1: \documentclass{emulateapj}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \shortauthors{Luhman et al.}
6: \shorttitle{Oph 1622$-$2405: Not Planetary-Mass Binary}
7:
8: \title{Oph 1622$-$2405: Not a Planetary-Mass Binary}
9:
10: \author{K. L. Luhman\altaffilmark{1},
11: K. N. Allers\altaffilmark{2,3},
12: D. T. Jaffe\altaffilmark{4},
13: M. C. Cushing\altaffilmark{3,5,6},
14: K. A. Williams\altaffilmark{5,7},
15: C. L. Slesnick\altaffilmark{8},
16: and W. D. Vacca\altaffilmark{9}}
17:
18: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics,
19: The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802;
20: kluhman@astro.psu.edu.}
21:
22: \altaffiltext{2}{Institute for Astronomy, The University of Hawaii at Manoa,
23: 2680 Woodlawn Drive, Honolulu, HI 96822.}
24:
25: \altaffiltext{3}{Visiting Astronomer at the Infrared Telescope Facility, which
26: is operated by the University of Hawaii under Cooperative Agreement no. NCC
27: 5-538 with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of Space
28: Science, Planetary Astronomy Program.}
29:
30: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Astronomy, The University of Texas, Austin, TX
31: 78712.}
32:
33: \altaffiltext{5}{
34: Steward Observatory, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721.}
35:
36: \altaffiltext{6}{Spitzer Fellow.}
37:
38: \altaffiltext{7}{Current address: Department of Astronomy, The University of
39: Texas, Austin, TX 78712.}
40:
41: \altaffiltext{8}{
42: Department of Astronomy, MS105-24, California Institute of Technology,
43: Pasadena, CA 91125.}
44:
45: \altaffiltext{9}{
46: SOFIA-USRA, NASA Ames Research Center, MS N211-3, Moffett Field, CA 94035.}
47:
48: \begin{abstract}
49:
50:
51: We present an analysis of the mass and age of the young low-mass binary
52: Oph~1622$-$2405.
53: Using resolved optical spectroscopy of the binary, we measure spectral types of
54: M7.25$\pm0.25$ and M8.75$\pm0.25$ for the A and B components, respectively.
55: We show that our spectra are inconsistent with the spectral types of
56: M9 and M9.5-L0 from Jayawardhana \& Ivanov and M9$\pm$0.5 and M9.5$\pm0.5$
57: from Close and coworkers.
58: Based on our spectral types and the theoretical evolutionary models of
59: Chabrier and Baraffe, we estimate masses of $\sim0.055$ and
60: $\sim0.019$~$M_\odot$ for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B, which are significantly higher
61: than the values of 0.013 and 0.007~$M_\odot$ derived by Jayawardhana \& Ivanov
62: and above the range of masses observed for extrasolar planets
63: ($M\lesssim0.015$~$M_\odot$). Planet-like mass estimates are further
64: contradicted by our demonstration that Oph~1622$-$2405A is only slightly later
65: (by 0.5~subclass) than the composite of the young eclipsing binary brown
66: dwarf 2M~0535-0546, whose components have dynamical masses of 0.034 and
67: 0.054~$M_\odot$. To constrain the age of Oph~1622$-$2405, we compare the
68: strengths of gravity-sensitive absorption lines
69: in optical and near-infrared spectra of the primary to lines in
70: field dwarfs ($\tau>1$~Gyr) and members of Taurus ($\tau\sim1$~Myr)
71: and Upper Scorpius ($\tau\sim5$~Myr).
72: The line strengths for Oph~1622$-$2405A are inconsistent
73: with membership in Ophiuchus ($\tau<1$~Myr) and instead indicate an age
74: similar to that of Upper Sco, which is agreement with a similar analysis
75: performed by Close and coworkers. We conclude that Oph~1622$-$2405 is
76: part of an older population in Sco-Cen, perhaps Upper Sco itself.
77:
78:
79:
80:
81:
82:
83:
84:
85:
86:
87: \end{abstract}
88:
89: \keywords{infrared: stars --- stars: evolution --- stars: formation --- stars:
90: low-mass, brown dwarfs --- binaries: visual -- stars: pre-main sequence}
91:
92: \section{Introduction}
93: \label{sec:intro}
94:
95: Since the discovery of the first free-floating brown dwarfs a decade ago
96: \citep{shp94,reb95,bas96}, surveys of young clusters and the field have
97: found brown dwarfs in increasing numbers and at decreasing masses.
98: A natural consequence of these growing samples of brown dwarfs has been the
99: identification of binary systems with progressively lower total masses
100: \citep[][references therein]{cha04,bur06ppv}.
101: The least massive binaries are potentially valuable for testing theories
102: for the formation of objects at the bottom of the initial mass function
103: \citep{bur06ppv,luh06ppv}. To produce meaningful results,
104: these tests require reliable measurements of the basic properties of
105: the components of substellar binaries, including spectral type, luminosity,
106: age, and mass.
107:
108:
109:
110: Oph~1622$-$2405 is one such low-mass binary that deserves careful scrutiny.
111: This system was discovered during a search for disk-bearing young brown
112: dwarfs with the {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} \citep{all05,all06a}.
113: The $1.9\arcsec$ pair was only partially resolved by
114: {\it Spitzer}, but was fully resolved in optical and near-infrared (IR)
115: images and low-resolution near-IR spectroscopy presented by
116: \citet[][see also \citet{all06b}]{all05}.
117: Through this spectroscopy, she classified each
118: component as a pre-main-sequence object and measured spectral types of
119: M7.5 and M8 for the primary and secondary, respectively.
120: By placing the two components on the Hertzsprung-Russell (H-R) diagram
121: with theoretical evolutionary models, \citet{all05} estimated masses of 0.06
122: and 0.05~$M_\odot$ and a system age of $\sim40$~Myr.
