THE ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 532 : 487496, 2000 March 20

( 2000. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A.

BETELGEUSE AND ITS VARIATIONS

DAVID F. GRAY
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 3K7, Canada ; dfgray=uwo.ca
Received 1999 May 3 ; accepted 1999 October 6

ABSTRACT
Observations of Betelgeuse show that (1) the photospheric spectral lines are very broad with a 1/e
width of 11 km s~1, but they have stable shapes with time as the star varies in other ways ; (2) all the
spectral lines within the observed wavelength region change their depths by essentially the same factor
and in phase with the photometric brightness of the star on timescales of months ; (3) small deviations
from perfect scaling of the line depths imply temperature variations that to rst order are in phase with
the line depths, i.e., cooler temperatures go with weaker lines ; and (4) to second order, the temperature
variations lag behind the changes in line depths by D5 days. The hypothesis of changing continuous
opacity is put forward as a coherent explanation of all of these spectroscopic and photometric eects. In
addition, the bright spot observed by others is explained as a region where the opacity does not change ;
it is not a giant convection cell. The physical reason for the opacity change has yet to be identied.
Structure in the cores of spectral lines varies on the timescale of a day, and this may be the signature of
giant convection cells, but other interpretations are also possible, including hot spots, prominences, or
nonradial oscillations.
Subject headings : line : proles stars : individual (a Orionis) stars : late-type stars : spots
supergiants
1.

INTRODUCTION

reason for these variations has been a source of speculation

(e.g., Hayes 1984 ; Uitenbroek et al. 1998b).
Because of its large size, the angular diameter of the star
has been measured many times. White (1980) and Cheng
(1986) summarize the earlier measurements. More recent
observations have been done in the UV (Uitenbroek et al.
1998b), in the visible window (Bruscher et al. 1990 ; Wilson
et al. 1992 ; Tuthill et al. 1997 ; Wilson et al. 1997 ; Burns et
al. 1997), at 11 mm (Bester et al. 1996), and at 6 cm (Skinner
et al. 1997). Minimum size occurs at visible wavelengths
because the absorption coefficient is a minimum there and
because contribution from surrounding dust has little eect.
There is some evidence for temporal variation in the
angular size (e.g., White 1980), perhaps on a period of 5.8 yr,
but complications arising from the presence of the bright
spot on the disk make the situation complex and uncertain.
The eective temperature of Betelgeuse is D3600 K (e.g.,
Dyck et al. 1998, based on interferometric measurements of
the angular size at 2.2 mm ; see also Lim et al. 1998 and
White 1980). Published values apparently ignore the variability of the star and do not combine simultaneous measurements of angular size and bolometric luminosity. In
addition to the uncertainty in limb darkening, the concept
of eective temperature itself begins to be ill-dened in stars
like this one, where the radius depends markedly on the
wavelength. The mass of the star is unknown, but most
investigators show a preference for a fairly large mass in the
range of 1020 M . The position the star had on the main
_
sequence is important
for understanding the rotation rate
as discussed below in 3.
The bright spot, either a single spot or a tight-knit group
of spots, has been reported on several occasions (e.g., Gilliland & Dupree 1996 ; Kluckers et al. 1997 ; Uitenbroek et al.
1998b, and others). At other times the spot is absent (Burns
et al. 1997). Arguments against rotational modulation as an
explanation of the spot variation have been brought
forward in a number of the cited papers. The strongest is

By any standard Betelgeuse (a Ori, HR 2061, HD 39801,

M2 Iab, B[V \ 1.86) is a remarkable object, a cool supergiant star some 800 times larger than the Sun but with a
radius that depends very much on the opacity in the spectral region in which the star is viewed. A bright spot of
unknown origin comes and goes on a backdrop of a
dynamic photosphere. Variations on timescales from days
to decades are seen in visual magnitude, UV continuum,
chromospheric indicators, and radial velocity. Surrounding
the star itself is a disk system apparently composed of ejecta
from the star. The study I present here focuses on the
photosphere and its variations, the mechanism of variability, and the nature of the bright spots seen on the stars
surface.
Hipparcos satellite observations determined the parallax
to be 7.6 ^ 1.6 mas. Although this is a considerable
improvement over previous measurements, this star has signicant surface features that vary with time, possibly altering the photometric centroid of the Hipparcos images and
compromising the parallax study. If a bright spot contributed 25% of the light and resided midway between the
center of the disk and the limb, and using a visual photospheric diameter of 55 mas, the centroid shift would be
nearly half the size of the parallax. The Hipparcos parallax
gives an absolute magnitude of M \ [5.1 based on the
V is observed to vary
characteristic apparent magnitude that
between about V \ 0.3 and 0.8. Light and radial velocity
variations show quasiperiodic behavior (e.g., Dupree et al.
1987 ; Smith et al. 1989 ; Krisciunas 1996 ; Morgan et al.
1997). Although several characteristic periods have been
found, most notably one near 6 yr and one near 1 yr, it is
doubtful that the star is periodic in any strict sense. The
amplitude, median magnitude, and phase seem to wander,
especially for the shorter timescale variations. The light is
polarized D0.5%, and, as one might expect, the polarization is variable in both amplitude and orientation. The
487

TABLE 1
OBSERVATION LOG
Date
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998

