New Neighbors from 2MASS: Activity and Kinematics at the Bottom of the Main Sequence

By J. Gizis, D. Monet, I. Neill Reid, J. D. Kirkpatrick, J. Liebert, Rik J. Williams IPACCaltech, Usno Flagstaff, U. Pennsylvania, U. Arizona, Caltech. 2000

415 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We have combined 2MASS and POSS II data in a search for nearby ultracool (later than M6.5) dwarfs with Ks < 12. Spectroscopic follow-up observations identify 53 M7–M9.5 dwarfs and seven L dwarfs. The observed space density is 0.0045 ± 0.0008 M8–M9.5 dwarfs per cubic parsec, without accounting for biases, consistent with a mass function that is smooth across the stellar/substellar limit. We show the observed frequency of Hα emission peaks at ∼100% for M7 dwarfs and then decreases for cooler dwarfs. In absolute terms, however, as measured by the ratio of Hα to bolometric luminosity, none of the ultracool M dwarfs can be considered very active compared to earlier M dwarfs, and we show that the decrease that begins at spectral type M6 continues to the latest L dwarfs. We find that flaring is common among the coolest M dwarfs and estimate the frequency of flares at 7% or higher. We show that the kinematics of relatively active (EW > 6 Å) ultracool M dwarfs are consistent with an ordinary old disk stellar population, while the kinematics of inactive ultracool M dwarfs are more typical of a 0.5 Gyr old population. The early L dwarfs in the sample have kinematics consistent with old ages, suggesting that the hydrogen-burning limit is near spectral types L2–L4. We use the available data on M and L dwarfs to show that chromospheric activity drops with decreasing mass and temperature and that at a given (M8 or later) spectral type, the younger field (brown) dwarfs are less active than many of the older, more massive field stellar dwarfs. Thus, contrary to the well-known stellar age-activity relationship, low activity in field ultracool dwarfs can be an indication of comparative youth and substellar mass.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/55136e44b337865cb7e1af6e318eddce6b9a20a5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. A. Burgasser
  2. Michael C. Liu
  3. J. D. Kirkpatrick
  4. K. Luhman
  5. T. Dupuy
  6. Kelle Cruz
  7. D. Schneider
  8. J. Brinkmann

Citations in the corpus