1:
2: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
5:
6:
7: \shorttitle{A New Detached M Dwarf Eclipsing Binary}
8: \shortauthors{Creevey et al.}
9: \begin{document}
10: \title{A New Detached M Dwarf Eclipsing Binary}
11: \author{
12: O.L. Creevey\altaffilmark{1,2,3},
13: G.F. Benedict\altaffilmark{4},
14: T.M. Brown\altaffilmark{1},
15: R. Alonso\altaffilmark{3},
16: P. Cargile\altaffilmark{4},
17: G. Mandushev\altaffilmark{5},
18: D. Charbonneau\altaffilmark{6},
19: B.E. McArthur\altaffilmark{4},
20: W. Cochran\altaffilmark{4},
21: F.T. O'Donovan\altaffilmark{7},
22: S.J. Jim\'enez-Reyes\altaffilmark{3},
23: J.A. Belmonte\altaffilmark{3},
24: D. Kolinski\altaffilmark{1}}
25:
26: \email{creevey@hao.ucar.edu}
27: \email{fritz@astro.as.utexas.edu}
28: \email{timbrown@hao.ucar.edu}
29: \email{ras@iac.es}
30: \email{p.cargile@mail.utexas.edu}
31: \email{gmand@lowell.edu}
32: \email{dcharbonneau@cfa.harvard.edu}
33: \email{mca@barney.as.utexas.edu}
34: \email{wdc@shiraz.as.utexas.edu}
35: \email{francis@caltech.edu}
36: \email{sjimenez@iac.es}
37: \email{jba@iac.es}
38: \email{kolinski@hao.ucar.edu}
39:
40: \altaffiltext{1}{High Altitude Observatory, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder 80307, CO USA}
41: \altaffiltext{2}{Universidad de La Laguna, 38206 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain }
42: \altaffiltext{3}{Instituto de Astrof\'isica de Canarias, E-38200 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain}
43: \altaffiltext{4}{McDonald Observatory, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 USA}
44: \altaffiltext{5}{Lowell Observatory, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 USA}
45: \altaffiltext{6}{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138 USA}
46: \altaffiltext{7}{California Institute of Technology, 1200 E. California Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91125 USA}
47:
48:
49:
50: \begin{abstract}
51: We describe a newly-discovered detached M-dwarf eclipsing binary system.
52: %the fifth such system known.
53: This system was first observed by the TrES network during a long term
54: photometry campaign of 54 nights.
55: Analysis of the folded light curve indicates two very similar
56: components orbiting each other with
57: a period of 1.12079 $\pm$ 0.00001 days.
58: Spectroscopic observations
59: with the Hobby-Eberly Telescope show the system to consist of two
60: M3e dwarfs in a near-circular orbit.
61: Double-line radial velocity amplitudes,
62: combined with the orbital inclination derived from light-curve fitting, yield
63: M$_{total}$ = 0.983 $\pm$ 0.007 M$_{\odot}$, with component masses of
64: M$_1$=0.493 $\pm$ 0.003 M$_{\odot}$ and M$_2$=0.489 $\pm$ 0.003 M$_{\odot}$.
65: The light-curve fit yields component radii of R$_1$=0.453 $\pm$ 0.060 R$_\odot$ and
66: R$_2$=0.452 $\pm$ 0.050 R$_\odot$.
67: Though a precise parallax is lacking, broadband VJHK colors and spectral typing
68: suggest component absolute magnitudes of M$_V$(1) = 11.18 $\pm$ 0.30 and
69: M$_V$(2) = 11.28 $\pm$ 0.30.
70:
71: \end{abstract}
72:
73:
74: \keywords{binaries: eclipsing---binaries: close---stars: late-type---stars: individual: (TrES-Her0-07621)}
75:
76:
77: \section{Introduction}
78: Although low mass binary stars are the most abundant stars in the galaxy
79: (Henry et al. 1999),
80: their intrinsic faintness inhibits their detection and study.
81: Non-contact eclipsing binary M dwarf systems have
82: great value, as these systems allow accurate estimates
83: of the most basic stellar parameters: mass and radius.