Mar 23 . . . . . .
Mar 26 . . . . . .
Mar 26 . . . . . .
Mar 29 . . . . . .
Mar 30 . . . . . .
Jan 28 . . . . . . .
Jan 28 . . . . . . .
Feb 15 . . . . . .
Feb 22 . . . . . .
Mar 8 . . . . . . .
Mar 11 . . . . . .
Mar 12 . . . . . .
Mar 18 . . . . . .
Mar 23 . . . . . .
Mar 27 . . . . . .
Mar 31 . . . . . .
Mar 31 . . . . . .
Apr 3 . . . . . . . .
Apr 13 . . . . . .
Apr 14 . . . . . .
Apr 17 . . . . . .
Apr 20 . . . . . .
Apr 20 . . . . . .
Apr 26 . . . . . .
Apr 28 . . . . . .
Sep 27 . . . . . .
Oct 6 . . . . . . . .
Oct 6 . . . . . . . .
Oct 7 . . . . . . . .
Nov 29 . . . . . .
Dec 16 . . . . . .
Dec 16 . . . . . .
Dec 18 . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 3 . . . . . . . .
Feb 5 . . . . . . . .
Feb 5 . . . . . . . .
Feb 5 . . . . . . . .
Feb 5 . . . . . . . .
Feb 6 . . . . . . . .
Feb 7 . . . . . . . .
Feb 8 . . . . . . . .
Feb 8 . . . . . . . .
Feb 15 . . . . . .
Feb 15 . . . . . .
Mar 7 . . . . . . .
Mar 15 . . . . . .
Mar 15 . . . . . .
Mar 15 . . . . . .
Mar 16 . . . . . .
Mar 16 . . . . . .
Mar 22 . . . . . .
Mar 22 . . . . . .
Mar 23 . . . . . .
Apr 4 . . . . . . . .
Apr 4 . . . . . . . .
Apr 4 . . . . . . . .
Apr 10 . . . . . .
Apr 10 . . . . . .
Apr 11 . . . . . .
Apr 11 . . . . . .

Year

JD [2,440,000

S/N

Weight

1996.226865
1996.235216
1996.235248
1996.243259
1996.246008
1997.076788
1997.076805
1997.126132
1997.145521
1997.183654
1997.191863
1997.194601
1997.211149
1997.224715
1997.235647
1997.246624
1997.246636
1997.254910
1997.282284
1997.285021
1997.293299
1997.301446
1997.301456
1997.317939
1997.323394
1997.738098
1997.762744
1997.762759
1997.765559
1997.910686
1997.957078
1997.957092
1997.962712
1998.093299
1998.093320
1998.093342
1998.093383
1998.093415
1998.093441
1998.093465
1998.098813
1998.098832
1998.099066
1998.101289
1998.104027
1998.106823
1998.106845
1998.126418
1998.126429
1998.181094
1998.202769
1998.202800
1998.202838
1998.205530
1998.205540
1998.222238
1998.222252
1998.224700
1998.257598
1998.257614
1998.257627
1998.274023
1998.274033
1998.276755
1998.276763

10166.532465
10169.589120
10169.600694
10172.532812
10173.539062
10477.527778
10477.533854
10495.538310
10502.615278
10516.533565
10519.529919
10520.529225
10526.569271
10531.520891
10535.511227
10539.517824
10539.521991
10542.542014
10552.533565
10553.532812
10556.554051
10559.527662
10559.531424
10565.547917
10567.538889
10718.905787
10727.901736
10727.907002
10728.928935
10781.900231
10798.833507
10798.838715
10800.889699
10848.554282
10848.561921
10848.569850
10848.584722
10848.596412
10848.606134
10848.614873
10850.566898
10850.573727
10850.658970
10851.470602
10852.469907
10853.490336
10853.498438
10860.642708
10860.646759
10880.599306
10888.510590
10888.522164
10888.535880
10889.518519
10889.521991
10895.616725
10895.621875
10896.515625
10908.523437
10908.528935
10908.533796
10914.518519
10914.522164
10915.515451
10915.518519

578
223
552
719
616
538
667
587
624
662
677
705
591
635
801
733
727
733
764
629
729
597
768
712
700
845
849
749
733
804
850
643
709
514
648
528
734
738
667
644
553
660
756
746
684
461
831
565
659
670
572
681
741
592
674
519
607
660
453
556
656
425
616
600
685

0.33
0.05
0.30
0.52
0.38
0.29
0.45
0.34
0.39
0.44
0.46
0.50
0.35
0.40
0.64
0.54
0.53
0.54
0.58
0.40
0.53
0.36
0.59
0.51
0.49
0.71
0.72
0.56
0.54
0.65
0.72
0.41
0.50
0.26
0.42
0.28
0.54
0.55
0.44
0.41
0.31
0.44
0.57
0.56
0.47
0.21
0.69
0.32
0.43
0.45
0.33
0.46
0.55
0.35
0.45
0.27
0.37
0.44
0.21
0.31
0.43
0.18
0.38
0.36
0.47

488

TABLE 1Continued
Date
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998

Apr 20 . . . . . .
Apr 23 . . . . . .
Apr 23 . . . . . .
Apr 24 . . . . . .
Apr 24 . . . . . .
Apr 27 . . . . . .
Apr 28 . . . . . .
May 5 . . . . . . .
Aug 2 . . . . . . .
Aug 3 . . . . . . .
Aug 14 . . . . . .
Aug 15 . . . . . .
Aug 17 . . . . . .
Aug 19 . . . . . .
Aug 20 . . . . . .
Aug 20 . . . . . .
Aug 20 . . . . . .
Aug 26 . . . . . .
Aug 27 . . . . . .
Aug 30 . . . . . .
Aug 31 . . . . . .
Sep 1 . . . . . . . .
Sep 4 . . . . . . . .
Sep 6 . . . . . . . .
Sep 10 . . . . . .
Sep 11 . . . . . .
Sep 11 . . . . . .
Sep 11 . . . . . .
Sep 12 . . . . . .
Sep 17 . . . . . .
Sep 18 . . . . . .
Sep 19 . . . . . .
Sep 29 . . . . . .
Sep 29 . . . . . .
Oct 10 . . . . . .
Oct 10 . . . . . .
Oct 16 . . . . . .
Oct 17 . . . . . .
Oct 20 . . . . . .
Oct 23 . . . . . .
Oct 24 . . . . . .
Oct 24 . . . . . .
Oct 25 . . . . . .
Oct 29 . . . . . .
Oct 31 . . . . . .
Nov 2 . . . . . . .
Nov 12 . . . . . .
Nov 13 . . . . . .
Nov 13 . . . . . .
Nov 18 . . . . . .
Nov 22 . . . . . .
Nov 24 . . . . . .
Nov 28 . . . . . .
Dec 2 . . . . . . .
Dec 2 . . . . . . .
Dec 3 . . . . . . .
Dec 3 . . . . . . .
Dec 9 . . . . . . .
Dec 9 . . . . . . .
Dec 9 . . . . . . .
Dec 12 . . . . . .
Dec 13 . . . . . .
Dec 14 . . . . . .
Dec 14 . . . . . .
Dec 14 . . . . . .
Dec 25 . . . . . .
Dec 27 . . . . . .

Year

JD [2,440,000

S/N

Weight

1998.301502
1998.309665
1998.309678
1998.312419
1998.312434
1998.320699
1998.323389
1998.342582
1998.584668
1998.587413
1998.617540
1998.620304
1998.625765
1998.631271
1998.633993
1998.634007
1998.634020
1998.650440
1998.653212
1998.661400
1998.664167
1998.666825
1998.675088
1998.680637
1998.691439
1998.694324
1998.694333
1998.694362
1998.697101
1998.710776
1998.713546
1998.716274
1998.743530
1998.743549
1998.773349
1998.773364
1998.789938
1998.792582
1998.800866
1998.809226
1998.812238
1998.812249
1998.814984
1998.825660
1998.831373
1998.836538
1998.863727
1998.866402
1998.866416
1998.880180
1998.891359
1998.896641
1998.907634
1998.918560
1998.918573
1998.923733
1998.923771
1998.937693
1998.937705
1998.940231
1998.945830
1998.948644
1998.951270
1998.951279
1998.953904
1998.983786
1998.987034

10924.548322
10927.527546
10927.532581
10928.532986
10928.538252
10931.555093
10932.537153
10939.542593
11027.903646
11028.905671
11039.901968
11040.910880
11042.904398
11044.913831
11045.907292
11045.912500
11045.917245
11051.910532
11052.922338
11055.910938
11056.920891
11057.891088
11060.907118
11062.932581
11066.875116
11067.928183
11067.931713
11067.942303
11068.941840
11073.933333
11074.944387
11075.939931
11085.888542
11085.895255
11096.772338
11096.777836
11102.827431
11103.792477
11106.815972
11109.867361
11110.966725
11110.971065
11111.969213
11115.865799
11117.951042
11119.836516
11129.760417
11130.736806
11130.741898
11135.765741
11139.845891
11141.773785
11145.786574
11149.774363
11149.779051
11151.662384
11151.676273
11156.758102
11156.762269
11157.684144
11159.727951
11160.755035
11161.713542
11161.717014
11162.675058
11173.581829
11174.767477

193
685
608
832
724
712
764
647
547
548
574
781
655
690
737
669
683
618
526
659
679
563
627
648
555
661
738
653
661
592
646
699
651
684
679
547
698
286
783
628
500
598
826
662
803
653
770
653
740
781
729
731
701
652
640
885
767
662
691
763
654
620
693
652
774
379
566

0.04
0.47
0.37
0.69
0.52
0.51
0.58
0.42
0.30
0.30
0.33
0.61
0.43
0.48
0.54
0.45
0.47
0.38
0.28
0.43
0.46
0.32
0.39
0.42
0.31
0.44
0.54
0.43
0.44
0.35
0.42
0.49
0.42
0.47
0.46
0.30
0.49
0.08
0.61
0.39
0.25
0.36
0.68
0.44
0.64
0.43
0.59
0.43
0.55
0.61
0.53
0.53
0.49
0.42
0.41
0.78
0.59
0.44
0.48
0.58
0.43
0.38
0.48
0.42
0.60
0.14
0.32

489

490

GRAY

simply that the timescale of the spots variability (D100

days) is much too short to be the rotation period (D6000
days or more). Therefore, other mechanisms have been suggested, including giant convection cells, also called supergranulation, and shock fronts.
Radial velocity variations are documented (a summary
diagram can be seen in Uitenbroek et al. 1998a), but their
meaning is unclear, as will be discussed below. Mass outows are indicated by velocity increasing outward through
the chromosphere to D7 km s~1 (Carpenter & Robinson
1997). A dust shell around a Ori extends from 0A. 3 to 5A, and
there is evidence for episodes of ejection (Bester et al. 1996 ;
Skinner et al. 1997 ; Wilson et al. 1997 ; Rinehart et al. 1998).
An unusual triple-star model was also put forward to
explain some of the observations (Karovska et al. 1986 ;
Hebden et al. 1986 ; Christou et al. 1988 ; Tuthill et al. 1997).
Sections 25 describe the observations, while 6 presents
an explanation, tying the observations together with a
physical picture and giving a new interpretation of the
bright spot. Evidence for giant convection cells is presented
in 7.
2.

SPECTROSCOPIC OBSERVATIONS

Spectroscopic exposures were started at the University of

Western Ontario in 1996 and the data presented here run
through the end of 1998. Details are given in Table 1. The
coude spectrograph has been described earlier (Gray 1986).
The resolving power is approximately 100,000, and a span
of some 70 A centered near 6250 A was recorded with an
1872 diode Reticon detector. The mean signal-to-noise ratio
is about 650. Although some of the exposures were taken in
the waxing or waning twilight, skylight is kept to less than
one part per thousand as judged by exposure-meter readings taken on blank sky near the star. Although these observations have high signal-to-noise ratios and high spectral
resolving power, making them suitable for studies of spectral line widths and shapes, no absolute wavelength calibration is available and therefore they yield no radial
velocity information.
3.