123: In comparison, \citet{jay06a,jay06b} have reported spectral types
124: of M9 and M9.5-L0 and masses of 0.013 and 0.007~$M_\odot$ for the components
125: of Oph~1622$-$2405, leading \citet{jay06b} to characterize Oph~1622$-$2405
126: as the first known planetary-mass binary. \citet{clo07} independently
127: discovered the binarity of Oph~1622$-$2405 and estimated masses of
128: 0.017 and 0.014~$M_\odot$ for its components.
129:
130: We seek to better determine the physical properties of
131: the components of Oph~1622$-$2405, particularly their masses, through
132: new optical and near-IR spectroscopy (\S~\ref{sec:obs}).
133: With the optical data, we measure the spectral types of Oph~1622$-$2405A
134: and B with the optical classification scheme that has been most commonly
135: applied to young late-type objects and show how these types compare to
136: those of other young binaries through direct comparison of their optical spectra
137: (\S~\ref{sec:class}). We use gravity-sensitive absorption lines
138: in the optical and IR spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A to constrain its age
139: (\S~\ref{sec:grav}). We then estimate the masses of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B
140: via theoretical evolutionary models and by considering the dynamical
141: mass measurements of the eclipsing binary brown dwarf 2MASS~J05352184-0546085
142: (hereafter 2M~0535-0546, \S~\ref{sec:mass}).
143:
144:
145: \section{Observations}
146: \label{sec:obs}
147:
148:
149: The optical and IR images of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B (referred to as
150: Oph~1622$-$2405n and s, respectively, in \citet{all05})
151: from \citet{all05} are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:image}.
152: The astrometry and photometry measured by \citet{all05} for this pair
153: are provided in Table~\ref{tab:data1}.
154: \citet{all06a} described the collection and reduction of the larger imaging
155: survey from which these images are taken.
156: \citet{clo07} measured near-IR colors for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B as well.
157: Their colors differed significantly from those of field M and L dwarfs,
158: which they attributed to low surface gravity. However, a color difference of
159: that kind is not present in previous data for young late-M objects
160: \citep[e.g.,][]{luh99,bri02} and the colors that we measure for
161: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B are similar to those of both dwarfs and
162: pre-main-sequence sources.
163:
164: On the nights of 2006 August 17 and 18,
165: we performed optical spectroscopy on Oph~1622$-$2405A and B, respectively, with
166: the Low Dispersion Survey Spectrograph (LDSS-3) on the Magellan~II Telescope
167: and a $0.85\arcsec$ slit. This configuration resulted in a spectral resolution
168: of 5.8~\AA\ at 8000~\AA\ and a wavelength coverage of 5800-11000~\AA.
169: For each component of the binary, we obtained one 20~min exposure with the
170: slit aligned at the parallactic angle. After bias subtraction and flat-fielding,
171: the spectra were extracted and calibrated in wavelength with arc lamp data.
172: The spectra were then corrected for the sensitivity functions of the detectors,
173: which were measured from observations of spectrophotometric standard stars.
174: For comparison to Oph~1622$-$2405 in \S~\ref{sec:grav}, we will make use of a
175: spectrum of the eclipsing binary brown dwarf 2M~0535-0546 \citep{sta06} that
176: was obtained with LDSS-3 on 2006 February 10 and spectra of GL~1111 (M6.5V)
177: and LHS~2243 (M8V) that were obtained with the Blue Channel spectrograph
178: at the MMT on 2004 December 11 and 12, respectively.
179: The LDSS-3 configuration for 2M~0535-0546 was the same as for Oph~1622$-$2405.
180: The spectra of GL~1111 and LHS~2243 from Blue Channel have a resolution
181: of 2.6~\AA\ at 8000~\AA\ and a wavelength coverage of 6300-8900~\AA.
182:
183:
184: We obtained near-IR spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B with the spectrometer
185: SpeX \citep{ray03} at the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) on the
186: nights of 2006 June 22 and 24.
187: The instrument was operated in the SXD mode with a $0.5\arcsec$ slit,
188: producing a wavelength coverage of 0.8-2.5~\micron\ and a resolving power of
189: $R=1200$. With the slit rotated to encompass both components of the pair,
190: we obtained 10 2-minute exposures during sequences of dithers
191: between two positions on the slit on each night.
192: For comparison purposes, we also make use of a spectrum of the Taurus
193: member CFHT~4 that was obtained on the night of 2006 January 4 with the
194: same instrument configuration as used for Oph~1622$-$2405, except with a
195: $0.3\arcsec$ slit ($R=2000$). These SpeX data were reduced with the Spextool
196: package \citep{cus04} and corrected for telluric absorption \citep{vac03}.
197:
198: \section{Analysis}
199: \label{sec:analysis}
200:
201: \subsection{Spectral Classification}
202: \label{sec:class}
203:
204: Spectral types of late-M dwarfs and giants are defined at red optical
205: wavelengths \citep{kir91}. Averages of optical spectra of standard dwarfs and
206: giants agree well with data for late-M pre-main-sequence objects
207: \citep{luh97,luh98,luh99} and are the basis
208: of most of the published optical spectral types for low-mass members of nearby
209: star-forming regions \citep[e.g.,][]{bri02,luh03ic,luh04cha,luh06tau}.
210: We have applied this classification scheme to our optical
211: spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B, arriving at spectral types of M7.25$\pm0.25$
212: and M8.75$\pm0.25$, respectively.
213: If we use dwarfs alone to classify our spectra as done for this binary
214: by \citet{jay06b}, then we derive nearly the same spectral types, namely
215: M7.5 and M9. Figs.~\ref{fig:op1} and \ref{fig:op2} show comparisons of
216: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B to these best-matching standards. The averages of dwarfs
217: and giants match the target spectra more closely than dwarfs alone,
218: in agreement with previous work \citep[e.g.,][]{luh99}. Thus, we adopt the
219: types based on the comparisons to averages of dwarf and giant standards.
