Astrophysicist,
Institute for Astronomy,
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa

 ↓ 

王加冕 Joel Ong

 

Research

Theoretical Asteroseismology

Stars are made of fluids, and (small) perturbations to this fluid may propagate as sound waves. Waves of certain shapes may constructively interfere with themselves when they resonate at certain characteristic frequencies associated with the structure of the star, yielding a normal mode of oscillation at each frequency where this is possible. Since stars are (mostly) spherically symmetric, the shapes of these normal modes can be described by spherical harmonics, indexed by quantum numbers \(l\) and \(m\), in addition to their radial order \(n\). We measure these normal-mode frequencies using time-series observations of stellar surfaces.

Time series observations of stellar surfaces (§1 — data shown are from \(\ell=0\) MDI solar dopplergrams) yield Fourier power spectra (§2) showing many peaks, each of which corresponds to a normal mode of oscillation. The normal modes of stars like the Sun show a characteristic overtone spacing \(\Delta\nu\) and excitation frequency \(\nu_\text{max}\), which are features of convectively-driven pulsations. We may phase-fold the power spectrum by the overtone spacing \(\Delta\nu\) (§§3-5) to obtain so-called “échelle” diagrams — each ridge in such a diagram (§§6-7) corresponds to modes of a different spherical harmonic degree \(\ell\).

Observationally, some stars (like the Sun) show normal-mode frequencies which approximately satisfy a “comb” parameterisation: \[\nu_{n\ell m} = \Delta\nu\left(n + {\ell \over 2} + \epsilon_{\ell m}(\nu)\right),\] where \(\Delta\nu\) is called the “large frequency separation”. This is what we would expect for sound waves (“p-modes”, because pressure provides the restoring force) in a spherically-shaped resonant mode cavity, where a more or less constant overtone spacing emerges, given by the sound-crossing time. \(\epsilon_{\ell m}(\nu)\) is a function of frequency that specifies the eigenvalues for a given pair of \(\ell, m\), and containes information about how the star’s internal structure differs from being a truly homogenous “spherical mode cavity”.

On the other hand, some other normal-mode frequencies satisfy a converse eigenvalue relation, \[{1 \over \nu_{n\ell m}} = \Delta\Pi_\ell\left(n + {\ell \over 2} + \epsilon_{\ell m}(\nu)\right),\] where it is the mode periods, rather than frequencies, which have a characteristic “undertone” period spacing relative to the fundamental mode. Waves of this kind are buoyancy waves (“g-modes”, because gravity provides the restoring force), not unlike those which you might see on the surface of a body of water, or reflected in the undulatory motions of clouds in the atmosphere.


Multicavity oscillations are well-approximated as linear combinations of pure p- and g-modes (above), in the same way that molecular orbitals are well-approximated as linear combinations of atomic orbitals (below).

Accurate measurement of these eigenvalues requires quite long observational campaigns. Often, the only quantities that are directly accessible are average values of \(\Delta\nu\) and \(\epsilon\), as well as a characteristic excitation frequency called \(\nu_\text{max}\). Moreover, many unconstrained aspects of stellar surface astrophysics (e.g. global magnetic activity, radiative turbulence) enter into the boundary problem via the choice of surface boundary conditions. These perturb theoretical results relative to the frequencies observed in real stars.

Much of my research pertains to understanding, analytically, how these two kinds of normal modes relate to the internal structures of stars, react to each other, and respond to perturbations not captured in our computational modelling. Recent highlights include:

  • Constructing integral estimators of various seismic diagnostics for stellar structure and evolution;
  • Deriving a weak-interaction limit (and corresponding scattering-matrix elements) to describe the coupling of different mode cavities in evolved stars, via analogies with few-body quantum mechanics.
  • Understanding how multicavity oscillations might be used to probe various aspects of stellar rotation and internal structure.

