DOCSLIB.ORG

Deriving the Most Likely Stellar Properties : Bayesian Methods and Star Count Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Deriving the most likely stellar properties : Bayesian methods and star count models Léo Girardi INAF – Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Italy with contributions from A. Miglio, B. Chaplin, A. Bressan, P. Marigo, S. Rubele, L. Kerber, M. Groenewegen, L. da Silva, B. Rossetto, J. Johnson, et al. ”Know the star, know the planet” How to derive masses, ages, distances, radii, of candidate planet-hosting stars? What do we usually have: ● Multi-band photometry + 1. Parallaxes + spectroscopy for bright stars (V<8) 2. Asteroseismology + spectroscopy for Kepler+CoRoT targets ● Plenty of statistics about stars of similar colors & mags, in and outside clusters Where do stellar ages/masses come from 7 10 evolutionary tracks 100 − 0.1 M⊙ isochrones 10 − 10 yr L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 3 Where do stellar ages/masses come from limitations we measure (mag,colour), • not (L, Teff ) tracks change with • metallicity (spectroscopy needed) at of close to the ZAMS: • gets only mass + upper limit to the age lower MS: only mass • isochrones 107 − 1010 yr L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 3 Some more subtle limitations accurate tracks do not exist • they all use “fake physics” for convection: mixing length theory • and overshooting even the solar chemical composition is debated • what does really exist • updated tracks: with the best-ever microphysics (often • irrelevant) successful tracks: that reproduce more observations with less • change in parameters L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 4 Ages (and masses) of star clusters and binaries Just choose the isochrone that passes above the most points L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 5 M67 Ages (and masses) of isolated stars Observable parameters: , , [Fe/H] from spectrum • Teff log g (V ,parallax) MV L • → → no parallax? use (big errors however) • log g Gaussian errors for all parameters • Ages can come from: isochrone fitting (Edvardsson et al. 1993) • Bayesian approaches (Jørgensen & Lindegren 2005) • L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 6 Isochrone fitting identify the isochrone that • passes above the star want error bars? • select isochrones at 1σ of star ± from Jørgensen & Lindegren (2005) L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 7 Isochrone fitting Problems isochrones cross each • other not evenly spaced with age • behaviour changes with • [Fe/H] population density along • isochrones varies widely (evolutionary rate, IMF) from Jørgensen & Lindegren (2005) L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 7 Bayesian estimation take into account all we know about the star (and similar stars), • and about the isochrones does not give an age, but an age distribution function • needs a prior for the ages • L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 8 Bayesian estimation The Bayes theorem, the posterior probability P (τ,m,ξ) is P (τ,m,ξ) Pprior(τ,m,ξ) L(τ,m,ξ) ∝ × is what we expect a priori for • Pprior τ is the likelihood function • L For a set of n different data qi, with Gaussian errors n 1 L(τ,m,ξ) exp χ2/2 ∝ √ × − i=1 σ 2π ! Y n obs 2 qi qi(τ,m,ξ) χ2 = − σi i=1 X qi can be anything observed: Teff , log g, MV , B V , [M/H], ... − L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 8 Bayesian estimation Separate into 3 indepedent probability functions for τ,m,ξ, and you have (Jørgensen & Lindegren 2005): f(τ) ψ(τ)G(τ) ∝ with ψ(τ) being the prior for the age, i.e. the star formation rate G(τ) L(τ,m,ξ) φ(m)dm dξ ∝ Z Z with φ(m) being the prior for the mass function, i.e. the IMF and the prior for metallicity ξ disappeared because assumed constant. G(τ) is what we want to determine. What about ψ(τ) ? A lot of freedom here. L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 8 How does it work in practice (da Silva et al. 2006) given a star of MV σ, Teff σ, [Fe/H] σ • 0 ± 0 ± 0 ± take an isochrone of [Fe/H] and age • τ take a small section of 1 2 and mean (i.e. , , , etc.) • [Mi ,Mi ] x M g R the probability of star V belonging to this section is • [M 0, Teff ] 2 2 2 Mi (MV MV ) (T T ) P φ(M )dM exp 0 eff eff 0 12 1 i i −2 −2 ∝ M × − σ − σ Z i " MV Teff # add to cumulative histogram of • P12 P (x) integrate over entire isochrone • over all possible [Fe/H] values (Gaussian distribution) • over all possible values (flat distribution) • τ plot , compute median, mean, variance, etc. • P (x) x L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 9 Sample in the CMD for 53 stars, da Silva et al. (2006), determined [Fe/H] 0.1 dex, • ± log g 0.2 dex, Teff 70 K ± ± L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 10 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 11 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 12 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 13 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 