SPECTRAL LINES : GROSS CHARACTERISTICS

One is immediately struck by the large broadening that

smears out and blends together the photospheric lines of
a Ori. A comparison is made in Figure 1 between a Ori and
b And, a somewhat less luminous M star. Many of the

Vol. 532

lines seen in b And appear in a Ori as well, although the

blending of lines in a Ori is signicantly more severe.
The sharpest of the a Ori lines in these observations is
j6273.39 of Ti I at the right edge of the eld in some exposures and just out of the eld in most exposures owing to
slightly dierent settings of the grating. Because of its sharpness, it seems likely that the line suers from relatively little
blending, but being at the extreme edge of the camera eld
means less than optimum focus and signicant vignetting.
Figure 2 shows a Gaussian compared to the prole of this
line. The line extends over at least ^17 km s~1 ; the Gaussians dispersion is 11 km s~1. This broadening is probably
caused by rotation and macroturbulence ; these are now
considered.
One might expect rotational broadening to be small
simply because of the enormous radius of a Ori, D800 R .
However, if a Ori is a massive star, it might have had_a
rotation rate as high as 400 km s~1 on the main sequence.
Moment of inertia and internal redistribution of angular
momentum during postmain-sequence evolution are not
well understood. Still, for comparison purposes, it is worth
considering a classical example. If angular momentum were
conserved in shells, a main-sequence radius of 8 R ,
_
expanded to 800 R , would reduce 400 km s~1 to 4 km s~1.
_
Dierent assumptions concerning the moment of inertia
could change this value by a factor of 2 or more either way.
For example, Heger & Langer (1998) suggest that considerable spin-up may occur, while less extreme assumptions
concerning the main-sequence rotation rate would imply a
signicantly lower rotation rate now. The prole shown in
Figure 2 is approximately Gaussian, and it is well known
(e.g., Gray 1988, chap. 25) that an equal mixture of

Ori
1.0

6273.39 Ti I
5 exposures

F/F c
0.9

0.8

Gaussian
11 km/s dispersion

0.7

230

FIG. 1.Part of the 6250 A spectral region for a Ori is compared with
the corresponding spectrum of the less luminous star b And. The velocity
eld in the atmosphere of a Ori broadens the lines and increases the
blending, but one can still identify a number of lines.

235

240

245
250
Diode Steps

FIG. 2.Ti I 6273.39 A line, the narrowest in the observed eld, is

compared to a Gaussian (crosses). The line is located at the extreme edge of
the 70 A eld, and variable vignetting causes the scatter toward the righthand side of the gure. Considering the massive amount of line blending in
this spectrum, the agreement with the Gaussian is remarkable.

No. 1, 2000

BETELGEUSE AND ITS VARIATIONS

Doppler shifts from rotation and radial-tangential macroturbulence can mimic a Gaussian. If this were the case here,
v sin i would be D4.5 km s~1 and the macroturbulence
dispersion would be f D 4.5 km s~1. This value of macroRT
turbulence dispersion is not totally out of line with data for
other cool luminous stars (Gray & Toner 1987 ; Gray 1988,
chap. 36) although it may be somewhat low. Alternatively,
one might postulate a dominant isotropic Gaussian macroturbulence, or something close to it, within which one could
hide D23 km s~1 rotational broadening.
Using partially resolved images of the star, Uitenbroek et
al. (1998b) nd v sin i \ 5 km s~1 from their ultraviolet
observations. This value is for the UV radius that is 2 or 2.5
times larger than the classical visual photospheric radius. If
there is no dierential rotation with depth, their measurements imply a visual-photosphere rotation rate of
v sin i D 2.5 or 2 km s~1. They also nd evidence for the
inclination of the rotation axis of only 20, which means the
actual equatorial rotation rate would be three times larger,
or 67 km s~1. A value this size is not very far from our
rough shells estimate above, and the v sin i is compatible
with the information deduced from the spectral line
broadening in Figure 2.

491

Rotation is therefore likely to account for some, but not

all, of the line broadening. Macroturbulence therefore
remains a major or dominant component of the line
broadening. Macroturbulence in this context includes all
large-scale motions such as granulation (convection cells)
and nonradial oscillations. Furthermore, as we will see in
the next paragraph, the shapes of the spectral lines are
nearly constant through cycles of variation in other parameters. Consequently, macroturbulence must be stable with
time, at least over the span of these observations.
4.

FEW-MONTH TIME VARIATION

The investigation presented here is limited to the variations occurring on the few-month timescales. These variations are large and easy to see, as illustrated in Figure 3a,
where an exposure taken at the minimum line-depth phase
is compared to one at maximum line-depth phase. While
there are small and subtle variations as well, the dominant
variation is in the depths of the spectral lines. To rst order,
all spectral lines vary together and by nearly the same
amount, i.e., one can scale the depths of the absorption lines
in any given exposure and nearly reproduce any other exposure. In Figure 3b, the exposure having the weaker lines is

FIG. 3.(a) 1998 September 19 exposure shows shallower lines and was taken when the star was near minimum brightness ; the 1998 November 24
exposure has stronger lines and was taken when the star was near maximum brightness. (b) The line depths in the spectrum with the weaker lines are
strengthened 20%. This simple scaling brings the two spectra into close agreement. (c) An expanded view of a portion of (b) shows more of the detail.
Although small variations can easily be seen, the widths of features like the j6243 V I blend do not change. (d) The scaling of line depth is the same as for (c),
and here we can see that the deeper lines should have a slightly smaller scaling factor than needed for the shallower lines. This is a curve-of-growth eect, as
explained in 6.

Core Depth of 6253

492

GRAY

0.35

Ori

0.30

0.25

0.20
1997

1998

1999

V Magnitude

0.35
0.45
0.55
0.65
0.75
10200

10400

10600

10800
11000
JD - 2440000

11200

FIG. 4.Upper panel : The depths of the spectral lines vary several per
cent on timescales of months. Individual cycles look like they should be
periodic but are not. L ower panel : The recent photometry of K. Krisciunas
and K. Luedeke (Krisciunas 1996 ; K. Krisciunas 1999, private communication) shows that the brightness varies in phase with the changes in
line depths.

strengthened by 20%. (This scaling factor uses the highest

peaks in the exposures as a relative reference. Because of the
line blending, the true continuum may be somewhat higher.
Consequently, the 20% value should be considered approximate and an upper limit.) A portion of Figure 3b is
enlarged in Figure 3c to illustrate how closely simple scaling
can match the proles.
Equally important, the shapes of the spectral lines, and
especially their widths, remain constant while the depths
change. This is true for all phases of variability. Therefore
macroturbulence in the photosphere has a constant disper-

Vol. 532

sion. It follows that there must be a large number of velocity

elements continuously on the surface ; the stars surface
cannot be dominated by a few (D110) stochastically
occurring giant convection cells. (But see 7 below.) In
particular, the bright spot seen from time to time on the
surface cannot be a large convection cell because it would
grossly distort the line proles when it appeared and would
not contribute to the observed line widths when it was gone.
Small deviations from simple scaling are also seen. The
rst of these is a curve-of-growth eect ; weaker lines require
slightly more scaling, stronger lines slightly less (Fig. 3d).
The reason for this is explained in 6. Another second-order
eect arises from the diering sensitivities to temperature
from line to line. We exploit this in 5 as a temperature
index.
The precise depths of several spectral features were measured by tting vertically oriented parabolas to the line (or
blend) cores. These depths are measured downward from a
nominal continuum. Figure 4 illustrates the typical time
variation of visual magnitude (photometry by Krisciunas
and Luedeke, kindly made available by K. Krisciunas) and
depths of the spectral lines ; the variation of other line
depths is similar. These variations are not periodic even
though individual episodes look like portions of cyclic
behavior. There is enough overlap to see that the spectral
lines are deeper when the visual magnitude is brighter, i.e.,
variations in line depths are in phase with variations in
brightness. This is an important point as we will see shortly.
There are basically two ways in which the line depths can
be made to scale in this way. The rst way is illustrated by a
spectroscopic binary where the light of an early-type star
(which has few spectral lines) is added to the light of a later
type star causing the cooler stars lines to appear weakened.
If a Ori were an eclipsing binary, this eect would give
weaker spectral lines outside of eclipse, and vice versa. But a
Ori is fainter when the spectral lines are weaker, exactly
opposite the eclipsing binary eect.
0.41

Ori

Last episode of 1998

End

0.30

Start

0.25

Depth of 6243 V I blend

Depth of Fe I 6219

End

Start
0.36

b)

a)

0.31

0.20
0.25

0.30
Depth of Fe I 6253

0.30

Depth of 6251 V I

0.35

FIG. 5.All lines go through the cycle of weakening and strengthening and do so approximately together. (a) Iron lines, like these two, track each other
within the errors of observation. Errors shown are estimated from the photon count and the readout noise of the light detector ; see Table 1. (b) Vanadium
lines also track each other but dier slightly from iron (see Fig. 6).

No. 1, 2000

BETELGEUSE AND ITS VARIATIONS

493

Ori

Line-Depth Ratio 6251 V I to 6253 Fe I

Line-Depth Ratio 6243 V I to 6253 Fe I

1.15

Start

1.20

1.25
End

1.30

1.35
a)
1.40
0.24

Ori

End

1.10

1.15

Start

1.20

b)
1.25

0.26

0.28

0.30

0.32

0.34

0.24

0.26

0.28

0.30

0.32

0.34

Mean Line Depth (6 lines)

Mean Line Depth (6 lines)

FIG. 6.The temperature index of vanadium-to-iron line depths is plotted as a function of the mean depths of ve iron lines. A running mean of three
points is used for the ordinate. Temperature increases upward. The direction of increasing time is shown by arrows. (a) The V I blend j6243 is used in the
ratio. (b) The V I line j6251 is used in the ratio. Both line-depth ratios show a loop, and the sense of the loop implies that temperature lags behind the change
in line depths.

The second way to weaken spectral lines en masse is to

have a change in the continuous opacity. An increase in
continuous absorption coefficient would reduce the brightness of the star as it weakened the spectral lines, and this is
precisely the observed phase relation. This is the root of the
hypothesis posed in 6 below.
5.

LINE DEPTHS : TEMPERATURE AND TIME LAGS

In order to avoid confusion introduced by small dierences from cycle to cycle, we concentrate here on the single
cycle comprising the last big dip in line depths between
1998.7 and 1998.9. The lines j6219.29, j6252.57, and
j6265.14 are all Fe I lines of nearly identical excitation
potential (2.22.4 eV). The depths of these lines track each
other within the errors of measurement, as shown in Figure
5a. Vanadium lines are typically more sensitive than iron
lines to temperature changes. The V I lines also track each
other reasonably well, especially considering the heavy
blending of the j6243 pair (Fig. 5b).
The line-depth ratio of V I to Fe I has been used as a
temperature index in other investigations (e.g., Gray &
Johanson 1991 ; Gray 1994 ; Gray et al. 1996). Indeed, one
sees the vanadium-to-iron ratio strengthen monotonically
with declining eective temperature in cool stars, and therefore it seems plausible to interpret variations in this ratio as
changes in temperature. While we cannot rule out changes
in the atmospheric structure as the cause of the variation in
line-depth ratio, the fact that the excitation potentials are
not terribly dierent (0.3 eV for the V I lines vs. 2.4 eV for
the Fe I line) and that the line depths themselves do not
dier greatly argues against this possibility. Two ratios of
V I to Fe I are shown in Figure 6 as a function of mean line
depth. A rise in line-depth ratio implies a decline in temperature. With this interpretation, temperature falls as the
depths of the spectral lines decline. In addition, the loop in
Figure 6 shows temperature changes lagging behind the

line-depth changes. Ignoring the ne structure of the loop,

the general ellipticity implies a time lag D5 days.
6.

OPACITY HYPOTHESIS

The following hypothesis is proposed to explain the

photospheric variations of Betelgeuse. A disturbance rises
through the outer envelope triggering an increase in continuous opacity. The opacity increase extends from below the
lower photosphere upward through the line-forming region.
The increase in opacity restricts the amount of light getting
out, so the star dims. The increase in opacity weakens the
spectral lines without distorting their proles, as demanded
by the spectroscopic observations presented above. Further,
an increase in continuous opacity weakens weaker lines
more ; stronger lines have to be brought down the saturation part of the curve of growth, which means they change
less. This explains why one scaling factor does not work
exactly for all strength lines, as illustrated in Figure 3d
above.
If other photospheric parameters remain constant, the
continuous opacity would have to increase by D20% in the
j6250 region to produce a drop in the spectral line depths of
D20% (or somewhat less if the continuum has been placed
too low because of line blending). The drop in ux in the
visual magnitude band (Fig. 4) is D30%, but exactly how
this relates to the drop in ux in j6250 region is not currently known. Wilson et al. (1997) estimate the variation at 7000
A to be D2/3 that in the V band (see also Morgan et al.
1997). The more important point however, is that the two
eects are in phase, in accord with the opacity hypothesis.
What happens to the blocked energy is an important question that needs further study. It might be redistributed in
wavelength or might be stored within the envelope just as it
is in the case of sunspots (Spruit 1994).
With less energy coming from below, the photosphere
cools by outward radiation, but only after the power sup-

GRAY

the convection cell hypothesis is the simple fact that the

spot is always observed at the same place (within errors) on
the disk. There is every reason, however, still to expect
vigorous convection to play a strong role in the atmospheric dynamics of stars like Betelgeuse ; the large macroturbulence and the extended atmosphere, including
mass-loss events, are likely a result of convection eects
(e.g., Lim et al. 1998). It also seems plausible that if the
general idea of Schwarzschild (1975) is correct, namely that
there are only relatively few convection cells on such stars,
then their variation in density and opacity should surely
introduce a degree of chaos into the general opacity variations proposed here, i.e., this may be the very reason why
Betelgeuse is only quasiperiodic. Convection cells might
also be the reason why the spot has structure upon occasion
as in the observations of Wilson et al. (1997), or why a polar
spot might appear to wander from the pole.
Bester et al. (1996) concluded that the brightness variation of Betelgeuse is a result of temperature changes and not
radius changes because the 11 km ux showed much less
variation than the ux in the visible region. Temperature
changes are certainly part of the opacity hypothesis, but the
specic variation of the continuous absorption coefficient
with wavelength strongly aects the relative amplitude of
variation at dierent wavelengths. Consequently, if the
opacity hypothesis is correct, their result may need reinterpretation. In a similar vein, the interpretation of changes in
the TiO band strength (Morgan et al. 1997) may be altered
by changes in the continuous opacity.
7.

VARIATIONS ON THE DAY TIMESCALE

Structure in the cores of the stronger lines is variable on a

timescale of a day. Figure 7 illustrates the general level of
the signal, and Figure 8 shows examples of the variation for
a small subset of the observations. This structure is typically
D2% of the line depth and seems to be composed of
absorption spikes. Less strong lines show similar variations,
but the amplitude is scaled down in proportion to the line
depth. Given the small size of this structure, conrming
observations will be needed. The features at j6258.11 and
j6258.71 are composed of several spectral lines, making the
interpretation more challenging because an individual event
can be replicated in each of the lines in the blend. The

1.1

Ori

6261.11

1.0

6258.71

plied from below has been reduced, hence the drop in temperature lags the opacity change and the loops in Figure 6
are explained. The 5 day lag deduced above from Figure 6 is
indicative of the cooling time for the photosphere, but
detailed modeling would be required to make a more denitive statement.
Under the Opacity Hypothesis, the bright spot seen on
the disk is simply a region that is spared the increase in
opacity suered by surrounding material. The spot
becomes visible when light from the rest of the disk falls
away with the increase in opacity. The spot is therefore not
a hot spot in the sense of a rising convection cell, but rather
a region that retains the characteristics of the surface shown
by the whole disk during the times of minimum opacity.
The spot appears to fade away when the surrounding
surface regains its brightness.
The observations strongly support this interpretation of
the spot, although they are not conclusive (regular monitoring of the stars disk would be needed). For example, the
observations of Wilson et al. (1997) were taken during a
time of decline in brightness ; they estimate that during the
span of their observations, the ux of the star dropped
10% ^ 3%. Across these same observations, the total spot
contribution to the ux rose 16% ^ 3%. In other words, the
spot ux stayed constant to within the errors of measurement. The spot study of Uitenbroek et al. (1998b ; see also
Kluckers et al. 1997) was based on data taken 1995 March
3, during a phase of minimum brightness, in accord with the
opacity hypothesis. The observations of Burns et al. (1997),
taken in 1995 October when the star was near maximum
brightness, failed to show the spot, again in accord with the
opacity hypothesis. Because of the timing of the observations, the data of Tuthill et al. (1997) oer more modest
support for the opacity hypothesis, but support nonetheless.
Earlier work (Buscher et al. 1990) shows a strong spot in
1989 February when the star was at a deep minimum of
brightness, oering still more support for the hypothesis.
Through all of these observations, when the spot is visible,
its contrast is characteristically 10%20%. This implies an
opacity change of this same amount, and that is also the
amount needed to account for the observed changes in the
depths of the spectral lines.
The bright spot seen on the surface might well be at the
rotation pole, as suggested by Uitenbroek et al. (1998b).
With an equatorial rotation rate of 7 km s~1 (as per 2
above), a 10 M star would have a centripetal acceleration
_ of the surface gravity. In other words, the
amounting to 5%
rotation would be large enough to support a modest density
gradient with latitude on the star. A disturbance producing
opacity changes could therefore have a latitude dependence.
A counterargument is found in the observations of Tuthill
et al. (1997) who observed two other M supergiants in addition to Betelgeuse and found hot spots on all three stars,
whereas the probability of seeing stars near pole-on is small,
varying with the sine of the inclination of the rotation axis.
However, the validity or otherwise of the opacity hypothesis
does not depend on the spot occurring at a rotation pole.
The giant convection cell hypothesis for explaining the
bright spot should probably be abandoned. The most
damning evidence is simply that the star should be brighter
when a hot convection cell comes to the surface, not fainter
as observed. The invariance of the shapes of the spectral
lines, discussed above, would be very surprising indeed if
such giant convection cells occurred. Also arguing against

Vol. 532

6258.11

494

0.9

F/F c
0.8

0.7

24NO98 (dotted)

0.6

0.5

0.4
1360

25OC98 (solid)

1380

1400

1420

1440

1460

1480

1500

Diode

FIG. 7.Spikelike structure in the cores of the lines varies on timescales

of a day. These two examples are chosen arbitrarily from the data set.

No. 1, 2000

BETELGEUSE AND ITS VARIATIONS

FIG. 8.Variations in line core structure are illustrated with this

sequence of exposures. Both j6258.11 and j6258.71 are composites of two
or three lines, so the core structure is complex. There is less blending in
j6261. The horizontal line connecting the left-hand and right-hand sections of the diagram is at a residual ux level of 0.60 for each exposure. The
amplitude of the variations is D2% and is contained within a D10 km s~1
span around the center of the line. Some exposures are shown with dashed
lines to reduce visual confusion.

feature at j6261 is less blended, yielding a somewhat more

clear picture of the variations. The structure is similar but
not identical in lines of comparable strength. The individual
features of the structure itself are not resolved by the
spectrograph. Therefore, the features have internal
Doppler-shift spans less than D3 km s~1. The excursions
extend over approximately ^5 km s~1 from nominal line
center.
This line-core structure cannot arise from spots being
carried across the disk of the star by rotation, since the
rotation period is vastly longer than the timescale of the
variations. But the Doppler shift of rotation could position
the signature of surface features. For example, if a large hot
convection cell moved upward at a fraction of a km s~1, its
own Doppler shift would be very small, but if it occurred
away from the central meridian on the stellar disk, its signal
would be Doppler shifted by the projected rotation velocity,
up to ^v sin i.
Therefore, one explanation of the core structure is slowmoving, large, bright convection cells (supergranules). The
structure shows up primarily because the cells are large and
bright, meaning that they contribute D2% of the total ux
in this region of the spectrum. Bright cells will produce
downward spikes, just the inverse of what is seen in stars
showing dark spots. If a cell fades in a day, another may
take its place at a Doppler shift appropriate for the project-

495

ed rotation rate at the disk position of the new cell. If rotational Doppler shifts do play this role, the bright cells need
not have any velocity of their own ; the cell could even be a
transparent hole through which we see light from deeper
hotter layers, perhaps analogous to faculae on the solar
surface, rather than a rising convection cell. More likely the
cell does have a rise velocity and the Doppler shift it produces will be added to that of the rotational displacement.
Alternatively, if rotational Doppler shifts play no role,
i.e., v sin i is very small compared to the cell velocities, then
Doppler displacements would arise from the cells themselves. That would imply cell velocities D^5 km s~1, and
since the spikes are seen on both sides of the core, it implies
that the cells stay hot on their way back down. This would
be rather unorthodox behavior for convection cells, but
perhaps the cells result from a arelike event rather than
from simple convection. The characteristic distance covered
at 5 km s~1 for a day is about 0.6 R or less than 0.1% of
_
the stellar radius.
Other explanations of the line-core structure include
absorption spikes caused by cool absorbing material propelled above the photosphere, perhaps similar to solar
prominences or Doppler shifts produced by nonradial oscillations (e.g., Vogt & Penrod 1983 ; Hatzes 1996). Under this
later interpretation, the dominant period would correspond
to the D1 day timescale of the variations and the velocity
amplitude would be B5 km s~1.
This discussion is predicated on the reality of the core
structure, which has yet to be conrmed by independent
observations.
8.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND PROSPECTUS

Although the opacity hypothesis correctly predicts a wide

range of behavior shown by Betelgeuse, intensive monitoring is needed to delineate further the phasing and strength
variations of spectral lines, spot characteristics, and the
brightness, radius, and temperature. It is not clear if magnetic elds even exist in this type of star, but if they do, they
might be a central part of the story. A study of the time
variation of the ux and the spectral line depths with wavelength might delineate the wavelength dependence of that
component of the continuous absorption coefficient that is
changing with time. If, for example, it is the negative hydrogen ion, then the blue and UV regions should show progressively less variation. There is no reason to expect variations
of chromospheric lines to be explained by this photospheric
mechanism.
No attempt has been made to integrate the radial velocity
and polarization observations into the opacity hypothesis.
Using the brightness variations as an intermediary, radial
velocity apparently varies out of phase with the line depths
(Smith et al. 1989 ; Uitenbroek et al. 1998a) ; that is,
maximum opacity occurs at times of maximum velocity.
These are relative velocities in the sense that the maximum
velocity could be outward relative to the center of mass
motion of the star. Some caution should be used here
because the wide lines of Betelgeuse make determination of
positions of lines difficult. In addition, the long-term variations, for example, those shown by Uitenbroek et al. (1998a),
show a rise D6 km s~1 between 1985 and 1990. If we take
even half this value and multiply it by the time interval, the
distance is essentially equal to the size of the star. This
implies that we should not interpret the long-term variations in radial velocity as wave or pulsation amplitudes. If

496

GRAY

we do a similar calculation using a 400 day timescale, the

distance amounts to a small percent of the size of the star
and could imply a real change in the size of the star,
although no one has reported such changes.
The nature of the disturbance driving the opacity variation has yet to be identied. Pulsations and waves are not
strangers to Betelgeuse research (Dupree et al. 1987 ; Smith
et al. 1989 ; Cuntz 1990) and would seem to be likely candidates. Detection of radius variations over time or harder
limits on nonvariation could be important constraints provided we rst understand the nature of the opacity variations and how they might aect the apparent radius.
Modeling the photosphere and the subphotosphere would
be useful for understanding these points and for exploring
opacity sources and mechanisms for their change.
9.

SUMMARY

High-resolution, high signal-to-noise ratio observations

of the photospheric spectrum reveal several characteristics
about Betelgeuse and its variations :
1. The broadening of the spectral lines does not vary and
is well matched by a Gaussian with a dispersion of 11 km
s~1. These characteristics can reasonably be interpreted as a
combination of Doppler shifts from rotation and macroturbulence.
2. The main spectroscopic variation is a scaling of the
line depths by D20% across the full cycle, and this occurs
on a timescale of months, as does the photometric variation ; the lines are shallower when the star is fainter.
3. Curve-of-growth eects and temperature eects are
seen as small deviations from the basic scaling in point (2).
The photospheric temperature declines when the line
depths decline, but lags behind the line-depth changes by
D5 days.
4. The hypothesis of variable continuous opacity
explains all of the above eects.

5. The opacity hypothesis also oers a new explanation

of the nature and behavior of the bright spot seen on
Betelgeuse : it is an invariant region ; in contrast, the surrounding photosphere varies in brightness as the continuous opacity changes there, making the spot visible when
the surroundings are fainter and invisible when the surroundings are of similar brightness to the spot.
6. Evidence is presented against interpreting the spot as a
single giant convection cell : (a) the star is fainter when the
spot is present, exactly opposite expectations for a hot rising
cell ; (b) the spot always appears at essentially the same disk
position, whereas convection cells should appear at random
around the disk ; and (c) the overall shapes of the spectral
lines are essentially invariant while other parameters vary,
whereas rising giant convection cells should produce distinct distortions in the spectral lines that come and go with
the cells.
7. Over a span of D^5 km s~1 in the cores of lines, there
is variable structure with amplitude D2% of the line depth
occurring on a timescale of a day. This has been interpreted
as the signature of supergranulation, i.e., those large convection cells misinvoked as an explanation of the spot. But in
addition to alternative explanations oered by prominences, hot spots, or nonradial oscillations, the reality of the
structure needs corroboration.

I am grateful to the Natural Sciences and Engineering

Research Council of Canada for continued support of my
research and the Elgineld Observatory at the University of
Western Ontario. I wish to thank two enthusiastic and
hard-working observing assistants, Christopher Tycner and
Kevin Brown, for taking some of the observations used in
this paper. The manuscript was improved by comments
from A. K. Dupree, R. L. Gilliland, R. E. Griffin, and E. F.
Guinan.

REFERENCES
Bester, M., Danchi, W. C., Hale, D., Townes, C. H., Degiacomi, C. G.,
Heger, A., & Langer, N. 1998, A&A, 334, 210
Mekarnia, D., & Geballe, T. R. 1996, ApJ, 463, 336
Karovska, M., Nisenson, P., & Noyes, R. 1986, ApJ, 308, 260
Burns, D., et al. 1997, MNRAS, 290, L11
Kluckers, V. A., Edmunds, M. G., Morris, R. H., & Wooder, N. 1997,
Buscher, D. F., Hani, C. A., Baldwin, J. E., & Waner, P. J. 1990, MNRAS,
MNRAS, 284, 711
245, 7
Krisciunas, K. 1996, IAU Inf. Bull., 4355
Carpenter, K. G., & Robinson, R. D. 1997, ApJ, 479, 970
Lim, J., Carilli, C. L., White, S. M., Beasley, A., & Marson, R. G. 1998,
Cheng, A. Y. S., Hege, E. K., Hubbard, E. N., Goldberg, L., Strittmatter,
Nature, 392, 575
P. A., & Cocke, W. J. 1986, ApJ, 309, 737
Morgan, D., Wasatonic, R., & Guinan, E. F. 1997, Inf. Bull. Variable Stars,
Christou, J. C., Hebden, J. C., & Hege, E. K. 1988, ApJ, 327, 894
4499
Cuntz, M. 1990, ApJ, 349, 141
Rinehart, S. A., Hayward, T. L., & Houck, J. R. 1998, ApJ, 503, 415
Dupree, A. K., Baliunas, S. L., Guinan, E. F., Hartmann, L., Nassiopoulos,
Schwarzschild, M. 1975, ApJ, 195, 137
G. E., & Sonneborn, G. 1987, ApJ, 317, L85
Skinner, C. J., Dougherty, S. M., Meixnner, M., Bode, M. F., Davis, R. J.,
Dyck, H. M., van Belle, G. T., & Thompson, R. R. 1998, AJ, 116, 981
Drake, S. A., Arens, J. F., & Jernigan, J. G. 1997, MNRAS, 288, 295
Gilliland, R. L., & Dupree, A. K. 1996, ApJ, 463, L29
Smith, M. A., Patten, B. M., & Goldberg, L. 1989, AJ, 98, 2233
Gray, D. F. 1986, in IAU Symp. 118, Spectral Line Measurements, InstruSpruit, H. 1994, in IAU Colloq. 143, The Sun as a Variable Star, Solar and
mentation, and Research Programmes for Small Telescopes, ed. P. B.
Stellar Irradiance Variations, ed. J. M. Pap, C. Froehlich, H. S. Hudson,
Hearnshaw & P. L. Cottrell (Dordecht : Reidel), 401
& S. K. Solanki (Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press), 270
. 1988, Lectures on Spectral-Line Analysis : F, G, and K Stars (Arva,
Tutthill, P. G., Hani, C. A., & Baldwin, J. E. 1997, MNRAS, 285, 529
Ontario : The Publisher)
Uitenbroek, H., Dupree, A. K., & Gilliland, R. L. 1998a, in ASP Conf. Ser.
. 1994, PASP, 106, 1248
154, Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, ed. R. A. Donahue & J. A.
Gray, D. F., Baliunas, S. L., Lockwood, G. W., & Ski, B. A. 1996, ApJ,
Bookbinder (San Francisco : ASP), 393
465, 945
. 1998b, AJ, 116, 2501
Gray, D. F., & Johanson, H. L. 1991, PASP, 103, 439
Vogt, S. S., & Penrod, G. D. 1983, ApJ, 275, 661
Gray, D. F., & Toner, C. G. 1987, ApJ, 322, 360
White, N. M. 1980, ApJ, 242, 646
Hatzes, A. P. 1996, PASP, 108, 839
Wilson, R. W., Baldwin, J. E., Buscher, D. F., & Warner, P. J. 1992,
Hayes, D. P. 1984, ApJS, 55, 179
MNRAS, 257, 369
Hebden, J. C., Christou, J. C., Cheng, A. Y. S., Hege, E. K., Strittmatter,
Wilson, R. W., Dhillon, V. S., & Hani, C. A. 1997, MNRAS, 291, 819
P. A., Beckers, J. M., & Murphy, H. P. 1986, ApJ, 309, 754