84: %Only three such systems are known and have been studied in detail;
85: %YY Gem (Bopp 1974; Leung \& Schneider 1978),
86: %CM Dra (Lacy 1977; Metcalfe et al. 1996; Kozhevnikova et al. 2004)
87: %and GJ 2069A (Delfosse et al. 1999; Ribas 2003).
88: Only four\footnote{We refer specifically to binaries where both components are M Dwarfs. There have been, however, a number of M stars whose companion is an F or G MS star (e.g. Pont et al., 2004), see Figure \ref{gr_mr}} such systems are known and have been studied in detail;
89: YY Gem (Bopp 1974; Leung \& Schneider 1978),
90: CM Dra (Lacy 1977; Metcalfe et al. 1996; Kozhevnikova et al. 2004),
91: GJ 2069A (Delfosse et al. 1999; Ribas 2003),
92: and OGLE BW03 V038\footnote{This is a very close although still detached
93: system.} (Maceroni \& Montalban, 2004).
94: The observed properties of each of these systems
95: present discrepancies with the theory of low-mass stellar objects;
96: neither the observed mass-radius nor mass-luminosity
97: relations are well represented
98: by existing models (Benedict 2000); see Figure \ref{gr_mr}.
99: The problem most likely lies in the shortcomings of the physical models,
100: owing to the lack of understanding of the complex atmospheres
101: of such low-mass objects (Baraffe et al. 1998).
102: Enlarging the small existing sample of such systems is therefore desirable,
103: to allow more detailed comparisons between observations and the theory
104: of these ubiquitous, interesting, and complex objects.
105: Here we report preliminary analysis of a fourth such low-mass eclipsing binary.
106:
107:
108:
109:
110: \section{Observations}
111: \subsection{Photometric Observations}
112: The recently discovered spectroscopic binary, TrES--Her0-07621
113: ($\alpha$=16$^h$50$^m$20.7$^s$, $\delta$=+46$^{\circ}$39$'$01$''$ (J2000), $V$=15.51 $\pm$ 0.08)
114: was first identified through an analysis of photometric time series from
115: the TrES (Trans-Atlantic Exoplanet Survey) network.
116: This network consists of three telescopes:
117: {\it STellar Astrophysics and Research on Exoplanets} (STARE,\footnote{Observatorio del Teide, Tenerife, Spain}
118: Brown \& Charbonneau, 1999),
119: {\it Planet Search Survey Telescope}
120: (PSST\footnote{Lowell Observatory, AZ, USA}, Dunham et al. 2004),
121: and {\it Sleuth}\footnote{Palomar Observatory, CA, USA. \tt http://www.astro.caltech.edu/$\sim$ftod/tres/sleuth.html }.
122: The telescopes are similar in their characteristics,
123: with apertures of 10cm, 2048$\times$2048 pixel CCD detectors
124: and fields of view of 6$^{\circ}\times$6$^{\circ}$.
125:
126: TrES collects long-term time-series photometry in one filter.
127: The photometry run in question spanned 54 days,
128: beginning May 6 2003, and was observed in a band roughly
129: equivalent to Harris R at a cadence
130: of 1 image every 2 minutes.
131: The images were reduced and calibrated by an automatic package
132: developed specifically for these data.
133: TrES--Her0-07621 was observed by both STARE and PSST,
134: but the latter time series proved significantly noisier.
135: We therefore analyzed only the STARE lightcurve. The R magnitude is 14.42
136: with each point having a formal accuracy of 0.04 mag rms.
137: This lightcurve
138: contains 8781 data points, obtained in
139: 309.5 hours over 54 days, giving a duty cycle of
140: 23.8\%{\bf \footnote{The data are available via STARE website
141: {\tt http://www.hao.ucar.edu/public/research/stare/stare.html} } }.
142:
143: A high-SNR peak in the time series' frequency spectrum at 1.79 cycles per day
144: initiated the study of TrES--Her0-07621.
145: Folding the star's light curve with a period of 1.1208 d showed it to be
146: an eclipsing binary.
147: The light curve also displays sinusoidal out-of-eclipse variations
148: near the photometric period.
149: The star's infrared colors from the
150: 2MASS\footnote{Two Micron All Sky Survey:
151: University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis
152: Center/California Institute of Technology
153: \tt http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/Gator/nph-dd }
154: catalog are quite red, (Table \ref{facts}), and the
155: USNO-B\footnote {SIMBAD, operated at CDS,
156: Strasbourg, France; the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED)
157: and supported by JPL, California Institute of Technology,
158: {\tt http://www.nofs.navy.mil/data/fchpix/}} catalog
159: shows a significant proper motion.
160: Taken together, these facts suggested that the object is a binary
161: M dwarf, with substantial levels of magnetic activity driven by the
162: rapid, tidally-locked rotation of the component stars; this motivated
163: further study.
164:
165:
166:
167:
168: \subsection{Spectroscopic Observations}
169: In September 2004 we obtained spectroscopic observations
170: of TrES--Her0-07621 using the High Resolution Spectrograph (HRS, Tull 1998) on the
171: Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET).
172: We secured
173: measurements at 4 epochs;
174: each epoch contained three separate exposures taken over
175: approximately one hour --- giving a total of 12 spectra.
176: The analysis was carried out with standard IRAF (Tody 1993) {\tt echelle}
177: and {\tt rv} package tools, including {\tt fxcorr}.
178: We cross-correlate TrES-Her0-07621 with
179: an M2 dwarf (Gl 623) template and extract velocities for both components
180: at four distinct phases. We adopted a radial velocity for the Gl 623 primary
181: of -29.2 km s$^{-1}$, given the orbital phase at which the template was
182: secured and a systematic velocity, V$_{sys}$ = -27.5 km s$^{-1}$,
183: from Marcy \& Moore (1989).
184: The HRS utilizes two CCDs covering the blue and red spectral regions.
185: The data from each chip were analyzed independently, resulting in two velocity
186: estimates. A third velocity estimate was obtained by cross-correlating an
187: artificial H-alpha emission template with the H-alpha emission line found
188: in each exposure.
189: Given the large orbital velocities, there was no
190: blending of correlation peaks at any phase.
191: The three velocities (blue, red, H$\alpha$) are obviously not independent
192: determinations, but do provide an estimate of our internal error.
193:
194:
195:
196: \section{Analysis}
197: Figure \ref{gr_het} shows the component velocities plotted against
198: photometric phase, while figure \ref{gr_fit_res} (top panel) shows the
199: folded photometric light curve.
200: It is evident from the
201: nearly-symmetrical and sinusoidal radial velocity variation and
202: from the highly symmetrical light curve
203: that the orbit is nearly circular, and that the component masses
204: and surface brightnesses are similar.
205:
206: An initial period analysis of the entire STARE lightcurve
207: using the technique of phase dispersion
208: minimization refined the photometric period to 1.1209 $\pm$ 0.0006 days. We
209: predicted and then observed an eclipse on
210: 14 May 2004 using
211: the 1.2m telescope at the Fred L. Whipple Observatory, AZ, USA using
212: SLOAN filters $r$, $i$ and $z$.
213: The long time base provided by this observation allowed us to refine
214: the photometric period.
215: By fitting the lightcurves during (21) eclipse times
216: (we included only totally observed eclipses) to parabolas, we determined all
217: the times of minimum light (center of eclipse)
218: with corresponding error.
219: For the
220: eclipse observed on May 14th 2004,
221: we only used the time of minimum light from the $r$ filter. We also used
222: observations from IAC80 (see below).
223: Using the bootstrap method we refined the period to 1.12079 $\pm$ 0.00001
224: corresponding to a precision of 1 second.
225: The epoch of secondary minimum, T$_0$, was meanwhile determined to be
226: 2453139.749509 (HJD) $\pm$ 0.000075.
227:
228:
229: TrES--Her0-07621 has a stellar neighbor at a distance of 8'',
230: close enough that
231: the two objects are blended in our STARE observations (STARE has a pixel
232: size of about 11 arcsec).
233: Observations in $R$ and $I$ Johnson filters using the IAC80 at
234: Observatorio del Teide on 30 August 2004 provided a
235: more realistic picture of the depth of one of the eclipses, while also
236: allowing us to confirm the photometric period.
237: We measured the PSF of both the binary and the neighbor using all five
238: images outside of the eclipse.
239: From these we derived the R fractional flux contribution from this
240: companion star of 0.19 $\pm$ 0.04.
241: Because the companion star is also quite red (Table \ref{facts}), the flux should be
242: similar (to within the error) in both Johnson and Harris R filters,
243: and so we can use this number to analyze the STARE time series.
244: Measurement of
245: the contamination of the eclipse signal from TrES--Her0-07621
246: by the companion star
247: is important, because it must be accounted for when fitting the
248: time-series data to estimate the stellar radii.
249: This neighbor also has a proper motion that is similar
250: in magnitude and direction to that of TrES--Her0-07621, indicating the
251: possibility that TrES--Her0-07621 is at least
252: a triple system, with
253: the eclipsing pair of stars accompanied by a third M dwarf at a distance
254: of hundreds of AU.
255:
256:
257:
258: Adopting the photometric period as the orbital period and introducing its associated error,
259: %Introducing the period as an observation with its associated error,
260: we fit all 36 radial velocities (blue, red, H$\alpha$) with a Keplerian model
261: using GaussFit
262: (Jefferys, Fitzpatrick \& McArthur, 1988).
263: The model is similar to that used in McArthur et al. (2004). We assume
264: an eccenctricity $e$ of 0.
265: The resulting radial velocity semi-amplitudes are
266: ${\rm K}_1 = 100.54 \ \pm 0.31$ km s$^{-1}$ and
267: ${\rm K}_2 = 101.29 \ \pm 0.31$ km s$^{-1}$,
268: $({\rm M}_1 + {\rm M}_2) \sin^3 i = 0.9547 \ \pm 0.0062$ M$_\odot$,
269: and M$_1$/M$_2 = 1.0075 \ \pm 0.0044$.
270: A formal solution including eccentricity (e = 0.006 $\pm$ 0.002) provided a
271: better solution, reducing $\chi^2$ by 8\%, while reducing the number of degrees
272: of freedom by 3\%.
273: However, we constrain $e$ = 0 for this analysis.
274:
275:
276: We developed a chi-square minimization algorithm
277: to estimate orbital parameters from the light curve, ignoring any variations
278: between eclipses (Figure 3).
279: The input parameters are period $P$, component masses M$_1$ and M$_2$,
280: limb-darkening coefficients (0.7, Claret, 1998, Table 7)
281: and the light from a third nearby
282: star as a fraction of the total light of the system (0.19 $\pm$ 0.04).
283: The code solves for both radii R$_1$ and R$_2$, effective temperature ratio
284: T$_2$/T$_1$,
285: center of minimum eclipse T$_0$ and
286: inclination $i$.
287: Figure \ref{gr_fit_res} shows the resulting fit to the data.
288:
289: The initial estimates for R$_1$, R$_2$, T$_2$/T$_1$ and $i$ were derived from
290: two-dimensional $\chi^2$ contour
291: plots (while keeping the other two parameters fixed).
292: These contour plots presented high correlations between the two
293: radii, constraining their sum while insensitive to their difference;
294: and between radius (R$_1$ or R$_2$) and inclination; larger radius implies
295: smaller inclination.
296: T$_2$/T$_1$ was uncorrelated to both radii and inclination, so its
297: error is given by the corresponding value of this parameter at
298: $\chi^2 + \sigma$ (Press et al, 1986) in the direction of its axis.
299: However, because the other parameters are obviously
300: not independant, R$_1$ and R$_2$ for example, the error spanned the range of
301: radii where the contour value is $\chi^2 + \sigma$, (the full range error ellipsoid).
302:
303: Even with the component masses determined, in absence of a T$_{eff}$
304: measurement we require the component
305: absolute magnitudes to place these stars on the Mass-Luminosity Relation (MLR).
306: From the TrES data,
307: calibrated using stars within 1$^{\circ}$ that have measured V magnitudes
308: from SIMBAD,
309: we obtain a V-band apparent magnitude of 15.51 $\pm$ 0.08 for the combined
310: 3-star system, giving
311: V-K = 4.63 $\pm$ 0.10 (Table \ref{facts}).
