source
stringlengths 1
2.05k
⌀ | target
stringlengths 1
11.7k
|
|---|---|
We expect the sigual to be sanaller as the lens approaches the source because of the econmetrv of eravitational lensing. | We expect the signal to be smaller as the lens approaches the source because of the geometry of gravitational lensing. |
The fact that it drops so quickly. aud in fact for τν=1.2 rises slightlv first. is because at ligher redshifts a magnitude luted survey contaius more massive objects. that are more effective at lensing. | The fact that it drops so quickly, and in fact for $z_s=1.2$ rises slightly first, is because at higher redshifts a magnitude limited survey contains more massive objects, that are more effective at lensing. |
At low redshift. ealaxies have a larger angular size so fora elven augular separation we start to probe iuto the center of the NEW profile where the profile slope is more constant with radius. | At low redshift, galaxies have a larger angular size so for a given angular separation we start to probe into the center of the NFW profile where the profile slope is more constant with radius. |
However. on averaging over redshift the lower redshift contribution would become simaller since there will be fewer objects in the light cone. | However, on averaging over redshift the lower redshift contribution would become smaller since there will be fewer objects in the light cone. |
Also there is little cosmic shear signal at low redshift so these ealaxics could be ignored. | Also there is little cosmic shear signal at low redshift so these galaxies could be ignored. |
Finally we investigated the effect of survey depth. aud fud that for a given angular scale. fixing ;;=0.3 and te=OLS. the signal was around a factor 2.5 lareer if kc«22. and a factor approximately | smaller if r27. depending ou the extrapolation of the huuinositv function. | Finally we investigated the effect of survey depth, and find that for a given angular scale, fixing $z_d=0.3$ and $z_s=0.8$, the signal was around a factor 2.5 larger if $r<22$, and a factor approximately 4 smaller if $r<27$, depending on the extrapolation of the luminosity function. |
This is to be expected because deeper survevs contain many less niassive objecta. | This is to be expected because deeper surveys contain many less massive objects. |
Iu Figs. | In Figs. |
3. aud 1. we compare the ealaxy-ealaxy lensing contribution to the ellipticity correlation function with that from cosmic shear cross-correlatiou toiiograpliy. | \ref{fig:cf cosmic shear} and \ref{fig:z dep}
we compare the galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution to the ellipticity correlation function with that from cosmic shear cross-correlation tomography. |
We calculate the nou-Iinear matter power spectruni as a function of redshift usine CAAIB (Lewisetal.2000) with the WaloFit (Sumithetal.2003) option. | We calculate the non-linear matter power spectrum as a function of redshift using CAMB \citep{lewiscl00} with the HaloFit \citep{smithea03} option. |
This is converted iuto the cosmüc shear cross power spectrin using equations from Iu(1999). | This is converted into the cosmic shear cross power spectrum using equations from \cite{hu99}. |
. We asse delta function redshift distributions corresponding to the ealaxy-ealaxy lens and source redshifts. | We assume delta function redshift distributions corresponding to the galaxy-galaxy lens and source redshifts. |
The cosmic shear correlation fuuctiou is flatter than the ealaxv-salaxy lensing contribution Above ~0.2" the ealaxv-galaxyv lensing contribution is simaller than the cosmic shear signal for NEW leuses. | The cosmic shear correlation function is flatter than the galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution Above $\sim0.2'$ the galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution is smaller than the cosmic shear signal for NFW lenses. |
However it ust be much sinaller than the cosmic shear signal if it is not to interfere with cosmological parameter analyses. | However it must be much smaller than the cosmic shear signal if it is not to interfere with cosmological parameter analyses. |