220: By doing so, our classifications can be reliably compared to types of
221: most known young late-type objects, which have been measured in the same way.
222:
223: In Figure~\ref{fig:op1}, we compare the spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A to data
224: for the composite of the young eclipsing binary 2M~0535-0546 (\S~\ref{sec:obs})
225: and the primary in the young wide binary 2M~1101-7732 \citep{luh04bin}.
226: This comparison demonstrates that Oph~1622$-$2405A is slightly later than
227: 2M~0535-0546A+B (which we classify as M6.75) and has the same spectral type as
228: 2M~1101-7732A \citep[M7.25,][]{luh04bin}.
229: Meanwhile, Oph~1622$-$2405B is slightly later than 2M~1101-7732B
230: \citep[M8.25,][]{luh04bin} based on the comparison of their spectra in
231: Figure~\ref{fig:op2}.
232:
233: Our optical spectral types of M7.25$\pm0.25$ and M8.75$\pm0.25$
234: for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B are significantly earlier than the optical types
235: of M9 and M9.5-L0 from \citet{jay06a,jay06b}.
236: This is true even if we use dwarf standards as done in those studies.
237: As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:op1}, the spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A
238: is poorly matched by both M9V and M9V+M9III, as well as
239: the M9 Taurus member KPNO~12 \citep{luh03tau}.
240: Similarly, the spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405B is earlier than
241: KPNO~4 (Figure~\ref{fig:op2}), which is the prototypical
242: pre-main-sequence representative of the M9.5 spectral class \citep{bri02}.
243: Oph~1622$-$2405B also differs significantly from M9.5V
244: and the young L0 object 2MASS~01415823-4633574
245: \citep[hereafter 2M~0141-4633,][]{kir06}. For instance, a defining
246: characteristic of the transition from M to L types for dwarfs is the
247: disappearance of TiO absorption at 7000-7200~\AA\ \citep{kir99},
248: and yet the TiO in Oph~1622$-$2405B is strong, indicating that
249: a dwarf-based spectral type of M9.5-L0 is not appropriate.
250: Our results for Oph~1622$-$2405~A and B are similar to those of \citet{all07}
251: for another object classified by \citet{jay06a}, 2M~1541-3345, which is
252: a disk-bearing source in the vicinity of the Lupus clouds \citep{all05,all06a}.
253: \citet{jay06a} reported a spectral type of M8 for this object while
254: \citet{all07} classified it is M5.75$\pm$0.25 with spectra and methods
255: like those used in this work.
256:
257: We now compare our optical classifications of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B
258: to previous near-IR observations.
259: Our optical types of M7.25$\pm0.25$ and M8.75$\pm0.25$ for Oph~1622$-$2405A and
260: B are consistent with the IR types of M7.5$\pm1$ and M8$\pm1$ from
261: \citet{all05} and M7$\pm1$ and M8$\pm1$ from \citet{all06b}, which were
262: measured by comparison to young objects that have been optically
263: classified with the same methods employed in this work.
264: \citet{bra06} and \citet{clo07} also presented near-IR spectra for
265: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B. \citet{bra06} did not compare their spectra
266: to data for classification standards and thus did not measure spectral types.
267: \citet{clo07} found that Oph~1622$-$2405B exhibited similar IR spectral
268: features as the young L0 source 2M~J0141-4633, and thus classified the former
269: as M9.5$\pm0.5$. Because the spectral features of the primary indicated
270: a slightly earlier type, they classified it as M9$\pm0.5$. However, given that
271: \citet{clo07} did not present a comparison of Oph~1622$-$2405 to earlier types,
272: it is unclear if earlier types would have provided better or
273: worse matches to their data. In fact, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:op2},
274: our optical spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405B is very different from the spectrum
275: of 2M~J0141-4633 from \citet{kir06}, demonstrating that they do not have the
276: same optical spectral types.
277:
278: \citet{bra06} and \citet{clo07} estimated
279: effective temperatures and surface gravities by comparing their data
280: to synthetic spectra. However, because of known deficiencies in theoretical
281: spectra of late-type objects \citep{leg01}, temperature and gravity estimates
282: of this kind are subject to systematic errors, and thus the accuracies of these
283: estimates are unknown. In addition, the temperature and gravity estimates
284: from those studies cannot be reliably compared to those of other young
285: late-type objects unless the latter are derived with the same
286: spectral features, model spectra, and fitting procedures.
287:
288: \subsection{Age}
289: \label{sec:grav}
290:
291: \citet{all05} and \citet{all06b} determined that the components of
292: Oph~1622$-$2405 are pre-main-sequence objects rather than field dwarfs by
293: performing low-resolution near-IR spectroscopy and detecting the presence
294: of triangular $H$-band continua \citep{luc01}.
295: This spectral characteristic is present during most of the pre-main-sequence
296: evolution of late-type objects, thus constraining the age of Oph~1622$-$2405
297: to be $\tau\lesssim100$~Myr \citep{kir06,all06b}.
298: To further constrain the age of this system, we examine additional
299: gravity-sensitive absorption lines in our higher-resolution optical and near-IR
300: spectra, namely K~I, Na~I, and FeH \citep{mar96,luh98,gor03,mc04}.
301:
302: In this analysis, we consider only the primary because
303: its data exhibit better signal-to-noise.
304: For comparison to Oph~1622$-$2405A, we select representatives of three
305: distinct luminosity classes and ages: members of the Taurus star-forming
306: region \citep[$\tau\sim1$~Myr,][]{bri02,luh03tau}, members of the
307: Upper Scorpius OB association \citep[$\tau\sim5$~Myr,][]{pm06},
308: and field dwarfs ($\tau>1$~Gyr). We require that these objects have spectral
309: types that are within 0.5 subclass of the spectral type of the primary
310: so that our comparison is sensitive to variations in surface gravity alone.
311: For Taurus, we use the optical spectrum of 2MASS~04484189+1703374
312: \citep[M7,][]{luh06tau}
313: from \citet{luh06tau} and our IR spectrum of CFHT~4 \citep[M7,][]{bri02}.
314: Field dwarfs are represented by an average of our optical spectra of
315: GL~1111 \citep[M6.5V,][]{hen94} and LHS~2243 \citep[M8V,][]{kir95}
316: and the IR spectrum of vB~8 \citep[M7,][]{kir91} from \citet{cus05}.
317: For Upper Sco, we use the $J$-band spectrum of U~Sco~CTIO~128
318: \citep[M7,][]{ard00} from \citet{sle04}.
319: To enable a reliable comparison of absorption line strengths, spectra for
320: a given wavelength range have been smoothed to a common spectral resolution.
321: Although optical spectra for Upper Sco are available from \citet{sle06},
322: we do not include them in this comparison because they have significantly
323: lower spectra resolution that the other optical data we are examining,
324: and we prefer to make these comparisons at the highest possible resolution.
325:
326: In Figs.~\ref{fig:lines1} and \ref{fig:lines2},
327: we compare the spectra for Taurus, Upper Sco, and field dwarfs to
328: the spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A for wavelength ranges encompassing
329: K~I, Na~I, and FeH. For all of these transitions, Oph~1622$-$2405A
330: exhibits stronger lines than the Taurus members and weaker lines than
331: the field dwarfs, indicating that it is above the main sequence
332: ($\tau\lesssim100$~Myr) but older than Taurus ($\tau>1$~Myr).
333: For the subset of comparisons in which Upper Sco is represented, the line
334: strengths are similar between Oph~1622$-$2405A and the Upper Sco member.
335: If we degrade the optical spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A to the lower
336: spectral resolution of optical data in Upper Sco from \citet{sle06}, we
337: also find similar line strengths for the optical transitions of Na~I and K~I.
338: Thus, the gravity-sensitive lines in the spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A
339: suggest an age similar to that of Upper Sco ($\tau\sim5$~Myr) with
340: an upper limit that is undetermined, but probably no more than a few tens
341: of millions of years.
342:
343: Using their near-IR spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B,
344: \citet{bra06} compared the equivalent widths of gravity-sensitive lines
345: between Oph~1622$-$2405 and field dwarfs, demonstrating that the binary's
346: components have lower gravities and hence younger ages than dwarfs,
347: which is consistent with the results in this work, \citet{all05},
348: \citet{all06b}, and \citet{clo07}.
349: However, their analysis did not further refine the age of the system and
350: they did not claim to accurately measure the gravities and ages of
351: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B, and instead assumed membership in Ophiuchus.
352: On the other hand, \citet{clo07} constrained the gravity of Oph~1622$-$2405A
353: and B more tightly by comparing their data to KPNO~4 ($\tau\sim1$~Myr)
354: and $\sigma$~Ori~51 ($\tau\sim5$~Myr). This comparison indicated that
355: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B are older than KPNO~4 and similar in age to
356: $\sigma$~Ori~51, which is in agreement with the age constraints that we
357: have derived in this section.
358:
359: \subsection{Membership}
360:
361: The analysis of gravity-sensitive lines in \S~\ref{sec:grav}
362: demonstrated that Oph~1622$-$2405A is older than Taurus ($\tau\sim1$~Myr),
363: which in turn is older than the stellar population within
364: the Ophiuchus cloud core \citep[$\tau<1$~Myr,][]{lr99}.
365: Thus, Oph~1622$-$2405 is not a member of the current generation of stars
366: forming within the Ophiuchus cloud, which is consistent with the
367: low extinction of this binary ($A_V<1$) and its large angular
368: distance from the cloud core ($\theta\sim0\fdg5$).
369: Instead, Oph~1622$-$2405 probably is part of an older population of stars
370: in the Sco-Cen complex, which contains several neighboring and overlapping
371: generations of stars with ages from $<1$ to 20~Myr \citep{pm06}.
372: For instance, Oph~1622$-$2405 is within the area encompassed by
373: known members of Upper Sco \citep{sle06,pm06} and is near a population of
374: exposed young stars distributed across the front of the Ophiuchus cloud,
375: which is coeval with Upper Sco and may be an extension of it \citep{wil05}.
376:
377: Although we cannot definitively identify the origin of Oph~1622$-$2405 nor
378: measure its distance, membership in Upper Sco is likely based on its
379: location and surface gravity diagnostics. Indeed, this evidence of membership
380: in Upper Sco is the same as for previously reported
381: late-type members \citep{mar04,sle06}. Therefore, for the purpose of
382: estimating their luminosities, we assign to Oph~1622$-$2405A and B the distance
383: of Upper Sco, which extends from 125 to 165~pc \citep{pm06}.
384: Based on the comparison of the optical spectra of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B to
385: spectra of other young late-type objects in \S~\ref{sec:class}, we find
386: that the extinction of each component is $A_V<1$. Therefore,
387: we adopt $A_V=0.5\pm0.5$ for measuring their luminosities.
388: The remaining details of the luminosity estimates are provided by
389: \citet{all06a}. Our luminosity measurements for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B
390: are listed in Table~\ref{tab:data2}.
391:
392: To examine the ages implied by their luminosities, we plot Oph~1622$-$2405A
393: and B on the H-R diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:hr} with the evolutionary models of
394: \citet{bar98} and \citet{cha00}. We have converted our optical spectral types
395: to effective temperatures with a temperature scale that is compatible
396: with these models for young objects \citep{luh03ic}.
