Paper detail

Detection of the Binarity of the Star J1158+4239

One of the goals of the Pulkovo program of research on stars with large proper motions is to reveal among the low-luminosity stars those that have evidence of binarity. Twelve astrometric binary candidates from the Pulkovo list have been included in the program of speckle observations with the BTA telescope at the Special Astrophysical Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SAO RAS) and the 2.5-m telescope at the Caucasus Mountain Observatory (CMO) of the Sternberg Astronomical Institute of the Moscow State University to confirm their binarity and then to determine the parameters of the revealed stellar pairs. The binarity of the brightest of these stars, J1158+4239 (GJ 3697), has been confirmed. Four sessions of speckle observations with the BTA SAO RAS telescope and one session with the 2.5-m CMO telescope have been carried out in 2015 - 2016. The weighted mean estimates of the pair parameters are $ρ$=286.5$\pm$1.2 mas and $θ$=230.24$\pm$0.16$^{\circ}$ at the epoch B2015.88248. The magnitude difference between the pair stars is $Δm$=0.55$\pm$0.03 (a filter with a central wavelength of 800 nm and a FWHM of 100 nm) and $Δm$=0.9$\pm$0.1 (an R filter).

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.