312: Assuming a wavelength independent relative flux
313: we estimate $\Delta$V$_{AB-C}$ = 1.72 from difference J, H and K magnitudes
314: (between the neighbor and the binary).
315: We can also estimate $\Delta$V$_{A-B}$ (between the binary components)
316: = 0.1 $\pm$ 0.05,
317: based on the derived temperature and radii differences.
318: Taking all of the above into account, we estimate
319: the component magnitudes of
320: V$_A$ = 16.37 $\pm$ 0.1, V$_B$ = 16.56 $\pm$ 0.1
321: and V$_C$ = 17.43 $\pm$ 0.1, where $C$ is the stellar neighbor.
322:
323:
324: From Hawley et al, (2002) color-spectral type relations we estimate
325: an M3 spectral type for each component.
326: We obtain from the Hawley
327: $M_J$ - spectral type
328: relationships component absolute magnitudes of
329: M$_V$ = 11.18, 11.28 $\pm$ 0.3.
330: Accepting this estimate of the luminosities,
331: the distance modulus is $\mu$ ($\sim$16.4-11.2) $\sim$ 5.2,
332: corresponding to d$\sim$110 pc.
333: For this nearby system we have assumed no absorption (A$_V$ = 0).
334: We also use the radii and effective temperature (Table \ref{tbl-orbital}) to
335: determine luminosities,
336: differentially with respect to the Sun (e.g. Benedict et al, 2003).
337: With bolometric corrections as a function of temperature from
338: Flower (1996) we obtain an average d = 118 $\pm$ 13 pc for the
339: two components.
340:
341:
342:
343:
344: \section{Results and Comments}
345:
346: Using all the derived parameters and errors, we refit the lightcurve using
347: our code, and tested these results with the code
348: {\it Nightfall}\footnote{http://www.lsw.uni-heidelberg.de/users/rwichman/Nightfall.html}
349: (see below).
350: Both codes give similar results,
351: their difference being within the error bars.
352: Tables \ref{tbl-system} and \ref{tbl-orbital} summarize the results.
353:
354: Our code does not allow for stellar spots, so we subtracted a smooth function
355: (by a Fourier technique) to remove the out-of-eclipse variations
356: making a rectified lightcurve.
357: We also constrain $e$ = 0.
358: The top panel of Figure \ref{gr_fit_res} shows the synthetic lightcurve
359: (continuous line)
360: corresponding to the model fit (our code) of
361: the folded light curve (small crosses).
362: Phase = 0 corresponds to the secondary eclipse.
363: The bottom panel shows the residuals of the fit.
364: %We have also highlighted the mean of the residuals (-0.00089).
365: The residuals show no variation as a function of phase indicating
366: an adequate model fit.
367:
368: Because our code is unable to account for spot variability, we inspected the
369: residuals after subtracting the model fit from the unrectified lightcurve.
370: These residuals also showed no evidence of eclipses.
371: We also fit this unrectified lightcurve to find R$_1$, R$_2$, $i$, T$_0$ and
372: T$_2$/T$_1$.
373: The results varied slightly from those for the rectified light curve,
374: but stayed within the
375: error bars (Table \ref{tbl-orbital}).
376:
377: Our original (unrectified) photometric light curve contains non-uniform
378: outside-eclipse variations. Binary systems
379: such as TrES--Her0-07621 are often magnetically active
380: (e.g., Strassmeier et al. 1993).
381: While tidal effects may be important,
382: these non-uniform variations are most likely
383: explained by star spots.
384: We used {\it Nightfall}
385: to model our unrectified lightcurve,
386: because this code allows for the presence of spots
387: on each of the components. Our derived parameters were used as
388: inputs and we attempted
389: to solve for the longitude, latitude and radii of spot(s).
390: There was no unique solution; many combinations of these spot parameters
391: could compensate for the out-of-eclipse variations,
392: although they always presented a 180$^{\circ}$ longitude difference.
393: This preferred longitude
394: difference has also been observed in
395: other active binary systems (see e.g., Henry et al. 1995).
396: The presence of spots can have a significant effect on the
397: accuracy of the derived parameters, such as inclination, temperature and radii
398: (Torres \& Ribas (2002) discuss this for the case of YY Gem).
