Paper detail

Getting to know the cataclysmic variable beneath the nova eruption

The eruption of a (classical) nova is widely accepted to be a recurrent event in the lifetime of a cataclysmic binary star. In-between eruptions the system should therefore behave as a "normal" cataclysmic variable (CV), i.e. according to its characteristic properties like the mass-transfer rate or the strength of the magnetic field of the white dwarf. How important are these characteristics for the nova eruption itself, i.e. which type of systems preferably undergo a nova eruption? This question could in principle be addressed by comparing the post-nova systems with the general CV population. However, information on post-novae is scarce, even to the extent that the identification of the post-nova is ambiguous in most cases. In this paper we inform on the progress of a project that has been undertaken to significantly improve the number of confirmed post-novae, thus ultimately providing the means for a better understanding of these objects.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.

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 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.