 2000, ApJ, {\bf 401}, 265\\

950: Natta A., Grinin V.P., Mannings V. 2000, {\it Protostars and

951: Planets} IV. Ed. by V.Mannings,

952: A.Boss, S.S.Russell, (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson), p. 559\\

953: Pogodin M.A., Miroshnichenko A.S., Tarasov A.E. et al., A\&A, in press \\

954: Rozyczka M, Laughlin G., 1997, in ASP Conf. Ser. 121,

955: {\it Accretion phenomena and related outflows}, 792\\

956: Rostopchina A.N., Grinin V.P., Shakhovskoi D.N., 1999, Astron.

957: Let. {\bf 25}, 243\\

958: Safier P.N., 1993, ApJ {\bf 408}, 115\\

959: Sawada K., Matsuda T., \& Hachisu I., 1986a, MNRAS, {\bf 219}, 75\\

960: Sawada K., Matsuda T., \& Hachisu I., 1986b, MNRAS, {\bf 221}, 679\\

961: Stone J.M., Gammie C.F., Balbus S.A., Hawley J.F., 2000, in {\it

962: Protostars and

963: Planets}. IV. Eds. V.Mannings, A.P.Boss, S.S.Russel, p. 589\\

964: Shakura N.I., Sunyaev R.A., 1973, A\&A, {\bf 24}, 337\\

965: Shevchenko V.S., Grankin K.N., Melnikov S. Yu., Lamzin S.A., 1998,

966: Astronomy Let. {\bf 24}, 528\\

967: van den Ancker M., Blondel P.F.C., Tjin A Djie H.R.E. et al. 2004,

968: astro-ph 0401338\\

969: Winn J.N., Garnavich P.M., Stanek K.Z., Sasselov D.D., 2003, ApJ,

970: {\bf 593}, L121\\

971: \end{document}

972: