Paper detail

Period decrease in three SuperWASP eclipsing binary candidates near the short-period limit

SuperWASP light curves for 53 W UMa-type eclipsing binary (EB) candidates, identified in previous work as being close to the contact binary short-period limit, were studied for evidence of period change. The orbital periods of most of the stars were confirmed, and period decrease, significant at more than 5 sigma, was observed in three objects: 1SWASP J174310.98+432709.6 (-0.055 \pm0.003 s/yr), 1SWASP J133105.91+121538.0 (-0.075 \pm0.013 s/yr) and 1SWASP J234401.81-212229.1 (-0.313 \pm0.019 s/yr). The magnitudes of the observed period changes cannot be explained by magnetic braking or gravitational radiation effects, and are most likely primarily due to unstable mass transfer from primary to secondary components, possibly accompanied by unstable mass and angular momentum loss from the systems. If these period decreases persist, the systems could merge on a relatively short timescale.

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.