Selected Publications:

  • Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2020, ApJ, 898, 127 — Hybridisation of standing waves
  • Ong, J. M. J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 920, 8 — Avoided crossings and perturbation theory
  • Ong, J. M. J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 18 — Avoided crossings in rotating stars
  • Ong, J. M. J., & Gehan, C. 2023, ApJ, 946, 92 — Translating between coupling matrices and JWKB analysis

Asteroseismology as a Tool

Astronomers are often more interested in the inverse problem: that is, in inferring properties of a star given a set of observed oscillation frequencies. For example, we might infer masses, radii, and ages by comparing these mode frequencies against computational models of stellar structure. Alternatively, we might infer rotation rates and magnetic field strengths, if we are able to examine how modes of different \(m\) pulsate at different frequencies.

Échelle power diagram of Zvrk, a rapidly-rotating red giant, showing rotationally-split multiplets

Some of my recent work involves using these diagnostics of internal rotation to make interesting inferences about interactions between stars and their interactions with companions (e.g. planets). Highlights of this include a chemically anomalous, rapidly-rotating, planet-engulfment candidate, as well as a red giant whose core and envelope rotate separately around axes pointing in different directions.

Échelle diagram for ν Indi

For the past few years, I’ve also been working on results from the NASA Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) mission through the TESS Asteroseismic Science Consortium (TASC) (in working groups 1 and 2), helping to constrain the global properties and interior structures of these stars in this manner. For this purpose, I am both a methodologist and a practitioner: I develop and investigate methods used in deriving these constraints, as well as actually perform the calculations for actual stars. I’m glad to be able to make contributions to such a large collaboration. Interesting stars I’ve studied on include:

  • TOI-197, which formed the basis of the first TESS asteroseismology paper since other people found a “hot Saturn” exoplanet around it
  • ν Indi, a metal-poor but otherwise chemically enriched star with unusual kinematic properties, which was observed with TESS
  • KIC 8144907, perhaps the most metal-poor star whose age we have pinned down using asteroseismology

Selected Publications:

  • Ong, J. M. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 42 — A rapidly-rotating planet-engulfment candidate
  • Ong, J. M. J., submitted to ApJ — Kepler-56, whose core and envelope rotate around different axes

Extreme Precision Radial Velocity (EPRV) Instrumentation

The tale of exoplanet detection and discovery is long and storied, but the oldest and still most reliable way of detecting planets, and measuring their masses, is through the radial velocity method, which requires spectroscopic characterisation. As planets orbit their stars, they exert an opposite gravitational pull on the star that causes it to also orbit (much more slowly) their common centre of mass, moving towards and then away from us over time. From Earth, we are able to measure this time-varying reflex velocity by the Doppler shift it induces on stellar spectra.

EXPRES cross-correlation functions for HD 75732 (55 Cancri) computed with respect to different Gauss-Hermite window functions

These measurements are made on high-resolution spectrographs. One of them, the EXtreme PREcision Spectrograph, was built at Yale. I wrote parts of its calibration and analysis software, including its template cross-correlation-function (CCF) radial velocity code, and various infrastructural components of its automated optimal-extraction data reduction pipeline.

While the ultimate goal of EXPRES is, of course, to discover long-period, low-mass planets with the radial-velocity method that would otherwise not be accessible to short-baseline space photometry, the high-resolution spectra returned from this process are very useful for other purposes. One example of this is Doppler imaging of active stellar surface, which can be further refined by way of joint constraints with contemporaneous photometry.

More recently, I’ve become a regular observer on the Keck Planet Finder instrument on Maunakea, Hawaiʻi, and have conducted some of the earliest science using it.

Comparison of power spectra from σ Draconis (HD 185144) as obtained from space photometry by the TESS satellite (faint blue, with a smoothed version shown in black), vs. from ground-based radial velocities measured using KPF. The frequency of maximum power \(\nu_\text{max}\) exhibited by the velocity power spectrum differs from that exhibited by photometry, shown with the gray line (with TESS modes identified with vertical dotted lines). I took these radial velocities personally!