397: The data and models in Figure~\ref{fig:hr} imply ages of 10-30~Myr for
398: the primary and 1-20~Myr for the secondary. Thus, these results are
399: consistent with coevality for the two objects, which is expected for a
400: binary system. These ages are somewhat older than the canonical value of
401: 5~Myr that is usually quoted for Upper Sco, but the age of a young population is
402: sensitive to how it is defined, the mass range of objects considered, and
403: the choice of models. To reliably compare the inferred ages of
404: Oph~1622$-$2405A and B to those of Upper Sco members, the luminosities and
405: temperatures of this binary should be compared directly to those of late-type
406: members of Upper Sco. We do this by including in Figure~\ref{fig:hr}
407: the late-type members of Upper Sco from \citet{sle06}. The lower limits
408: of the sequence in temperature and luminosity are reflections of the
409: detection limits of the survey from \citet{sle06}. An extension of the
410: sequence below these limits in a manner that is parallel to the theoretical
411: isochrones would encompass both components of Oph~1622$-$2405. In other words,
412: the model ages of the more massive members of the Upper Sco sequence from
413: \citet{sle06} are consistent with the model ages of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B.
414: Similarly, the binary components fall within the sequence of low-mass
415: Upper Sco members in the color-magnitude diagram from \citet{mar04}.
416:
417:
418: \subsection{Mass}
419: \label{sec:mass}
420:
421: In addition to ages, the evolutionary models in Figure~\ref{fig:hr}
422: also provide estimates of masses, implying values of 0.055$\pm$0.01 and
423: $0.019^{+0.01}_{-0.005}$~$M_\odot$ for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B, respectively.
424: The quoted uncertainties reflect only the uncertainties in spectral types
425: and luminosities. Additional systematic errors could be introduced by the
426: adopted temperature scale and evolutionary models.
427: However, the sizes of these systematic errors are probably not large, as
428: demonstrated by various observational tests \citep{luh03ic,luh06abdor}.
429: The mass estimated for Oph~1622$-$2405A by \citet{all05} is similar to our
430: value, while her estimate for the secondary was twice our value because of
431: the earlier spectral type that she derived.
432: Meanwhile, our estimates for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B are significantly higher
433: than the masses of 0.013 and 0.007~$M_\odot$ from \citet{jay06b}.
434: Our estimate for the primary is also much higher than the value of
435: 0.017~$M_\odot$ from \citet{clo07}, while our mass for the secondary is
436: only slightly higher than their mass of 0.014~$M_\odot$.
437: The validity of higher estimates is supported by the fact that
438: Oph~1622$-$2405A is only slightly cooler than the composite of the eclipsing
439: binary brown dwarf 2M~0535-0546A+B (Figure~\ref{fig:op1}) and thus
440: should have a comparable mass \citep[$M=0.054$ and 0.034~$M_\odot$,][]{sta06}.
441:
442: The spectral types, temperatures, luminosities, and masses of Oph~1622$-$2405A
443: and B produced by our analysis are compiled in Table~\ref{tab:data2}.
444:
445: \section{Conclusions}
446:
447: Using optical spectroscopy, we have measured spectral types for
448: the young binary Oph~1622$-$2405 that are significantly earlier than those
449: reported by \citet{jay06a,jay06b} and \citet{clo07}.
450: As a result, our mass estimates for these objects ($M=0.055$ and
451: 0.019~$M_\odot$) are higher than those from
452: \citet[][$M=0.013$ and 0.007~$M_\odot$]{jay06a,jay06b}
453: and \citet[][$M=0.017$ and 0.014~$M_\odot$]{clo07} and are above the range of
454: planetary masses \citep[$M\lesssim0.015$~$M_{\odot}$,][]{mar05}.
455: Through a direct comparison of their spectra, we find that the primaries
456: in Oph~1622$-$2405 and the young wide binary 2M~1101-7732 have the same spectral
457: types while Oph~1622$-$2405B is only slightly later than 2M~1101-7732B,
458: which strongly indicates that these two binaries have similar masses.
459: Our analysis of gravity-sensitive absorption lines in the spectra of
460: Oph~1622$-$2405A have demonstrated that this system is too old to be a member
461: of the Ophiuchus star-forming region ($\tau<1$~Myr).
462: Instead, the age constraints from those data combined with the position of
463: Oph~1622$-$2405 on the H-R diagram are consistent with membership in Upper Sco
464: ($\tau\sim5$~Myr)\footnote{Using the same spectral classification methods
465: shown in this work, \citet{all07} concluded that another object from
466: \citet{jay06a}, 2M~1541-3345, is also earlier, older, and more massive than
467: reported in that study.}. Additional observations (e.g., proper motions,
468: radial velocities) are
469: needed to better determine the origin and membership of this binary system.
470: If the distance of Upper Sco is adopted for Oph~1622$-$2405, then the
471: separation of $1.9\arcsec$ for this binary corresponds to $\sim300$~AU, making
472: it the second young wide binary brown dwarf to be found.
473: Thus, Oph~1622$-$2405 is very similar to 2M~1101-7732 in both mass and
474: separation but is somewhat older (5~Myr versus 1~Myr).
475: Given the advanced age of this system compared to most disk-bearing stars
476: and brown dwarfs, the disk detected in Oph~1622$-$2405 by \citet{all06a}
477: is a valuable laboratory for studying the evolution of brown dwarf disks.
478:
479:
480:
481:
482:
483: \acknowledgements
484: We thank Davy Kirkpatrick for providing his spectrum of 2M~J0141-4633
485: and Laird Close for providing his results prior to publication.
486: K. L. was supported by grant AST-0544588 from the National Science Foundation.
487: We thank Ivelive Momcheva for providing the telescope time for the LDSS-3
488: observations of Oph~1622$-$2405.