To illustrate this we also show the chanee iu cosmic shear signal for a small change (Aw= 0.01) in the equation of state of dark energv. w. leaving the other cosmological paralcters Guchiding 04) fixed. | To illustrate this we also show the change in cosmic shear signal for a small change $\Delta w=0.01$ ) in the equation of state of dark energy, $w$, leaving the other cosmological parameters (including $\sigma_8$ ) fixed. |
The galaxy-salaxy leusine contribution is not negligible below 1 απο for NEW ealaxy profiles. | The galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution is not negligible below 4 arcmin for NFW galaxy profiles. |
We fiud that this scale will strouglv depeud ou the leus profile since it is ereater than 30 arciuin for SIE profiles. | We find that this scale will strongly depend on the lens profile since it is greater than 30 arcmin for SIE profiles. |
We asstuned that the lens ellipticity is the same size aud orientation as the mass ellipticity. | We assumed that the lens ellipticity is the same size and orientation as the mass ellipticity. |
This is consistent with mcasurelent attempts (IHooekstraetal.200E:Maudelbaiuuetal.2006).. but the signal to noise is low. | This is consistent with measurement attempts \citep{hoekstrayg04,mandelbaumea06}, but the signal to noise is low. |
If tle mass ellipticitv were a factor f simaller than the liebt then this would simply scale the ealaxy-galaxy leusiug contribution bv f. | If the mass ellipticity were a factor $f$ smaller than the light then this would simply scale the galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution by $f$ . |
If there is a musaliguient then the effective. f on stacking would be a first approximation to the change. | If there is a misalignment then the effective $f$ on stacking would be a first approximation to the change. |
Tevinansetal.(2006) consider a more sophisticated alieumieut model which can reduce the signal by a factor of roughly three. | \cite{heymanswhvv06} consider a more sophisticated alignment model which can reduce the signal by a factor of roughly three. |
It would be interesting to see whether the coutribution is increased or reduced ou considering clustering of the Ίος ealaxies. | It would be interesting to see whether the contribution is increased or reduced on considering clustering of the lens galaxies. |
Further. it is not clear whether deviations frou ellipsoidal svuuuetry of the lens (such as substructures) would average out. | Further, it is not clear whether deviations from ellipsoidal symmetry of the lens (such as substructures) would average out. |
A roueh comparison of Fig. | A rough comparison of Fig. |
3. with UWevmansctal.(2006) (Table 2) indicates that at 1 arciminute the galaxy- NEW lensing contribution is a significant fraction of the total shearutrinsic ale@mmenut correlation. whereas at 10 arcnün the sheardintrinsic aligunieut correlation is dominated by tidal aligninents. | \ref{fig:cf cosmic shear} with \cite{heymanswhvv06} (Table 2) indicates that at 1 arcminute the galaxy-galaxy NFW lensing contribution is a significant fraction of the total shear-intrinsic alignment correlation, whereas at 10 arcmin the shear-intrinsic alignment correlation is dominated by tidal alignments. |
Note that this comparison is only approximate since Wevinansetal.(2006) iutegrate over lens redshift. | Note that this comparison is only approximate since \cite{heymanswhvv06} integrate over lens redshift. |
Fortunately it may be relatively easv to remove the ealaxy-ealaxy lensing contribution using the characteristic taugential nature of galaxs-galaxw leusiug. | Fortunately it may be relatively easy to remove the galaxy-galaxy lensing contribution using the characteristic tangential nature of galaxy-galaxy lensing. |
For example the ellipticity two-poiut fuuctiou could be measured as a function of two dimensional separation (04.05). where the position angle à is measured frou, the major axis of the foreground lens. | For example the ellipticity two-point function could be measured as a function of two dimensional separation $(\theta_1, \theta_2)$, where the position angle $\alpha$ is measured from the major axis of the foreground lens. |
