1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
3: %\received{}
4: %\revised{}
5: %\accepted{}
6:
7: %\slugcomment{v1.5}
8: \shorttitle{Large Molecules in Comets LINEAR and NEAT}
9: \shortauthors{Remijan et al.}
10: \begin{document}
11:
12:
13: \title{A BIMA ARRAY SURVEY OF MOLECULES IN COMETS LINEAR (C/2002 T7) AND NEAT (C/2001 Q4)}
14:
15: \author{Anthony J. Remijan\altaffilmark{1,2,3}, D. N. Friedel\altaffilmark{4}, Imke de Pater\altaffilmark{5},
16: M. R. Hogerheijde\altaffilmark{6}, L. E. Snyder\altaffilmark{4}, M. F. A'Hearn\altaffilmark{7}, Geoffrey A. Blake\altaffilmark{8},
17: H. R. Dickel\altaffilmark{4,9}, J. R. Forster\altaffilmark{5}, C. Kraybill\altaffilmark{5}, L. W. Looney\altaffilmark{4}, Patrick Palmer\altaffilmark{10}, \& M. C. H. Wright\altaffilmark{5}}
18:
19: \altaffiltext{1}{NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Computational and Information
20: Sciences and Technologies Office, Code 606, Greenbelt, MD 20771}
21: \altaffiltext{2}{National Research Council Resident Research Associate}
22: \altaffiltext{3}{Current address: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22901\\
23: email: aremijan@nrao.edu}
24:
25: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Astronomy, 1002 W. Green St., University of
26: Illinois, Urbana IL 61801\\
27: email: friedel@astro.uiuc.edu, snyder@astro.uiuc.edu, lwl@astro.uiuc.edu}
28:
29: \altaffiltext{5}{Department of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720\\
30: email: imke@floris.berkeley.edu, rforster@astro.berkeley.edu, ckraybill@astro.berkeley.edu,\\
31: wright@astro.berkeley.edu}
32:
33: \altaffiltext{6}{Leiden Observatory, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA, Leiden, The Netherlands\\
34: email: michiel@strw.leidenuniv.nl}
35:
36: \altaffiltext{7}{Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College
37: Park MD 20742-2421\\
38: email: ma@astro.umd.edu}
39:
40: \altaffiltext{8}{Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences; Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
41: California Institute of Technology 150-21, Pasadena, CA 91125\\
42: email: gab@gps.caltech.edu}
43:
44: \altaffiltext{9}{Current address: Department of Physics \& Astronomy, University of New Mexico,
45: 800 Yale Blvd. NE, Albuquerque, NM 87131\\
46: email: h-dickel@phys.unm.edu}
47:
48: \altaffiltext{10}{Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637\\
49: email: ppalmer@oskar.uchicago.edu}
50:
51: \clearpage
52:
53: \begin{abstract}
54:
55:
56: We present an interferometric search for large molecules, including methanol (CH$_3$OH),
57: methyl cyanide (CH$_3$CN), ethyl cyanide (CH$_3$CH$_2$CN), ethanol (CH$_3$CH$_2$OH), and
58: methyl formate (CH$_3$OCHO), in comets LINEAR (C/2002 T7) and NEAT (C/2001 Q4) with the
59: Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland Association (BIMA) array.
60: In addition, we also searched for transitions of the simpler molecules
61: CS, SiO, HNC, HN$^{13}$C and $^{13}$CO . We detected transitions of CH$_3$OH and CS around
62: Comet LINEAR and one transition of CH$_3$OH around Comet NEAT within a synthesized
63: beam of $\sim$20$''$. We calculated the total column density and production rate of each
64: molecular species using the variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV) model
65: described by Friedel et al.\ (2005).
66: %toward Comet LINEAR, we find a total CH$_3$OH column density of
67: %$<N_T>=1.4\pm0.3\times10^{14}$~cm$^{-2}$ and a CH$_3$OH production rate of Q(CH$_3$OH)=
68: %$7.5\pm1.5\times10^{27}$~s$^{-1}$. For CS toward Comet T7 LINEAR, we find a total column density of
69: %$<N_T>=1.4\pm0.4\times10^{12}$~cm$^{-2}$ and a production rate of Q(CS)=
70: %$1.5\pm0.5\times10^{27}$~s$^{-1}$. Toward Comet Q4 NEAT, we find a total CH$_3$OH column density of
71: %$<N_T>=4.6\pm2.7\times10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$ and a CH$_3$OH production rate of Q(CH$_3$OH)=
72: %$2.9\pm1.7\times10^{27}$~s$^{-1}$.
73: Considering the molecular production rate ratios with respect to water, Comet T7 LINEAR is
74: more similar to Comet Hale-Bopp while Comet Q4 NEAT is more similar to Comet Hyakutake.
75: It is unclear, however, due to such a small sample size, whether there is a clear
76: distinction between a Hale-Bopp and Hyakutake class of comet or whether
77: %in fact there are two distinct
78: %classes of comet or if
79: comets have a continuous range of molecular production rate ratios.
80: \end{abstract}
81:
82: \keywords{comets: individual (LINEAR (C/2002 T7), NEAT (C/2001 Q4)) - molecular processes -
83: techniques: interferometric - radio lines: solar system}
84:
85: \section{INTRODUCTION}
86:
87: Comets are believed to contain the most pristine material remaining from the
88: presolar nebula and
89: %However, the origin of comets and the processing of their
90: %material are still not well understood. Currently, there are three models
91: %proposed to explain the origins of comets. First, there is the
92: %interstellar model, which suggests that interstellar grains accreted in the
93: %extended presolar nebula in cold regions far from the protosun.
94: %Second is the chemical equilibrium model that suggests comets were altered and
95: %processed along with other presolar material (Lunine et al.\ 1991).
96: %Finally, there is a third model combining of the two previous theories (Chick \&
97: %Cassen 1997; Fegley 1999).
98: %In addition, comets
99: are providing important insights into the formation mechanisms
100: of complex molecular species.
