Paper detail

Amplitude variation and multiplet structures: Is PG1605+072 a slow rotator?

The subdwarf B star PG1605+072, with an unusually low log g ~ 5.3, shows a high number of non-radial pulsation modes, making it a promising candidate for asteroseismology. This could allow probing the star&#39;s interior to gain important insights in its structure and evolution. Comparison of previous work conducted over the last decade shows clear amplitude variation and hints of frequency variation. We analyse white light photometric data of the Multi-Site Spectroscopic Telescope (MSST) and Whole Earth Telescope (WET) XCov22 campaigns using prewhitening techniques and O-C diagrams. A total of 85 significant frequencies are identified, among them more than 20 frequency sums and harmonics. Moreover, it is shown that the main mode&#39;s amplitude varies like a sine with a period of ~630 d, indicative of long-term beating. Strong hints for the existence of frequency multiplets support the hypothesis that PG1605+072 is a slow rotator with V_eq < 0.9 km/s, contrary to previous claims. Existing asteroseismic models mainly suggest that the star possesses a high mass of ~0.7 M_Sun, presuming the main pulsation mode to be radial. This calls for an alternate formation channel.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.

Institutions

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.