(This"stackaudrotate”methodsureellipticityofgalaxydarkmatterhalos.) The ealaxy ellipticitv and profile could then be fitted simultaucously with extracting the cosmic shear two point function. | \citep[This ``stack and rotate" method was
advocated by][to measure ellipticity of galaxy dark matter
halos.]{natarjanr00} The galaxy ellipticity and profile could then be fitted simultaneously with extracting the cosmic shear two point function. |
Alternatively one could use the method of Kine(2005).. which uses the redshift signature of the effect. | Alternatively one could use the method of \cite{king05}, which uses the redshift signature of the effect. |
Also Ieviuausctal.(2006) sugeest removing the most huninous galaxies in the lower redshift slice. | Also \cite{heymanswhvv06} suggest removing the most luminous galaxies in the lower redshift slice. |
This effect should also ultimately be takeu iuto account for higher order statistics of cosmic shear. since they probe snaller scales than the two-point statistic (sce2.foracalculationforthethreepoint function).. | This effect should also ultimately be taken into account for higher order statistics of cosmic shear, since they probe smaller scales than the two-point statistic \citep[see ][for a calculation for the
three point function]{how01}. |
Furthermore the ealaxy-ealaxy flexion signal could be a bigger coutaminaut of cosunic flexion because the latter is more sensitive than cosluic shear at sinall augular scales. | Furthermore the galaxy-galaxy flexion signal could be a bigger contaminant of cosmic flexion because the latter is more sensitive than cosmic shear at small angular scales. |
We thank Weith Diner. Masahiro Takada. Peter Schucider. Vireiuda Corless. Eduardo Cypriano. David Sutton. Phil Marshall. Richard Massey. Fergus Simpson. Aci Nusser andLindsay Wine for helpful discussions. | We thank Keith Biner, Masahiro Takada, Peter Schneider, Virginia Corless, Eduardo Cypriano, David Sutton, Phil Marshall, Richard Massey, Fergus Simpson, Adi Nusser andLindsay King for helpful discussions. |
SLB acknowledges support from a Roval Society University Research Fellowship. | SLB acknowledges support from a Royal Society University Research Fellowship. |
We determined the unabsorbed fluxes by correcting for waveleneth-dependent transmission. as caleulated iu NSPEC using the “wals” model. | We determined the unabsorbed fluxes by correcting for wavelength-dependent transmission, as calculated in XSPEC using the “wabs” model. |
We used the absorption cohuun deusities. Ny. toward the target stars. also οἼνοιι by the above authors. | We used the absorption column densities, $N_{\rm H}$, toward the target stars, also given by the above authors. |
We adopted Ny=1073 cm? for V1016 Sex. as sugeestedCC» by Catheretal.(2006). | We adopted $N_{\rm H} = 10^{21}$ $^{-3}$ for V4046 Sgr, as suggested by \citet{guenther06}. |
Finally. line luninosities were calculated using the published cistauces. | Finally, line luminosities were calculated using the published distances. |
Total X-ray πιοσο», Lx. were taken from the sale authors: for VLOLG Ser. the spectral line fluxes are about half as hieh as for TW Ίνα (see comparison io1 Cüntheretal. 2006)) while ιο disfauce seems to be very uncertaim: we adopted a distance of 83 pe (Quastetal. 2000): the uncertainties will uot be crucial for our investigation. | Total X-ray luminosities, $L_{\rm X}$, were taken from the same authors; for V4046 Sgr, the spectral line fluxes are about half as high as for TW Hya (see comparison in \citealt{guenther06}) ) while the distance seems to be very uncertain; we adopted a distance of 83 pc \citep{quast00}; the uncertainties will not be crucial for our investigation. |
For AIP Mus. distance aud Lx are from Maimajeketal. (2002).. | For MP Mus, distance and $L_{\rm X}$ are from \citet{mamajek02}. . |
Data for solar-analog (C-type) AIS stars weretaken from Telleschietal.(2005).. aud for a larger MS sample from Nessetal.(200L). | Data for solar-analog (G-type) MS stars weretaken from \citet{telleschi05}, and for a larger MS sample from \citet{ness04}. |