101: %Comets are considered to be the frozen remnants from the
102: %formation of the solar system and thus contain information on the makeup of the
103: %solar nebula.
104: Comets are primarily located in two distinct regions of the solar
105: system. The Oort cloud, the source of long period (P$>$200 years) comets, is
106: a spherically symmetric distribution of comets that encompasses the solar system
107: out to a distance of nearly 100,000 AU. The Kuiper-Edgeworth belt that lies in the
108: ecliptic plane just beyond the orbit of Pluto out to several hundred AU is the source of short
109: period (20$<$P$<$200 years) comets (Jewitt 2004).
110: %that lies in the ecliptic plane just
111: %beyond the orbit of Pluto out to several hundred AU (Mumma et al.\ 2005).
112: Recent models have suggested that the Oort cloud comets may have had origins in the
113: entire giant planet region between Jupiter and Neptune. These models suggest
114: that comets were formed in a much wider range of nebular environments and probably experienced
115: thermal and collisional processing before they were ejected into the Oort cloud
116: (Weissman 1999). This processing may have ``homogenized'' the cometary nuclei of
117: Oort cloud comets. Observations comparing long and short period comets,
118: which are believed to have had different origins, will allow us to address the
119: molecular diversity in comets (A'Hearn et al.\ 1995, Mumma et al.\ 2005).
120:
121: Furthermore, a key goal in astrochemistry is to learn whether the
122: molecular diversity seen in high and low mass hot molecular cores (HMCs) is similar to
123: the chemistry of the primordial solar nebula. The molecular diversity in comets may
124: provide the link between the formation mechanisms of complex molecular species
125: seen in high mass HMCs and low mass young stellar objects to the formation of
126: young solar systems. Therefore, only through comprehensive surveys of HMCs and comets
127: will a consistent, coherent picture emerge regarding the basic chemistry involved
128: in the evolution of HMCs and comets.
129:
130: Most observations of the molecular composition of cometary
131: gas and dust have taken place in the visible, ultraviolet (see e.g.\ Hutsem\'{e}kers et al.\ 2005
132: and references therein) or infrared parts of the spectrum (see e.g.\ Helbert et al.\ 2005;
133: Dello Russo et al.\ 2001). Also, a vast inventory of interstellar
134: ices and volatiles was discovered by satellites passing through the coma of Comet Halley
135: (see e.g.\ Mitchell et al.\ 1992). However, there have been
136: several successful detections of the rotational transitions of molecular species, including
137: organic compounds, at millimeter wavelengths (see e.g.\ Crovisier et al.\ 2004a,b;
138: Biver et al.\ 2002). Many of these species are important in prebiotic organic chemistry
139: (e.g.\ H$_2$O, HCN, CH$_3$OH, aldehydes, nitriles) and are believed to be parent molecules
140: (originating from the comet nucleus) rather than the products of photodissociation or gas
141: phase chemistry in the cometary coma. Two prominent examples of parent molecules of prebiotic
142: importance are hydrogen cyanide (HCN) (see e.g.\ Friedel et al.\ 2005)
143: and methanol (CH$_{3}$OH) (see e.g.\ Ikeda et al.\ 2002).
144:
145: In the Spring of 2004, there was a rare opportunity to observe two dynamically
146: new Oort cloud comets passing into the inner solar system and within $\sim$0.3 AU of the Earth: Comet
147: LINEAR (C/2002 T7) (hereafter, T7 LINEAR) and Comet NEAT (C/2001 Q4) (hereafter, Q4 NEAT).
148: This paper presents the results of an effort to further investigate the
149: astrochemistry of comets by observing several large molecular species in Comets T7
150: LINEAR and Q4 NEAT with the Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland Association (BIMA) array\footnote{Operated by the
151: University of California, Berkeley, the University of Illinois, and the
152: University of Maryland with support from the National Science Foundation.}; these species
153: include methanol (CH$_3$OH), methyl cyanide (CH$_3$CN), ethyl cyanide (CH$_3$CH$_2$CN),
154: ethanol (CH$_3$CH$_2$OH), and methyl formate (CH$_3$OCHO).
155: In addition, we also searched for transitions of the simpler molecules
156: CS, SiO, HNC, HN$^{13}$C and $^{13}$CO. We
157: were successful in obtaining single-field images, cross-correlation spectra,
158: and production rates for cometary methanol (CH$_3$OH) in both comets and
159: CS in Comet T7 LINEAR. Upper limits were found for the remaining species in both
160: comets.
161:
162: \section{OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS}
163:
164: The observations were conducted using the BIMA array near Hat Creek, California\footnote{121$^o$28$'$8$''$.0
165: West, 40$^o$49$'$4$''$.1 North; altitude 1033 m} in D-configuration
166: (baselines from $\sim$6m to $\sim$35m), cross-correlation mode toward
167: Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT during their 2004 apparitions.
168:
169: The observations of Comet T7 LINEAR, using JPL reference orbit 69, were taken 2004
170: May 11-15 near $\alpha(J2000)=01^h40^m$, $\delta(J2000)=-09\degr30'$\footnote{Both
171: comets moved substantially across the sky during the observations, thus only approximate
172: coordinates are given.}. The comet was at a heliocentric distance of 0.73-0.77 AU
173: and a geocentric distance of 0.32-0.44 AU (1\arcsec=319 km at 0.44 AU).
174: W3(OH) was used as the flux density calibrator for these observations. The quasar
175: 0108+015 was used to calibrate the antenna based gains. The observations of Comet Q4
176: NEAT, using JPL reference orbit 123, were taken 2004 May 20-24 near
177: $\alpha(J2000)=09^h07^m$, $\delta(J2000)=34\degr30'$\footnotemark[11].
178: The comet was at a heliocentric distance of $\sim$0.97 AU and a geocentric distance
179: of 0.55-0.61 AU (1\arcsec=442 km at 0.61 AU). Mars was used as the flux density
180: calibrator and 0927+390 was used to calibrate the antenna based gains. The absolute amplitude
181: calibration is accurate to within $\sim$20\%. The channel spacing of all observations
182: was 0.391 MHz, except for CS which had a spacing of 0.098 MHz. The data were reduced, combined,
183: and imaged using the MIRIAD software package (Sault et al.\ 1995).
