Ph.D. Dissertation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PLANETS AROUND SOLAR-TYPE STARS: METHODS FOR DETECTION AND CONSTRAINTS ON THEIR DISTRIBUTION FROM AN L’ AND M BAND ADAPTIVE OPTICS IMAGING SURVEY by Aren Nathaniel Heinze A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF ASTRONOMY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2007 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Aren Nathaniel Heinze entitled “Planets Around Solar- Type Stars: Methods for Detection and Constraints on their Distribution from an L’ and M Band Adaptive Optics Imaging Survey” and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Phi- losophy. Date: 2 August 2007 Phil Hinz Date: 2 August 2007 Michael Meyer Date: 2 August 2007 Adam Burrows Date: 2 August 2007 Laird Close Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candi- date’s submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. Date: 2 August 2007 Dissertation Director: Phil Hinz 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the Univer- sity Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permis- sion, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: Aren Nathaniel Heinze 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My first and ultimate thanks, now and forever, goes to my Creator and Re- deemer, the triune God. He made the cosmos of which I am both a part and an observer for his glory, but also for my joy. He healed my heart and set me free to stand in awe of him and his works. He has also blessed me with many oportunities which came through people – people who also deserve my heartfelt thanks. My parents, who have always loved me and encouraged me. My Dad, who passed on to me his infinite curiosity, and who tried to answer every question I ever asked, even if it meant explaining calculus to an eleven year old. He also told me he thought I could make it through Caltech, when I didn’t think so — and that started it all. My Mom, whose joy in my accomplishments and confidence in what I could do have always encouraged me. You’re also one of the two bravest women I know. My wife, who has encouraged me, believed I could do it, and sacrificed so that this dissertation and the degree that goes with it would become reality. You have not been dismayed when I have been, and your faith and good sense have blessed me and guarded me from more than I know or like to think. My advisor, Phil Hinz, who is a great scientist and a good man. You have prodded me when I needed prodding, and been encouraging and forgiving the whole way. Many other scientists and technicians with whom I feel very privileged to have been able to work: The designers and operators of the MMT’s amazing AO system: Doug Miller, Matt Kenworthy, Phil Hinz (again), Vidhya Vaitheeswaran, Thomas Stalcup, Guido Brusa, and others with whom I worked less closely. My committee members: Michael Meyer, who jumped on every planet candidate with an eagerness to rival my own, and found information on them so quickly I still wonder how he did it. Adam Burrows, whose models of extrasolar plan- ets have guided my research, and Laird Close, pioneer in AO science and planet detection. The other designers and builders of the Clio instrument: Phil Hinz (again), who made it happen; Melanie Freed, who worked on the early design and acquired and carefully documented much of the hardware; Suresh Sivanan- dam, who worked long hours with the hardware, saved the dichroic from an untimely death, and helped me brainstorm observing strategies and improve my image processing code; and Andy Breuninger, who met the formidible challenge of writing code to run the detector, and turned it into an efficient science instru- ment. Finally, the Telescope Operators of the MMT: John McAfee, Ale Milone, and Mike Alegria, surely members of one of the most exclusive skilled groups in the world, and the many other members of the MMT staff whose names, alas, I never thoroughly learned, but without whom that finicky, awesomely powerful telescope would never have done what I asked of it. 5 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated first of all to my Lord, the Creator of all the glory and wonder I have studied. It is dedicated, secondly, to those I hope it will serve: the starwatchers who will come after me. They, like me, will spend lonely nights on mountains or with computers, using the technology and math developed by centuries of genius – standing on the shoulders of giants – trying to tease out the great secrets of the stars of God. They will carry on the great adventure in which I have had only a tiny part. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ................................ 