. These authors list Lx. the energy fluxes (in cre ?«4 1) in the Lvo line aud iu the Heo triplet (only the + line in Nessetal. 2001). from which L(O VILL} resp. | These authors list $L_{\rm X}$ the energy fluxes (in erg $^{-2}$ $^{-1}$ ) in the $\alpha$ line and in the $\alpha$ triplet (only the $r$ line in \citealt{ness04}) ), from which $L$ ) resp. |
Z(O vil}) were calculated. | $L$ ) were calculated. |
For these stars. Aq is low aud docs not need to be cousidered. | For these stars, $N_{\rm H}$ is low and does not need to be considered. |
Fig. | Fig. |
1 highlights the soft excess for the CTTS T Tau N. The figure compares the X-ray spectrum of the active. evolved binary TR 1099 dominated bv cussion from a Ἱνπρο subgiaut (top panel: archival data. see Audardctal. 2001)) with the spectrim of the weakly absorbed WITS VIIO Tau (Telleschietal..2007c).. the CTTS T Tau (Cadeletal.2007c).. and the old sinele F-tvpe star Procyon (archival data. see Raassenetal. 2002)). | \ref{fig1} highlights the soft excess for the CTTS T Tau N. The figure compares the X-ray spectrum of the active, evolved binary HR 1099 dominated by emission from a K-type subgiant (top panel; archival data, see \citealt{audard01}) ) with the spectrum of the weakly absorbed WTTS V410 Tau \citep{telleschi07c}, the CTTS T Tau \citep{guedel07c}, and the old single F-type star Procyon (archival data, see \citealt{raassen02}) ). |
IIR. 1099 and VIIO Tau show he typical siguaturesOo of a hot. active corona: a strongc» continui. strong lines ofx. and hiehhlv-ionized Fe ines but little flux in he liue triplet. | HR 1099 and V410 Tau show the typical signatures of a hot, active corona: a strong continuum, strong lines of, and highly-ionized Fe lines but little flux in the line triplet. |
Di contrast. the spectrum of Procvou is dominated by lines of C. N. aud O. he triple exceeding the Ίνα line in flux. | In contrast, the spectrum of Procyon is dominated by lines of C, N, and O, the triplet exceeding the $\alpha$ line in flux. |
The observe spectrum of T Tau reveals a lybricd situation. with signatures of a very active corona shortward of 19 yout also an unusually strong triplet. | The observed spectrum of T Tau reveals a hybrid situation, with signatures of a very active corona shortward of 19 but also an unusually strong triplet. |
Because its wdrogen absorption is large (in contrast to VLLO Tau - note the latter’s Lyra A2L8 line formed over a wide temperature range). we have nodcled the intriusic. unabsorbed spectrum based on transiissions determined in NSPEC (based ou the "wabs model) using Nyy from Giideletal.(2007¢) (Ny=L9.«1073 cm 2). but also the somewhat lower value found from EPIC spectra (ANqpDA1023 2: Güdoletal. 2007a)). | Because its hydrogen absorption is large (in contrast to V410 Tau - note the latter's $\alpha$ $\lambda$ 24.8 line formed over a wide temperature range), we have modeled the intrinsic, unabsorbed spectrum based on transmissions determined in XSPEC (based on the “wabs” model) using $N_{\rm H}$ from \citet{guedel07c} $N_{\rm H} = 4.9\times 10^{21}$ $^{-2}$ ), but also the somewhat lower value found from EPIC spectra $N_{\rm H} \approx 3\times 10^{21}$ $^{-2}$; \citealt{guedel07a}) ). |
In either case. the lines ave now the strongest lines in the Nav spectrmm. remduiscent of the situation iu Procyon. | In either case, the lines are now the strongest lines in the X-ray spectrum, reminiscent of the situation in Procyon. |
Fie. | Fig. |
2 shows the measured (absorbed) Ίνα photon-flux ratio. 9. versus the X-ray determined Ny CTTS and WTTS are marked. respectively. by filled (red) and open (blue) circles: the flaring C'TTS SU Aur and DIT Tau are marked by small. filled: circkΤε | \ref{fig2} shows the measured (absorbed) $\alpha$ photon-flux ratio, $S$, versus the X-ray determined $N_{\rm H}.$ CTTS and WTTS are marked, respectively, by filled (red) and open (blue) circles; the flaring CTTS SU Aur and DH Tau are marked by small, filled circles. |