184:
185: Table 1 lists the molecular line parameters of the searched species in Comets
186: T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT. The first column lists the molecular species, the second lists the transition, the
187: third lists the transition frequency (MHz), the fourth lists the upper state energy level
188: of the transition (K), the fifth lists the line strength multiplied by the square of the
189: electronic dipole moment (D$^2$), and the last column lists the
190: quiet sun photodissociation rate for each species (s$^{-1}$). Table 2 lists the observational
191: parameters. For each comet, the heliocentric distance ($r_H$), geocentric distance
192: ($\Delta$) in astronomical units (AU), and the synthesized beam size ($''$$\times$$''$) are listed.
193:
194: Figure 1(a-c) display the map and spectra of CH$_3$OH around Comet T7 LINEAR.
195: Figure 1a shows the contour image of the $3_{1,3}-4_{0,4} A+$ transition of CH$_3$OH starting
196: at 3 $\sigma$.
197: %The synthesized beam of $22\farcs 1\times17\farcs 2$
198: %is at the bottom left of the map. The line segment in the image is the projection
199: %from the predicted location of the cometary nucleus toward the sun.
200: %The coordinates are given in offset arcseconds centered on the comet nucleus.
201: Figure 1b shows the cross-correlation spectrum of this transition. The dashed line
202: corresponds to the rest frequency of the $3_{1,3}-4_{0,4} A+$ line for a cometocentric rest
203: velocity of 0 km s$^{-1}$. The 1 $\sigma$ rms noise level is indicated at the left of the panel.
204: The CH$_3$OH line for Comet T7 LINEAR was fit with a Gaussian by a least-squares method which
205: gives a peak intensity of 0.44(0.06) Jy beam$^{-1}$ and a FWHM of 1.74(0.31) km s$^{-1}$.
206: Figure 1c shows the cross-correlation spectrum (Hanning smoothed over three channels) of this transition.
207: Figure 1(d-f) display the map and spectra of CH$_3$OH around Comet Q4 NEAT.
208: Figure 1d shows the contour image of CH$_3$OH emission starting at 3 $\sigma$.
209: %and
210: %the synthesized beam of $16\farcs 9\times14\farcs 3$ is at the bottom left.
211: Figure 1e is the cross-correlation spectrum and the dashed line is similar to Figure 1b for a
212: cometocentric rest velocity of 0 km s$^{-1}$. The least-squares Gaussian line fit for Comet Q4
213: NEAT gives a peak intensity of 0.31(0.13) Jy beam$^{-1}$ and a FWHM of 0.72(0.3) km s$^{-1}$.
214: Figure 1f is the Hanning smoothed cross-correlation spectrum.
215:
216: Figure 2(a-c) display the map and spectra of CS around Comet T7 LINEAR. Figure 2a shows the contour image of the
217: $J=2-1$ transition of CS starting at 2 $\sigma$.
218: %The synthesized beam of
219: %$23\farcs 7\times18\farcs 9$ is at the bottom left of the map.
220: Figure 2b is the cross-correlation spectrum
221: of this transition. The least-squares Gaussian line fit for Comet T7 LINEAR gives a peak intensity
222: of 0.21(0.05) Jy beam$^{-1}$ and a FWHM of 2.45(0.60) km s$^{-1}$. Figure 2c is the Hanning
223: smoothed cross-correlation spectrum.
224:
225: All other molecular transitions in Table 1, including CS in Comet Q4 NEAT, were not detected above 3
226: $\sigma$. Thus, all column density and production rate upper limits were calculated using the
227: 1 $\sigma$ rms noise level of the window containing the molecular line emission
228: and a line width of one channel ($\sim$1.3 km s$^{-1}$). Tables 3 and 4 list
229: either the measured intensities (Jy beam$^{-1}$) and line widths (km s$^{-1}$) or the upper limits of the intensity
230: and line width for each species in columns 2 and 3. Column 4 lists the total beam-averaged
231: molecular column density (cm$^{-2}$) and column 5, the production rate (s$^{-1}$). The
232: calculated production rates were determined using the variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV)
233: model (Friedel et al.\ 2005). Finally, columns 6 and 7 list the production rate ratios with respect to
234: H$_2$O and CN as will be discussed in $\S$3.2.
235:
236: \section{DISCUSSION}
237: \subsection{Column Densities and Production Rates}\label{sec:NT}
238:
239: As described in Friedel et al.\ (2005), the VTOV model calculates
240: the total column density and production rate of a cometary species assuming optically thin
241: emission in LTE and that the temperature and outflow velocity within the coma vary with
242: cometocentric distance. The VTOV model calculations to determine the total column density
243: and production rate are discussed in detail in Friedel et al.\ (2005) Appendix A.
244: %This model has been validated
245: %by Hogerheide et al.\ (2006), through a full statistical equilibrium calculation including fluorescent excitation
246: %by solar IR photons.
247: Here, we discuss the implication of the production rates and column densities.
248: %based on optically thin
249: %emission in LTE.
250: %For cross-correlation observations, $<N_T>$, the beam-averaged molecular column density
251: %is given by Friedel et al.\ (2005):
252: %\begin{equation}
253: %<N_T> = {2.04~W_{\rm I}~Z~e^{E_{\rm u}/T_{\rm rot}}\over \theta_{\rm a}\theta_{\rm b} S \mu^2 \nu^3} \times~10^{20}~{\rm cm}^{-2}.
254: %\end{equation}
255: %In equation (1), $W_{\rm I} = \int I_\nu dv$ in Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$,
256: %$I_\nu$ the flux density per beam, $Z$ the rotational partition
257: %function, $E_u$ the upper state energy of the transition, $T_{\rm rot}$
258: %the rotation temperature, $\theta_{\rm a}$ and $\theta_{\rm b}$ the FWHM
259: %synthesized beam dimensions in arcsec, $S$ the line strength, $\mu$ the
260: %dipole moment in Debye, and $\nu$ the frequency in GHz.