399: Additional observations, photometry
400: in particular, will be necessary to increase the precision of the
401: radii estimates as well as to learn more about the magnetic behaviour of the
402: stars.
403: This could then
404: provide a link towards a better understanding of the physical processes
405: of these low-mass objects.
406:
407:
408:
409: \acknowledgments
410: We thank Hect\'or Vazquez Ramio (observations on IAC80),
411: and operating staff for STARE. The IAC80 and STARE
412: are operated by the Instituto
413: de Astrof\'isica de Canarias in
414: the Spanish Observatorio del Teide.
415: We thank Mark Everett (observations on 48-inch telescope at
416: Fred L. Whipple Observatory on Mount Hopkins, Arizona USA,
417: operated by Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.)
418: We also thank Rainer Wichmann for the use of the program
419: for the light-curve synthesis, {\it Nightfall}.
420: Support for this work was provided by NASA through grants
421: GO-09408 and GO-09407 the Space Telescope Science Institute,
422: which is operated by the Association of Universities of Research in Astronomy,
423: Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.
424: The Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) is a joint project of
425: the University of Texas at Austin, the Pennsylvania State University,
426: Stanford University, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Muenchen,
427: and Georg-August-Universitat, Goettingen.
428: We thank the HET resident astronomers and telescope operators.
429: We thank the referee for their constructive comments.
430:
431:
432: \begin{thebibliography}{}
433:
434: \bibitem[Baraffe 1998]{bar98} Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F. \& Hauschildt, P.H. 1998, \aap, 337, 403
435:
436:
437: \bibitem[Benedict et al. 2000]{ben} Benedict, G.F., McArthur, B.E.,
438: Franz, O.G., Wasserman, L.H., Henry, T.J. 2000, AJ, 120, 1106
439:
440: \bibitem[Benedict et al.(2003)]{2003AJ....126.2549B} Benedict, G.~F., et
441: al.\ 2003, AJ, 126, 2549 %\bibitem[bes 1988]{bes} Bessell, M.S. \& Brett, J.M. 1988, PASP, 100, 1134
442:
443: \bibitem[Bopp 1974]{bopp} Bopp, B.W. 1974, ApJ, 193, 389
444:
445: \bibitem[Bouchy et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...431.1105B} Bouchy, F., Pont, F.,
446: Melo, C., Santos, N.~C., Mayor, M., Queloz, D., \& Udry, S.\ 2005, \aap,
447: 431, 1105
448:
449: \bibitem[Brown \& Charbonneau(1999)]{1999AAS...19510907B} Brown, T.~M.~\&
450: Charbonneau, D.\ 1999, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 31,
451: 1534
452:
453: \bibitem[Claret 1998]{clar98} Claret, A. 1998, A\&A, 335, 647
454:
455: \bibitem[Cochran et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...611L.133C} Cochran, W.D., et al.\
456: 2004, ApJ, L611
457:
458: \bibitem[Cox 2000]{cox} Cox, A.N. 2000, Allen's Astrophysical Quantities (4th ed.; New York, AIP Press: Springer)
459:
460: %\bibitem[Covino et al.(2000)]{2000A&A...361L..49C} Covino, E., et al.\
461: %2000, A\&A, 361, L49
462:
463: \bibitem[Delfosse 1999]{delf99} Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Mayor, M., Burnet, M., \& Perrier, C. 1999, \aap, 341, L63
464:
465: \bibitem[Dunham 2004]{psst04} Dunham, E. W., Mandushev, G. I., Taylor, B. W., \& Oetiker, B. 2004, PASP, 116, 1072
466:
467: \bibitem[Flower(1996)]{1996ApJ...469..355F} Flower, P.~J.\ 1996, ApJ, 469,
468: 355
469:
470: \bibitem[Hawley et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....123.3409H} Hawley, S.L., et al.\
471: 2002, \aj, 123, 3409
472:
473: \bibitem[Henry \& McCarthy(1993)]{1993AJ....106..773H} Henry, T.~J., \&
474: McCarthy, D.~W.\ 1993, AJ, 106, 773
475:
476: \bibitem[Henry et al.(1995)]{1995ApJS...97..513H} Henry, G.W., Eaton,
477: J.A., Hamer, J., \& Hall, D.S.\ 1995, \apjs, 97, 513
478:
479:
480: \bibitem[Jefferys, Fitzpatrick, \& McArthur(1988)]{1988CeMec..41...39J}
481: Jefferys, W.~H., Fitzpatrick, M.~J., \& McArthur, B.~E.\ 1988, Celestial
482: Mechanics, 41, 39
483:
484: \bibitem[Ko 2004]{cmdra04} Kozhevnikova, A.V., Kozhevnikov, V.P., Zakharova, P.S., Polushina, T.S., Svechnikov, M.A. 2004, Astronomy Reports, 48, 826
485:
486: \bibitem[Lacy 1977]{lacy} Lacy, C. 1977, ApJ, 218, 444
487:
488: \bibitem[Leung \& Schneider 1978]{ls} Leung, K., \& Schneider, D. 1978, AJ, 83, 618
489:
490: \bibitem[Maceroni \& Montalb{\' a}n(2004)]{2004A&A...426..577M} Maceroni,
491: C., \& Montalb{\' a}n, J.\ 2004, \aap, 426, 577
492:
493: \bibitem[Marcy \& Moore (1989)]{1989ApJ} Marcy, G.W., \& Moore, D., 1989, ApJ, 341, 961
494:
495: \bibitem[McArthur et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...614L..81M} McArthur, B.E., et
496: al.\ 2004, ApJ, L614, L81
497:
498: \bibitem[Metcalfe et al. 1996]{trav} Metcalfe, T.S., Mathieu, R.D., Latham, D.W., Torres, G. 1996, ApJ, 456, 356
499:
500: %\bibitem[Pont et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...433L..21P} Pont, F., Melo, C.~H.~F.,
501: %Bouchy, F., Udry, S., Queloz, D., Mayor, M., \& Santos, N.~C.\ 2005, \aap,
502: %433, L21
503:
504: \bibitem[Pont et al. (2005)]{ogle2} Pont, F., Bouchy, F., Melo, C., Santos, N.C., Mayor, M., Queloz, D., Udry, S. 2005, astro-ph/0501615
505:
506: \bibitem[Press et al., 1986]{numrec} Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky,
507: S.A., Vetterling, W.T., 1986, Numerical Recipes, Cambridge, Sect 14.5
508:
509: \bibitem[Ribas 2003]{ribas03} Ribas, I. 2003, A\&A, 398, 239
510:
511:
512: \bibitem[Strassmeier et al.(1993)]{1993A&AS..100..173S} Strassmeier, K.~G.,
513: Hall, D.~S., Fekel, F.~C., \& Scheck, M.\ 1993, A\&AS, 100, 173
514:
515: \bibitem[Torres \& Ribas(2002)]{2002ApJ...567.1140T} Torres, G., \& Ribas,
516: I.\ 2002, ApJ, 567, 1140
517:
518: \bibitem[Tody 1993]{tody} Tody, D. 1993, ASP Conf. Ser. 52: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II, 2, 173
519:
520:
521: \bibitem[Tull 1998]{tull} Tull, R.G. 1998, Proc. SPIE, 3355, 387
522:
523: \end{thebibliography}
524:
525: \clearpage
526:
527:
528: \begin{table*}
529: \begin{center}
530: \caption{Catalog Information \label{facts}}
531: \begin{tabular}{lcc}
532: %\tableline
533: & Binary & Neighbor\\
534: \tableline
535: J\tablenotemark{a} & 11.773 & 13.487\\
536: H & 11.137 & 12.863\\
537: K & 10.880 & 12.615\\
538: J-K & 0.893 & 0.872\\
539: $\mu_{\alpha}$\tablenotemark{b} & -2 $\pm$ 8 & -26 $\pm$ 14\\
540: $\mu_{\delta}$ & +30 $\pm$ 3 & +28 $\pm$ 7\\
541: \tableline
542: \tablenotetext{a}{2MASS catalog}