14 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 15 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 16 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 17 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 18 Examples of PDFs L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 19 Examples of PDFs de Medeiros et al. (2009) L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 20 Sanity checks observed vs. derived diameters L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 21 Sanity checks “colour excess vs. distance” “colour excess vs. Teff ” L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 22 Sanity checks the mass–metallicity relation L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 23 Sanity checks 2 Hyades giants in the sample • HD27371: τ = 0.53 0.09 Gyr, M = 2.70 0.13 M⊙ • ± ± HD27697: τ = 0.67 0.13 Gyr, M = 2.54 0.14 M⊙ • ± ± best turn-off age is 0.625 0.05 Gyr (Perryman et al. 1998) • ∼ ± 3 Hya binaries indicate 0.63 Gyr (Lastennet et al. 1999) • ∼ L. Girardi, Marseille, May 13 – p. 24 SOLAR-LIKE OSCILLATIONS KIC8006 Sun 161 SOHO KIC8379 KIC6603 927 624 KIC6106 KIC6116 415 048 Chaplin et al. 2011 Seismology of planet-host e.g. stars Kepler-37 Barclay et al. 2013 Kepler-68 Gilliland et al. 2013 Kepler-56 Huber et al. 2013 Ensemble of 77 KOI with seismic constraints Solar-like oscillations: average parameters Δν: large frequency separation BiSON data Solar-like oscillations: average parameters νmax : frequency of maximum power Mosser et al. 2010 Brown et al. 1991 Kjeldsen & Bedding 1995 Solar-like oscillations: average parameters average seismic parameters: Mass and radius estimate: EVOLUTIONARY STATE OF GIANTS Distinguishing between RGB and RC stars evolutionary track 1.4 Msun Composite YC population RC vs RGB EVOLUTIONARY STATE OF GIANTS RGB RC vs RGB period spacing of high- RC order g modes where EVOLUTIONARY STATE OF GIANTS Observations with Kepler and CoRoT: He-burning Kepler He-burning RGB CoRoT RGB Bedding et al. 2011, Nature Mosser et al. 2011, A&A ”Grid-based methods” in asteroseismology Basic observables: Δγ, γmax, ΔP, Teff , and their errors → Weighted likelihood over all isochrone sections That's the same as the classical Bayesian estimation, but for minor details: ● Some authors do not weight on the occupation probability along the isochrone ● ΔP, when used, is just a on/off flag for the evolutionary stage (RGB or RC) PARAM v1.3 http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/param ● http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/param This part works Almost works... Going further: the role of star count models ● Johnson, Morton & Wright 2013: using TRILEGAL Galaxy model as a prior for the stellar mass Small correction in this case, but no reason for not taking it into account in large surveys with uniform & simple selection criteria Going further: the role of star count models ● Gaidos & Mann 2013: bias and selection effects in transiting planet surveys ● Gaidos 2013: identifying most likely Earth-size Kepler transiting planets in the habitable zone ● Batalha et al. 2013: simulating Kepler false-alarm probabilities ● ... Given the increased use of such models in planet-host characterization, how reliable are their predicted mass, radius, and age distributions? (Predicted CMD distributions are not in question) TRILEGAL ● TRIdimensional modeL of thE GALaxy (or ”very nice” in Southern Brazil) ● A population synthesis code to simulate resolved stellar populations in general – star clusters, background galaxies, and the Milky Way ● Main particularities: ● stands on well-tested stellar models / isochrones ● (m)any photometric system(s) TRILEGAL scheme (v1.3) TRILEGAL web interface ● http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/trilegal TRILEGAL web interface ● http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/trilegal Evolutionary tracks / isochrones ● Girardi et al. (2000) for most stars – 0.2 to 7 Mꙩ ● Bertelli et al. (1994) for massive stars ● Marigo & Girardi (2007) for AGB stars ● Vassiliadis & Wood for PNN + Benvenuto & Althaus for white dwarfs (under revision; Zabot et al. 2010) ● Chabrier et al. (2000) for very-low mass and brown dwarfs – down to 0.01Mꙩ Stellar atmosphere models ● Mainly ATLAS9 ODFNEW (Castelli & Kurucz 2004), for -2.5<[M/H]<+0.5], 3500<Teff/K<50000, ● Blackbody for OB stars with Teff>50000 K (replacement planned) ● Koester et al. for DA white dwarfs (being updated, Zabot et al. 2010) ● Fluks et al. (1994) for M giants (under revision, Aringer et al. 2010) ● Either Loidl et al. (2003, v1.3) or Aringer et al. (2009, v1.4+) for C-type giants ● BDUSTY1999 (Allard et al. 2000) for very-low mass and brown dwarfs – down to 500 K Stellar atmosphere models ● Mainly ATLAS9 ODFNEW (Castelli & Kurucz 2004), for 3500<Teff/K<50000 ● Blackbody for OB stars with Teff>50000 K (replacement planned) ● Koester et al.
Recommended publications
  • Rocket Team to Discern If Our Star Count Should Go Way up | NASA

    Rocket Team to Discern If Our Star Count Should Go Way up | NASA

    6/10/2021 Rocket Team to Discern if Our Star Count Should Go Way Up | NASA (https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/index.html) (/multimedia/nasatv/index.html) (/) NASA TV Search Stars (/subject/6892/stars) (/sites/default/files/ciber_launch_0.jpg) Jun 3, 2021 S E I R O T S Rocket Team to Discern if Our Star Count Should Go Way Up E R UPDATE June 7, 2021: The Cosmic Infrared Background Experiment-2 or CIBER-2 was successfully launched on a NASA Black Brant O M IX sounding rocket at 2:25 a.m. EDT from the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Preliminary indications show that the intended targets were viewed by the payload and good data was received. The payload flew to an apogee of about 193 miles before descending by parachute for recovery. The universe contains a mind-boggling number of stars – but scientists’ best estimates may be an undercount. A NASA-funded sounding rocket is launching with an improved instrument to look for evidence of extra stars that may have been missed in stellar head counts. The Cosmic Infrared Background Experiment-2, or CIBER-2, mission is the latest in a series of sounding rocket launches that began in 2009. Led by Michael Zemcov, assistant professor of physics and astronomy at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York, CIBER-2’s launch window opens at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico on June 6, 2021. If you’ve had the pleasure of seeing an open sky on a clear, dark night, you’ve probably been struck by the sheer number of stars.
  • PDF (Pbcameron Thesis.Pdf)

    PDF (Pbcameron Thesis.Pdf)

    The Formation and Evolution of Neutron Stars: Astrometry, Timing, and Transients Thesis by P. Brian Cameron In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 2009 (Defended June 2, 2008) ii c 2009 P. Brian Cameron All Rights Reserved iii Acknowledgements I have been incredibly fortunate these last five years to work with and have the support of so many amazing people. Foremost, I would like to acknowledge my enormous debt to my advisor, Shri Kulkarni. His vision and tireless dedication to astronomy were inspiring, and led to the topics in this thesis being at the forefront of astrophysics. Our styles contrasted, but his energy, open advice, and support made for a very rewarding collaboration. In this same vein, I am grateful to Matthew Britton whose ideas and open door made the last 2 years incredibly enjoyable. I have also had the privilege of working with a number talented people on a wide variety of topics. I am grateful to Bryan Jacoby, David Kaplan, Bob Rutledge, and Dale Frail for their insights and patience. I would also like to thank the NGAO crowd that got me thinking hard about astrometry: Rich Dekany, Claire Max, Jessica Lu, and Andrea Ghez. No observer could ever function with out people working tirelessly at the telescope and when you return from it. I am grateful for the patience and dedication of the Keck astronomers, especially Al Conrad, Randy Campbell and Jim Lyke, as well as those at Palomar: Jean Mueller, and Karl Dunscombe. I am indebted to the excellent staff here at Caltech for putting up with my endless questions and requests: Patrick Shopbell, Anu Mahabal, and Cheryl Southard.
  • Gaia Data Release 1 Special Issue

    Gaia Data Release 1 Special Issue

    A&A 599, A50 (2017) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629895 & c ESO 2017 Astrophysics Gaia Data Release 1 Special issue Gaia Data Release 1 Catalogue validation F. Arenou1, X. Luri2, C. Babusiaux1, C. Fabricius2, A. Helmi3, A. C. Robin4, A. Vallenari5, S. Blanco-Cuaresma6, T. Cantat-Gaudin5, K. Findeisen1, C. Reylé4, L. Ruiz-Dern1, R. Sordo5, C. Turon1, N. A. Walton7, I.-C. Shih1, E. Antiche2, C. Barache8, M. Barros9, M. Breddels3, J. M. Carrasco2, G. Costigan10, S. Diakité4, L. Eyer6, F. Figueras2, L. Galluccio11, J. Heu1, C. Jordi2, A. Krone-Martins9, R. Lallement1, S. Lambert8, N. Leclerc1, P. M. Marrese12; 13, A. Moitinho9, R. Mor2, M. Romero-Gómez2, P. Sartoretti1, S. Soria2, C. Soubiran14, J. Souchay8, J. Veljanoski3, H. Ziaeepour4, G. Giuffrida13, E. Pancino15, and A. Bragaglia16 1 GEPI, Observatoire de Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 5 Place Jules Janssen, 92190 Meudon, France e-mail: [email protected] 2 Institut de Ciències del Cosmos, Universitat de Barcelona (IEEC-UB), Martí Franquès 1, 08028 Barcelona, Spain 3 Kapteyn Astronomical Institute, University of Groningen, Landleven 12, 9747 AD Groningen, The Netherlands 4 Institut UTINAM, CNRS, OSU THETA Franche-Comté Bourgogne, Univ. Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 25000 Besançon, France 5 INAF, Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Vicolo Osservatorio, 35131 Padova, Italy 6 Observatoire de Genève, Université de Genève, 1290 Versoix, Switzerland 7 Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB30HA, UK 8 SYRTE, Observatoire de Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ. Paris 06, LNE, 61 Avenue de l’Observatoire, 75014 Paris, France 9 CENTRA, Universidade de Lisboa, FCUL, Campo Grande, Edif.
  • Pulsating Red Giant Stars in Eccentric Binary Systems Discovered from Kepler Space-Based Photometry a Sample Study and the Analysis of KIC 5006817 P

    Pulsating Red Giant Stars in Eccentric Binary Systems Discovered from Kepler Space-Based Photometry a Sample Study and the Analysis of KIC 5006817 P

    A&A 564, A36 (2014) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322477 & c ESO 2014 Astrophysics Pulsating red giant stars in eccentric binary systems discovered from Kepler space-based photometry A sample study and the analysis of KIC 5006817 P. G. Beck1,K.Hambleton2,1,J.Vos1, T. Kallinger3, S. Bloemen1, A. Tkachenko1, R. A. García4, R. H. Østensen1, C. Aerts1,5,D.W.Kurtz2, J. De Ridder1,S.Hekker6, K. Pavlovski7, S. Mathur8,K.DeSmedt1, A. Derekas9, E. Corsaro1, B. Mosser10,H.VanWinckel1,D.Huber11, P. Degroote1,G.R.Davies12,A.Prša13, J. Debosscher1, Y. Elsworth12,P.Nemeth1, L. Siess14,V.S.Schmid1,P.I.Pápics1,B.L.deVries1, A. J. van Marle1, P. Marcos-Arenal1, and A. Lobel15 1 Instituut voor Sterrenkunde, KU Leuven, 3001 Leuven, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] 2 Jeremiah Horrocks Institute, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK 3 Institut für Astronomie der Universität Wien, Türkenschanzstr. 17, 1180 Wien, Austria 4 Laboratoire AIM, CEA/DSM-CNRS – Université Denis Diderot-IRFU/SAp, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France 5 Department of Astrophysics, IMAPP, University of Nijmegen, PO Box 9010, 6500 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands 6 Astronomical Institute Anton Pannekoek, University of Amsterdam, Science Park 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands 7 Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia 8 Space Science Institute, 4750 Walnut street Suite #205, Boulder CO 80301, USA 9 Konkoly Observ., Research Centre f. Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1121 Budapest, Hungary 10 LESIA, CNRS, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Université Denis Diderot, Observatoire de Paris, 92195 Meudon Cedex, France 11 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field CA 94035, USA 12 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Edgebaston, Birmingham B13 2TT, UK 13 Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Villanova University, 800 East Lancaster avenue, Villanova PA 19085, USA 14 Institut d’Astronomie et d’Astrophysique, Univ.
  • Distinguishing Post-AGB Impostors in a Sample of Pre-Main Sequence Stars

    Distinguishing Post-AGB Impostors in a Sample of Pre-Main Sequence Stars

    A&A 526, A24 (2011) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015592 & c ESO 2010 Astrophysics Distinguishing post-AGB impostors in a sample of pre-main sequence stars R. G. Vieira1, J. Gregorio-Hetem1, A. Hetem Jr.2,G.Stasinska´ 3, and R. Szczerba4 1 Universidade de São Paulo, IAG – Rua do Matão, 1226, 05508-900 São Paulo, SP, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] 2 Universidade Federal do ABC, CECS, Rua Santa Adélia, 166, 09210-170 Santo André, SP, Brazil 3 Observatoire de Meudon, LUTH, 5 Place Jules Janssen, 92190 Meudon, France 4 N. Copernicus Astronomical Center, Rabianska´ 8, 87-100 Torun,´ Poland Received 16 August 2010 / Accepted 16 September 2010 ABSTRACT Context. A sample of 27 sources, cataloged as pre-main sequence stars by the Pico dos Dias Survey (PDS), is analyzed to investigate a possible contamination by post-AGB stars. The far-infrared excess due to dust present in the circumstellar envelope is typical of both categories: young stars and objects that have already left the main sequence and are suffering severe mass loss. Aims. The two known post-AGB stars in our sample inspired us to seek for other very likely or possible post-AGB objects among PDS sources previously suggested to be Herbig Ae/Be stars, by revisiting the observational database of this sample. Methods. In a comparative study with well known post-AGBs, several characteristics were evaluated: (i) parameters related to the circumstellar emission; (ii) spatial distribution to verify the background contribution from dark clouds; (iii) spectral features; and (iv) optical and infrared colors.
  • PHYS 390 Lecture 30 - Morphology of Galaxies 30 - 1

    PHYS 390 Lecture 30 - Morphology of Galaxies 30 - 1

    PHYS 390 Lecture 30 - Morphology of galaxies 30 - 1 Lecture 30 - Morphology of galaxies What's Important: • size and shape of galaxies • distribution of masses Text: Carroll and Ostlie, Chap. 22.1, 22.2, 22.4 Milky Way The galaxy in which we reside, the Milky Way, is a collection of about 1011 stars. From what we can now see of other galaxies, the structure of the Milky Way is probably not unusual, although we don't have an "external" picture of the galaxy taken from a remote vantage point. Amusingly, our view of the galaxy changes with time, as the orbit of the Sun is not in the plane of the galaxy: in 15 million years, the Sun will be sufficiently far from the galactic plane that we will have a view of the galactic centre, a view now blocked by dust etc. Historical note (from Carroll and Ostlie): With the invention of the telescope, Galileo recognized that the Milky Way is a vast collection of individual stars. It was first proposed by Immanuel Kant and Thomas Wright in the mid-1700s that the Milky Way is disk-shaped. In the 1780's William Herschel used a star count (with some assumptions) to conclude that the Sun is close to the centre of this disk. Performing an accurate star count is not an easy task because of the varying intrinsic magnitude, intervening dust clouds, etc., and it was not until the 20th century that many of these effects could be properly taken into account. Our picture of the Milky Way A modern side view of our galaxy, with its distance scales, is stellar halo (stars and clusters) disk 8 kpc 25 kpc © 2001 by David Boal, Simon Fraser University.
  • Connecting the Physics of Stars, Galaxies and the Universe FAME Astrometry & Photometry and NASA’S Research Themes Version 2.0, April 8, 2003

    Connecting the Physics of Stars, Galaxies and the Universe FAME Astrometry & Photometry and NASA’S Research Themes Version 2.0, April 8, 2003

    { 1 { Connecting the Physics of Stars, Galaxies and the Universe FAME Astrometry & Photometry and NASA's Research Themes Version 2.0, April 8, 2003 Rob P. Olling1;2 1US Naval Observatory, 2USRA { 2 { 1. Description of the FAME Mission 1.1. Science Objectives The scientific return of the FAME astrometric mission has been well-documented by the FAME team (FAME 2000{2002), and include: 1) the definitive calibration of the absolute luminosities of the standard candles (Sandage & Saha 2002); 2) the physical characteriza- tion of solar neighborhood stars of most types, 3) the frequency of companions (M & 80MJ ) of solar-type stars; 4) stellar variability; 5) the binarity frequency; 5) stellar evolution and structure will be checked in great detail in nearby star clusters and visual astrometric bina- ries; 6) distances and proper motions allow, for the first time, a detailed study of the ages and kinematics of the youngest known stars in star forming regions; 7) the survey nature of FAME ensures that a large number of stars become available to probe the potential of the Milky Way in both the radial and vertical directions (rotation curve and disk mass). The implications of the FAME mission are so diverse that new applications of its accurate astro- metric and photometric data are constantly being reported in the literature: 8) improving and extending the reference frame to R 18 (Salim, Gould & Olling 2002); 9) exploring ∼ the low-luminosity stellar population in the immediate solar neighborhood [d . 50 pc; Salim, Gould & Olling (2002)]; 10) optimal methods for detecting (low-mass) companions via astro- metric techniques [Eisner & Kulkarni (2001, 2002)]; 11) unraveling details in the dynamics of extra-solar planetary systems (Chiang, Tabachnik, & Tremaine 2001); 12) the history of stellar encounters with the Solar system (Garc´ıa-S´anchez et al.
  • Points of Light Lesson