261: Using the VTOV model, tables 3 and 4 list the total beam-averaged column densities and
262: production rates of each molecular species observed toward Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT.
263: The VTOV model was also used to determine the total beam-averaged column density and
264: production rate of CS even though it is believed to be the daughter species.
265: The parent molecule of CS may be CS$_2$, which has a very short lifetime of $\sim$10$^3$ s
266: or less (Snyder et al.\ 2001). This short lifetime suggests that CS is formed in the inner
267: coma and the measured line width of CS in Comet LINEAR is similar to HCN and CH$_3$OH, which
268: are known parent species. Thus, at the spatial resolution of our observations, CS can be fitted as
269: though it were a parent species.
270:
271: %we find a total CH$_3$OH column density of $<N_T>=1.4\pm0.3\times10^{14}$~cm$^{-2}$,
272: %and a CH$_3$OH production rate of Q(CH$_3$OH)= $7.5\pm1.5\times10^{27}$~s$^{-1}$. For CS toward
273: %Comet T7 LINEAR, we find a total column density of $<N_T>=2.3\pm0.6\times10^{12}$~cm$^{-2}$, and a
274: %production rate of Q(CS)= $8.7\pm3.0\times10^{26}$~s$^{-1}$. Toward Comet NEAT, we find a
275: %total CH$_3$OH column density of $<N_T>=4.6\pm2.7\times10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$, and a CH$_3$OH
276: %production rate of Q(CH$_3$OH)= $2.9\pm1.7\times10^{27}$~s$^{-1}$.
277:
278: \subsection{Relative Production Rates of X to H$_2$O and CN}
279:
280: \subsubsection{Comet LINEAR}
281: Based upon the H$_2$O production rates as measured by Schleicher et al.\ (2005, private communication)
282: at different heliocentric distances, Friedel et al.\ (2005) determined the H$_2$O production rate to
283: be $\sim2\times10^{29}$ s$^{-1}$
284: during our observing period. The relative production rates of each molecular species relative to H$_2$O are
285: listed in column 6 of Table 3.
286: The relative production rate ratios of HCN (Friedel et al.\ 2005), CH$_3$OH, and CS with respect to H$_2$O
287: for Comet LINEAR are most similar to those observed around Comet Hale-Bopp (C/1995 O1)
288: (($2.1-2.6)\times10^{-3}$, $4\times10^{-2}$, and $(3.7-4.3)\times10^{-3}$, respectively) (Snyder et al.\ 2001,
289: Remijan et al.\ 2004). Schleicher et al.\ (2005) estimated the CN production rate to be
290: $\sim1.4\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$. We also attempted to determine the relative production rates of each
291: nitrogen bearing molecular species relative to CN. However in this work, no species observed toward Comet
292: LINEAR with a CN bond was detected above the 3 $\sigma$ detection limit. The upper limits to the production
293: rate ratios are listed in column 7 of Table 3.
294:
295: \subsubsection{Comet NEAT}
296:
297: Schleicher et al.\ (2005) also determined the H$_2$O and CN production rates for comet NEAT during our
298: observing period (as reported by Friedel et al.\ 2005). These are
299: very similar to water production rates measured from Comet Hyakutake at similar heliocentric distances
300: ($\sim1\times10^{29}$ s$^{-1}$ Lis et al.\ 1997). The relative production rates of each
301: molecular species relative to H$_2$O are listed in column 6 of Table 4. The relative production rate ratios
302: of HCN (Friedel et al.\ 2005) and CH$_3$OH relative to H$_2$O are most similar to those measured around Comet
303: Hyakutake (C/1996 B2) ($1.2\times10^{-3}$ and $1.7\times10^{-2}$, respectively) (Biver et al.\ 1999).
304: The average CN production rate is Q(CN)$\sim2.6\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$. The relative production rates
305: of each nitrogen bearing molecular species relative to CN are listed in column 7 of Table 4, however
306: the only species observed toward Comet NEAT with a CN bond was CH$_3$CN which was not detected above
307: the 3 $\sigma$ detection limit. The upper limit to the production rate ratio was $<$4.0$\times$10$^{-2}$.
308:
309: %\subsubsection{Comparing the Calculated Production Rates from the VTOV and Haser Models}
310:
311: \subsection{Classifying Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT}
312:
313: Comets are diverse objects, as has been noted by many researchers in the past. For example, A'Hearn et al.\
314: (1995) reported an optical study of 85 comets, Biver et al.\
315: (2002) reached this conclusion based upon a radio survey of 24 comets, while Mumma et al.\ (2005) reached
316: the same conclusion from the hypervolatile gases CO and CH$_4$ from observations at IR wavelengths. Many comet
317: observers have searched for differences between comets from the Oort cloud and the short-period (Jupiter family)
318: comets to attempt to find clear differences in chemical composition depending on their place of formation.
319: As more observations become available, it becomes harder to differentiate between the various comets classes,
320: in particular after the Deep Impact mission (e.g., Mumma et al, 2005).
321: %From Biver et al.\ (2002) and Mumma et al.\ (2002), there is no mistaking the apparent chemical diversity seen
322: %in Oort cloud and Kuiper-Edgeworth belt comets. There
323: %is a clear distinction between the chemical make-up within these families of comets
324: %which may be explained by where they were formed in the pre-solar nebula (i.e.\ from the giant planet region
325: %out to the Kuiper-Edgeworth belt).
