4.6 Article

DIRECT IMAGING OF FINE STRUCTURES IN GIANT PLANET-FORMING REGIONS OF THE PROTOPLANETARY DISK AROUND AB AURIGAE

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 729, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/729/2/L17

关键词

planetary systems; polarization; protoplanetary disks; stars: individual (AB Aurigae); stars: pre-main sequence

资金

  1. MEXT
  2. Mitsubishi Foundation
  3. Chretien International Research Grant
  4. [AST-1008440]
  5. [AST-1009314]
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  7. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [1009314] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  8. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  9. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0901967, 1009203, 1008440] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19104004] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report high-resolution 1.6 mu m polarized intensity (PI) images of the circumstellar disk around the Herbig Ae star AB Aur at a radial distance of 22 AU (0 ''.15) up to 554 AU (3 ''.85), which have been obtained by the high-contrast instrument HiCIAO with the dual-beam polarimetry. We revealed complicated and asymmetrical structures in the inner part (less than or similar to 140 AU) of the disk while confirming the previously reported outer (r greater than or similar to 200 AU) spiral structure. We have imaged a double ring structure at similar to 40 and similar to 100 AU and a ring-like gap between the two. We found a significant discrepancy of inclination angles between two rings, which may indicate that the disk of AB Aur is warped. Furthermore, we found seven dips (the typical size is similar to 45 AU or less) within two rings, as well as three prominent PI peaks at similar to 40 AU. The observed structures, including a bumpy double ring, a ring-like gap, and a warped disk in the innermost regions, provide essential information for understanding the formation mechanism of recently detected wide-orbit (r > 20 AU) planets.

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

4.6
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