    Points of Light Lesson

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Points of Light NASA SUMMER OF INNOVATION UNIT DESCRIPTION Earth and Space Science – Universe This lesson guide integrates a series of activities looking at and measuring objects GRADE LEVELS in the night sky. 7 – 9 OBJECTIVES CONNECTION TO CURRICULUM Students will: Science, Mathematics, and Technology • Discuss the effect of light pollution on the number of objects visible in TEACHER PREPARATION TIME the night sky 2 hours • Differentiate between stars and galaxies LESSON TIME NEEDED • Discuss the cultural implications of 4 hours Complexity: Moderate constellations and create a constellation myth NATIONAL STANDARDS National Science Education Standards (NSTA) Science as Inquiry • Skills necessary to become independent inquirers about the natural world • An appreciation of 'how we know' what we know in science Earth and Space Science • Earth in the solar system • Origin and evolution of the universe History and Nature of Science • Science as a human endeavor • History of science • Nature of scientific knowledge Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (NCTM) Statistics and probability • Use random sampling to draw inferences about a population ISTE NETS Performance Indicators for Students (ISTE) Research and Information Fluency • Process data and report results Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and Decision Making • Collect and analyze data to Identify solutions and make informed decisions Aerospace Education Services Project MANAGEMENT The Light Pollution Star Count activity must be done after dusk. Construction of the planetarium for the activity “Stories in the Sky” should be done and the dome tested for leaks well in advance of the activity date. Watch students for claustrophobia and anxiety issues.
  • Methods of Stellar Space-Density Analyses: a Retrospective Review B. Cameron Reed, Department of Physics

    Methods of Stellar Space-Density Analyses: a Retrospective Review B. Cameron Reed, Department of Physics

    Methods of Stellar Space-Density Analyses: A Retrospective Review B. Cameron Reed, Department of Physics (Emeritus), Alma College Alma, MI 48801 [email protected] June 17, 2020 [Author’s note. This paper was published in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 114(1) 16-27 (2020). Unfortunately, typesetting problems resulted in many of the mathematical formulae appearing very scrambled.] Stellar space density analyses, once a very active area of astronomical research, involved transforming counts of stars to given limiting magnitudes in selected areas of the sky into graphs of the number of stars per cubic parsec as a function of distance. Several methods of computing the transformation have been published, varying from manual spreadsheets to computer programs based on very sophisticated mathematical techniques for deconvolving integral equations. This paper revisits these techniques and compares the performance of seven of them published between 1913 and 2003 as applied to both simulated and real data. 1 1. Introduction The origins of quantitative efforts to analyze the distribution of stars within the Galaxy date to the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries with the work of Sir William Herschel (1738-1822), who attempted to determine what he called the “construction of the heavens” by “star gauging”. By counting the numbers of stars to successively fainter magnitude limits in some 700 regions of the sky and assuming that all stars were of the same absolute magnitude, Herschel was able to deduce the relative dimensions of the Galaxy, concluding that the Sun was near the center of a flattened, roughly elliptical system extending about five times further in the plane of the Milky Way than in the perpendicular direction.
  • Astronomy 1: Sky Gazing

