4.7 Article

Discovery of a planetary-mass brown dwarf with a circumstellar disk

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 635, 期 1, 页码 L93-L96

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/498868

关键词

accretion, accretion disks; planetary systems : protoplanetary disks; stars : formation; stars : low-mass, brown dwarfs; stars : pre-main-sequence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using the Hubble Space Telescope, the 4 m Blanco Telescope at the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory, and the Spitzer Space Telescope, we have performed deep imaging from 0.8 to 8 mu m of the southern subcluster in the Chamaeleon I star-forming region. In these data, we have discovered an object, Cha 110913-773444, whose colors and magnitudes are indicative of a very low mass brown dwarf with a circumstellar disk. In a near-infrared spectrum of this source obtained with the Gemini Near-Infrared Spectrograph, the presence of strong steam absorption confirms its late-type nature (greater than or similar to M9.5) while the shapes of the H- and K-band continua and the strengths of the Na I and K I lines demonstrate that it is a young, pre-main-sequence object rather than a field dwarf. A comparison of the bolometric luminosity of Cha 110913-773444 to the luminosities predicted by the evolutionary models of Chabrier & Baraffe and Burrows and coworkers indicates a mass of 8(-3)(+7)M(J), placing it fully within the mass range observed for extrasolar planetary companions (M less than or similar to 15M(J)). The spectral energy distribution of this object exhibits mid-infrared excess emission at lambda > 5 mu m, which we have successfully modeled in terms of an irradiated viscous accretion disk with M less than or similar to 10(-12) M-circle dot yr(-1). Cha 110913-773444 is now the least massive brown dwarf observed to have a circumstellar disk, and indeed is one of the least massive free- floating objects found to date. These results demonstrate that the raw materials for planet formation exist around free-floating planetary-mass bodies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据