Draft version November 25, 2019 Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX62

WISE2150-7520AB: A very low mass, wide co-moving system discovered through the project Backyard Worlds: 9.∗

Jacqueline K. Faherty,1 Sam Goodman,2 Dan Caselden,2 Guillaume Colin,2 Marc J. Kuchner,3 Aaron M. Meisner,4 Jonathan Gagne´,5 Adam C. Schneider,6 Eileen C. Gonzales,1, 7, 8 Daniella C. Bardalez Gagliuffi,1 Sarah E. Logsdon,3 Katelyn Allers,9 Adam J. Burgasser,10 and The Backyard Worlds: Planet 9 Collaboration2

1Department of Astrophysics, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, NY 10024, USA 2Backyard Worlds: Planet 9 3NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and Stellar Astrophysics Laboratory, Code 667, Greenbelt, MD 20771 4National Optical Astronomy Observatory, 950 N. Cherry Ave., Tucson, AZ 85719, USA† 5Institute for Research on Exoplanets, Universit de Montral, 2900 Boulevard douard-Montpetit Montral, QC Canada H3T 1J4 6School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85282, USA 7The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, NY 10016, USA 8Department of Physics and Astronomy, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, NY 10065, USA 9Physics and Astronomy Department, Bucknell University, 701 Moore Ave, Lewisburg, PA 17837 Norman, OK 73019 10Department of Physics, Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences, Mail Code 0424, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0424 USA

Submitted to ApJ

ABSTRACT We report the discovery of WISE2150-7520AB (W2150AB): a widely separated (∼ 341 AU) very low mass L1 + T8 co-moving system. The system consists of the previously known L1 primary 2MASS J21501592-7520367 and a newly discovered T8 secondary found at position 21:50:18.99 - 75:20:54.6 (MJD=57947) using Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) data via the Backyard Worlds: Planet 9 citizen science project. We present Spitzer ch1 and ch2 photometry (ch1-ch2= 1.41 ±0.04 mag) of the secondary and FIRE prism spectra of both components. The sources show no peculiar spectral or photometric signatures indicating that each component is likely field age. Using all observed data and the Gaia DR2 of 41.3593 ± 0.2799 mas for W2150A we deduce funda- mental parameters of log(Lbol/L )=-3.69 ± 0.01, Teff =2118 ± 62 K, and an estimated mass=72 ± 12 MJup for the L1 and log(Lbol/L )=-5.64 ± 0.02, Teff =719 ± 61 K, and an estimated mass=34 ± 22 41 MJup for the T8. At a physical separation of ∼341 AU this system has Ebin = 10 erg making it the lowest binding energy system of any pair with Mtot < 0.1 MSun not associated with a young cluster. It is equivalent in estimated mass ratio, Ebin, and physical separation to the ∼ 2 Myr M7.25 + M8.25 binary brown dwarf 2MASS J11011926-7732383AB (2M1101AB) found in the Chameleon star forming region. W2150AB is the widest companion system yet observed in the field where the primary is an L

arXiv:1911.04600v1 [astro-ph.SR] 11 Nov 2019 dwarf or later.

Keywords: brown dwarfs – – solar neighborhood –

1. INTRODUCTION

Corresponding author: J. Faherty Brown dwarfs are a unique population of astronomical [email protected] objects and a critical bridge between stars and . [email protected] On the high mass end, brown dwarfs overlap in observ- ∗ This paper includes data gathered with the 6.5 meter Magel- lan Telescopes located at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile. † Hubble Fellow 2 Faherty et al. able properties with the coolest stars like TRAPPIST-1 and unresolved in all but high resolution imaging. Un- which hosts seven terrestrial worlds (Gillon et al. 2017). til this work there were only two easily resolved visual On the low mass end, brown dwarfs overlap with the ob- L+T binaries: SDSS J1416+13AB (Burningham et al. servable properties of directly imaged exoplanets like 51 2010) which is an L7+T7.5 binary with an angular sep- Eri b (Macintosh et al. 2015) and Beta Pictoris b (La- aration of 9.8100 or a physical separation of 89.3±1.5 AU grange et al. 2010). On the coolest end brown dwarfs at the system’s distance of 9.1±0.15pc (Dupuy & Liu like J085510.83-071442.5 – a ∼ 250 K object at just 2 pc 2012) and Luhman 16AB (Luhman 2013) which is an from the Sun (Luhman 2014) – are directly comparable L7.5+T0.5 binary with an angular separation of 1.500 or to Jupiter (Skemer et al. 2016, Morley et al. 2018). a physical separation of ∼3 AU at the systems distance Studying brown dwarfs provides insight into stellar of 2.02±0.019. and planetary atmospheres and activity. One of the Brown dwarf formation theories are specific in their most important and outstanding questions in substel- predictions of binary parameters. Model scenarios that lar mass science is how these objects form and evolve. involve ejection (e.g. Bate et al. 2002; Bate 2011; Co-moving companions are a key sub-population for in- Reipurth & Clarke 2001), turbulent fragmentation (e.g. vestigating questions of formation. Padoan & Nordlund 2004), and/or disc fragmentation Early searches for low mass companions resulted in (e.g. Goodwin & Whitworth 2007; Li et al. 2015) to pro- two distinct categories of objects. Those that were ei- duce brown dwarfs predict statistical properties which ther (1) well-resolved companions discovered through can be compared to observational studies as evidence common or closely separated and with for or against formation pathways. In general, theo- statistically consistent distances (e.g. Kirkpatrick et al. retical models do not produce very low mass binaries 2001,Wilson et al. 2001, Faherty et al. 2010) or those (Mtot < 0.1 MSun) with separations > 10 AU (e.g. Bate that were (2) closely bound and discovered through high et al. 2002) that can survive to field age. This predic- resolution imaging (e.g. Martin et al. 1999, Koerner tion is roughly consistent with the very low mass wide et al. 1999, Burgasser et al. 2003a). For several binary population of near equal mass companions. The the only objects that fell in category (1) were brown exceptions are those found in clusters and the hand- dwarfs orbiting higher mass stars (mass ratios << 1) ful of slightly higher mass wide objects. This dearth and those that fell in category (2) were near equal mass of observed widely separated companions was explained binaries (mass ratio ∼ 1) with very low total masses (∼ because they were thought to either not exist or not 0.1 M ) and binding energies. survive to field age. Work done on young clusters such as Taurus, Rho In this paper we report the discovery of a wide very Ophiucus, and Chameleon resulted in the discovery of low mass co-moving system consisting of an L1 and T8 widely separated objects (> 100 AU) with mass ratios discovered through the citizen science project Backyard near 1 and small total masses that were hybrids between Worlds: Planet 9. Section 2 reviews how the discovery the two previously distinct classes (e.g. Luhman 2004, was made. Section 3 describes new data acquired on the Close et al. 2007). Searches in the field also turned up a primary and secondary sources in the system. Section handful of objects that were widely separated with rela- 4 has observational details on each component. Section tively low total masses, though nothing that rivaled the 5 discusses the Gaia parallax, kinematics of each com- low binding energies found among young cluster com- ponent and probability of chance alignment. Section 6 panions (e.g. Artigau et al. 2007, Radigan et al. 2009). has the color magnitude diagram analysis for the system Brown dwarf spectral classification categories include while section 7 reviews the age. Section 8 details the L, T, and Y dwarfs (e.g. Kirkpatrick et al. 1999, Bur- fundamental parameters for each component and sec- gasser et al. 2006, Cushing et al. 2011 – M dwarfs are tion 9 has the binding energy analysis. Conclusions are almost exclusively stellar unless young). In the absence summarized in section 10. of dynamical mass measurements, an age is required to determine whether an object of a given spectral class 2. DISCOVERY has a mass that is above or below the Hydrogen burning The Backyard Worlds: Planet 9 citizen science project limit. However the L, T, and Y classes are all definitively (Backyard Worlds for short) has been operational since in the low temperature regime for compact sources (e.g. February 2017. The scientific goal of the project is to Vrba et al. 2004, Dupuy & Kraus 2013 Tinney et al. complete the census of the solar neighborhood (includ- 2014, Filippazzo et al. 2015). Consequently, the bulk ing the solar system, e.g. Planet 9) with objects that of ultracool dwarf companions (e.g. L+L,L+T, T+T, are detectable primarily at mid infrared wavelengths T+Y) have been found in category (2): closely bound and that were missed by previous searches (see Kuch- Wide brown dwarf binary 3 ner et al. 2017 and Debes et al. 2019). Backyard Worlds full 0.8 - 2.5 µm band. We observed the A component utilizes multiple epochs of NASA’s Wide-field Infrared using a standard ABBA nod pattern with an exposure Survey Explorer (WISE) mission at both W1 (∼3.5 µm) time of 90 seconds per nod. For the B component we and W2 (∼4.5µm) wavelengths. Project participants are obtained an ABBAAB nod pattern with an exposure asked to blink between four unWISE images (see Meis- time of 120 seconds per nod. Immediately after the B ner et al. 2017a) where the time-span between the first component, we observed the A star HD 200523 for tel- and last image is ∼ 4.5 years. Given this time base- luric correction and obtained a Ne Ar lamp spectrum for line, objects of significant motion (e.g. > 200 mas yr−1) wavelength calibration. At the start of the night we used are relatively easy to visually identify (see for example quartz lamps as domeflats in order to calibrate pixel-to- Kuchner et al. 2017). pixel response. Data were reduced using the FIREHOSE The BackyardWorlds.org website hosted by Zooni- package which is based on the MASE and SpeXtool re- verse provides two avenues for reporting a proper motion duction packages (Bochanski et al. 2009, Cushing et al. candidate of scientific interest to the Backyard Worlds: 2004, Vacca et al. 2003). Planet 9 research team. The first is by using the web portal to blink WISE images and “click” on an 3.2. Spitzer Photometry object that appears to move over the ∼4.5 baseline. The field surrounding W2150B was observed by the Once identified, these objects go into a large repository on 2018-12-07. Data were ob- that the research team can access through . tained in both ch1 and ch2 bands. Peak-up was disabled The second avenue for reporting a candidate is to alert and each filter was observed using a 16 position spiral the science team by submitting the coordinates and de- dither pattern with 30 seconds per frame. The readout tails of the source on a Google form labeled “Think was done in full array mode. Data were downloaded You’ve Got One”. and aperture photometry was performed on the Spitzer Three citizen science users (Co-authors S. Goodman, Heritage reduced mosaic images. D. Caselden, and G. Colin) brought to our attention a WISE W 2 only detected source with significant motion. They used the Google form and emphasized the objects importance by emailing the Backyard Worlds distribu- tion list as well as key researchers on our team. In ad- dition, these users easily noted a bright source ∼14.1 00 away that appeared to be co-moving. Upon further WISE 2150A investigation the users realized this was the known L1 dwarf SIPS J2150-7520 (or source 2MASS J21501592- WISE 2150B 7520367; Deacon et al. 2005). On 29 June 2018, the 14.1” motion of W2150B was vetted by the research team and added to our high priority follow-up target list. Fig- ure1 shows a screenshot from the WISEview website N (Caselden et al. 2018) which was used to identify and E confirm the system. FOV = 120’’

3. DATA Figure 1. The finder chart for the W2150AB sys- tem taken from the WISEVIEW website (Caselden et al. We obtained both near infrared spectra and mid in- 2018). To see the animated motion between available WISE frared photometry for the system WISE2150-7520AB epochs visit the URL byw.tools/wiseview and use coordi- (W2150AB). nates RA,DEC=327.576919, -75.34805934. The color choice combines WISE W1 and W2 images where ”orange” sources 3.1. Magellan FIRE Spectroscopy are strong W2 and weak W1 detections. We used the 6.5m Baade Magellan telescope and the Folded-port InfraRed Echellette (FIRE; Simcoe et al. 2013) spectrograph to obtain near-infrared spectra of 4. DETAILS ON THE COMPONENTS both the primary and the secondary in this system. Ob- servations were made on 01 December 2018 under clear 4.1. Primary conditions. For all observations, we used the prism mode W2150A was originally reported as a proper motion and the 0.600 slit (resolution λ/∆λ ∼ 100) covering the source with red optical and near infrared colors remi- 4 Faherty et al.

3.0

0.4 Hα TiO 1.2 0.3 2.5 L2 L1 L0 Li CrH FeH 0.2 W2150 A Na 1.0 0.1 2.0

) 0.0 λ

6500 6550 6600 6650 6700 6750 e u l

a 1.5 V

0.8 Value Cs I 1.0 0.6 VO Cs I K I VO 0.5 0.4 Normalized Flux (f Hα Li 0.0 JmH JmK JmW1 JmW2 HmK HmW1 HmW2 KmW1 KmW2 W1mW2 Color 0.2 Color Rb I 0.4 Rb I residuals with L1 only

s 0.2 l a

0.0 u 0.0 d i s

e 0.2 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 R 0.4

Wavelength (Å) Residuals 0.6 JmH JmK JmW1 JmW2 HmK HmW1 HmW2 KmW1 KmW2 W1mW2 Color

H2O H2O CO 13 1.0 FeH L2 L1 L0 W2150 A 12 0.8

FeH/CrH 11 Value 0.6 K I K I 10

Normalized Flux 0.4 9

MJ MH MK MW1 MW2 MW3 0.2 Absolute Magnitude 1.0 residuals with L1 only s l 0.5 a

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 u d i s

e 0.0

Wavelength (µm) R 0.5 Residuals

MJ MH MK MW1 MW2 MW3 Figure 2. Top: The optical spectrum of W2150A (black Color solid line) from Reid et al.(2008) compared to the L1 stan- Figure 3. Top: Average colors and their spread for 2MASS dard 2MASSW J2130446-084520 (red dashed; also from Reid JHK through WISE W 1W 2 bandpasses for field L0 (red), et al. 2008). Prominent spectral absorption features are high- L1 (black), and L2 (blue) dwarfs as listed in Faherty et al. lighted. The region surrounding the Hα and Li I features is (2016). We show the values calculated for W2150A with contained in the inset; we find no detection of either. Bot- uncertainties as a five point star colored in green. Bottom: tom: The infrared spectrum of W2150A (black solid line) Average absolute magnitudes and their spread as above. The obtained using the FIRE spectrograph in prism mode (this values for W2150A are calculated using 2MASS and WISE work), normalized to the peak in each band (JHK). We com- photometry as well as the Gaia DR2 parallax. pare this spectrum to that of the L1 standard 2MASSW J2130446-084520 (red dashed curve) from Kirkpatrick et al. 2010. Prominent near infrared features are labeled. with FIRE highlighting prominent spectral features. Overplotted on each is the L1 near infrared standard niscent of a late-type M/early L dwarf in Deacon et al. 2MASSW J2130446-084520. The sources are normal- 2005 (originally called SIPS J2150-7520 and identified in ized by the maximum flux over the wavelength covered 2MASS as 2MASS J21501592-7520367). It was followed (J,H and K). In the optical, Hα and Li I absorption are up with optical spectroscopy by Reid et al.(2008) and indicators of activity as well as mass (hence age). The published as an L1±1. Subsequently, the proper motion optical spectrum of W2150A shows no detectable Li I or was updated for this object in Casewell et al.(2008) Hα absorption or emission although the noise is signifi- and Faherty et al.(2009). Faherty et al.(2010) specif- cant. There is also no Rb I or appreciable Cs I detected ically looked for co-moving companions to known M although this may be due to the low resolution of the and L dwarfs but nothing of note was recovered around data. The near infrared spectrum receives a field grav- W2150A in either the Hipparcos or LSPM catalogs. ity designation using the Allers & Liu(2013) spectral In Figure2 we plot the optical spectrum from Reid et al.(2008) and the near infrared spectrum obtained Wide brown dwarf binary 5 indices and we see no visible signatures of low surface (Meisner et al. 2018). We bin into yearly intervals be- gravity. cause W2150B is so faint that coaddition of two six- month WISE sky passes is necessary to form one mea- surement epoch. The field surrounding W2150B was ob- 1.0 served by WISE in two separate sky passes during 2010 (mean MJD=55402), 2015 (mean MJD=57198), 2016 0.8 (mean MJD=57580), and 2017 (mean MJD=57947).

