Paper detail

The planets around NN Ser: still there

We present 25 new eclipse times of the white dwarf binary NN Ser taken with the high-speed camera ULTRACAM on the WHT and NTT, the RISE camera on the Liverpool Telescope, and HAWK-I on the VLT to test the two-planet model proposed to explain variations in its eclipse times measured over the last 25 years. The planetary model survives the test with flying colours, correctly predicting a progressive lag in eclipse times of 36 seconds that has set in since 2010 compared to the previous 8 years of precise times. Allowing both orbits to be eccentric, we find orbital periods of 7.9 +/- 0.5 yr and 15.3 +/- 0.3 yr, and masses of 2.3 +/- 0.5 Mjup and 7.3 +/- 0.3 Mjup. We also find dynamically long-lived orbits consistent with the data, associated with 2:1 and 5:2 period ratios. The data scatter by 0.07 seconds relative to the best-fit model, by some margin the most precise of any of the proposed eclipsing compact object planet hosts. Despite the high precision, degeneracy in the orbit fits prevents a significant measurement of a period change of the binary and of N-body effects. Finally, we point out a major flaw with a previous dynamical stability analysis of NN Ser, and by extension, with a number of analyses of similar systems.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.