Selected Publications:

  • Blackman, Ong, et al. 2019 — wavelength-dependent barycentric corrections
  • Petersburg, Ong, et al. 2020 — The EXPRES data reduction pipeline

Publications

First-Author

  1. Ong, J. M. J., Nielsen, M. B., Hatt, E. J., & Davies, G. R. 2024, JOSS, 9, 6588 (ADS Link)
    “Reggae: A Parametric Tuner for PBJam, and a Visualization Tool for Red Giant Oscillation Spectra”
  2. Ong, J. M. J., Hon, M. T. Y., Soares-Furtado, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 42 (ADS Link)
    “The Gasing Pangkah Collaboration: I. Asteroseismic Identification and Characterization of a Rapidly Rotating Engulfment Candidate”
  3. Ong, J. M. J. 2024, ApJ, 960, 2 (ADS Link)
    “Red Giant Rotational Inversion Kernels Need Nonlinear Surface Corrections”
  4. Ong, J. M. J., & Gehan, C. 2023, ApJ, 946, 92 (ADS Link)
    “Mode Mixing and Rotational Splittings. II. Reconciling Different Approaches to Mode Coupling”
  5. Ong, J. M. J., Bugnet, L., & Basu, S. 2022, ApJ, 940, 18 (ADS Link)
    “Mode Mixing and Rotational Splittings. I. Near-degeneracy Effects Revisited”
  6. Ong, J. M. J., Basu, S., Lund, M. N., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, 18 (ADS Link)
    “Mixed Modes and Asteroseismic Surface Effects: II. Subgiant Systematics”
  7. Ong, J. M. J., Basu, S., & Roxburgh, I. W. 2021, ApJ, 920, 8 (ADS Link)
    “Mixed Modes and Asteroseismic Surface Effects: I. Analytic Treatment”
  8. Ong, J. M. J., Basu, S., & McKeever, J. M. 2021, ApJ, 906, 54 (ADS Link)
    “Differential Modelling Systematics across the HR Diagram from Asteroseismic Surface Corrections”
  9. Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2020, ApJ, 898, 127 (ADS Link)
    “Semianalytic Expressions for the Isolation and Coupling of Mixed Modes”
  10. Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2019, ApJ, 885, 26 (ADS Link)
    “Structural and Evolutionary Diagnostics from Asteroseismic Phase Functions”
  11. Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2019, ApJ, 870, 41 (ADS Link)
    “Explaining Deviations from the Scaling Relationship of the Large Frequency Separation”

Major Contributions

  1. Hatt, E. J., Ong, J. M. J., Nielsen, M. B., et al., MNRAS, 534, 1060
    “Asteroseismic Signatures of Core Magnetism and Rotation in Hundreds of Low-Luminosity Red Giants”
  2. Hon, M. T. Y., Li, Y., & Ong, J. M. J. 2024, ApJ, 973, 154
    “Flow-Based Generative Emulation of Grids of Stellar Evolutionary Models”
  3. Lindsay, C. J., Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2024, ApJ, 965, 171
    “Fossil Signatures of Main-sequence Convective Core Overshoot Estimated through Asteroseismic Analyses”
  4. Rui, N. Z., Ong, J. M. J., Mathis, S. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 6346,
    “Asteroseismic g-mode period spacings in strongly magnetic rotating stars”
  5. Lindsay , C. J., Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2023, ApJ, 950, 19,
    “Near-Core Acoustic Glitches are Not Oscillatory: Consequences for Asteroseismic Probes of Convective Boundary Mixing”
  6. Campante, T., Li, T., Ong, J. M. J., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 214,
    “Revisiting the Red-giant Branch Hosts KOI-3886 and ι Draconis: Detailed Asteroseismic Modeling and Consolidated Stellar Parameters”
  7. Saunders , D., Ong, J. M. J., & Basu, S. 2023, ApJ, 947, 22,
    “Evolutionary and Observational Properties of Red Giant Acoustic Glitch Signatures”
  8. Lindsay, C. J., Ong, J. M. J., Basu, S. 2022, ApJ, 931, 116,
    “Mixed-Mode Asteroseismology of Red Giant Stars Through the Luminosity Bump”
  9. Petersburg, R. R., Ong, J. M. J., Zhao, L. L., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 187,
    “An Extreme-precision Radial-velocity Pipeline: First Radial Velocities from EXPRES”
  10. Blackman, R., Ong, J. M. J., & Fischer, D. 2019, AJ, 158, 40,
    “The Measured Impact of Chromatic Atmospheric Effects on Barycentric Corrections: Results from the EXtreme PREcision Spectrograph”
  11. Viani, L. S., Basu, S., Ong, J. M. J., Bonaca, A., & Chaplin, W. J. 2018, ApJ, 858, 28
    “Investigating the Metallicity-Mixing-length Relation”

