On the RZ Draconis substellar circumbinary companions

Hinse, T. C.; Horner, Jonathan; Lee, Jae Woo; Wittenmyer, Robert A.; Lee, Chung-Uk; Park, Jang-Ho; Marshall, Jonathan P.

doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423799

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The third class of system are those for which the proposed planets in a given system move on orbits that appear highly dynamically unfeasible-sometimes even crossing one anotherʼs path (e.g., Horner et al 2011Horner et al , 2012dHorner et al , 2013Horner et al , 2014bHorner et al , 2019Wittenmyer et al 2012a;Hinse et al 2014aHinse et al , 2014bMarshall et al 2020). While it is certainly feasible for mutually crossing orbits to be dynamically stable (examples in our own solar system include the Jovian and Neptunian Trojans, and the Plutinos; e.g., Morbidelli et al 2005;Di Sisto et al 2010, 2019Horner & Lykawka 2010a;Pirani et al 2019), such stability is typically facilitated by mutual mean motion resonance between the orbits of the objects in question.…”

Section: Dynamics Of Exoplanetary Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar System Physics for Exoplanet Research

Horner

Kane

Marshall

et al. 2020

PASP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past three decades, we have witnessed one of the great revolutions in our understanding of the cosmos—the dawn of the Exoplanet Era. Where once we knew of just one planetary system (the solar system), we now know of thousands, with new systems being announced on a weekly basis. Of the thousands of planetary systems we have found to date, however, there is only one that we can study up-close and personal—the solar system. In this review, we describe our current understanding of the solar system for the exoplanetary science community—with a focus on the processes thought to have shaped the system we see today. In section one, we introduce the solar system as a single well studied example of the many planetary systems now observed. In section two, we describe the solar system's small body populations as we know them today—from the two hundred and five known planetary satellites to the various populations of small bodies that serve as a reminder of the system's formation and early evolution. In section three, we consider our current knowledge of the solar system's planets, as physical bodies. In section four we discuss the research that has been carried out into the solar system's formation and evolution, with a focus on the information gleaned as a result of detailed studies of the system's small body populations. In section five, we discuss our current knowledge of planetary systems beyond our own—both in terms of the planets they host, and in terms of the debris that we observe orbiting their host stars. As we learn ever more about the diversity and ubiquity of other planetary systems, our solar system will remain the key touchstone that facilitates our understanding and modeling of those newly found systems, and we finish section five with a discussion of the future surveys that will further expand that knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Dynamics Of Exoplanetary Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar System Physics for Exoplanet Research

Horner

Kane

Marshall

et al. 2020

PASP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The LM technique produces the formal errors computed from the best-fit covariance matrix. Thus, we determined the parameter errors from Monte Carlo bootstrap-resampling experiments (Press et al 1992, Hinse et al 2014a. For this, we generated 50,000 bootstrap-resampling datasets and used the best-fit model as our initial guess for each dataset.…”

Section: Eclipse Timing Variation and Its Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The pulsating sdB+M eclipsing system NY Virginis and its circumbinary planets

Lee¹,

Hinse²,

Youn³

et al. 2014

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We searched for circumbinary planets orbiting NY Vir in historical eclipse times including our long-term CCD data. Sixty-eight times of minimum light with accuracies better than 10 s were used for the ephemeris computations. The best fit to those timings indicated that the orbital period of NY Vir has varied due to a combination of two sinusoids with periods of P 3 =8.2 yr and P 4 =27.0 yr and semi-amplitudes of K 3 =6.9 s and K 4 =27.3 s, respectively. The periodic variations most likely arise from a pair of light-time effects due to the presence of third and fourth bodies that are gravitationally bound to the eclipsing pair. We have derived the orbital parameters and the minimum masses, M 3 sin i 3 = 2.8 M Jup and M 4 sin i 4 = 4.5 M Jup , of both objects. A dynamical analysis suggests that the outer companion is less likely to orbit the binary on a circular orbit. Instead we show that future timing data might push its eccentricity to moderate values for which the system exhibits long-term stability. The results demonstrate that NY Vir is probably a star-planet system, which consists of a very close binary star and two giant planets. The period ratio P 3 /P 4 suggests that a long-term gravitational interaction between them would result in capture into a nearly 3:10 mean motion resonance. When the presence of the circumbinary planets is verified and understood more comprehensively, the formation and evolution of this planetary system should be advanced greatly.

show abstract

“…However, the fits were not statistically convincing, with reduced chi-squares of the fitted models in the range 10-15, although this may be partly a result of underestimated uncertainties in previously published timing measurements (cf. Hinse et al 2014). In addition, the model solutions were degenerate: Both the 2 and 3 component models fit the timing data equally well, but the solutions are very different.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eclipse Timing Modeling of Three Post-Common Envelope Binaries: Hybrid Solutions

Mai,

Mutel

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report 88 new observations of three post common envelope binaries at primary eclipse spanning between December 2018 to February 2021. We combine recent primary eclipse timing observations with previously published values to search for substellar circumbinary components consistent with timing variations from a linear ephemeris. We used a least-squares minimization fitting algorithm weighted by a Hill orbit stability function, followed by Bayesian inference, to determine best-fit orbital parameters and associated uncertainties. For HS2231+2441, we find that the timing data are consistent with a constant period and that there is no evidence to suggest orbiting components. For HS0705+6700, we find both two and three-component solutions that are stable for at least 10 Myr but have very different parameters. For HW Vir, we find multi-component solutions that fit the timing data but they are unstable on short timescale, and therefore highly improbable. Conversely, both the least-squares and Bayesian solutions provide a poor fit. In both systems, the best-fit stable solutions significantly deviate from the ensemble timing data.For both HS0705+6700 and HW Vir, substellar component solutions that fit all observed eclipse timing data are dynamically unstable, whereas best-fit solutions with stable orbits provide poor O-C fits. We speculate that the observed timing variations for these systems, and very possibly other sdB binaries, may result from a combination of substellar component perturbations and an Applegate-Lanza mechanism.

show abstract

On the RZ Draconis substellar circumbinary companions

Cited by 8 publications

References 64 publications

Solar System Physics for Exoplanet Research

Solar System Physics for Exoplanet Research

The pulsating sdB+M eclipsing system NY Virginis and its circumbinary planets

Eclipse Timing Modeling of Three Post-Common Envelope Binaries: Hybrid Solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About