326:
327: We can now include Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT
328: in the chemical comparison from the detections of both CH$_3$OH and HCN (Friedel et
329: al.\ 2005). Both comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT are believed to be Oort
330: cloud comets given their measured orbital parameters and our observations show that both
331: comets are chemically very similar. However, from the Biver et al.\ (2002) 30 m
332: survey, there appears to be a distinction between comets rich in HCN
333: (HCN/H$_2$O$>$0.2\%) including comets Hale-Bopp (C/1995 01), 109P/Swift-Tuttle,
334: 1P/Halley and 9P/Tempel 1 (Mumma et al.\ 2005) compared to
335: %This is in contrast to a class of
336: comets with an HCN/H$_2$O abundance ratio $\sim$0.1\% which include, among several
337: others, comets Hyakutake (C/1996 B2), Austin (C/1989 X1) and Levy (C/1990 K1).
338: It is unclear, however, due to such a small sample size, whether in fact there are two distinct
339: classes of comets (i.e.\ Hale-Bopp and Hyakutake class) or if comets have a range of different
340: molecular production rate ratios. Given the abundance ratios of Comet T7 LINEAR, it is more similar Comet
341: Hale-Bopp that was both HCN and CH$_3$OH rich. Comet Q4 NEAT on the
342: other hand, has column densities of HCN and CH$_3$OH more similar to Comet Hyakutake.
343: Furthermore, this distinction appears across both Oort cloud
344: and Kuiper-Edgeworth belt comets as illustrated by recent Deep Impact observations
345: of Comet 9P/Tempel 1 (Mumma et al.\ 2005).
346: %In that analysis, the chemical similarities
347: %between the nuclear composition of Comet 9P/Tempel 1 and most other Oort cloud comets
348: %suggested both classes of comets were formed in a common region of the pre-solar nebula,
349: %and the apparent chemical difference seen between Oort cloud and Kuiper-Edgeworth
350: %belt comets is due to thermal processing on the surfaces of Kuiper-Edgeworth
351: %belt comets.
352: Thus, while our observations still tend to support a chemical distinction between Hale-Bopp
353: and Hyakutake class comets due to the abundance rations of CH$_3$OH/H$_2$O and HCN/H$_2$O,
354: more observations of both long and short period comets are necessary to increase the
355: sample size. With better statistics, it may be possible to reliably determine the origins
356: of both Oort cloud and Kuiper-Edgeworth belt comets in the pre-solar nebula.
357:
358: \section{SUMMARY}
359:
360: In this paper, we have presented the results of an interferometric search for several large
361: molecules including, methanol (CH$_3$OH), methyl cyanide (CH$_3$CN), ethyl cyanide (CH$_3$CH$_2$CN),
362: ethanol (CH$_3$CH$_2$OH), and methyl formate (CH$_3$OCHO) in
363: Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT. In addition, we also searched for transitions of the simpler molecules
364: CS, SiO, HNC, HN$^{13}$C and $^{13}$CO. Of the 10 species listed in Table 1, we detected transitions of CH$_3$OH
365: and CS around Comet T7 LINEAR and one transition of CH$_3$OH around Comet Q4 NEAT.
366: Using the variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV) model described by Friedel
367: et al.\ (2005), we determined the total beam-averaged column densities and production
368: rates of each molecular species observed toward Comets T7 LINEAR and Q4 NEAT. Based on the
369: molecular production rate ratios with respect to water it appears
370: that Comet T7 LINEAR is more similar to Comet Hale-Bopp while Comet Q4 NEAT is more
371: similar to Comet Hyakutake. However, due to such a small sample size, it is unclear
372: whether there are two distinct classes of comet or if there is a continuous range of classes
373: with numerous and different molecular production rate ratios. More observations with
374: higher sensitivity interferometers such as CARMA or ALMA of both long
375: and short period comets are necessary to increase the sample size, hopefully allowing a determination of the
376: origins of both Oort cloud and Kuiper-Edgeworth belt comets in the pre-solar nebula.
377:
378: \acknowledgements
379: We thank J.~R. Dickel for assisting with the observations, an anonymous referee for many helpful comments,
380: and D.~G. Schleicher for providing H$_2$O and CN production rates.
381: This work was partially funded by: NSF AST02-28953, AST02-28963, AST02-28974 and AST02-28955;
382: and the Universities of Illinois, Maryland, and California, Berkeley.
383:
384: \begin{thebibliography}{}
385:
386: \bibitem[]{}A'Hearn, M. F., Millis, R. L., Schleicher, D. G., Osip, D. J., \& Birch, P. V. 1995, Icarus, 118, 223.
387:
388: \bibitem[]{}Biver, N., et al.\ 1999, \aj, 118, 1850
389:
390: \bibitem[]{}Biver, N., Bockel\'{e}e-Morvan, D., Crovisier, J., Colom, P., Henry, F., Moreno, R., Paubert, G.,
391: Despois, D., \& Lis, D. C. 2002, Earth, Moon, and Planets, 90, 323
392:
393: \bibitem[]{}Crovisier, J., 1994, Journal of Geophysical Research, 99, 3777
394:
395: \bibitem[]{}Crovisier, J., Bockel\'{e}e-Morvan, D., Colom, P., Biver, N., Despois, D., Lis, D. C., \&
396: the Team for target-of-opportunity radio observations of comets 2004a, A\&A, 418, 1141
397:
398: \bibitem[]{}Crovisier, J., Bockel\'{e}e-Morvan, D., Biver, N., Colom, P., Despois, D., \& Lis, D. C.
399: 2004b, A\&A, 418, L35
400:
401: \bibitem[]{}Dello Russo, N., Mumma, M. J., DiSanti, M. A., \& Magee-Sauer, K. 2001, BAAS, 33, 1076
402:
403: \bibitem[]{}Friedel, D. N., Remijan, Anthony J., Snyder, L. E., A'Hearn, M. F., Blake, Geoffrey A., de Pater,
404: Imke, Dickel, H. R., Forster, J. R., Hogerheijde, M. R., Kraybill, C., Looney, L. W., Palmer, Patrick,
405: \& Wright, M. C. H. 2005, ApJ, 630, 623
406:
407: \bibitem[]{}Helbert, J., Rauer, H., Boice, D. C., \& Huebner, W. F. 2005, A\&A, 442, 1107
408:
409: %\bibitem[]{}Hogerheijde, M. R., de Pater, Imke, Friedel, D. N., Remijan, Anthony J., Snyder, L. E., A'Hearn, M. F.,
410: %Blake, Geoffrey A., Dickel, H. R., Forster, J. R., Kraybill, C., Looney, L. W., Palmer, Patrick, \& Wright, M. C. H.
