Inferring the parallax of Westerlund 1 from Gaia DR2

Westerlund 1 (Wd1) is potentially the largest star cluster in the Galaxy. That designation critically depends upon the distance to the cluster, yet the cluster is highly obscured, making luminosity-based distance estimates difficult. Using {\it Gaia} Data Release 2 (DR2) parallaxes and Bayesian inference, we infer a parallax of $0.35^{+0.07}_{-0.06}$ mas corresponding to a distance of $2.6^{+0.6}_{-0.4}$ kpc. To leverage the combined statistics of all stars in the direction of Wd1, we derive the Bayesian model for a cluster of stars hidden among Galactic field stars; this model includes the parallax zero-point. Previous estimates for the distance to Wd1 ranged from 1.0 to 5.5 kpc, although values around 5 kpc have usually been adopted. The {\it Gaia} DR2 parallaxes reduce the uncertainty from a factor of 3 to 18\% and rules out the most often quoted value of 5 kpc with 99\% confidence. This new distance allows for more accurate mass and age determinations for the stars in Wd1. For example, the previously inferred initial mass at the main-sequence turn-off was around 40 M$_{\odot}$; the new {\it Gaia} DR2 distance shifts this down to about 22 M$_{\odot}$. This has important implications for our understanding of the late stages of stellar evolution, including the initial mass of the magnetar and the LBV in Wd1. Similarly, the new distance suggests that the total cluster mass is about four times lower than previously calculated.Comment: 14 pages, 10 figure

On the Gaia DR2 distances for Galactic Luminous Blue Variables

We examine parallaxes and distances for Galactic luminous blue variables (LBVs) in Gaia DR2. The sample includes 11 LBVs and 14 LBV candidates. For about half of the sample, DR2 distances are either similar to commonly adopted literature values, or the DR2 values have large uncertainties. For the rest, reliable DR2 distances differ significantly from values in the literature, and in most cases the Gaia DR2 distance is smaller. Two key results are that the S Doradus instability strip may not be as clearly defined as previously thought, and that there exists a population of LBVs at relatively low luminosities. LBVs seem to occupy a wide swath from the end of the main sequence at the blue edge to 8000 K at the red side, with a spread in luminosity reaching as low as log(L/Lsun)=4.5. The lower-luminosity group corresponds to effective single-star initial masses of 10-25 Msun, and includes objects that have been considered as confirmed LBVs. We discuss implications for LBVs including (1) their instability and origin in binary evolution, (2) connections to some supernova (SN) impostors such as the class of SN 2008S-like objects, and (3) LBVs that may be progenitors of SNe with dense circumstellar material across a wide initial mass range. Although some of the Gaia DR2 distances for LBVs have large uncertainty, this represents the most direct and consistent set of Galactic LBV distance estimates available in the literature.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figures, MNRAS accepted. Updated inclusion of excess astrometric noise and discussion of literature distance

Recurring outbursts of the supernova impostor AT 2016blu in NGC 4559

We present the first photometric analysis of the supernova (SN) impostor AT 2016blu in NGC 4559. This transient was discovered by the Lick Observatory Supernova Search in 2012 and has continued its outbursts since then. Optical and infrared photometry of AT 2016blu reveals at least 19 outbursts in 2012-2022. Similar photometry from 1999-2009 shows no outbursts, indicating that the star was relatively stable in the decade before discovery. Archival {\it Hubble Space Telescope} observations suggest that the progenitor had a minimum initial mass of $M >= 33$ M$_{\odot}$ and a luminosity of $L >= 10^{5.7}$ L$_{\odot}$. AT 2016blu's outbursts show irregular variability with multiple closely spaced peaks having typical amplitudes of 1-2 mag and durations of 1-4 weeks. While individual outbursts have irregular light curves, concentrations of these peaks recur with a period of $\sim 113 \pm 2$ d. Based on this period, we predict times for upcoming outbursts in 2023 and 2024. AT 2016blu shares similarities with SN 2000ch in NGC 3432, where outbursts may arise from periastron encounters in an eccentric binary containing a luminous blue variable (LBV). We propose that AT 2016blu's outbursts are also driven by interactions that intensify around periastron in an eccentric system. Intrinsic variability of the LBV-like primary star may cause different intensity and duration of binary interaction at each periastron passage. AT 2016blu also resembles the periastron encounters of $\eta$ Carinae prior to its Great Eruption and the erratic pre-SN eruptions of SN 2009ip. This similarity and the onset of eruptions in the past decade hint that AT 2016blu may also be headed for a catastrophe, making it a target of great interest.Comment: 18 pages, 14 figures, 6 tables, MNRAS Accepte

Hubble Space Telescope Imaging Reveals that SN 2015bh is Much Fainter than its Progenitor

We present Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging of the site of SN 2015bh in the nearby spiral galaxy NGC 2770 taken between 2017 and 2019, nearly four years after the peak of the explosion. In 2017-2018, the transient fades steadily in optical filters before declining more slowly to $F814W = -7.2$ mag in 2019, nearly 4 mag below the level of its eruptive luminous blue variable (LBV) progenitor observed with HST in 2008-2009. The source fades at a constant color of $F555W - F814W = 0.3$ mag until 2018, similar to SN 2009ip and consistent with a spectrum dominated by continued interaction of the ejecta with circumstellar material (CSM). A deep optical spectrum obtained in 2021 lacks signatures of ongoing interaction ($L_{\mathrm{H}\alpha} \lesssim 10^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$ for broadened emission $\lesssim 2000$ km s$^{-1}$), but but indicates the presence of a nearby H II region ($\lesssim 300$ pc). The color evolution of the fading source makes it unlikely that emission from a scattered light echo or binary OB companion of the progenitor contributes significantly to the flattening of the late-time light curve. The remaining emission in 2019 may plausibly be attributed to an unresolved ($\lesssim 3$ pc), young stellar cluster. Importantly, the color evolution of SN 2015bh also rules out scenarios in which the surviving progenitor evolves back to a hot, quiescent, optically faint state or is obscured by nascent dust. The simplest explanation is that the massive progenitor did not survive. SN 2015bh, therefore, likely represents a remarkable example of the terminal explosion of a massive star preceded by decades of end-stage eruptive variability.Comment: 15 pages, 5 figures, submitted to ApJ

Limit on Supernova Emission in the Brightest Gamma-Ray Burst, GRB 221009A

We present photometric and spectroscopic observations of the extraordinary gamma-ray burst (GRB) 221009A in search of an associated supernova. Some past GRBs have shown bumps in the optical light curve that coincide with the emergence of supernova spectral features, but we do not detect any significant light-curve features in GRB 221009A, nor do we detect any clear sign of supernova spectral features. Using two well-studied GRB-associated supernovae (SN 2013dx, ${M}_{r,\max }=-19.54;$ SN 2016jca, ${M}_{r,\max }=-19.04$ ) at a similar redshift as GRB 221009A ( z = 0.151), we modeled how the emergence of a supernova would affect the light curve. If we assume the GRB afterglow to decay at the same rate as the X-ray data, the combination of afterglow and a supernova component is fainter than the observed GRB brightness. For the case where we assume the best-fit power law to the optical data as the GRB afterglow component, a supernova contribution should have created a clear bump in the light curve, assuming only extinction from the Milky Way. If we assume a higher extinction of E ( B − V ) = 1.74 mag (as has been suggested elsewhere), the supernova contribution would have been hard to detect, with a limit on the associated supernova of ${M}_{r,\max }\approx -$ 19.54. We do not observe any clear supernova features in our spectra, which were taken around the time of expected maximum light. The lack of a bright supernova associated with GRB 221009A may indicate that the energy from the explosion is mostly concentrated in the jet, leaving a lower energy budget available for the supernova