Probing the Low Mass Stellar End of the eta Chamaeleontis Cluster

We have identified three faint new members of the eta Chamaeleontis cluster. Spectral types of the new members are estimated to be ~M5 based on their TiO band strengths and broadband colors. With an age of 5-8 Myr for the cluster, masses of these new members are estimated to be ~0.08 Msun. All three display strong Li 6708A absorption and Halpha emission features including one with Halpha emission equivalent width ~60A along with HeI 6678 & 7605 A emission features that are characteristics of classical T Tauri stars.Comment: 11 pages, 4 figures, 2 tables, accepted in Ap

Dusty Debris Disks as Signposts of Planets: Implications for SIRTF

Submillimeter and near-infrared images of cool dusty debris disks and rings suggest the existence of unseen planets. At dusty but non-imaged stars, semi-major axes of associated planets can be estimated from the dust temperature. For some young stars these semi-major axes are greater than an arc second as seen from Earth. Such stars are excellent targets for sensitive near-infrared imaging searches for warm planets. To probe the full extent of the dust and hence of potential planetary orbits, SIRTF observations should include measurements with the 160mu filter.Comment: 8 figures, 1 table, accepted in Ap

New Members of the Scorpius Centaurus Complex and Ages of its sub-regions

We have spectroscopically identified about 100 G-, K- and M-type members of the Scorpius Centaurus complex. To deduce the age of these young stars we compare their Li $\lambda$6708 absorption line strengths against those of stars in the TW Hydrae association and $\beta$ Pictoris moving group. These line strengths indicate that Sco-Cen stars are younger than $\beta$ Pic stars whose ages of ~12 Myr have previously been derived from a kinematic traceback analysis. Our derived age,~10Myr, for stars in the LCC and UCL subgroups of ScoCen is younger than previously published ages based on the moving cluster method and upper main sequence fitting. The discrepant ages are likely due to an incorrect (or lack of) cross-calibration between model-dependent and model-independent age-dating methods.Comment: 3 figures, accepted in A