489: This work is supported by NASA through the Spitzer Space Telescope Fellowship
490: Program, through a contract issued by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California
491: Institute of Technology under a contract with NASA.
492:
493: \begin{thebibliography}{}
494:
495: \bibitem[Allen et al.(2007)]{all07}
496: Allen, P. R., et al. 2007, \apj, in press
497:
498: \bibitem[Allers(2005)]{all05}
499: Allers, K. N. 2005, PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin
500:
501: \bibitem[Allers et al.(2006)]{all06a}
502: Allers, K. N., Kessler-Silacci, J. E., Cieza, L. A., \& Jaffe, D. T. 2006,
503: \apj, 644, 364
504:
505: \bibitem[Allers et al.(2007)]{all06b}
506: Allers, K. N., et al. 2007, \apj, in press
507:
508: \bibitem[Ardila et al.(2000)]{ard00}
509: Ardila, D., Mart{\'\i}n, E., \& Basri, G. 2000, \aj, 120, 479
510:
511: \bibitem[Baraffe et al.(1998)]{bar98}
512: Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F., \& Hauschildt, P. H. 1998, \aap, 337, 403
513:
514: \bibitem[Basri et al.(1996)]{bas96}
515: Basri, G., Marcy, G. W., \& Graham, J. R. 1996, \apj, 458, 600
516:
517: \bibitem[Brandeker et al.(2006)]{bra06}
518: Brandeker, A., Jayawardhana, R., Ivanov, V. D., \& Kurtev, R. 2006, \apj, 653,
519: L61
520:
521: \bibitem[Brice\~no et al.(2002)]{bri02}
522: Brice\~{n}o, C., Luhman, K. L., Hartmann, L., Stauffer, J. R., \& Kirkpatrick,
523: J. D. 2002, \apj, 580, 317
524:
525: \bibitem[Burgasser et al.(2006)]{bur06ppv}
526: Burgasser, A. J., Reid, I. N., Siegler, N., Close, L., Allen, P., Lowrance, P.,
527: Gizis, J. 2006, Protostars and Planets V, in press
528:
529: \bibitem[Chabrier et al.(2000)]{cha00}
530: Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I., Allard, F., \& Hauschildt, P. 2000, \apj, 542, L119
531:
532: \bibitem[Chauvin et al.(2004)]{cha04}
533: Chauvin, G., et al. 2004, \aap, 425, L29
534:
535: \bibitem[Close et al.(2007)]{clo07}
536: Close, L. M., et al. 2007, \apj, submitted
537:
538: \bibitem[Cushing et al.(2005)]{cus05}
539: Cushing, M. C., Rayner, J. T., \& Vacca, W. D. 2005, \apj, 623, 1115
540:
541: \bibitem[Cushing et al.(2004)]{cus04}
542: Cushing, M. C., Vacca, W. D., \& Rayner, J. T. 2004, \pasp, 116, 362
543:
544: \bibitem[Gizis et al.(2000)]{giz00}
545: Gizis, J. E., Monet, D. G., Reid, I. N., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Liebert, J., \&
546: Williams, R. J. 2000, \aj, 120, 1085
547:
548: \bibitem[Gorlova et al.(2003)]{gor03}
549: Gorlova, N. I., Meyer, M. R., Rieke, G. H., \& Liebert, J. 2003, \apj, 593, 1074
550:
551: \bibitem[Henry et al.(1994)]{hen94}
552: Henry, T. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., \& Simons, D. A. 1994, \aj, 108, 1437
553:
554: \bibitem[Jayawardhana \& Ivanov(2006a)]{jay06a}
555: Jayawardhana, R., \& Ivanov, V. D. 2006a, \apj, 647, L167
556:
557: \bibitem[Jayawardhana \& Ivanov(2006b)]{jay06b}
558: Jayawardhana, R., \& Ivanov, V. D. 2006b, Science, 313, 1279
559:
560: \bibitem[Kirkpatrick et al.(1991)]{kir91}
561: Kirkpatrick, J. D., Henry, T. J., \& McCarthy, D. W. 1991, \apjs, 77, 417
562:
563: \bibitem[Kirkpatrick et al.(1995)]{kir95}
564: Kirkpatrick, J. D., Henry, T. J., \& Simons, D. A. 1995, \aj, 109, 797
565:
566:
567: \bibitem[Kirkpatrick et al.(1999)]{kir99}
568: Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 1999, \apj, 519, 802
569:
570: \bibitem[Kirkpatrick et al.(2006)]{kir06}
571: Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2006, \apj, 639, 1120
572:
573: \bibitem[Leggett et al.(2001)]{leg01}
574: Leggett, S. K., Allard, F., Geballe, T. R., Hauschildt, P. H., \& Schweitzer,
575: A. 2001, \apj, 548, 908
576:
577: \bibitem[Lucas et al.(2001)]{luc01}
578: Lucas, P. W., Roche, P. F., Allard, F., \& Hauschildt, P. H. 2001,
579: \mnras, 326, 695
580:
581:
582: \bibitem[Luhman(1999)]{luh99}
583: Luhman, K. L. 1999, \apj, 525, 466
584:
585: \bibitem[Luhman(2004a)]{luh04cha}
586: Luhman, K. L. 2004a, \apj, 602, 816
587:
588: \bibitem[Luhman(2004b)]{luh04bin}
589: Luhman, K. L. 2004b, \apj, 614, 398
590:
591:
592:
593: \bibitem[Luhman(2006)]{luh06tau}
594: Luhman, K. L. 2006, \apj, 645, 676
595:
596: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2003a)]{luh03tau}
597: Luhman, K. L., Brice\~{n}o, C., Stauffer, J. R., Hartmann, L.,
598: Barrado y Navascu\'{e}s, D., \& Nelson, C. 2003a, \apj, 590, 348
599:
600: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(1997)]{luh97}
601: Luhman, K. L., Liebert, J., \& Rieke, G. H. 1997, \apj, 489, L165
602:
603:
604:
605: \bibitem[Luhman \& Potter(2006)]{luh06abdor}
606: Luhman, K. L., \& Potter, D. 2006, \apj, 638, 887
607:
608: \bibitem[Luhman \& Rieke(1999)]{lr99}
609: Luhman, K. L., \& Rieke, G. H. 1999, \apj, 525, 440
610:
611: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(1998)]{luh98}
612: Luhman, K. L., Rieke, G. H., Lada, C. J., \& Lada, E. A. 1998, \apj, 508, 347
613:
614:
615:
616: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2003b)]{luh03ic}
617: Luhman, K. L., et al. 2003b, \apj, 593, 1093
618:
619:
620:
621: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2006)]{luh06ppv}
622: Luhman, K. L., Joergens, V., Lada, C., Muzerolle, J., Pascucci, I., \& White, R.
