Paper detail

The Photometric Periods of the Nova-Like Cataclysmic Variable LQ Pegasi (PG 2133+115)

We present a time-resolved differential photometric study and time series analysis of the nova-like cataclysmic variable star LQ Peg. We discover three periodicities in the photometry, one with a period of 3.42 +/- 0.03 hours, and another with a period of 56.8 +/- 0.01 hours. We interpret these to be the apsidal superhump and precessional periods of the accretion disk, respectively, and predict that the orbital period of LQ Peg is 3.22 +/- 0.03 hours. The third periodicity, with a period of 41.3 +/- 0.01 hours, we interpret to be the nodal precessional period of the accretion disk. We also report a flare that lasted four minutes and had an energy in visible light of (1.2 +/- 0.3) x 10^36 ergs, or 10^4-5 times more energetic than the largest solar flares, comparable to the most energetic visible-light stellar flares known. We calculate the absolute magnitude of LQ Peg to be M_J = 4.78 +/- 0.54, and its distance to be 800 +/- 200 pc.

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.