411: %2006, ApJ, submitted
412:
413: \bibitem[]{}Hutsem\'{e}kers, D., Manfroid, J., Jehin, E., Arpigny, C., Cochran, A., Schulz, R.,
414: St\"{u}we, J. A., \& Zucconi, J.-M. 2005, A\&A, 440, L21
415:
416: \bibitem[]{}Ikeda, M., Kawaguchi, K., Takakuwa, S., Sakamoto, A., Sunada, K., \& Fuse, T. 2002, A\&A, 390, 363
417:
418: \bibitem[]{}Jewitt, D. C. 2004 in Comets II, M. C. Festou, H. U. Keller, \& H. A. Weaver (eds.),
419: University of Arizona Press, Tucson, p.659-676
420:
421: \bibitem[]{}Lis, D. C., Keene, J., Young, K., Phillips, T. G., Bockel\'{e}e-Morvan, D., Crovisier, J.,
422: Schilke, P., Goldsmith, P. F., \& Bergin, E. A. 1997, Icarus, 130, 355
423:
424: \bibitem[]{}Mitchell, D. L., Lin, R. P., Carlson, C. W., Korth, A., Reme, H., \& Mendis, D. A. 1992,
425: Icarus, 98, 125
426: Authors:
427: \bibitem[]{}Mumma, M. J., Disanti, M. A., dello Russo, N., Magee-Sauer, K., Gibb, E., \& Novak, R. 2002,
428: Proceedings of Asteroids, Comets, Meteors, Berlin, Germany. Ed. Barbara Warmbein, 753
429:
430: \bibitem[]{}Mumma, M. J., DiSanti, M. A., Magee-Sauer, K., Bonev, B. P., Villanueva, G. L.,
431: Kawakita, H., Dello Russo, N., Gibb, E. L., Blake, G. A., Lyke, J. E., Campbell, R. D., Aycock, J.,
432: Conrad, A., \& Hill, G. M. 2005, Science, 310, 270
433:
434: \bibitem[]{}Pickett, H. M., Poynter, R. L., Cohen, E. A., Delitsky, M. L., Pearson, J. C., \& M\"{u}ller, H. S. P.
435: 1998, J. Quant. Spectrosc. \& Rad. Transfer, 60, 883
436:
437: \bibitem[]{}Remijan, A., Snyder, L. E., Friedel, D. N., Veal, J. M., Palmer, Patrick, Woodney, L. M., A'Hearn,
438: Michael F., Forster, J. R., Wright, M. C. H., \& de Pater, I. 2004, BAAS, 36, \#33.02
439:
440: \bibitem[]{}Sault, R.~J., Teuben, P.~J., \& Wright, M.~C.~H.\ 1995, ASP Conf.~Ser.~ 77: Astronomical Data
441: Analysis Software and Systems IV, 77, 433
442:
443: \bibitem[]{}Snyder, L. E., Veal, J. M., Woodney, L. M., Wright, M. C. H., Palmer, Patrick, A'Hearn, M. F.,
444: Kuan, Y.-J., de Pater, I., \& Forster, J. R. 2001, AJ, 121, 1147
445:
446: \bibitem[]{}Weissman, P. R. 1999, Space Science Reviews, 90, 301
447:
448: \end{thebibliography}
449:
450: \clearpage
451: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}
452: \tablewidth{0pt}
453: \tablecolumns{6}
454: \tablecaption{Molecular Line Parameters}
455: \tablehead{
456: \colhead{\small } &\colhead{\small Quantum} & \colhead{\small Frequency} & \colhead{\small $E_{u}$} & \colhead{\small $S\mu^{2}$} & \colhead{$\alpha$(\small 1 AU)\tablenotemark{a}}\\
457: \colhead{\small Species} &\colhead{\small Numbers} & \colhead{\small (MHz)} & \colhead{\small (K)} & \colhead{\small (D$^{2}$)} & \colhead{\small (s$^{-1}$)}
458: }
459: \startdata
460: {\small CH$_3$OH }&{\small $3_{1,3}-4_{0,4}A+$ }&{\small 107,013.770(13) }&{\small 28.3 }&{\small 3.1 }&{\small $1.3\times10^{-5}$ }\\
461: {\small CS }&{\small $2-1$ }&{\small 97,980.985(15) }&{\small 7.7 }&{\small 7.1 }&{\small $6.7\times10^{-6}$ }\\
462: {\small $^{13}$CO }&{\small $1-0$ }&{\small 110,201.353(1) }&{\small 5.3 }&{\small 0.01 }&{\small $1.2\times10^{-6}$\tablenotemark{b}}\\
463: {\small CH$_3$CN }&{\small $6_K-5_K$ }&{\small 110,383.502(2)\tablenotemark{c} }&{\small 18.5 }&{\small 91.9 }&{\small $2.9\times10^{-6}$ }\\
464: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$CN }&{\small $10_{1,10}-9_{1,9}$ }&{\small 86,819.846(0) }&{\small 24.1 }&{\small 146.7 }&{\small $\sim10^{-5}$ }\\
465: {\small SiO }&{\small $2-1$ }&{\small 86,846.960(50) }&{\small 6.3 }&{\small 19.2 }&{\small $6.7\times10^{-6}$}\\
466: {\small HN$^{13}$C}&{\small $1-0$ }&{\small 87,090.850(50) }&{\small 4.2 }&{\small 7.3 }&{\small $1.5\times10^{-5}$\tablenotemark{d}}\\
467: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$OH }&{\small $4_{1,4}-3_{0,3}$ }&{\small 90,117.576(2) }&{\small 9.4 }&{\small 5.4 }&{\small $1.8\times10^{-5}$}\\
468: {\small CH$_3$OCHO }&{\small $8_{0,8}-7_{0,7}E$ }&{\small 90,227.595(13) }&{\small 20.1 }&{\small 21.0 }&{\small $4.7\times10^{-5}$ }\\
469: {\small }&{\small $8_{0,8}-7_{0,7}A$ }&{\small 90,229.647(14) }&{\small 20.1 }&{\small 21.0 }&{\small $4.7\times10^{-5}$}\\
470: {\small HNC }&{\small $1-0$ }&{\small 90,663.572(4) }&{\small 4.4 }&{\small 9.3 }&{\small $1.5\times10^{-5}$}\\
471: \enddata
472: %\tablecomments{CH$_3$OH molecular parameters taken from Xu \& Lovas (1997); CS molecular parameters taken from Kewley et al.\ (1963); $^{13}$CO molecular parameters taken from Winnewisser et al.\ (1985); CH$_3$CN molecular parameters taken from Boucher et al.\ (1980); CH$_3$CH$_2$CN molecular parameters taken from Lovas (1982); SiO molecular parameters taken from Lovas \& Krupenie (1974); HN$^{13}$C molecular parameters taken from Freking et al.\ (1979); CH$_3$CH$_2$OH molecular parameters taken from Lovas (1982); CH$_3$OCHO molecular parameters taken from Oesterling et al.\ (1999); HNC molecular parameters taken from Lovas (1978).}
473: \tablecomments{\footnotesize All molecular line parameters taken from Pickett et al. (1998). Errors in the rest frequency are
474: 2 $\sigma$.}
475: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize a}{\footnotesize Taken or estimated from Crovisier et al.\ (1994).}
476: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize b}{\footnotesize Assumed to be the same as for CO.}
477: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize c}{\footnotesize Only the frequency of the $K=0$ transition is given.}
478: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize d}{\footnotesize Assumed to be the same as for HNC.}
479: \end{deluxetable}
480:
481: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
482: \tablewidth{0pt}
483: \tablecolumns{8}
484: \tablecaption{Observational Parameters}
485: \tablehead{
486: \colhead{\small } & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\small LINEAR} & \colhead{} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\small NEAT} \\
487: \cline{2-4}\cline{6-8}\colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small $r_H$} & \colhead{\small $\Delta$} & \colhead{\small $\theta_a\times\theta_b$} & \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small $r_H$} & \colhead{\small $\Delta$} & \colhead{\small $\theta_a\times\theta_b$}\\
488: \colhead{\small Species} & \colhead{\small (AU)} & \colhead{\small (AU)} & \colhead{\small (\arcsec$\times$\arcsec)} & \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small (AU)} & \colhead{\small (AU)} & \colhead{\small (\arcsec$\times$\arcsec)}
489: }
490: \startdata
491: {\small CH$_3$OH }&{\small 0.75 }&{\small 0.38 }&{\small $22.3\times16.9$ }&{\small }&{\small 0.97 }&{\small 0.55 }&{\small $16.7\times14.3$ }\\
492: {\small CS }&{\small 0.74 }&{\small 0.41 }&{\small $23.7\times18.9$ }&{\small }&{\small 0.97 }&{\small 0.55 }&{\small $18.8\times15.4$ }\\
493: {\small $^{13}$CO }&{\small 0.75 }&{\small 0.38 }&{\small $21.8\times16.1$ }&{\small }&{\small 0.97 }&{\small 0.55 }&{\small $16.0\times14.1$ }\\
494: {\small CH$_3$CN }&{\small 0.75 }&{\small 0.38 }&{\small $21.6\times16.4$ }&{\small }&{\small 0.97 }&{\small 0.55 }&{\small $16.2\times14.0$ }\\
495: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$CN }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $28.5\times21.3$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
496: {\small SiO }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $28.5\times21.3$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
497: {\small HN$^{13}$C }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $28.7\times20.0$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
498: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$OH }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $28.2\times19.6$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
499: {\small CH$_3$OCHO }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $27.7\times19.3$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
500: {\small HNC }&{\small 0.77 }&{\small 0.32 }&{\small $27.7\times20.4$ }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }&{\small }\\
501: \enddata
502: \end{deluxetable}
503:
504: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
505: \tablewidth{0pt}
506: \tablecolumns{7}
507: \tablecaption{Variable Temperature and Outflow Velocity (VTOV) Results for Comet LINEAR}
508: \tablehead{
509: \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small $I_0$} & \colhead{\small $\Delta v$} &\colhead{\small $\langle N_T\rangle$} & \colhead{\small Q} & \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small }\\
510: \colhead{\small Species} &\colhead{\small (Jy bm$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small (cm$^{-2}$)} & \colhead{\small (s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small $\frac{\rm Q(X)}{\rm Q(H_2O)}$} & \colhead{\small $\frac{\rm Q(X)}{\rm Q(CN)}$\tablenotemark{a}}}
511: \startdata
512: {\small CH$_3$OH }&{\small 0.44(0.06) }&{\small 1.74(0.31) }&{\small $1.4(0.3)\times10^{14}$ }&{\small $7.5(1.5)\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $3.8(0.8)\times10^{-2}$ }&{\small }\\
513: {\small CS }&{\small 0.21(0.05) }&{\small 2.45(0.60) }&{\small $1.4(0.4)\times10^{12}$ }&{\small $1.5(0.5)\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $7.5(25)\times10^{-3}$ }&{\small }\\
514: {\small CH$_3$CN }&{\small $<0.13$ }&{\small 1.06 }&{\small $<4.6\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<2.3\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<1.2\times10^{-4}$ }&{\small $<0.16$}\\
515: {\small $^{13}$CO }&{\small $<0.12$ }&{\small 1.06 }&{\small $<1.5\times10^{14}$ }&{\small $<7.7\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $<4.0\times10^{-2}$ }&{\small }\\
516: {\small CH$_3$OCHO }&{\small $<0.09$ }&{\small 1.30 }&{\small $<2.5\times10^{13}$ }&{\small $<2.2\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $<1.0\times10^{-2}$ }&{\small }\\
517: {\small HNC }&{\small $<0.08$ }&{\small 1.35 }&{\small $<1.8\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<1.4\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<7.5\times10^{-5}$ }&{\small $<0.10$}\\