The dotted lines mark the loci of 5 for an isothermal plasina: the labels eive the electron temperatures. | The dotted lines mark the loci of $S$ for an isothermal plasma; the labels give the electron temperatures. |
The plasina coutributing to and is. however. not --isothermalρα as the hotter plasma also contributes to the flux. | The plasma contributing to and is, however, not isothermal as the hotter plasma also contributes to the flux. |
AllCTTS show οzLt125 in this ranec of Ay. | AllCTTS show $S \approx 1 \pm 0.25$ in this range of $N_{\rm H}$ . |
WITS are fou at πιο lower values: their published spectra show at best marginal evidence of the triplet (e.g..Telleschietal. 2007¢)). | WTTS are found at much lower values; their published spectra show at best marginal evidence of the triplet (e.g.,\citealt{telleschi07c}) ). |
MIS solar analogs are plotted near Ny=0.01 although their true ANY are iuuch lower. | MS solar analogs are plotted near $N_{\rm H} = 0.01$ although their true $N_{\rm H}$ are much lower. |
Characteristic coronal temperatures. T. ofMS stars are a function of Lx. | Characteristic coronal temperatures, $T$ , ofMS stars are a function of $L_{\rm X}$. |
For solar analogs at different activity levels. Z7 increases frou | For solar analogs at different activity levels, $T$ increases from |
For solar analogs at different activity levels. Z7 increases frou. | For solar analogs at different activity levels, $T$ increases from |
case, the evolution of the outer solar system would have been very violent, similar to the one that is expected to have occurred in many (or most) extra-solar planetary systems. | case, the evolution of the outer solar system would have been very violent, similar to the one that is expected to have occurred in many (or most) extra-solar planetary systems. |
In this work, we turn our attention to the asteroid belt. | In this work, we turn our attention to the asteroid belt. |
Similar to the terrestrial planet region, the migration of the giant planets drives secular resonances through the belt, but now these are g=gq and s=sq (g and s denoting generically the pericenter and nodal precession frequencies of the asteroids, while gq and ας are the mean precession frequencies of Saturn). | Similar to the terrestrial planet region, the migration of the giant planets drives secular resonances through the belt, but now these are $g=g_6$ and $s=s_6$ $g$ and $s$ denoting generically the pericenter and nodal precession frequencies of the asteroids, while $g_6$ and $s_6$ are the mean precession frequencies of Saturn). |
The radial displacement of these secular resonances affects the asteroids’ local orbital distribution in a way that depends sensitively on the rate of migration (Gomes, 1997). | The radial displacement of these secular resonances affects the asteroids' local orbital distribution in a way that depends sensitively on the rate of migration (Gomes, 1997). |
Therefore, reproducing the current orbital distribution of the asteroid belt under different conditions can lead to strong constraints on how Jupiter and Saturn separated from each other. | Therefore, reproducing the current orbital distribution of the asteroid belt under different conditions can lead to strong constraints on how Jupiter and Saturn separated from each other. |
In addition the orbital properties of the asteroid belt might also provide information about the orbital configuration of the giant planets prior to their migration: it might help us constrain whether the pre-migration orbits of the giant planets were more circular or Recently. Minton Malhotra (2009) showed that the orbital distribution of the asteroid belt is consistent with a smooth increase in the separation between Jupiter and Saturn. | In addition the orbital properties of the asteroid belt might also provide information about the orbital configuration of the giant planets prior to their migration: it might help us constrain whether the pre-migration orbits of the giant planets were more circular or Recently, Minton Malhotra (2009) showed that the orbital distribution of the asteroid belt is consistent with a smooth increase in the separation between Jupiter and Saturn. |