Other Coauthored Papers

  1. Metcalfe, T. S., van Saders, J. L., Huber, D., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2024, accepted to ApJ,
    “TESS Asteroseismology of β Hydri: a Subgiant with a Born-again Dynamo”
  2. Huber, D., Slumstrup, D., Hon, M., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2024, accepted to ApJ,
    “Stellar Models are Reliable at Low Metallicity: An Asteroseismic Age for the Ancient Very Metal-Poor Star KIC 8144907”
  3. Dai, F., Howard, A. W., Halverson, S., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2024, AJ, 168, 101,
    “An Earth-sized Planet on the Verge of Tidal Disruption”
  4. Lund, M. N., Basu, S., Bieryla, A., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2024, A&A, 688, A13,
    “The K2 Asteroseismic KEYSTONE sample of Dwarf and Subgiant Solar-Like Oscillators. I. Data and Asteroseismic parameters”
  5. Gaidos, E., Thanathibodee, T., Hoffman, A., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2024, ApJ, 966, 167,
    “The Dynamic, Chimeric Inner Disk of PDS 70”
  6. Metcalfe, T. S., Buzasi, D., Huber, D., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2023, AJ, 166, 167,
    “Asteroseismology and Spectropolarimetry of the Exoplanet Host Star λ Serpentis”
  7. Nielsen, M. B., Davies, G. R., Chaplin, W. J., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2023, A&A, 676, A117,
    “Simplifying Asteroseismic Analysis Of Solar-like Oscillators: An Application Of Principal Component Analysis For Dimensionality Reduction”
  8. Hon, M., Huber, D., Rui, N. Z., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2023, Nature, 618, 917,
    “A Close-in Giant Planet Escapes Engulfment By Its Star”
  9. Jiang, C., Wu, T., Feinstein, A. D., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2023, ApJ, 945, 20,
    “TESS Asteroseismic Analysis of HD 76920: The Giant Star Hosting an Extremely Eccentric Exoplanet”
  10. Gaulme, P., Borkovits, T., Appourchaux, T., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2022, A&A, 668, A173,
    “KIC 7955301: A hierarchical triple system with eclipse timing variations and an oscillating red giant”
  11. Ball, W. H., Miglio, A., Chaplin, W. J., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2022, MNRAS, 516, 3709,
    “Solar-like oscillations and ellipsoidal variations in TESS observations of the binary 12 Boötis”
  12. Huber, D., White, T. R., Metcalfe, T. S., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2022, AJ, 163, 79,
    “A 20-Second Cadence View of Solar-Type Stars and Their Planets with TESS: Asteroseismology of Solar Analogs and a Re-characterization of π Men c”
  13. Cunha, M. S., Roxburgh, I. W., Aguirre Børsen-Koch, V., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2021, MNRAS, 508, 5864, “PLATO hare-and-hounds exercise: asteroseismic model fitting of main-sequence solar-like pulsators”
  14. Hill, M., Kane, S., Campante, T., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2021, AJ, 162, 211,
    “Asteroseismology of ι Draconis and Discovery of an Additional Long-Period Companion”
  15. Chontos, A., Huber, D., Kjeldsen, H., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.). 2021, ApJ, 922, 229,
    “TESS Asteroseismology of α Mensae: Benchmark Ages for a G7 Dwarf and its M-dwarf Companion”
  16. Lillo-Box, J., Ribas, A., Montesinos, B., Santos, N. C., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) A&A, 653, A40,
    “An Eclipsing Brown Dwarf In A Hierarchical Triple With Two Evolved Stars”
  17. Nielsen, M. B., Davies, G. R., Ball, W. H., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2021, AJ, 161, 62,
    “PBjam: A Python Package for Automating Asteroseismology of Solar-like Oscillators”
  18. Ball, W. H., Chaplin, W. J., Nielsen, M. B., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2020, MNRAS, 499, 6084,
    “Robust asteroseismic properties of the bright planet host HD 38529”
  19. Brewer, J. M., Fischer, D. A., Blackman, R. T., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2020, AJ, 160, 67, “EXPRES I. HD 3651 as an Ideal RV Benchmark”
  20. Jiang, C., Bedding, T. R., Stassun, K. G., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2020, ApJ, 896, 65,
    “TESS Asteroseismic Analysis of the Known Exoplanet Host Star HD 222076”
  21. Blackman, R. T., Fischer, D. A., Jurgenson, C. A., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2020, AJ, 159, 238, “Performance Verification of the EXtreme PREcision Spectrograph”
  22. Chaplin, W. J., Serenelli, A. M., Miglio, A., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2020, Nature Astronomy,
    “Age dating of an early Milky Way merger via asteroseismology of the naked-eye star ν Indi”
  23. Huber, D., Chaplin, W. J., Chontos, A., et al. (including Ong, J. M. J.) 2019, AJ, 157, 245,
    “A Hot Saturn Orbiting an Oscillating Late Subgiant Discovered by TESS”

Presentations

Here is an archive of science presentations I’ve given recently.

Talks


Posters


Teaching

I enjoy making interactive visualisations of asteroseismic phenomena for pedagogical purposes — I have found them very helpful in allowing my students to build physical and mathematical intuition by playing around with the parameters of these toys at their own time and pace. If you should choose to use them in your own teaching or presentations, I would very much appreciate attribution.

Over the years, I’ve accumulated enough of these toys that even displaying a subset of them is no longer easy to do on a single page. I’ve now started to group them thematically. Please select a series of toys to view:


Gravitoacoustic Mixed Modes

As stars evolve across the Hertzsprung gap and up the red giant branch, the frequencies of their p-modes decrease over time, and those of their g-modes increase over time. I show below how the power spectrum of such a star might change if we were able to follow it over evolutionary timescales. During the time interval shown, we have one g-mode (at low frequency at first, whose location is shown with the orange dashed line) coming into resonance, and then off resonance, with a p-mode (shown with the blue dashed line.)

Naively, one would expect that this means at some point one would obtain a pair of p- and g-modes with identical frequencies. However, what happens instead is that the p- and g-mode cavities couple to each other (described with the \(\alpha\) parameter in the figure). As a result of this coupling, the actual normal modes that exist in these evolved stars are neither pure p-modes nor pure g-modes — they exhibit mixed character. They behave like p-modes in the envelope, and like g-modes in the core. When the two mode cavities are coupled in this fashion, the two modes smoothly interchange character — the g-mode becomes a p-mode, and vice versa.

This kind of phenomenon is called an avoided crossing. We describe how modes progress through avoided crossings with “mixing fractions” \(\zeta\) assigned to each mode. Conventionally, pure p-modes have \(\zeta = 0\), pure g-modes \(\zeta = 1\), and modes of mixed character take intermediate values.

A good physical analogy for how these modes behave can be found by thinking about how atomic orbitals hybridise to form molecular orbitals in chemistry.

For example, two hydrogen atoms might form a hydrogen molecule. We of course understand the hydrogen atom extremely well (§1). At infinite interatomic separation (§2), the eigenstates of a combined system made of two atoms are simply two copies of the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom — one at each infinitely-separated location. When the two atoms are brought closer together (§3), the Hamiltonian of the total system can be written in two separate ways: either as the Hamiltonian of atom #1 with a small perturbation from atom #2, or vice versa. The electronic ground state of the molecule (§4) is well-approximated as the ground state atomic orbitals interfering constructively, and the first excited state (§5) with them interfering destructively. In general, molecular orbitals may be described as linear combinations of atomic orbitals, whose coefficients and energy eigenvalues emerge from solving a Generalised Hermitian Eigenvalue Problem (§6).

It turns out that this construction also exhibits avoided crossings! Rather than two hydrogen atoms, let’s permit the nuclear charges \(Z_1\) and \(Z_2\) of the two atoms to vary. An avoided crossing emerges as the ground states of the two atoms enter and leave resonance with each other.

The situation in asteroseismology is entirely analogous! We may decompose a mixed mode that shows both p- and g-like character into a linear combination of notional pure p- and pure g-mode eigenfunctions.

As in quantum mechanics, our mixed-mode eigenfunctions are generated by a boundary value problem associated with some wave operator (§1 — here the black curves shows a mixed-mode eigenfunction propagating at a frequency close to \(\nu_\text{max}\), compared against a propagation diagram where shaded regions indicate combinations of frequency and spatial position where a wave is permitted to propagate; these are determined by the Brunt-Väisälä frequency \(N\) and the Lamb frequency \(S_\ell\)). In Ong & Basu 2020, I demonstrate how one might decompose it into either a pure g-mode wave operator and associated perturbation (§2), or correspondingly a pure p-mode wave operator and (different) associated perturbation (§3). Mixed modes are generated as linear combinations of “isolated” pure p- and g-modes (§4), whose frequencies and combination coefficients are computed by exactly the same mathematical machinery as used in reasoning about molecular orbitals (§5).

Rotation

The horizontal components of mode eigenfunctions are, in slowly rotating stars, described by the spherical harmonics. Modes which propagate in the prograde direction will appear, to a stationary nonrotating observer, to oscillate more rapidly than modes which propagate in the retrograde direction. The inclination of the stellar rotational axis relative to the observer will determine which modes appear to cancel out when integrated over the visible disc, and which modes appear to oscillate the most.


The observational effect of the above dynamics is to turn each peak in the observed power spectrum into a multiplet of modes. The degree \(\ell\) of the multiplet determines the number of components, \(2\ell + 1\), while the inclination of the rotational axis determines the distribution of observed power between multiplet components.


In evolved stars, we observe modes of mixed p- and g-like character. These are the result of two mode cavities coupling to produce avoided crossings. The interaction between this mode coupling and the rotational splittings yields quite complicated observational morphology for the rotational multiplets (here shown only for \(\ell = 1\)).


Core-Envelope Misalignment

We ordinarily think of stars as rotating around only a single axis. However, there do exist stars where this isn’t true — e.g. in stars whose cores and envelopes are effectively decoupled, these different parts of them may rotate around different axes. In principle, we describe the coordinate transformation between the core’s corotating frame to the envelope’s corotating frame using three Euler angles, \(\alpha, \beta, \gamma\). However, the Euler angles \(\alpha\) and \(\gamma\) don’t really matter observationally: they describe rotations of the overall orientation of the star, or around the propagation axis of the waves, that leave the mode frequencies invariant.

There are two ways of parameterising the overall geometry of such a misaligned system. On one hand, we may use inclination angles \(i_\text{core}\) and \(i_\text{env}\) for the projected inclinations of the core and envelope angular momentum vectors against the line of sight, as well as a further obliquity angle \(\lambda\) to fully specify a spherical triangle, as shown below. On the other hand, we might specify e.g. \(i_\text{env}\) only implicitly, and instead explicitly parameterise the same spherical triangle using the misalignment Euler angle \(\beta\) and a further interior angle \(\varphi\) for one corner of the spherical triangle.

In the presence of this misalignment, the phenomenology of how different multiplet components depend on viewing angle is also modified. The distribution of power between the components of a multiplet now also depends on the mixing fractions \(\zeta\) of different multiplet components — and those are themselves also modified by misalignment, since the shapes of the avoided crossings change too!


© Joel Ong 2019­—, CC BY 3.0.
Cover image: EXPRES echellogram of 55 Cancri in April 2019. Image credit: Lily Zhao.
Footer: Legendre polynomials; original work.
Joel Ong