Paper detail

Eclipsing time variations in close binary systems: Planetary hypothesis vs. Applegate mechanism

The observed eclipsing time variations in post-common-envelope binaries (PCEBs) can be interpreted as potential evidence for massive Jupiter-like planets, or as a result of magnetic activity, leading to quasi-periodic changes in the quadrupole moment of the secondary star. The latter is commonly referred to as the Applegate mechanism. Following Brinkworth et al. (2006), we employ here an improved version of Applegate's model including the angular momentum exchange between a finite shell and the core of the star. The framework is employed to derive the general conditions under which the Applegate mechanism can work, and is subsequently applied to a sample of 16 close binary systems with potential planets, including 11 PCEBs. Further, we present a detailed derivation and study of analytical models which allow for an straightforward extension to other systems. Using our full numerical framework, we show that the Applegate mechanism can clearly explain the observed eclipsing time variations in 4 of the systems, while the required energy to produce the quadrupole moment variations is too high in at least 8 systems. In the remaining 4 systems, the required energy is comparable to the available energy produced by the star, which we consider as borderline cases. Therefore, the Applegate mechanism cannot uniquely explain the observed period time variations for this entire population. Even in systems where the required energy is too high, the Applegate mechanism may provide an additional scatter, which needs to be considered in the derivation and analysis of planetary models.

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.

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.