623: 2006, Protostars and Planets V, in press
624:
625:
626: \bibitem[Marcy et al.(2005)]{mar05}
627: Marcy, G., et al. 2005, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, 158, 24
628:
629: \bibitem[Mart{\'\i}n et al.(2004)]{mar04}
630: Mart{\'\i}n, E. L., Delfosse, X., \& Guieu, S. 2004, \aj, 127, 449
631:
632: \bibitem[Mart{\'\i}n et al.(1996)]{mar96}
633: Mart{\'\i}n, E. L., Rebolo, R., \& Zapatero Osorio, M. R. 1996, \apj, 469, 706
634:
635:
636:
637:
638:
639:
640:
641: \bibitem[McGovern et al.(2004)]{mc04}
642: McGovern, M. R., Kirkpatrick, J. D., McLean, I. S., Burgasser, A. J.,
643: Prato, L., \& Lowrance, P. J. 2004, \apj, 600, 1020
644:
645:
646:
647:
648:
649:
650:
651:
652:
653:
654:
655: \bibitem[Preibisch \& Mamajek(2006)]{pm06}
656: Preibisch, T., \& Mamajek, E. 2006, Handbook of Star Forming Regions,
657: ASP Conference Series, submitted
658:
659: \bibitem[Rayner et al.(2003)]{ray03}
660: Rayner, J. T., et al. 2003, \pasp, 115, 362
661:
662:
663: \bibitem[Rebolo et al.(1995)]{reb95}
664: Rebolo, R., Zapatero-Osorio, M. R., \& Mart{\'\i}n, E. \nat, 377, 129
665:
666: \bibitem[Reid et al.(1999)]{rei99a}
667: Reid, I. N., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gizis, J. E., \& Liebert, J. 1999, \apj,
668: 527, L105
669:
670:
671:
672:
673: \bibitem[Slesnick et al.(2006)]{sle06}
674: Slesnick, C. L., Carpenter, J. M., \& Hillenbrand, L. A. 2006, \aj, 131, 3016
675:
676:
677: \bibitem[Slesnick et al.(2004)]{sle04}
678: Slesnick, C. L., Hillenbrand, L. A., \& Carpenter, J. M. 2004, \apj, 610, 1045
679:
680: \bibitem[Stassun et al.(2006)]{sta06}
681: Stassun, K. G., Mathieu, R. D., \& Valenti, J. A. 2006, Nature, 440, 311
682:
683: \bibitem[Stauffer et al.(1994)]{shp94}
684: Stauffer, J. R., Hamilton, D., \& Probst, R. G. 1994, \aj, 108, 155
685:
686:
687: \bibitem[Vacca et al.(2003)]{vac03}
688: Vacca, W. D., Cushing, M. C., \& Rayner J. T., 2003, \pasp, 115, 389
689:
690:
691:
692:
693:
694: \bibitem[Wilking et al.(2005)]{wil05}
695: Wilking, B. A., Meyer, M. R., Robinson, J. G., \& Greene, T. P. 2005, \aj,
696: 130, 1733
697:
698:
699:
700: \end{thebibliography}
701: \clearpage
702: \begin{deluxetable}{llllllll}
703: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
704: \tablewidth{0pt}
705: \tablecaption{Astrometry and Photometry for Oph 1622$-$2405\label{tab:data1}}
706: \tablehead{
707: \colhead{Component} &
708: \colhead{$\alpha$(J2000)} &
709: \colhead{$\delta$(J2000)} &
710: \colhead{$I$} &
711: \colhead{$J$} &
712: \colhead{$H$} &
713: \colhead{$K_s$} &
714: \colhead{[3.6]}}
715: \startdata
716: A & 16 22 25.2 & -24 05 13.7 & 17.78$\pm$0.10 & 14.53$\pm$0.03 & 14.01$\pm$0.03 & 13.55$\pm$0.03 & 13.02$\pm$0.11 \\
717: B & 16 22 25.2 & -24 05 15.6 & 18.98$\pm$0.10 & 15.24$\pm$0.03 & 14.64$\pm$0.03 & 14.03$\pm$0.03 & 13.22$\pm$0.11 \\
718: \enddata
719: \end{deluxetable}
720:
721: \begin{deluxetable}{lllll}
722: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
723: \tablewidth{0pt}
724: \tablecaption{Properties of Oph 1622$-$2405\label{tab:data2}}
725: \tablehead{
726: \colhead{} &
727: \colhead{Spectral} &
728: \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$\tablenotemark{a}} &
729: \colhead{} &
730: \colhead{Mass} \\
731: \colhead{Component} &
732: \colhead{Type} &
733: \colhead{(K)} &
734: \colhead{log $L/L_\odot$\tablenotemark{b}} &
735: \colhead{($M_\odot$)}}
736: \startdata
737: A & M7.25$\pm$0.25 & 2838 & -2.41$\pm$0.13 & 0.055$\pm$0.01 \\
738: B & M8.75$\pm$0.25 & 2478 & -2.63$\pm$0.13 & $0.019^{+0.01}_{-0.005}$ \\
739: \enddata
740: \tablenotetext{a}{Temperature scale from \citet{luh03ic}.}
741: \tablenotetext{b}{Based on an assumed distance of 145$\pm$20~pc.}
742: \end{deluxetable}
743: \clearpage
744: \begin{figure}
745: %\epsscale{0.55}
746: \plotone{f1.eps}
747: \caption{
748: Discovery images of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B at $I$, $K_s$, 3.6~\micron, and
749: 8.0~\micron\ \citep{all05}.