518: {\small HN$^{13}$C }&{\small $<0.08$ }&{\small 1.35 }&{\small $<2.8\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<2.2\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<1.1\times10^{-4}$ }&{\small $<0.16$}\\
519: {\small SiO }&{\small $<0.08$ }&{\small 1.35 }&{\small $<2.2\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<1.7\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<8.5\times10^{-5}$ }&{\small }\\
520: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$CN }&{\small $<0.08$ }&{\small 1.30 }&{\small $<2.3\times10^{12}$ }&{\small $<1.8\times10^{26}$ }&{\small $<9.0\times10^{-4}$ }&{\small $<1.3$}\\
521: {\small CH$_3$CH$_2$OH }&{\small $<0.08$ }&{\small 1.35 }&{\small $<1.9\times10^{13}$ }&{\small $<1.4\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $<7.0\times10^{-3}$ }&{\small }\\
522: \enddata
523: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize a}{\footnotesize The ratio is given only for those species which contain a C-N bond.}
524: \end{deluxetable}
525:
526: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
527: \tablewidth{0pt}
528: \tablecolumns{7}
529: \tablecaption{Variable Temperature and Outflow Velocity (VTOV) Results for Comet NEAT}
530: \tablehead{
531: \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small $I_0$} & \colhead{\small $\Delta v$} &\colhead{\small $\langle N_T\rangle$} & \colhead{\small Q} & \colhead{\small } & \colhead{\small }\\
532: \colhead{\small Species} &\colhead{\small (Jy bm$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small (cm$^{-2}$)} & \colhead{\small (s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{\small $\frac{\rm Q(X)}{\rm Q(H_2O)}$} & \colhead{\small $\frac{\rm Q(X)}{\rm Q(CN)}$\tablenotemark{a}}}
533: \startdata
534: {\small CH$_3$OH }&{\small 0.31(0.13) }&{\small 0.72(0.30) }&{\small $4.6(2.7)\times10^{13}$ }&{\small $2.9(1.7)\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $2.4(1.4)\times10^{-2}$ }&{\small }\\
535: {\small CS }&{\small $<0.14$ }&{\small 0.60 }&{\small $<4.0\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<1.4\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<1.4\times10^{-3}$ }&{\small }\\
536: {\small CH$_3$CN }&{\small $<0.06$ }&{\small 1.06 }&{\small $<2.0\times10^{11}$ }&{\small $<1.1\times10^{25}$ }&{\small $<9.2\times10^{-5}$ }&{\small $<4.0\times10^{-2}$}\\
537: {\small $^{13}$CO }&{\small $<0.06$ }&{\small 1.06 }&{\small $<9.8\times10^{13}$ }&{\small $<8.3\times10^{27}$ }&{\small $<7.0\times10^{-2}$ }&{\small }\\
538: \enddata
539: \tablenotetext{\footnotesize a}{\footnotesize The ratio is given only for those species which contain a C-N bond.}
540: \end{deluxetable}
541:
542:
543:
544:
545:
546: \clearpage
547: \figcaption{Comet LINEAR (C/2002 T7) and NEAT (C/2001 Q4) single field CH$_3$OH images and spectra. (a) Comet T7 emission
548: contours from the $J=3_{1,3}-4_{0,4} A+$ transition of CH$_3$OH at 107.013 GHz. The contour levels are -0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5,
549: and 0.6 Jy/beam ($1 \sigma$ spacing, starting at 3 $\sigma$). Image coordinates are arcseconds offsets relative to the
550: predicted position of the nucleus. The synthesized beam is in the lower left, and the line segment shows the solar direction.
551: (b) CH$_3$OH cross-correlation spectra, Ordinate is flux density per beam, I$_\nu$, in Jy/beam; $\sigma\sim$ 0.1 Jy/beam
552: (c) CH$_3$OH cross-correlation spectra (Hanning smoothed over 3 channels), labels are the same as in (b). (d) Comet Q4 emission
553: contours from CH$_3$OH. Contours indicate the CH$_3$OH emission near its peak centered at a cometocentric velocity of 0 km/s.
554: The contour levels are -0.1, 0.15, 0.2, and 0.25 Jy/beam ($1 \sigma$ spacing, starting at 3 $\sigma$).Image coordinates and
555: labels are the same as in (a). (e) CH$_3$OH cross-correlation spectra; labels are the same as in (b), $\sigma\sim$ 0.05
556: Jy/beam. (f) CH$_3$OH cross-correlation spectra (Hanning smoothed over 3 channels), abscissa and ordinate are the same as in
557: (b).}
558:
559: \figcaption{Comet LINEAR (C/2002 T7) single field CS image and spectra. (a) Comet T7 emission contours from the $J=2-1$
560: transition of CS at 97.980 GHz. Contours indicate the CS emission near its peak centered at a cometocentric velocity of 0
561: km/s. The contour levels are -0.15, 0.15, 0.225, and 0.3 Jy/beam ($1 \sigma$ spacing, starting at 2 $\sigma$) Image coordinates
562: and labels are the same as in Figure 1. (b) CS cross-correlation spectra; labels are the same as in Figure 1(b), $\sigma\sim$
563: 0.075 Jy/beam. (c) CS cross-correlation spectra (Hanning smoothed over 3 channels); labels are the same as in (b).}
564:
565: \clearpage
566: \begin{figure}
567: \epsscale{0.8}
568: \plotone{f1.eps}
569: \centerline{Figure 1.}
570: \end{figure}
571: \clearpage
572: \begin{figure}
573: \epsscale{0.45}
574: \plotone{f2.eps}
575: \centerline{Figure 2.}
576: \end{figure}
577:
578: \end{document}
579: