4.7 Article

FUNDAMENTAL VIBRATIONAL TRANSITION OF CO DURING THE OUTBURST OF EX LUPI IN 2008

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 728, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/5

关键词

circumstellar matter; protoplanetary disks; stars: formation; stars: individual (EX Lupi); stars: pre-main sequence; stars: variables: T Tauri, Herbig Ae/Be

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [PP002-110504]
  2. Hungarian Scientific Research Fund [OTKA K62304]
  3. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SI 1486/1-1]
  5. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1010004, 1108885, 0838268] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report monitoring observations of the T Tauri star EX Lupi during its outburst in 2008 in the CO fundamental band at 4.6-5.0 mu m. The observations were carried out at the Very Large Telescope and the Subaru Telescope at six epochs from 2008 April to August, covering the plateau of the outburst and the fading phase to a quiescent state. The line flux of CO emission declines with the visual brightness of the star and the continuum flux at 5 mu m, but composed of two subcomponents that decay with different rates. The narrow-line emission (50 km s(-1) in FWHM) is near the systemic velocity of EX Lupi. These emission lines appear exclusively in v = 1-0. The line widths translate to a characteristic orbiting radius of 0.4 AU. The broad-line component (FWZI similar to 150 km s(-1)) is highly excited up to v <= 6. The line flux of the component decreases faster than the narrow-line emission. Simple modeling of the line profiles implies that the broad-line emitting gas is orbiting around the star at 0.04-0.4 AU. The excitation state, the decay speed of the line flux, and the line profile indicate that the broad-line emission component is physically distinct from the narrow-line emission component, and more tightly related to the outburst event.

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