750: The size of each image is $7\arcsec\times7\arcsec$.
751: North is up and east is left in these images.
752: }
753: \label{fig:image}
754: \end{figure}
755:
756: \begin{figure}
757: %\epsscale{0.6}
758: \plotone{f2.eps}
759: \caption{
760: Optical spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A ({\it solid lines}) and seven comparison
761: spectra ({\it dotted lines}).
762: If dwarf standards are used to classify this object, then M7.5V provides the
763: best match. When we instead use averages of dwarfs and giants as standards,
764: we derive a spectral type of M7.25.
765: Oph~1622$-$2405A is slightly later than the composite spectrum of the
766: eclipsing binary 2M~0535-0546, whose components have dynamical masses of
767: 0.034 and 0.054~$M_\odot$ \citep{sta06}.
768: The spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405A agrees well with the primary
769: in the young binary 2M~1101-7732 \citep[M7.25,][]{luh04bin}.
770: Although \citet{jay06a} and \citet{clo07} each reported a spectral type of M9
771: for Oph~1622$-$2405A, its spectrum differs significantly from those of
772: M9V, M9V+M9III, and the M9 Taurus member KPNO~12 \citep{luh03tau}.
773: The data are displayed at a resolution of 18~\AA\ and are normalized at
774: 7500~\AA.
775: }
776: \label{fig:op1}
777: \end{figure}
778:
779: \begin{figure}
780: %\epsscale{0.6}
781: \plotone{f3.eps}
782: \caption{
783: Optical spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405B ({\it solid lines}) and six comparison
784: spectra ({\it dotted lines}).
785: If dwarf standards are used to classify Oph~1622$-$2405B, M9V provides the
786: best match. When we instead use averages of dwarfs and giants as standards,
787: we derive a spectral type of M8.75.
788: The average of the dwarf and giant agrees better with the spectrum of
789: Oph~1622$-$2405B than the dwarf, as expected for a pre-main-sequence object
790: of this kind \citep{luh99}. The spectrum of Oph~1622$-$2405B is later than the
791: secondary in the young binary 2M~1101-7732 \citep[M8.25,][]{luh04bin}.
792: Although \citet{jay06b} and \citet{clo07} reported spectral types of M9.5-L0
793: and M9.5$\pm$0.5 for Oph~1622$-$2405B, respectively, its spectrum differs
794: significantly from those of M9.5V, the M9.5 Taurus member KPNO~4
795: \citep{bri02}, and the young L0 object 2M~0141-4633 \citep{kir06}. The data
796: are displayed at a resolution of 18~\AA\ and are normalized at 7500~\AA.
797: }
798: \label{fig:op2}
799: \end{figure}
800:
801: \begin{figure}
802: %\epsscale{0.8}
803: \plotone{f4.eps}
804: \caption{
805: Gravity-sensitive absorption lines for Oph~1622$-$2405A ({\it solid lines}),
806: a Taurus member ($\tau\sim1$~Myr, {\it upper dotted lines}), and a
807: field dwarf ($\tau>1$~Gyr, {\it lower dotted lines}).
808: }
809: \label{fig:lines1}
810: \end{figure}
811:
812: \begin{figure}
813: %\epsscale{0.55}
814: %\vspace*{-10mm}
815: \plotone{f5.eps}
816: \caption{
817: Gravity-sensitive absorption lines for Oph~1622$-$2405A ({\it solid lines}),
818: a Taurus member ($\tau\sim1$~Myr, {\it upper dotted lines}),
819: an Upper~Sco member ($\tau\sim5$~Myr, {\it middle dotted lines}),
820: and a field dwarf ($\tau>1$~Gyr, {\it lower dotted lines}).
821: The data in this diagram and in Figure~\ref{fig:lines1} indicate that
822: Oph~1622$-$2405A is a pre-main-sequence source with an age of $\sim5$~Myr.
823: }
824: \label{fig:lines2}
825: \end{figure}
826:
827: \begin{figure}
828: %\epsscale{0.55}
829: \plotone{f6.eps}
830: \caption{
831: H-R diagram for Oph~1622$-$2405A and B
832: \citep[{\it filled circle},][Table~\ref{tab:data2}]{all05},
833: 2M~1101-7732A and B \citep[{\it triangle},][]{luh04bin},
834: and members of Upper Sco \citep[{\it circles},][]{sle06}
835: shown with the theoretical evolutionary models of
836: \citet{bar98} ($M/M_\odot>0.1$) and \citet{cha00} ($M/M_\odot\leq0.1$),
837: where the mass tracks ({\it dotted lines}) and isochrones ({\it solid lines})
838: are labeled in units of $M_\odot$ and Myr, respectively.
839: According to this diagram, Oph~1622$-$2405A and B have masses that
840: are similar to those of 2M~1101-7732A and B. In addition, the
841: positions of Oph~1622$-$2405A and B are consistent with an extension of the
842: Upper Sco sequence to lower masses.
843: }
844: \label{fig:hr}
845: \end{figure}
846:
847: \end{document}
848: