Paper detail

X-ray Eclipse Diagnosis of the Evolving Mass Loss in the Recurrent Nova U Scorpii 2010

We report the Suzaku detection of the earliest X-ray eclipse seen in the recurrent nova U Scorpii 2010. A target-of-opportunity observation 15 days after the outburst found a 27+/-5% dimming in the 0.2-1.0 keV energy band at the predicted center of an eclipse. In comparison with the X-ray eclipse depths seen at two later epochs by XMM-Newton, the source region shrank by about 10-20% between days 15 and 35 after the outburst. The X-ray eclipses appear to be deeper than or similar to contemporaneous optical eclipses, suggesting the X-ray and optical source region extents are comparable on day 15. We raise the possibility of the energy dependency in the photon escape regions, and that this would be a result of the supersoft X-ray opacity being higher than the Thomson scattering optical opacity at the photosphere due to bound-free transitions in abundant metals that are not fully ionized. Assuming a spherically symmetric explosion model, we constrain the mass-loss rate as a function of time. For a ratio of actual to Thomson opacity of 10-100 in supersoft X-rays, we find a total ejecta mass of about 10^{-7}-10^{-6} M_{\odot}.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.