CH The field should have also been observed by WISE in 0.6 4 April 2014, but due to a command timing anomaly, the CH4

CH location suffered a missed sky pass. We therefore omit 0.4 4 calendar year 2014 WISE data from our analysis. Com- Normalized Flux CH bining measurements from the remaining four coadds 0.2 4 −−− −−− −−− −−− yields W 2=15.81±0.05 mag. This value agrees well with

0.0 the W 2 estimate reported in the unWISE Catalog, with the latter being slightly faint due to its smeared point 1.0 1.5 2.0 spread function. The source is marginally detected in Wavelength (µm) W 1 yearly coadds and therefore we did not attempt to Figure 4. The FIRE prism spectrum of W2150B (black re-do photometry in this band. Instead we adopt W 1 = curve) compared to a spectrum of the T8 standard 2MASSI 18.18±0.15, which is the unWISE Catalog mag with a J0415195-093506 (red curve) from Burgasser et al. 2004. The correction to account for the smearing due to the high spectra has been normalized by the maximum flux over all proper motion of the source. W2150B was observed in the data. Spitzer GO program 14076 and both ch1 and ch2 pho- tometry were acquired to verify the cold nature of the source. We measured a (ch1-ch2) color for the object Figure3 shows the colors and absolute magnitudes of 1.41±0.04 mag. According to the Kirkpatrick et al. from 2MASS through WISE for W2150A compared to (2019) color spectral type relations, the (ch1-ch2) and median values of field objects as listed in Faherty et al. (W1-W2) colors correspond to a spectral type of T7±1. (2016). W2150A shows no deviation and fits within 1σ The FIRE prism spectrum for W2150B is shown in of seemingly normal equivalent type objects. All po- Figure4 and appears most like a field T8. The source sitional, photometric, and kinematic data are listed in matches the T8 infrared standard well, with the excep- Table1. tion of enhanced flux seen in the K band. 4.2. Secondary Using the Gaia parallax of the primary, we com- puted absolute magnitudes in WISE W 1W 2 and Spitzer At the time of its initial discovery, W2150B had not ch1ch2 bands. Figure5 shows a suite of absolute magni- been detected in any previously published WISE cat- tude versus spectral type diagrams featuring the WISE alog (for example it was in neither AllWISE nor the and Spitzer bandpasses discussed in this work. W2150B WISE All-Sky catalog) nor any publicly accessible cat- falls within the spread of normal field T8 objects dis- alog (e.g. it was also not in 2MASS). After citizen cussed in Kirkpatrick et al.(2019). scientists reported the source at position 21:50:18.99 - Figure6 shows the color magnitude diagrams for 75:20:54.6 (MJD=57947), the research team checked the brown dwarfs in WISE and Spitzer bands. Assuming the unWISE Catalog for a detection (Lang 2014; Meisner Gaia DR2 parallax for W2150B (see section6), its abso- et al. 2017b; Schlafly et al. 2019) and found that the lute magnitudes in each band are on the faint side for its source was faint (W2=16.01±0.06) and red in the WISE color. It remains unclear if such a position on color mag- bands ((W1-W2)=2.42±0.15). This red color, combined nitude diagrams might indicate slightly deviant cloud, with the source’s significant motion, were a tell-tale sign or gravity properties (e.g. Tinney et al. 2014, that the object was a close and cold brown dwarf. Leggett et al. 2017). The unWISE Catalog provides valuable information In summary, W2150B appears to be a spectrally nor- about W2150B, but the photometry in this catalog was mal field T8 dwarf. It is well matched to the absolute derived from the full 2010-2017 unWISE stack, with no magnitudes of known similar type objects yet slightly attempt made to account for the considerable ∼700 of faint for its color in all bands. All positional, photomet- source motion during that time span. We therefore per- ric, and kinematic data are listed in Table1. formed additional, custom WISE and pho- tometry using coadds binned into yearly time intervals 6 Faherty et al.

14 12 15

16 13 17 W1 W2

M M 14 18

19 15

20 W2150 B W2150 B 16 T4 T6 T8 Y0 Y2 T4 T6 T8 Y0 Y2 SpT SpT

14 12

15 13

Ch1 16 Ch2 M M 14

17 15

18 W2150 B W2150 B 16 T4 T6 T8 Y0 Y2 T4 T6 T8 Y0 Y2 SpT SpT

Figure 5. Absolute magnitude versus spectral type diagram for W2150B in the WISE and Spitzer bandpasses. The mid to late-type T comparative sample comes from Kirkpatrick et al.(2019) with a few earlier type sources from Dupuy & Liu(2012).

5. GAIA WITH PROBABILITY OF CHANCE While the WISEVIEW animation clearly shows the ALIGNMENT two sources are moving at a similar rate, we computed Using the WISEVIEW motion visualization tool the proper motion for W2150B by examining the yearly (Caselden et al. 2018)1, the motions of both the pri- WISE coadds of §4.2 in combination with the Spitzer mary and secondary are obvious (see Figure1 for a position. As we mentioned in §4.2, there are four yearly screenshot). After cross-matching with the Gaia DR2 WISE coadds for W2150B with mean MJDs of 55402, catalog release (Lindegren et al. 2018, Gaia Collabo- 57198, 57580, and 57947. Including the Spitzer image ration et al. 2016) citizen scientist and co-author S. taken at MJD=58459 provides an 8.37 year baseline be- Goodman reported that the primary was also source tween the first and last position measurements. We Gaia DR2 6358287868675805824 and had a well mea- calculated (µracos(dec), µdec)=(876±45, −278±45) mas −1 sured parallax and proper motion. The Gaia parameters yr and found that our calculated proper motions in for 2M2150A – which we assume as the astrometry for both RA and DEC for W2150B are within 1σ of the Gaia the system – are listed in Table1. DR2 values for W2150A. All kinematic information for W2150B is listed in Table1. To quantify the probability that the system might be 1 D. Caselden is also one of the citizen scientist co-discoverers a chance alignment, we examined the 100pc Gaia DR2 of this binary. catalog and found all the objects with proper motion component and parallax values that fell within 1σ of Wide brown dwarf binary 7

8 8

10 W2150 A 10 12 W2150 A

14 W1 W2

M M 12 16 W2150 B 18 14 W2150 B 20

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 (W1−W2) (W1−W2) 13 12 14

13 15 Ch2 Ch1 W2150 B M M 14 W2150 B 16

15 17

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 (Ch1−Ch2) (Ch1−Ch2)

Figure 6. Color magnitude diagrams for L through late-type T/Y dwarfs with W2150AB highlighted. The top panels show WISE color magnitude diagrams and both the primary and secondary. The bottom panels show Spitzer color magnitude diagrams, including only the secondary. The mid to late-type T dwarfs in the comparative sample come from Kirkpatrick et al. (2019) and the earlier type objects come from Dupuy & Liu(2012) and Faherty et al.(2012).

W2150B. Out of the 700,055 stars there were 4 matches For all analysis that follows, we assume that W2150AB including W2150A. W2150A is < 1500 away while the is a physically associated, co-evolving system; therefore three other matches were scattered across the sky (hun- we use the Gaia parallax of the primary for the sec- dreds of degrees away). We ran a Monte Carlo simu- ondary as well. We examined both sources on color lation with 90,000 iterations of randomly moving stars magnitude diagrams to investigate commonality or dif- to determine that there was a 0.00007% likelihood that ferences in their positions relative to the field sequence. W2150A is a chance coincidence with W2150B (at an The top panels of Figure6 show the WISE color mag- angular separation of < 15 00). nitude diagrams for field L through late-type T dwarfs Furthermore, the Gaia DR2 parallax for W2150A with both W2150A and W2150B highlighted. While matches within 1σ with the estimated spectrophotomet- W2150A sits well within the locus of field sources, ric distance for W2150B that comes from the spectral W2150B is faint and/or blue compared to equivalent type relations in Kirkpatrick et al.(2019) (see section sources. Given that we also had Spitzer photometry 4.2 and Table1). for the secondary and there is an array of trigonometric parallax and photometric data on late-type sources from 6. COLOR MAGNITUDE DIAGRAMS FOR THE the Kirkpatrick et al.(2019) program, we also show the SYSTEM Spitzer color magnitude diagrams in the bottom panels 8 Faherty et al. of Figure6. Similar to the WISE diagrams, W2150 neither it nor W2150A are in a particularly extreme part B appears slightly faint and/or blue for its given color of any diagram. compared to the field sequence. This position suggests The total tangential velocity of the system is > 100 that the source is lower metallicity and hence older than km s−1 (as shown in table1), which is notable espe- the field population (e.g. Leggett et al. 2010) however cially given the position of W2150B on Figure6. Fa- nothing conclusive can be drawn at this time. The pri- herty et al.(2009) found that objects with vtan > 100 mary shows no indications of high and km s−1 also tended to be those that were particularly none of the classic low metallicity/ spectral blue for their spectral types and yielded older kinematic indicators (e.g. Kirkpatrick et al. 2014, 2016, Burgasser ages. Since neither source is particularly deviant in its et al. 2004, Gonzales et al. 2018, Cushing et al. 2009). colors, we conclude that both components are of field age, possibly tending toward the older range of field 7. DISCUSSION ON THE AGE OF THE SYSTEM sources. While there are differing results on what “field age” might mean for L and T dwarfs, recent results from Identifying the age of a brown dwarf is an extremely Burgasser et al.(2015) show that L dwarfs within ∼ 20 difficult task. Solar type stars have a suite of diagnos- pc have kinematic mean ages of 6.5 ± 0.4 Gyr. However tics to estimate the age range of an object such as gy- we can only conclude that the L dwarf receives a field rochronology, astroseismology, chromospheric activity, gravity using spectral indices and neither the L nor the and Li I depletion (see for e.g Barnes 2007, Mamajek & T dwarf show features of a halo subdwarf. Consequently Hillenbrand 2008, Pavlenko & Magazzu 1996). However we adopt a broad age range for this system; it appears brown dwarfs have relatively few diagnostic tools largely to be older than 500 Myr and younger than ∼ 10 Gyr, due to their cool temperatures and lack of stable core nu- a conservative cap on the age of field sources. clear burning. There are a handful of emerging diagnos- tics but they are not precisely calibrated. For instance, spectral features like alkali lines, metal oxide and hy- dride bands and overall H band shape can strongly indi- 8. FUNDAMENTAL PARAMETERS cate whether an object is low/high surface gravity hence Following the prescription of Filippazzo et al.(2015), young/old (see for example Allers & Liu 2013, Cruz we use the Gaia DR2 parallax of W2150A combined et al. 2009). Near infrared colors combined with spec- with all available photometric and spectroscopic infor- tral type and kinematics can also indicate sub popula- mation to produce distance calibrated spectral energy tions of brown dwarfs which are redder/slower/younger distributions (SEDs) for the two sources. By integrat- or bluer/faster/older. While there are now several L and ing over these SEDs, we directly calculate their bolo- T dwarfs known in nearby moving groups (e.g. Faherty metric . Using the evolutionary models of et al. 2016, 2013, Gagn´eet al. 2017, 2018, Artigau et al. Saumon & Marley(2008) paired with the age range 2015, Liu et al. 2013, 2016, Riedel et al. 2019) as well as cited above, we obtain a radius range for each source and substellar mass subdwarfs (e.g. Burgasser et al. 2003b, semi-empirically obtain estimates for the Teff , mass, and Kirkpatrick et al. 2014) age diagnostics show significant logg. For W2150A we used the Gaia G, 2MASS JHK, scatter and are not established for field age objects. and WISE W1W2W3 photometry along with the op- Co-moving systems are excellent sources of calibra- tical and near infrared spectra to extract information. tion for age diagnostics. For this purpose, one would For W2150B we only have the WISE W1W2 bands and like to find a brown dwarf co-moving with a higher mass Spitzer ch1ch2 bands along with the FIRE prism spec- companion (solar type star for instance), take an age di- trum. The Filippazzo et al.(2015) method requires at agnostic for the primary and apply it to the secondary least a near infrared estimate of photometry to scale the to calibrate its observable features (see, e.g. Kirkpatrick spectrum, therefore we estimated the 2MASS J and H et al. 2010, Faherty et al. 2010, 2011, Deacon et al. 2014, bands using offsets computed from WISE and 2MASS Burningham et al. 2013, Muˇzi´cet al. 2012). The case of detected T8 objects in Kirkpatrick et al.(2011) (see Ta- W2150AB is intriguing because it is two well resolved ul- ble1 for details). tracool dwarf objects orbiting each other. By examining We find that W2150A has log(Lbol/L )=-3.69 ± 0.01, their spectral features and positions on color magnitude Teff =2118 ± 62 K, logg=5.2 ± 0,2, radius=1.03 ± and spectral photometric diagrams in tandem we can in- 0.06RJup and an estimated mass=72 ± 12 MJup while vestigate whether there are any common age-diagnostic the T8 has log(Lbol/L )=-5.64 ± 0.02, Teff =719 ± 61 trends in their values. However, as noted above, neither K, logg=4.9 ± 0,5, radius=0.95 ± 0.16 RJup and an es- object shows peculiar spectral features. While W2150B timated mass=34 ± 22 MJup. All of these fundamental appears slightly faint for its given WISE or Spitzer color, parameter values are listed in Table1; they appear con- Wide brown dwarf binary 9 sistent with field sources discussed in Filippazzo et al. ous field-age and young wide companions falling well be- (2015). low the previously considered minimum binding energy (e.g. Radigan et al. 2009, Artigau et al. 2009, Luhman 2004, Burgasser 2007). We attempted to compile an up- to-date sample of very low mass binaries/companions, drawing from both large survey papers such as Deacon 1.0 et al.(2014), spectral binary papers such as Bardalez Gagliuffi et al.(2014), and individual young companion

) papers such as Artigau et al.(2015), and Naud et al. sun

(M (2014). Figures7 and8 display a compilation of binary tot M (or co-moving) systems from various catalogs. We list

0.1 W2150 AB the objects displayed in Figures7 and8 with M tot < 0.2 MSun organized by increasing binding energy in Table L0 or later primary T6 or later secondary 2. Additionally we searched the Gaia DR2 catalog to Age < 1 Gyr Age < 1 Gyr + L0 or later primary see if either the primary or secondary component had

105 104 103 102 101 100 10−1 astrometry and/or photometry reported and we list the Separation (AU) results in Table3. We separate the different sub-populations of compan-

1000.0 ion systems thought to be younger than 1 Gyr and those older on Figure7. The top panel of Figure7 shows sep- aration versus total mass of the system and allows us

100.0 to examine if there is a distinguishable distance which

Erg) would delineate where systems become unstable and dis- 41 perse. The bottom panel of Figure8 shows the total 10.0 mass of the system versus binding energy allowing us to investigate if there is a minimum value required for formation or survival within the Galaxy. We find that Binding Energy (10 1.0 L0 or later primary W2150AB occupies a unique space on the upper and W2150 AB T6 or later secondary Age < 1 Gyr lower panels of Figure7. It is surrounded by only young Age < 1 Gyr + L0 or later primary sources with comparable low binding energy objects in 0.1 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 the field with higher total masses. It is the only L plus M (M ) tot sun T dwarf co-moving system with a separation larger than ∼100 AU and it is one of only three systems where both Figure 7. A collection of systems from the literature rep- the L and T dwarfs are resolved at all – the others are resenting co-moving or binary companions. Systems with ages < 1 Gyr are plotted as blue and field age objects are Luhman 16AB (Luhman 2013) and SDSS J1416+13AB either light grey or black. If the system contains at least an (Burningham et al. 2010). L dwarf or later primary, we plotted the system as a black Assuming that W2150 is field age (see section7 square. If it also contained a T6 or later secondary we plot- above), we can find an analog to its mass ratio and ted the system with an open purple circle. We show total binding energy among the young systems (< 1 Gyr) mass versus separation on the top panel and total mass ver- compiled. For instance, the ∼ 2 Myr Chamaeleon star sus binding energy on the lower panel. W2150AB stands out forming region contains 2MASS J11011926-7732383AB as the lowest binding energy system not in a young cluster. (2M1101AB), an M7.25 and an M8.25 with a mass ratio of ∼0.5 and a separation of ∼ 240 AU (Luhman 2004). As can be seen in Figure8, 2M1101AB has a similar 9. BINDING ENERGY mass ratio and binding energy to W2150AB. At the time of its discovery, 2M1101AB was the first brown dwarf Early studies of very low mass binaries concluded that binary discovered with a separation > 20 AU and its there was a minimum binding energy (E ) required for b existence was celebrated as a definitive insight into the systems to form and remain stable. Works such as Close formation of brown dwarfs. W2150AB now shows that et al.(2003) and Burgasser et al.(2003a) determined E b such systems can survive into the field. for field ultracool dwarf to ultracool dwarf pairs of ∼ While it is intriguing to see the two systems with sim- 2 x 1042 erg. However, as Faherty et al.(2010) have ilar properties, they differ in age by several Gyr. More- discussed, searches in recent years have revealed numer- 10 Faherty et al.

or, it was perturbed into its wide configuration while in a more dense cluster but the environment dispersed before it could evaporate the binary, leaving the system stable in the less dense field environment. Erg)

41 Another possible explanation for the survival of this source to field ages could be that one of their compo- nents is in reality a closely-separated binary system, making this a hierarchical triple system while increasing the overall binding energy. To test the latter hypothesis, Separation (AU)Separation we followed the prescription of Burgasser et al.(2010) Binding Energy(10 Binding

W2150AB to identify spectral binary systems from near-infrared, 2M1101 low-resolution, SpeX spectra. However, we do not find peculiarities in the spectrum of the primary attributable Mass ratio (q) to unresolved binarity. Unfortunately this technique is not applicable for T8 objects therefore we can not rule Figure 8. The same systems plotted as in Figure7. In this out that the secondary might harbor an unseen compan- case we show the mass ratio (q) versus binding energy and ion. color code the systems by their physical separation. Regardless of the reason it has survived until today, the total estimated mass of the system is 0.106 MSun. over, 2M1101AB is a member of Chamaeleon which is a So with a physical separation as large as 341 AU, the 41 densely crowded area of star formation compared to the binding energy (Ebin=10 erg) of W2150AB is the low- sparsely-separated field where we find W2150AB. While est found among ultracool dwarf objects not identified we have no idea how or where W2150AB formed, we can in a young cluster. investigate the feasibility that it could have formed like 2M1101AB and survived dynamical interactions in its 10. DISCUSSION natal cluster and the Galaxy until a field age. As was We report the discovery of a resolved L1+T8 co- discussed in Burgasser et al. 2003a and adapted in Close moving system: W2150AB with a physical separation et al.(2007), systems with total masses ∼ 0.1 M will be of ∼ 341 AU. This discovery was enabled by a dedicated stable against any type of stellar encounter as long as the cohort of citizen scientists participating in the Backyard separation is < 1800 AU and the number density of stel- Worlds: Planet 9 citizen science project. The cool sec- lar perturbers is on the order of the measured Galactic ondary appeared in no online catalogs, so it had eluded disk mass density (see Pham 1997, Holmberg & Flynn astronomers performing automated searches. 2000). W2150AB meets these criteria. Consequently, it We obtained Magellan FIRE prism near infrared spec- is not altogether surprising that W2150AB exists – even tra for both the primary and secondary and find both though no other system had been discovered to date that sources appear comparable to field sources with no de- rivals its properties in the field. What is surprising and viant or peculiar features. The primary in the system what has been discussed at length concerning the differ- is also a Gaia detected source and has a well deter- ence between young systems discovered and those in the mined parallax of 41.3593 ± 0.2799 mas and proper field, is whether very low mass companions born in star motion components of (µracos(dec), µdec)=(888.627 forming regions should become unstable and evaporate ± 0.502, -298.234 ± 0.518) mas. Assuming an age over time given their more dense natal environments. range for the system of 0.5 - 10 Gyr we find that Burgasser et al. 2003a postulated how the local stellar W2150A has log(Lbol/L )=-3.69 ± 0.01, Teff =2118 ± density at birth impacts the viability of a pair surviving. 62 K, logg=5.2 ± 0,2, radius=1.03 ± 0.06RJup and Close et al.(2007) built upon that work and examined an estimated mass=72 ± 12 MJup while W2150B has the stellar density for clusters such as Chamaeleon, Rho log(Lbol/L )=-5.64 ± 0.02, Teff =719 ± 61 K, logg=4.9 Ophiucus, Upper , etc., where the bulk of the ± 0,5, radius=0.95 ± 0.16 RJup and an estimated young sources from Figure7 have been discovered. Con- mass=34± 22 MJup. The total estimated mass of the sequently, Close et al.(2007) suggested that the major- system is 0.106 MSun hence with a physical separa- ity of young systems (including 2M1101AB) were in the 41 tion as large as 341 AU, the binding energy (Ebin=10 process of evaporating. Following this logic, W2150AB erg) is the lowest found among ultracool dwarf objects could either be considered a system that formed in a low not identified in a young cluster. In separation, Ebin, density environment (small sparse cluster for instance) and mass ratio, W2150AB resembles 2M1101AB, the Wide brown dwarf binary 11

first brown dwarf binary discovered with a separation > particular the institutions participating in the Gaia Mul- 20 AU. 2M1101AB, discovered in the Chamaeleon star tilateral Agreement. forming region, was heralded as a source of definitive in- sight into the formation of brown dwarfs. But W2150AB leaves us with an intriguing question about whether it is an evolved version of 2M1101AB or perhaps a sys- tem that formed in a low density cluster that survived unperturbed by interactions with nearby stellar or gi- ant molecular clouds. Given that it is easily resolved with ground or space based observatories, W2150AB is an excellent benchmark system for understanding how brown dwarfs form and evolve together.

The Backyard Worlds: Planet 9 team would like to thank the many Zooniverse volunteers who have partici- pated in this project, from providing feedback during the beta review stage to classifying flipbooks to contribut- ing to the discussions on TALK. We would also like to thank the Zooniverse web development team for their work creating and maintaining the Zooniverse platform and the Project Builder tools. This research was sup- ported by NASA Astrophysics Data Analysis Program grant NNH17AE75I. This research has made use of: the Washington Dou- ble Star Catalog maintained at the U.S. Naval Observa- tory; the SIMBAD database and VizieR catalog access tool, operated at the Centre de Donnees astronomiques de Strasbourg, France (Ochsenbein et al. 2000); data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS; Skrutskie et al. 2006), which is a joint project of the Uni- versity of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC)/California Institute of Technol- ogy (Caltech), funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Sci- ence Foundation; data products from the Wide-field In- frared Survey Explorer (WISE; and Wright et al. 2010), which is a joint project of the University of Califor- nia, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)/Caltech, funded by NASA. This project was de- veloped in part at the 2017 Heidelberg Gaia Sprint, hosted by the Max-Planck-Institut fur Astronomie, Hei- delberg. AMM acknowledges support from Hubble Fel- lowship HST-HF2-51415.001-A and NASA ADAP grant NNH17AE75I. SEL is supported by an appointment to the NASA Postdoctoral Program at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, administered by Universities Space Research Association under contract with NASA. This work has made use of data from the European Space Agency(ESA) mission Gaia, processed by the Gaia Data Processing and Analysis Consortium. Funding for the DPAC has been provided by national institutions, in 12 Faherty et al.

Table 1. Measured Parameters

Parameter W2150A W2150B System Units Reference (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) ASTROMETRY α 327.58083685735a (±0.2 mas) 327.579158e (±0.6 mas) ··· deg 1,2 δ -75.34482002123a (±0.3 mas) -75.348499e (±0.6 mas) ··· deg 1,2 `a 315.9126 ······ deg 1 ba -36.8406 ······ deg 1 $ 41.3593 ± 0.2799 ······ mas 1 −1 µα 888.627 ± 0.502 876 ± 45 ··· mas yr 1,2 −1 µδ -298.234 ± 0.518 -278 ± 45 ··· mas yr 1,2 PHOTOMETRY

GBP 21.4462±0.2021 ······ mag 1 G 18.9110±0.0038 ······ mag 1

GRP 17.3031±0.0118 ······ mag 1 I 17.53±0.17 ······ mag 5 J 14.056±0.029 (19.03±0.23)f ··· mag 3 H 13.176±0.032 (19.24±0.22)f ··· mag 3

Ks 12.673±0.030 ······ mag 3 W 1b 12.317±0.024 18.18±0.15 ··· mag 4,2 W 2b 12.053±0.023 15.81±0.05 ··· mag 4,2 W 3b 11.616±0.150 ······ mag 4 W 4b <9.328 ······ mag 4 ch1 ··· 17.01±0.03 ··· mag 2 ch2 ··· 15.60±0.02 ··· mag 2 SPECTROSCOPY Spectral Type (OpT) L1±1 ········· 2 Spectral Type (IR) L1±1 T8±1 ······ 2 FUNDAMENTALS Age 0.5 - 10 0.5 -10 0.5 - 10 Gyr 2

log(Lbol/L ) -3.69±0.01 -5.64 ± 0.02 ······ 2

Teff 2118±62 719±61 ··· K 2

Radius 1.03±0.06 0.95±0.16 ··· RJup 2

Mass 72±12 34±22 ··· MJup 2 log g 5.2±0.2 4.9±0.5 ······ 2 KINEMATICS Distancec 24.18±0.16 27±4g 24.18±0.16 pc 2 d −1 vtan 107.43 ± 0.06 117±6 107.43 ± 0.06 km s 2 ABS MAGS

MG 16.99± 0.02 ······ mag 2

Table 1 continued Wide brown dwarf binary 13 Table 1 (continued)

Parameter W2150A W2150B System Units Reference (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

MI 15.61± 0.17 ······ mag 2

MJ 12.14±0.03 ······ mag 2

MH 11.26± 0.03 ······ mag 2

MK 10.76± 0.03 ······ mag 2

MW 1 10.43± 0.03 16.26±0.15 ··· mag 2

MW 2 10.16± 0.03 13.89± 0.05 ··· mag 2

MW 3 9.55± 0.16 ······ mag 2

Mch1 ··· 15.09±0.03 ··· mag 2

Mch2 ··· 13.68±0.03 ··· mag 2 SYSTEM Separation ······ 14.1 00 2 Separation ······ 341 AU 2 Binding Energy ······ 1.004 10 41 erg 2 aepoch J2015.5, ICRS b For the L1 primary, we chose the original WISE catalog values in the analysis over the AllWISE values so we could compare to the photometry in Faherty et al.(2016), For the T8 secondary W2 comes from the yearly W2 coadd analysis of §4.2, and W1 comes from the unWISE Catalog (Schlafly et al. 2019) with a correction applied for source motion. c Calculated using D = 1/π, which is good approximation for parallax known to π/σπ = 133 accuracy dCalculated using Lindegren et al.(2018) astrometry. e Calculated using WISE image at MJD=57947. fThe 2MASS J and H magnitudes are estimates from the expected J-W2 and H-W2 colors of a T8. We used the sample of brown dwarfs in Kirkpatrick et al.(2011) to estimate an offset of 3.21 ±0.23 mag for 2MASS J and 3.43±0.23 mag for 2MASS H from the WISE W2 magnitude. g Calculated using the MW 2 from the SpT relation in Kirkpatrick et al.(2019) Note—The object does not have entries in GSC 2.2, USNO-B1.0, and does not appear on any of the photographic sky surveys scanned by SuperCOSMOS. References: (1) Lindegren et al.(2018), (2) This paper, (3) Cutri et al.(2003), (4) Wright et al.(2010). , (5) DENIS Consortium(2005) 14 Faherty et al. Wide brown dwarf binary 15 Reference g Young? f erg bin 41 d AU x10 Sun 1 Gyr. Not Yng indicates no associated region M (q) Sep E < The RA and DEC listed are of the primary in the i 0.2 < tot Sun M M e 2 M Sun M Mass e 1 M Sun M Mass 2 M SpT 1 Companion systems with total mass M SpT i Table 2. DEC i RA h (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Name —This stubtable is a preview of the entire sample, which will be available as a machine readable table. All of Table 1 and Table 2 data can be found therefore a field age for the source. system. on a viewable and commentable google spreadsheet here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15Eidlmsidj5kxqj2bc4HNrGdHJJZnjY0/view?usp=sharing mass relation from Dupuy & Liu ( 2017 ) binding energy. Dynamical masses from Dupuy & Liu ( 2017 ) Total masses listed in Dupuy &( 2017 ) Liu Dynamical but masses individual from massesGarcia were et not) al. ( 2017 thereforeDynamical we used masses the from relationDieterich et in al. ( 2018 ) that workMasses to were estimate either object obtained masses. from dynamical mass measurements (andTo noted account as for such), a discovery distribution paper of estimates the or eccentricities of by the applyingYng binary the indicates orbits, spectral a we type source multiply to is the associated physical with separation a by 1.26 cluster/moving-group/star and forming use region this with value an to age compute the FUTauOph-11UScoCTIO-108 161258+4013 05 53.94 04NLTT730 23 35.38 -18 16 180126-5022 22 42.7 25.20 +25 12 03 58 03.02M1207 35.01 -24 05 00 14.0LHS6176 +40 M7.25 M7 15 13 02.40 08.3 01LHS2803 26 55.50 +29 M9.25 59 M9 29.8Koenigstuhl-1 M9.5 M6 -50 12 22 071101-7732 39.0 33.40 09 50 00 0.05 M4 47.28 21 M9.5 05.912150-7520 13 -39 0.057 48 32 M6.5 M7 02.90 +01 54.0 17LP261-75 -42 34.3 44 43.5 11 L7.5 -131328+0808 0.017 01 0.015 44 19.26 07.1 0.013 M8 M8 21 M4VHS1256 0.105 50 18.99 -77 M6 32 0.065 M4.5 09 0.125 38.3 51 0.015 13 05.49 -75 0.07 28 20 35.49 0.30 54.6 0.095 L5 T8 0.091 +35 M9.5 58 M7 +08 0.23 02.1 12 T5 0.032 784 08 56 0.058 19.5 01.92 L1 670 0.196 0.88 M4.5 0.092 0.024 0.103 -12 0.125 57 0.183 M6 23.9 M8 0.17 0.87 243 0.125 0.187 0.19 0.46 6700 T8 L6 M7.5 0.004 0.079 0.036 M8.5 5070 0.97 0.18 0.05 0.036 Yng 0.25 5100 0.028 0.182 Yng L7 0.161 0.072 0.125 0.25 0.161 0.1 0.17 0.77 0.29 Not 0.30 Yng Yng 0.025 0.29 1800 68 1400 Not 41 0.034 Yng 0.025 0.073 1400 10 Not 0.075 Yng 0.094 79 0.80 0.57 0.106 49 0.50 0.15 0.41 37 0.57 0.011 0.194 0.47 242 0.20 Not 3 Not Yng Yng 0.94 430 0.084 Not Yng 450 Yng 1250 0.91 0.15 28 69 1.00 102 1.22 36 1.32 Yng 29 Not Yng 1.39 Not Yng Yng 96 67 Yng 97 83 42 The name used is a shorthand from the discovery paper or from the coordinates of the primary. h Note a b c d e f g 16 Faherty et al.

Facilities: Gaia, Hale(TripleSpec), WISE, CTIO:2MASS, Software: Aladin, BANYAN Σ (Gagn´eet al. 2018) UKIRT

REFERENCES

Allers, K. N., & Liu, M. C. 2013, ApJ, 772, 79 Cushing, M. C., Vacca, W. D., & Rayner, J. T. 2004, Artigau, E.,´ Gagn´e,J., Faherty, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, PASP, 116, 362 254 Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., et al. Artigau, E.,´ Lafreni`ere,D., Albert, L., & Doyon, R. 2009, 2011, ApJ, 743, 50 ApJ, 692, 149 Cutri, R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, Artigau, E.,´ Lafreni`ere,D., Doyon, R., et al. 2007, ApJL, 2MASS All Sky Catalog of point sources., ed. Cutri, 659, L49 R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., Beichman, C. A., Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Burgasser, A. J., Gelino, C. R., Carpenter, J. M., Chester, T., Cambresy, L., Evans, T., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 143 Fowler, J., Gizis, J., Howard, E., Huchra, J., Jarrett, T., Barnes, S. A. 2007, ApJ, 669, 1167 Kopan, E. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Light, R. M., Marsh, Bate, M. R. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 2036 K. A., McCallon, H., Schneider, S., Stiening, R., Sykes, Bate, M. R., Bonnell, I. A., & Bromm, V. 2002, MNRAS, M., Weinberg, M., Wheaton, W. A., Wheelock, S., & 332, L65 Zacarias, N. Bochanski, J. J., Hennawi, J. F., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2009, Deacon, N. R., Hambly, N. C., & Cooke, J. A. 2005, A&A, PASP, 121, 1409 435, 363 Burgasser, A. J. 2007, AJ, 134, 1330 Deacon, N. R., Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., et al. 2014, ApJ, Burgasser, A. J., Cruz, K. L., Cushing, M., et al. 2010, 792, 119 ApJ, 710, 1142 Debes, J. H., Th´evenot, M., Kuchner, M. J., et al. 2019, Burgasser, A. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cruz, K. L., et al. ApJL, 872, L25 2006, ApJS, 166, 585 DENIS Consortium. 2005, VizieR Online Data Catalog, Burgasser, A. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Reid, I. N., et al. 2263 2003a, ApJ, 586, 512 Dieterich, S. B., Weinberger, A. J., Boss, A. P., et al. 2018, —. 2003b, ApJ, 586, 512 ApJ, 865, 28 Burgasser, A. J., McElwain, M. W., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Dupuy, T. J., & Kraus, A. L. 2013, Science, 341, 1492 et al. 2004, AJ, 127, 2856 Dupuy, T. J., & Liu, M. C. 2012, ArXiv e-prints, Burgasser, A. J., Gillon, M., Melis, C., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, arXiv:1201.2465 104 —. 2017, ApJS, 231, 15 Burningham, B., Leggett, S. K., Lucas, P. W., et al. 2010, Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., Bochanski, J. J., et al. MNRAS, 404, 1952 2011, AJ, 141, 71 Burningham, B., Cardoso, C. V., Smith, L., et al. 2013, Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 433, 457 AJ, 137, 1 Caselden, D., Westin, III, P., Meisner, A., Kuchner, M., & Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., West, A. A., et al. 2010, Colin, G. 2018, WiseView: Visualizing motion and AJ, 139, 176 variability of faint WISE sources, Astrophysics Source Faherty, J. K., Rice, E. L., Cruz, K. L., Mamajek, E. E., & Code Library, , , ascl:1806.004 N´u˜nez,A. 2013, AJ, 145, 2 Casewell, S. L., Jameson, R. F., & Burleigh, M. R. 2008, Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., Walter, F. M., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 390, 1517 ApJ, 752, 56 Close, L. M., Siegler, N., Freed, M., & Biller, B. 2003, ApJ, Faherty, J. K., Riedel, A. R., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2016, 587, 407 ApJS, 225, 10 Close, L. M., Zuckerman, B., Song, I., et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, Filippazzo, J. C., Rice, E. L., Faherty, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 1492 810, 158 Cruz, K. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Burgasser, A. J. 2009, Gagn´e,J., Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., et al. 2017, AJ, 137, 3345 ApJL, 841, L1 Cushing, M. C., Looper, D., Burgasser, A. J., et al. 2009, Gagn´e,J., Mamajek, E. E., Malo, L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, ApJ, 696, 986 23 G

Wide brown20.24 dwarf binary 17 1 0.833 19.83 1.903 20.48 0.421 19.28 − 0.702 18.35 0.723 19.40 ± δ ± ± ± ± µ mas yr 1 0.442 -45.784 0.733 -1.884 0.748 1.931 4.056 -21.761 0.539 -109.434 − ± ± ± α ± ± 0.3546 146.684 0.5439 258.636 1.2887 12.450 0.5788 77.913 0.3368 -23.668 ± ± π µ ± ± ± ········· mas mas yr d Sun M 0.2 < ·················· ·················· ·················· ···································· ········································································ RA DEC G 15.05 1 0.445 19.17 12 58 37.99 +40 14 01.5 7.3800 0.077 14.11 0.096 12.63 0.124 13.54 0.518 18.91 0.126 13.83 0.202 15.24 04 23 35.73 +25 02 59.6 7.4909 0.5200.260 18.92 17.42 16 22 25.19 -24 05 15.9 0.311 18.80 01 27 02.83 -50 23 20.9 14.4188 0.130 17.41 0.092 15.37 00 21 05.91 -42 44 43.4 38.5223 0.418 19.07 − 0.397 18.33 11 01 19.42 -77 32 37.5 5.4333 ± ± ± ± ± ± δ ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± µ mas yr Companion systems with total mass 1 0.144 -512.979 0.142 -171.822 0.718 -57.100 0.1030.333 -227.076 -50.356 0.109 -360.553 0.088 -12.530 0.502 -298.234 0.6980.454 -23.236 -20.618 0.233 -23.720 0.435 2.062 0.356 -111.430 − 0.376 -21.026 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± α ± ± Table 3. 0.0709 381.542 0.2440 140.207 0.15610.0762 -64.083 234.644 0.0838 -687.597 0.0727 255.046 0.2799 888.627 0.1376 -100.975 0.1497 6.895 0.40600.2409 -15.790 0.3382 -10.156 79.289 0.1877 -22.653 0.3601 -148.679 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± π µ ± ± ± ± ± ± ········· mas mas yr Prim Prim Prim Prim Prim Prim Sec Sec Sec Sec Sec Sec (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Name RA DEC —This stubtable is a preview of the entire sample, which will be available as a machine readable table. All of Table 1 and Table 2 data can be found on a viewable and commentable google spreadsheet here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15Eidlmsidj5kxqj2bc4HNrGdHJJZnjY0/view?usp=sharing FUTau 04 23 35.39 +25 03 02.7 7.5981 Oph-11UScoCTIO-108 161258+4013 05 54.07 -18 16 18 22 44.3 25.20 12 58 35.01 -24 6.9306 05 13.6 +40 13 08.1 7.3440 8.4520 NLTT730 00 15 05.73 +29 55 40.3 28.6060 0126-5022 01 26 55.50 -50 22 38.7 13.9950 2M1207LHS6176 12 07 33.46 09 50 49.59 -39 32 +01 54.0 18 13.6 15.5242 50.8011 LHS2803Koenigstuhl-1 00 21 10.74 13 48 07.27 -42 45 40.1 -13 44 31.5 37.3985 54.9974 1101-7732 11 01 19.19 -77 32 38.7 5.4081 W2150 21 50 15.77 -75 20 36.7 41.3593 LP261-751328+0808VHS1256 09 51 13 04.44 28 35.39 35 12 58 08 56 06.7 08 01.84 18.8 29.4464 -12 57 24.8 9.2012 Note 18 Faherty et al.

Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. Macintosh, B., Graham, J. R., Barman, T., et al. 2015, 2016, Astron. Astrophys., 595, A1. Science, 350, 64 http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.04153{%}0Ahttp: Mamajek, E. E., & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2008, ApJ, 687, 1264 //dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Martin, E. L., Brandner, W., & Basri, G. 1999, Science, Garcia, E. V., Ammons, S. M., Salama, M., et al. 2017, 283, 1718 ApJ, 846, 97 Meisner, A. M., Lang, D., & Schlegel, D. J. 2017a, AJ, 154, Gillon, M., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Demory, B.-O., et al. 2017, 161 Nature, 542, 456 —. 2017b, AJ, 153, 38 —. 2018, AJ, 156, 69 Gonzales, E. C., Faherty, J. K., Gagn´e,J., Artigau, E.,´ & Morley, C. V., Skemer, A. J., Allers, K. N., et al. 2018, Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. 2018, ApJ, 864, 100 ApJ, 858, 97 Goodwin, S. P., & Whitworth, A. 2007, A&A, 466, 943 Muˇzi´c,K., Radigan, J., Jayawardhana, R., et al. 2012, AJ, Holmberg, J., & Flynn, C. 2000, MNRAS, 313, 209 144, 180 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Dahn, C. C., Monet, D. G., et al. 2001, Naud, M.-E., Artigau, E.,´ Malo, L., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, 5 AJ, 121, 3235 Ochsenbein, F., Bauer, P., & Marcout, J. 2000, A&AS, 143, Kirkpatrick, J. D., Reid, I. N., Liebert, J., et al. 1999, ApJ, 23 519, 802 Padoan, P., & Nordlund, A.˚ 2004, ApJ, 617, 559 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Looper, D. L., Burgasser, A. J., et al. Pavlenko, Y. V., & Magazzu, A. 1996, A&A, 311, 961 2010, ApJS, 190, 100 Pham, H.-A. 1997, in ESA Special Publication, Vol. 402, Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cushing, M. C., Gelino, C. R., et al. Hipparcos - Venice ’97, ed. R. M. Bonnet, E. Høg, P. L. 2011, ApJS, 197, 19 Bernacca, L. Emiliani, A. Blaauw, C. Turon, J. Kovalevsky, L. Lindegren, H. Hassan, M. Bouffard, Kirkpatrick, J. D., Schneider, A., Fajardo-Acosta, S., et al. B. Strim, D. Heger, M. A. C. Perryman, & L. Woltjer, 2014, ApJ, 783, 122 559–562 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Kellogg, K., Schneider, A. C., et al. Radigan, J., Lafreni`ere,D., Jayawardhana, R., & Doyon, R. 2016, ApJS, 224, 36 2009, ApJ, 698, 405 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Martin, E. C., Smart, R. L., et al. 2019, Reid, I. N., Cruz, K. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2008, AJ, ApJS, 240, 19 136, 1290 Koerner, D. W., Kirkpatrick, J. D., McElwain, M. W., & Reipurth, B., & Clarke, C. 2001, AJ, 122, 432 Bonaventura, N. R. 1999, ApJL, 526, L25 Riedel, A. R., DiTomasso, V., Rice, E. L., et al. 2019, AJ, Kuchner, M. J., Faherty, J. K., Schneider, A. C., et al. 157, 247 2017, ApJL, 841, L19 Saumon, D., & Marley, M. S. 2008, ApJ, 689, 1327 Lagrange, A.-M., Bonnefoy, M., Chauvin, G., et al. 2010, Schlafly, E. F., Meisner, A. M., & Green, G. M. 2019, Science, 329, 57 ApJS, 240, 30 Lang, D. 2014, AJ, 147, 108 Simcoe, R. A., Burgasser, A. J., Schechter, P. L., et al. Leggett, S. K., Tremblin, P., Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., 2013, PASP, 125, 270 Skemer, A. J., Morley, C. V., Allers, K. N., et al. 2016, & Morley, C. V. 2017, ApJ, 842, 118 ApJL, 826, L17 Leggett, S. K., Burningham, B., Saumon, D., et al. 2010, Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, ApJ, 710, 1627 131, 1163 Li, Y., Kouwenhoven, M. B. N., Stamatellos, D., & Tinney, C. G., Faherty, J. K., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. Goodwin, S. P. 2015, ApJ, 805, 116 2014, ApJ, 796, 39 Lindegren, L., Hernandez, J., Bombrun, A., et al. 2018, Vacca, W. D., Cushing, M. C., & Rayner, J. T. 2003, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1804.09366 PASP, 115, 389 Liu, M. C., Dupuy, T. J., & Allers, K. N. 2016, ApJ, 833, 96 Vrba, F. J., Henden, A. A., Luginbuhl, C. B., et al. 2004, Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., Deacon, N. R., et al. 2013, AJ, 127, 2948 ApJL, 777, L20 Wilson, J. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gizis, J. E., et al. 2001, Luhman, K. L. 2004, ApJ, 614, 398 AJ, 122, 1989 —. 2013, ApJL, 767, L1 Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. —. 2014, ApJL, 786, L18 2010, AJ, 140, 1868