10 LIST OF TABLES ................................. 17 ABSTRACT .................................... 21 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ 23 1.1 Poems from the Telescope . 23 1.2 ScienceIntroduction ........................... 29 2 DEEP L’ AND M-BAND IMAGING FOR PLANETS AROUND VEGA AND ǫ ERIDANI .................................... 37 2.1 Introduction ................................ 37 2.2 Observations and Data Analysis . 41 2.3 Sensitivity Measurements and Source Detection Tests . 45 2.3.1 Calculating and Verifying our Sensitivity Results . 45 2.3.2 FinalSensitivityResults . 56 2.4 Vega: Comparison with Other Studies, and Upper Limits for Hy- potheticalPlanets ............................. 82 2.4.1 Comparing Our Sensitivity with Other Studies . 82 2.4.2 Upper Limits at the Locations of Hypothetical Planets . 87 2.5 ǫ Eri: Comparison with Other Studies, and Upper Limits for Hy- potheticalPlanets ............................. 90 2.5.1 Comparing Our Sensitivity with Other Studies . 90 2.5.2 Upper Limits at the Locations of Hypothetical Planets . 95 2.6 Conclusions ................................100 3 THE SURVEY: DATA AQUISITION, DATA QUALITY,CONFIRMED AND SUS- PECTED FAINT SOURCES ............................ 104 3.1 Introduction ................................104 3.2 Motivation for an L′ and M BandSurvey . 108 3.3 OurSurveySample............................ 116 3.4 TheClioInstrument............................ 132 3.5 Observations................................136 3.6 DataProcessing .............................. 151 3.7 SensitivityAnalysis. 174 3.7.1 Three Sensitivity Estimators . 174 3.7.2 OurChoiceofEstimator . 177 3.7.3 Testing the Three Estimators . 180 3.7.4 BlindSensitivityTests . 182 3.7.5 One Caveat to Our Sensitivity Estimates . 204 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued 3.7.6 Sensitivity Estimators of Other Surveys . 210 3.8 Sensitivity Obtained Around Each Target . 217 3.9 Sensitivities Compared to Other Surveys . 278 3.10 Confirmed and Suspected Sources . 305 3.10.1 Our Source Detection Methods . 305 3.10.2 Confirmed and Suspected Sources . 310 3.11 Conclusion.................................339 4 CONSTRAINTS ON PLANET ABUNDANCE FROM THE CLIO SURVEY OF 50 STARS ...................................... 344 4.1 Introduction ................................344 4.2 TheSurveySample ............................ 351 4.3 Statistical Distributions from RV Planets . 353 4.4 Theoretical Models of Giant Planets . 361 4.4.1 TwoSetsofModels. 361 4.4.2 Absolute Magnitudes from the Burrows et al. (2003) Models 361 4.4.3 Interpolating Between Model Points . 363 4.4.4 Comparing the two Model Sets . 374 4.5 Introducing the Monte Carlo Simulations . 383 4.6 Monte-Carlo Simulations: A Detailed Look . 386 4.6.1 Constructing the Simulations . 386 4.6.2 SimulationResults . 390 4.7 Monte-Carlo Simulations: The Larger Picture . 415 4.7.1 Excluded Regions of Parameter Space . 415 4.7.2 Comparing Our Results to Other Surveys . 429 4.8 Conclusion.................................436 5 WHERE FROM HERE? LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE CLIO SURVEY, AND ′ THE FUTURE POTENTIAL OF THE L AND M BANDS ............ 439 5.1 Introduction ................................439 5.2 Clio Data Quality Under Various Conditions . 440 5.3 Comparing the Future Potential of Long and Short Wavelength Regimes ..................................449 5.4 FutureObservingPlans . 461 A THE ALGORITHMS USED BY THE LEGOLAS04 PROCESSING PACKAGE FOR CLIO IMAGES .................................. 465 A.1 TheClioCamera,itsCapabilitiesandLimitations . 466 A.2 ClioData..................................467 A.3 Overview of the Processing Steps for Clio Images . 474 A.4 Constructing the Nod-subtraction Pairings . 490 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued A.5 DarkSubtractionandFlatfielding. 496 A.6 BadPixelFixing.............................. 498 A.7 NodSubtraction.............................. 501 A.8 TheColfudgeAlgorithm . 502 A.8.1 History...............................503 A.8.2 Colfudge..............................504 A.8.3 Matt Kenworthy’s Algorithm . 507 A.8.4 Examples Images from Both Algorithms . 508 A.8.5 Dimming of Faint Sources By Colfudge . 518 A.9 RotationandShifting. 521 A.9.1 Calculation the Required Rotation . 521 A.9.2 Calculation the Required Shift . 523 A.9.3 Zero-Trim, Zero-Pad, Shift, and Rotate: A Single Operation 524 A.10 Image Stacking and the Creeping Mean . 526 A.11UnsharpMasking. 530 A.12SpecialtyProcessing . 531 A.12.1 PSF Subtraction: The ‘b’ Reduction Method . 531 A.12.2 PSF Subtraction: The ‘c’ Reduction Method . 537 A.12.3 Pre-Stack Unsharp Masking: The ‘d’ Reduction Method .