They assumed that, originally, the asteroids in the primordial belt were uniformly distributed in orbital parameter space and that the separation between the two gas giants increased as in eq. (2)). | They assumed that, originally, the asteroids in the primordial belt were uniformly distributed in orbital parameter space and that the separation between the two gas giants increased as in eq. \ref{renu}) ), |
with Ag=1.08 AU (Malhotra, 1993) and r=0.5 My. | with $\Delta_0=1.08$ AU (Malhotra, 1993) and $\tau=0.5$ My. |
Unfortunately, different values of 7 were not tested in that study nor did the authors offer any suggestions for a possible mechanism for this fast migration. | Unfortunately, different values of $\tau$ were not tested in that study nor did the authors offer any suggestions for a possible mechanism for this fast migration. |
Thus, in the first part of this paper we revisit Minton | Thus, in the first part of this paper we revisit Minton |
absorption that are stronger than those observed iu disk ΔΙ dwarls.2M1626--3925: | absorption that are stronger than those observed in disk M dwarfs.: |
The red spectrum strongly coufiriis the Burgasser(200.1) L subdwar[ classification. with a somewhat earlier (hotter) type than 2M025324-8216. | The red spectrum strongly confirms the \citet{latesdl2} L subdwarf near-IR classification, with a somewhat earlier (hotter) type than 2M0532+8246. |
There is an overall resemblance to au Li dwarl (Figure 2). particularly iithe appearauce of the Ix E line cores and broad wines. ( | There is an overall resemblance to an L4 dwarf (Figure 2), particularly in the appearance of the K I line cores and broad wings. ( |
Burgasser et al. | Burgasser et al. |
noted that 2N1¢JOB2+8216 resembles an L7). | noted that 2M0532+8246 resembles an L7). |
Neve‘theless. numerous features appear different. whici we cliscuss here. | Nevertheless, numerous features appear different, which we discuss here. |
The preseice of strong TiO absorption past is consistent with Burgasseretal.(3X 03)s observations of 2M0532--8216: there is a narrow feature at 8132 that is also cie to TiO. but it is narrower than iu the L dwarls. | The presence of strong TiO absorption past is consistent with \citet{latesdl}' 's observations of 2M0532+8246; there is a narrow feature at 8432 that is also due to TiO, but it is narrower than in the L dwarfs. |
This TIO is also consistent with the stroug TiO aready noted in the latest sdMs. | This TiO is also consistent with the strong TiO already noted in the latest sdMs. |
The CrH feature streugtli. as measured by its ludex. is consistent with mid-L dwarls (Ixirkpatricketal.1999).. but the FeH feature is much strouger than in the mikLL dwarfs. | The CrH feature strength, as measured by its index, is consistent with mid-L dwarfs \citep{k99}, but the FeH feature is much stronger than in the mid-L dwarfs. |
The atomic lines Rb I(7S800A.. 79183)). Na E (8182À..8195A)). Cs I (8521À)) are present ancl apparently as strong as ln mid-L dwarls. | The atomic lines Rb I, ), Na I ), Cs I ) are present and apparently as strong as in mid-L dwarfs. |
We are confident in the detectiou of these [eatures. )it the Dringiug makes measurements of their streneth impossible. | We are confident in the detection of these features, but the fringing makes measurements of their strength impossible. |
The CaH features shortward of are much stronger than any L dwarf | The CaH features shortward of are much stronger than any L dwarf. |
While the temperature of 2M1626-4-1231 is unkuown. it is clear that this L subdwarf is close to the bydrogen-burning limit [or its metallicity since at an age of>0 Cyr. it too cool to be higher-mass sar alid too hot to be a low inass brown dwarf: but evei assuiug a halo age. au exact ideutificatiou as a star or a browi cdwarL would recuire reliable measurements of its parallax. bolometric correctiou. effective tempe"alure. aud inetallicity and. compa‘TSO o models. | While the temperature of 2M1626+1231 is unknown, it is clear that this L subdwarf is close to the hydrogen-burning limit for its metallicity since at an age of $>10$ Gyr, it too cool to be higher-mass star and too hot to be a low mass brown dwarf; but even assuming a halo age, an exact identification as a star or a brown dwarf would require reliable measurements of its parallax, bolometric correction, effective temperature, and metallicity and comparison to models. |
