Paper detail

Implications of the non-detection of X-ray emission from HD 149427

HD 149427 is a very enigmatic object. It has been classified either as a planetary nebula or as a D'-type symbiotic star. Its distance is also highly uncertain. Furthermore, HD 149427 is a potential jet source. We report the non-detection of X-ray emission from HD 149427 and explore the implications to its nature. We observed the object with XMM-Newton with an effective exposure time of 33.5 ks. The upper limit for the flux of the X-ray emission in the soft band (<2 keV) is 10^-15 erg/s/cm^2, while in the hard band (>2 keV) it is about 10^-14 erg/s/cm^2. We discuss the implication of our results in light of the possible natures of HD 149427 -- being a planetary nebula or a symbiotic star, close or very distant. The derived upper limits on the mass accretion rate of the white dwarf are untypical for symbiotic stars and may favor the picture of HD 149427 being a young PN. HD 149427 might be a symbiotic star in hibernation -- if a symbiotic star at all. We estimate the possible mass-loss rate and kinetic luminosity of the jet and find no contradiction with our upper limit of soft X-ray emission. Therefore the jet may be still present but it was too faint to be detected via soft X-ray emission.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.