    Astronomy 1: Sky Gazing

    Astronomy 1: Sky Gazing About the 4-H Science Toolkit Series: Sky Gazing This series of activities focuses on a subject of fascination to both children and adults – astronomy – our Solar System and beyond. Through the activities, children will learn what scientists have discovered about our universe and feel both a sense of awe and connection to our world each time they look at the stars. All of these adventures call on students to predict what will happen, test their theories, then share their results. They’ll be introduced to astronomy vocabulary, make several items they can take home to expand their adventures and come home armed with enough knowledge about the night sky to share with their family. The lessons in this unit were adapted from “Astronomy – It’s Out of this World” 4-H Leader/Member Guide by Brian Rice. This guide is available online at http:// www.ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/3487. To find out more about astronomy activities, visit the Cornell Center for Radiophysics & Space Research education and public outreach web site at http://astro.cornell.edu/ outreach/ and to find numerous resources related to astronomy and other sciences, check out the national 4-H Resource Directory at http://www.4-hdirectory.org. Sky Gazing Table of Contents Telescopes: Students discover how a simple refracting telescope works. Constellations in a Can: Students build their own planetarium to help them learn the constellations. Making a Star Chart: Students will gaze at the night sky, learn to identify con- stellations and find out how ancient people used stars to chart the seasons and tell stories.
  • Revised Geometric Estimates of the North Galactic Pole and the Sun's

    Revised Geometric Estimates of the North Galactic Pole and the Sun's

    Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 1{13 (2016) Printed 27 October 2016 (MN LATEX style file v2.2) Revised Geometric Estimates of the North Galactic Pole and the Sun's Height Above the Galactic Midplane M. T. Karim 1? and Eric E. Mamajek1;2 1Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA 2Current Address: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA 91109, USA Accepted 2016 October 24. Received 2016 October 22; in original form 2016 September 5 ABSTRACT Astronomers are entering an era of µas-level astrometry utilizing the 5-decade-old IAU Galactic coordinate system that was only originally defined to ∼0◦.1 accuracy, and where the dynamical centre of the Galaxy (Sgr A*) is located ∼0◦.07 from the origin. We calculate new independent estimates of the North Galactic Pole (NGP) using recent catalogues of Galactic disc tracer objects such as embedded and open clusters, infrared bubbles, dark clouds, and young massive stars. Using these cata- logues, we provide two new estimates of the NGP. Solution 1 is an \unconstrained" NGP determined by the galactic tracer sources, which does not take into account the location of Sgr A*, and which lies 90◦:120 ± 0◦:029 from Sgr A*, and Solution 2 is a \constrained" NGP which lies exactly 90◦ from Sgr A*. The \unconstrained" NGP ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ has ICRS position: αNGP = 192 :729 ± 0 :035, δNGP = 27 :084 ± 0 :023 and θ = 122◦:928 ± 0◦:016. The \constrained" NGP which lies exactly 90◦ away from Sgr A* ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ has ICRS position: αNGP = 192 :728 ± 0 :010, δNGP = 26 :863 ± 0 :019 and θ = 122◦:928 ± 0◦:016.
  • Observational Constraints on Star Cluster Formation Theory I

    Observational Constraints on Star Cluster Formation Theory I

    A&A 586, A68 (2016) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527449 & c ESO 2016 Astrophysics Observational constraints on star cluster formation theory I. The mass-radius relation S. Pfalzner1, H. Kirk2, A. Sills3, J. S. Urquhart1;4, J. Kauffmann1, M. A. Kuhn5;6, A. Bhandare1, and K. M. Menten1 1 Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie, Auf dem Hügel 69, 53121 Bonn, Germany e-mail: [email protected] 2 National Research Council Canada, Herzberg Astronomy and Astrophysics, Victoria, BC, V9E 2E7, Canada 3 Department of Physics and Astronomy, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. W., Hamilton, ON L8S 4M1, Canada 4 Centre for Astrophysics and Planetary Science, University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NH, UK 5 Instituto de Fisica y Astronomía, Universidad de Valparaíso, Gran Bretaña 1111, Playa Ancha, Valparaíso, Chile 6 Millennium Institute of Astrophysics, Santiago, Chile Received 25 September 2015 / Accepted 1 December 2015 ABSTRACT Context. Stars form predominantly in groups usually denoted as clusters or associations. The observed stellar groups display a broad spectrum of masses, sizes, and other properties, so it is often assumed that there is no underlying structure in this diversity. Aims. Here we show that the assumption of an unstructured multitude of cluster or association types might be misleading. Current data compilations of clusters in the solar neighbourhood show correlations among cluster mass, size, age, maximum stellar mass, etc. In this first paper we take a closer look at the correlation of cluster mass and radius. Methods. We use literature data to explore relations in cluster and molecular core properties in the solar neighbourhood. Results.