4.7 Article

New light-travel time models and orbital stability study of the proposed planetary system HU Aquarii

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 420, Issue 4, Pages 3609-3620

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20283.x

Keywords

binaries: close; binaries: eclipsing; stars: individual: HU Aquarii

Funding

  1. Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute
  2. Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL)
  3. NASA Astrobiology Institute at the Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii [NNA04CC08A]
  4. NASA EXOB [NNX09AN05G]
  5. Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education [N/N203/402739]
  6. National Research Council of Science & Technology (NST), Republic of Korea [2012141002] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this work we propose a new orbital architecture for the two proposed circumbinary planets around the polar eclipsing binary HU Aquarii. We base the new two-planet, light-travel time model on the result of a Monte Carlo simulation driving a least-squares LevenbergMarquardt minimization algorithm on the observed eclipse egress times. Our best-fitting model with resulted in high final eccentricities for the two companions leading to an unstable orbital configuration. From a large ensemble of initial guesses, we examined the distribution of final eccentricities and semimajor axes for different parameter intervals and encountered qualitatively a second population of best-fitting parameters. The main characteristic of this population is described by low-eccentric orbits favouring long-term orbital stability of the system. We present our best-fitting model candidate for the proposed two-planet system and demonstrate orbital stability over one million years using numerical integrations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available