Photometric

 Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  

Throughput  Profiles  
 
Damian  R.  Sowinski  
American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  New  York,  NY  10024  
August  10,  2010  
 
Abstract  
In this paper we will examine the photometric properties of a sample of 1,608 M
and L dwarfs. Magnitudes are calculated for the I and Z optical bands using the
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope throughputs. These are compared with the J
and K near infrared magnitudes as calculated from the 2MASS survey. These
magnitudes are used to examine the color indices of the objects, and an analysis
of their properties as a function of spectral class is performed.
 
 
Introduction   Procedure  

Current data tells us that the initial mass function peaks
at the M4 spectral type. Beyond the M spectral class
there are the lower mass brown dwarfs, objects whose
properties resemble both stars and planets. They exhibit
both limited periods of lithium and deuterium fusion
during the early stages of their lives, reminiscent of stars,
and formation of molecular clouds, a very planet like
feature. The diverse number of molecules that form in
the atmospheres of these objects lead to very interesting
spectral features. Though complex, these distinctions
allow us to arrange the objects in a smooth continuum of
changing spectral features; brown dwarfs have extended
the spectral classification scheme to include both L and
T classes. A proper understanding of the number
densities of these new spectral classifications will help
resolve the tail end of the IMF.
In this analysis I started with 4,879 M and L dwarf
spectra. I required their spectral ranges to be wide
enough to be able to calculate the I and Z band
magnitudes (Fig. 1). Tossing out spectra whose
wavelength ranges were insufficient still left quite a few
outliers. After removing those from the data, I was left
with 1,608 viable objects (Fig. 2).
To analyze the photometric properties of this set, I first
had to develop a code in the Python programming
language that could calculate the color indices of each
object. This was achieved through several steps, a
handful of headaches, and several sleepless nights of
coding.

Unfortunately, with temperatures around 1500K, and

radii of the same order of magnitude as Jupiter’s, these
objects are incredibly faint and have only come into the
observational range of telescopes within the past 15
years. With each advance in telescope technology,
surveys have seen greater numbers of these objects. Both
the SDSS and 2MASS surveys catalogued many brown
dwarfs, and new surveys such as the LSST, with its
ability to observe even fainter magnitudes, will see many
more. To facilitate the discovery of these objects, their
photometric properties must be properly understood, so
that newly observed objects are quickly and properly  
binned for future analysis.  
Figure   1.     The   I   and   Z   band   throughputs   for   the   LSST.   They  
are  calculated  from  both  the  instrumental  (mirrors,  lens,  and  
filter)  and  telluric  profiles.    
 Photometric  Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  Throughput  Profiles  
 

This part of the code was the most time intensive upon
running.

Once the band luminosities had been calculated, the next

step was to find the band magnitudes. This involved
comparing my calculated band luminosities with the
band luminosity of a typical A0 star, which I chose as
Vega. With Vega’s band luminosity, LVega B
, the
calculation for the band magnitude of the objects was
straight forward:
 
 
Figure  2.    The  distribution  of  the  dwarfs  -­‐  over  spectral  class,   LB €
mB = −2.5log Vega + CVega
(4)
on  a  logarithmic  scale  -­‐  that  were  studied  in  this  analysis.  A   LB
total  of  1,608  objects  were  sampled.  0  corresponds  to  an  M0  
classification,  10  to  an  L0,  and  20  to  a  T0.  
Here CVega is a constant that depends on the Vega
All of the spectra I had in my data set were in the FITS spectrum used. If the spectrum is not normalized, then it
€is zero; otherwise it is -2.5 times the logarithm of the
format. Unfortunately, the data structures containing the
spectral data were not standardized across the board. normalization constant. I must point out here that using
After I pinpointed the four major data structure formats the spectrum of Vega is not necessary if one is only
that held the information we were looking for, Alejandro looking for photometric properties such as color indices.
Nunez, my lab partner, created a code that was capable Furthermore it must be noted that these magnitudes are
of reading an arbitrary file and extracting a spectral not absolute but apparent. Since luminous flux is
profile from it. Parallel to his work, I developed a similar inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the
code for reading files holding arbitrary band throughput object, two objects with the same intrinsic luminosity
profiles, and tested it on the SDSS and LSST will have differing band magnitudes if they are not
throughputs. equidistant from the observer.

Once we could readily read data from spectral and filter The last step was to calculate all of the color indices for
files, I moved on to writing a code that would the objects in the data set. Cross correlating all the
manipulate this data, and extract photometric objects with the 2MASS catalogue, I was also able to get
information. The first step in this process was finding the the J and K band magnitudes. With data on four separate
band luminosity. If F is the flux of an object, and B is bands, I could calculate six different color indices for
each object, where a color index is defined as the
the throughput profile, both functions of the wavelength,
difference between two band magnitudes:
, then the band luminosity is defined as

∞ CB1 −B 2 = mB1 − mB 2 (5)

LB = ∫ 0
Fλ Bλ dλ (1)
The reason for using color indices, as opposed to band
Since both the flux data and the filter profile were magnitudes, for the analysis is that they are distance
discrete I needed to use the Riemann sum form of the independent.
€ One can easily see this upon examining the
integral €
to approximate it. Since both pieces of data did logarithm in the definition of magnitude (4) in the
not have the same domain points, I had to interpolate the context of (5). The distance dependence cancels out in
latter in order to convolve it with the flux. The the color index.
interpolated flux is denoted as B below. I used a
trapezoidal sum, starting and ending at cutoff Analysis  
wavelengths at which the throughput profile was 1/100th
of the maximum in the band:
€ The six color indices are graphed versus spectral class in
Figure 3. It must be noted that the bars are not errors but
1 N −1 (2) standard deviations, representing the spread of colors in
LB = ∑ (B λi +1 Fλi +1 + B λi Fλi )(λi+1 − λi )
2 i=0 each spectral class. Errors in the fluxes were not used to
1 calculate errors in individual magnitudes.
λ0 = inf{λ ∈ domain(F) | B λ ≥ sup(B)} (3)
100
The indices all display a clear positive correlation with
1
€ λN = sup{λ ∈ domain(F) | B λ ≥ sup(B)} spectral class. This is expected since it implies a
100 reddening of dwarfs as we move to lower masses,

 € 2  
 Photometric  Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  Throughput  Profiles  
 
hence lower temperatures. The L dwarfs have a very low When the color indices are plotted against one another
spread in the optical color index (I-Z), while the M we see a similar reddening with spectral class (Fig. 4).
dwarf spread increases the closer we get to the M0 The M’s start on the lower left of each diagram, and
spectral class. Interestingly, this trend is reversed in the progress towards the L’s as we move to the upper right.
near infrared color index (J-K). Both the Z-J and Z-K Surprisingly, the M spectral classes tend to clump
indices exhibit increasing spread in the L’s. Since these together, in a tight band, which is in contradiction with
are both indices that are mixing optical with near the spread we see in some of the spectral class diagrams.
infrared, it means there are a greater variety of This spread is being caused by a second distribution of
differences between the optical and near infrared parts of low M objects in several of the diagrams. Whether this
the spectrum for L dwarfs. These differences could be an second distribution is being caused by selection bias, or
indication of the complex chemistry that emerging in the is it is a real separation of the objects into distinct classes
atmospheres of these cooler objects. has yet to be determined.

In the I-Z we see a real plateau emerge starting around Another very clear feature of the diagrams is the positive
M9 and going through to about L4. A very similar concavity exhibited in a majority of them. This tells us
plateau appears in the J-K in the early M’s. These zero that the color index on the y-axis is increasing faster than
slope regions indicate a similarity in spectral features the index on the x-axis. Interestingly, this curvature
over a broad range of spectral types, or that both bands doesn’t become evident until the L spectral classes.
change in a similar fashion as we move through the Since the y-axes probe more of the near infrared, while
range of spectral types.
 

 
Figure   3.     Plot   of   the   mean   color   indices   versus   spectral   classification.   Bars   represent   one   standard   deviation.   For  
classes  that  had  only  a  single  object  the  standard  deviation  of  .5  was  used.  Once  again,  0,  10,  and  20  represent  the  M0,  
L0,  and  T0  spectral  classes  respectively.  

  3  
 Photometric  Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  Throughput  Profiles  
 
 
Color  vs.  Color  Diagrams  
 

   
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
Figure   4.     Color-­‐Color   diagrams   for   the   sample   of   M   and   L   dwarfs.   All   of   the   interesting   scatter   plots   are  
displayed.  The  lower  left  of  each  diagram  corresponds  to  the  M0  spectral  class.  As  we  move  to  the  upper  right,  
the  spectral  class  of  the  objects  steadily  increases  through  L9.  

  4  
 Photometric  Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  Throughput  Profiles  
 

Figure   5.     Color-­‐Color   diagram   comparing   the   optical   and   near-­‐infrared   indices   of   M   and   L   dwarfs.   Means   and  
standard  deviations  for  each  spectral  class  are  superimposed  on  the  data.  Lower  left  starts  at  M0  going  through  
L9  on  the  upper  right.  

the x-axes probe the optical, one can infer that the M many of the L spectra in each spectral class to see if the
dwarfs change equally in the optical and near infrared as trends implied by the color-color diagrams are, in fact,
we move up through the spectral classes. Something real. The M spectra should also be examined, in
interesting begins to happen as we reach the L’s and the particular to find out whether the second group of
infrared part of the spectrum begins to change quicker objects clumping above the main belt has any
than the optical. discernable features in the infrared portion of the
spectrum.
Further insight can be gained into the behavior of the
color-color diagram if we plot the means on top of the Furthermore, it would be nice to increase the sample of
scatter data (Fig. 5). Thought-provoking behavior L dwarfs, since they were vastly outnumbered by the M
emerges in the higher L spectral classes. The color-color dwarfs in this set. This would, hopefully, help localize
diagram appears to make a sharp turn to the right at the data and better confine the regions of parameter
around L5, implying that there is a sudden change in the space that L dwarfs reside in. Including T dwarfs in the
optical portion of the spectra as compared with the analysis would also help give continuity to the diagrams,
infrared. allowing us to clearly see the progression that these
objects make with increasing spectral class.
Conclusion  
Lastly a better understanding of the contaminants that
The trends mentioned in the analysis are intriguing, and live in the same portion of parameter space must be
a thorough understanding would involve examining understood. Both carbon dwarfs and M giants live fairly

  5  
 Photometric  Analysis  of  M  &  L  Dwarfs  with  the  LSST  Throughput  Profiles  
 
close to the main belt of objects. Unfortunately the  
number of these spectra that I had available was too
small to properly analyze.  
 
Acknowledgements  
 
I would like to thank the American Museum of Natural  
History and Charles Liu, for providing an environment
that was both intellectually stimulating and quiet,  
Alejandro Nunez, for his work on the readspec code
 
which was the foundation of all of my work, Sebastian
Lepine, for his conversations and insight into M dwarfs,  
and to Jackie Faherty, for her discussions about L dwarfs
and their properties. Lastly I would like to thank Kelle  
Cruz for giving me the opportunity to partake in her  
research interests concerning dwarfs, and for imparting
on me a desire to learn more about these fascinating  
objects.  
References    
 
 
1.   John   J.   Bochanski,   Suzanne   L.   Hawley,   Kevin   R.   Covey,  
Andrew   A.   West,   I.   Neill   Reid,   David   A.   Golimowski,    
Zˇeljko  Ivezic,  2010,  ArXiv  pre-­‐prints  
 
2.  J.  D.  Kirkpatrick,  Annu.  Rev.  Astron.  Astrophys.  2005.  
 
43:195–245,    
 
3.   Kelle   L.   Cruz,   J.D.   Kirkpatrick,   Adam   J.   Burgasser   The  
Astronomical  Journal,  137:3345–3357,  2009  February    
4.   A.   Burrows,   W.B.   Hubbard,   J.I.   Lunine   and   J.   Liebert,    
Reviews  of  Modern  Physics,  Volume  73,  July  2001    
5.   Suzanne   L.   Hawley   et   al,   The   Astronomical   Journal,    
123:3409-­‐3427,  2002  June  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  6