Paper detail

A double white dwarf with a paradoxical origin?

We present Hubble Space Telescope UV spectra of the 4.6 h period double white dwarf SDSS J125733.63+542850.5. Combined with Sloan Digital Sky Survey optical data, these reveal that the massive white dwarf (secondary) has an effective temperature T2 = 13030 +/- 70 +/- 150 K and a surface gravity log g2 = 8.73 +/- 0.05 +/- 0.05 (statistical and systematic uncertainties respectively), leading to a mass of M2 = 1.06 Msun. The temperature of the extremely low-mass white dwarf (primary) is substantially lower at T1 = 6400 +/- 37 +/- 50 K, while its surface gravity is poorly constrained by the data. The relative flux contribution of the two white dwarfs across the spectrum provides a radius ratio of R1/R2 = 4.2, which, together with evolutionary models, allows us to calculate the cooling ages. The secondary massive white dwarf has a cooling age of about 1 Gyr, while that of the primary low-mass white dwarf is likely to be much longer, possibly larger than 5 Gyrs, depending on its mass and the strength of chemical diffusion. These results unexpectedly suggest that the low-mass white dwarf formed long before the massive white dwarf, a puzzling discovery which poses a paradox for binary evolution.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.