Lithium is not detected. as expected. | Lithium is not detected, as expected. |
Thereis a very stroug feature near 6570.4 which is present in all the iucividual spectra of this object. | Thereis a very strong feature near $6570\AA$ which is present in all the individual spectra of this object. |
We suggest this is neutral caleium (657 3.4). whichis also stroug in the late sd plotted in C97. | We suggest this is neutral calcium $6573\AA$ ), which is also strong in the late sdM plotted in G97. |
2N16104-1231 ca1 be understood as an subdwarl analog to an MS/M9 dwarl the ¢urrent optical classification sIgeests a type even later than the sdNS IB. classification — either sdMO or early sd. It is very siuilar to SSSPAL J1111-2019. | 2M1640+1231 can be understood as an subdwarf analog to an M8/M9 dwarf; the current optical classification suggests a type even later than the sdM8 IR classification – either sdM9 or early sdL. It is very similar to SSSPM J1444-2019. |
2M1I6264-3925 cau be understood as an L 5tbclwar tit is similar to. but ‘earlier’ (hotter) than. 2N10532+8216. | 2M1626+3925 can be understood as an L subdwarf; it is similar to, but 'earlier' (hotter) than, 2M0532+8246. |
LSR1610-0010 does not appear to be in )elween these wo objects: however. the features pointed out by Lépineetal.(2003b) are confirijecl. | LSR1610-0040 does not appear to be in between these two objects; however, the features pointed out by \citet{earlysdl} are confirmed. |
Both Reine"s&Basri(X906) and Cushing&Vaeca(2006) have extensive discussions of this pectliar object au its classificatiou. | Both \citet{b1610} and \citet{c1610} have extensive discussions of this peculiar object and its classification. |
In contrast to the situation in the range sdMO-sch17. the latest M all L subdwarls showenhanced TiO absorption relative to late-M and L dwarl spectra. | In contrast to the situation in the range sdM0-sdM7, the latest M and L subdwarfs show TiO absorption relative to late-M and L dwarf spectra. |
Plvsically. this is due o dust bei& relatively less important than iu solar-metallicity cdwarls. as suggesO0ed by Burgassereal.(200κ | Physically, this is due to dust being relatively less important than in solar-metallicity dwarfs, as suggested by \citet{latesdl}. |
)+)).. T 'e two impolant poits that emeree from the difficulty in dealiug with the spectra of these stars. | There are two important points that emerge from the difficulty in dealing with the spectra of these stars. |
First. if the L sulxπα ter is to suggest leatures in common with the L dwarf sequence, bolh: 2M116102-1231 aud LSI1610-0010. as well as SSSPAL JLO!13256 SSSPNI should be considered M. subwarls. | First, if the "L subdwarf" term is to suggest features in common with the L dwarf sequence, both 2M1640+1231 and LSR1610-0040, as well as SSSPM J1013-1356 and SSSPM J1444-2019, should be considered M subdwarfs. |
However. as noted by PEοἱραal.and03b) aud th). we liave "uu out of single digit sdM types. especially if JLOL3-1356 is au | However, as noted by \citet{earlysdl} and \citet{sss1444}, , we have run out of single digit sdM types, especially if SSSPM J1013-1356 is an |
which has the shortest duratiorand smallest. fluence. I find p=0.10. or a probability of 2.6.10 that the uull hvpothnesis is satisfied. | which has the shortest duration and smallest fluence, I find $\rho=0.49$, or a probability of $2.6\times 10^{-2}$ that the null hypothesis is satisfied. |
Thus. Il conclude that with the present sample the correlation between fluence and duration is sueeestive. though not conclusive. | Thus, I conclude that with the present sample the correlation between fluence and duration is suggestive, though not conclusive. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.