543: \tablenotetext{b}{USNO-B catalog, units mas yr$^{-1}$}
544: \end{tabular}
545: \end{center}
546: \end{table*}
547:
548: \clearpage
549:
550: \begin{table*}
551: \begin{center}
552: \caption{System Parameters \label{tbl-system}}
553: \begin{tabular}{lcrcl}
554: \tableline
555:
556: P(days)&\hspace{0.5cm} & 1.12079 & $\pm$& 0.00001\\
557: P(years)&&0.00306861 &$\pm$& 0.00000036\\
558: T$_0$(JHD)&& 2453139.749509 & $\pm$ & 0.00075\\ %.7375
559: M$_{T}$(M$_{\odot}$)
560: & & 0.983& $\pm$& 0.007\\
561: a(AU) && 0.01047 & $\pm$& 0.00002\\
562: a(R$_{\odot}$) && 2.251 & $\pm$ & 0.005\\
563: $i$($^{\circ}$) && 83.12& $\pm$& 0.30\\
564: $\gamma$(km s$^{-1}$) && -26.5 & $\pm$ & 0.3\\
565: T$_B$/T$_A$ && 0.97 &$\pm$ &0.02 \\
566:
567: \tableline
568: \end{tabular}
569: \end{center}
570: \end{table*}
571:
572:
573: \clearpage
574:
575: \begin{table*}
576: \begin{center}
577: \caption{Component Parameters \label{tbl-orbital}}
578: \begin{tabular}{lcrclcrclrcrclcrcl}
579: & & & A & && & B \\
580: \tableline
581:
582: M(M$_{\odot}$) &\hspace{1cm}&
583: 0.493 & $\pm$ & 0.003 & \hspace{3mm}& 0.489 & $\pm$ & 0.003 &\\
584: M$_V$ & & 11.18 & $\pm$ &0.30 && 11.28 & $\pm$ &0.30\\
585: K(km s$^{-1}$) & &
586: 100.54& $\pm$ &0.31 && 101.29 &$\pm$ & 0.31\\
587: R(R$_{\odot}$) &&
588: 0.453 &$\pm$ & 0.060 && 0.452 &$\pm$ & 0.050 \\
589: T$_{eff}$\tablenotemark{a} (K) & & 3500 & & && 3395 & & \\
590: \tableline
591: \tablenotetext{a}{The component A temperature is based on that expected of an M3V star (Cox, 2000).}
592: \end{tabular}
593: \end{center}
594: \end{table*}
595:
596:
597:
598: \clearpage
599:
600: \begin{figure*}
601: \plotone{f1.eps}
602: \caption{Mass-Radius relation showing the M-dwarf
603: component parameters (triangles).
604: Our binary system is represented by squares.
605: We also represent some other M dwarf stars, whose companions are
606: F or G MS stars (Bouchy et al. 2005; Pont et al. 2005)
607: We show theoretical models from Baraffe (1998), indicating an age of 10
608: (continuous), 5 (dash-dotted) and 1 Gyr (dashed),
609: corresponding to [Z]=0, Y=0.275.
610: }
611: \label{gr_mr}
612: \end{figure*}
613:
614: \clearpage
615:
616: \begin{figure*}
617: \plotone{f2.eps}
618: \caption{Phased radial velocity curve of TrES-Her0-07621 with residuals;
619: data observed by the HET.
620: A total of four nights were obtained, the system was observed for
621: one hour every night at 20 minutes per exposure. The Doppler displacement
622: was measured in two different wavelengths regions and at H$\alpha$.}
623: \label{gr_het}
624: \end{figure*}
625:
626: \clearpage
627:
628: \begin{figure*}
629: \plotone{f3.eps}
630: \caption{Observed light curve and fitting results.
631: The top panel shows the reconstructed lightcurve (continuous line) using the
632: parameters obtained by fitting the observed lightcurve without
633: the out-of-eclipse variations (small crosses, see section Results.). We
634: have indicated phase = 0 and 1 (center of secondary eclipse)
635: by dashed lines.
636: The bottom panel shows the residuals (dots), with the continuous line
637: representing the rms of residuals.}
638: \label{gr_fit_res}
639: \end{figure*}
640:
641:
642:
643: \end{document}
644:
645: