DOCSLIB.ORG

OBSERVATIONS and MODELS of ECLIPSING BINARY SYSTEMS by Jeffrey L. Coughlin Adviser Dr. Richard M. Williamon a Thesis Submitted T

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OBSERVATIONS and MODELS of ECLIPSING BINARY SYSTEMS by Jeffrey L. Coughlin Adviser Dr. Richard M. Williamon a Thesis Submitted T OBSERVATIONS AND MODELS OF ECLIPSING BINARY SYSTEMS by Jeffrey L. Coughlin Adviser Dr. Richard M. Williamon A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Emory College of Emory University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Bachelor of Sciences with Honors Department of Physics 2007 ABSTRACT Eclipsing binary systems form the fundamental basis of Astronomy in the sense that they are the primary means to determine fundamental stellar astrophysical quantities such as mass, radius, and temperature. Furthermore, they allow us to study the internal dynamos and resulting magnetic cycles of stars that we would normally only be able to study for one star, our Sun. The systems themselves are extremely interesting objects, consisting of a multitude of configurations that are tied together by a complex evolutionary history. Finally, they allow us to test theories of stellar structure and even General Relativity. Thus the accurate observation and modeling of these systems is of great importance to the field. The first three chapters of this thesis are devoted to acquainting a reader with a general science background, but no knowledge of Astronomy, to eclipsing binaries and the field in general, and should provide the reader with an adequate background to understand the rest of the thesis. The subsequent eight chapters are each devoted to the analysis of eight separate systems that I have studied while at Emory, with each chapter arranged as would be generally found in a journal article. The collected data, models, and derived parameters for each system are analyzed in context to previous findings and general trends seen throughout the thesis. An evolutionary scenario for the formation of A and W type W Uma systems, with two types of near-contact systems as precursors and intermediates, is proposed. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincerest thanks to my advisor, Richard Williamon, for providing me with a truly exceptional undergraduate background and inspiring me to pursue a career in Astronomy. You have always left your door wide open to my endless questions. This is the greatest quality I could have ever asked for in an adviser. My thanks to Horace Dale for teaching me all I know about photometry, data processing, instrumentation, and the many black arts of Astronomy that are normally missed in an undergraduate education. You are a truly a renaissance man, and have taught me to never neglect the smallest detail nor task. My thanks to J. Scott Shaw for patiently mentoring me this past summer, and introducing me to the “joys” of IRAF. My thanks to Jason Boss for setting up the Astromac for my modeling. My thanks to all the Astronomy students I have taught for showing me the joy of revealing the wonders of the universe to others and inspiring me to become a professor. My thanks to the Physics professors with whom I had morning classes, for being so understanding the many times I was either half-awake or skipped class to sleep having been up all night at the telescope. My thanks to Lowell Observatory for time on their 42” telescope, and to Scholarly Inquiry and Research at Emory (SIRE) for funding my travel to Lowell. Finally, my thanks to Jamie for keeping me company so many times at the telescope, drawing Jeff Jr., and always accompanying me to Java Monkey to work on my thesis. CONTENTS I. Introduction to Eclipsing Binaries and Astronomical Measurements 1.1 Definition of Eclipsing Binary Stars . 1 1.2 System Parameters . 1 1.3 Naming Conventions and System Classification . 3 1.4 Measurements of Brightness and Time . 6 1.5 Stellar Spectra and Radial Velocity . 8 1.6 Telescopes and CCD Cameras . 10 1.7 Photometry . 12 II. Minimum Timings and O-C Diagrams 2.1 Time of Minima and Resulting Science . 14 2.2 The Kwee-van Woerden Method . 14 2.3 O-C Diagrams . 15 III. Light Curve Modeling 3.1 Basic Concepts . 16 3.2 The Physics of Eclipsing Binary Models . 16 3.3 Solution Schemes in Multi-Parameter Space . 18 3.4 Currently Employed Codes . 19 IV. RT Andromedae 4.1 Background . 21 4.2 Observations . 22 4.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 22 4.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 27 4.5 Results . 39 4.6 Discussion . 42 V. TU Bootis 5.1 Background . 43 5.2 Observations . 43 5.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 44 5.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 47 5.5 Results . .. 49 5.6 Discussion . .. 50 VI. KV Geminorum 6.1 Background . .. 52 6.2 Observations . 53 6.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 53 6.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 56 6.5 Results . 58 6.6 Discussion . 60 VII. UU Lyncis 7.1 Background . 61 7.2 Observations . 61 7.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 61 7.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 64 7.5 Results . 66 7.6 Discussion . 67 VIII. MY Cygni 8.1 Background . 68 8.2 Observations . 69 8.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 69 8.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 74 8.5 Results . 74 8.6 Discussion . 74 IX. KR Persei 9.1 Background . 76 9.2 Observations . 76 9.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 77 9.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 79 9.5 Results . 79 9.6 Discussion . 79 X. RU Eridani 10.1 Background . 81 10.2 Observations . 81 10.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 81 10.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 84 10.5 Results . 86 10.6 Discussion . 87 XI. YY Ceti 11.1 Background . 88 11.2 Observations . 88 11.3 Minimum Timings and O-C Diagram . 88 11.4 Light Curves and Modeling . 89 11.5 Results . .. 92 11.6 Discussion . .. 93 XII. References . 94 LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Eclipsing Binary Illustration . 3 1.2 Gravitational Potential Distribution . 5 1.3 UBVRI Transmission Curves . 6 1.4 HJD Correction Diagram . 7 1.5 Cassegrain Telescope Diagram . 10 4.1 Williamon’s (1974) O-C Diagram . 23 4.2 RT And O-C Diagram . 26 4.3 RT And Fitted Kjurkchieva’s Model . 28 4.4 RT And Fitted with Pribulla’s Model . 29 4.5 RT And 1974 Light Curve . 31 4.6 RT And Oct. 15th 2004 Light Curve . 32 4.7 RT And Nov. 8th – 9th 2004 Light Curve . 33 4.8 RT And Sept. 12th – 14th 2005 Light Curve . 34 4.9 RT And Sept. 30th – Oct. 3rd 2005 Light Curve . 35 4.10 RT And Oct. 27th – 28th 2005 Light Curve . 36 4.11 RT.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Solar System
    5 The Solar System R. Lynne Jones, Steven R. Chesley, Paul A. Abell, Michael E. Brown, Josef Durech,ˇ Yanga R. Fern´andez,Alan W. Harris, Matt J. Holman, Zeljkoˇ Ivezi´c,R. Jedicke, Mikko Kaasalainen, Nathan A. Kaib, Zoran Kneˇzevi´c,Andrea Milani, Alex Parker, Stephen T. Ridgway, David E. Trilling, Bojan Vrˇsnak LSST will provide huge advances in our knowledge of millions of astronomical objects “close to home’”– the small bodies in our Solar System. Previous studies of these small bodies have led to dramatic changes in our understanding of the process of planet formation and evolution, and the relationship between our Solar System and other systems. Beyond providing asteroid targets for space missions or igniting popular interest in observing a new comet or learning about a new distant icy dwarf planet, these small bodies also serve as large populations of “test particles,” recording the dynamical history of the giant planets, revealing the nature of the Solar System impactor population over time, and illustrating the size distributions of planetesimals, which were the building blocks of planets. In this chapter, a brief introduction to the different populations of small bodies in the Solar System (§ 5.1) is followed by a summary of the number of objects of each population that LSST is expected to find (§ 5.2). Some of the Solar System science that LSST will address is presented through the rest of the chapter, starting with the insights into planetary formation and evolution gained through the small body population orbital distributions (§ 5.3). The effects of collisional evolution in the Main Belt and Kuiper Belt are discussed in the next two sections, along with the implications for the determination of the size distribution in the Main Belt (§ 5.4) and possibilities for identifying wide binaries and understanding the environment in the early outer Solar System in § 5.5.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Orbits of Planets in Binary Star Systems 1
    Theoretical Orbits of Planets in Binary Star Systems 1 Theoretical Orbits of Planets in Binary Star Systems S.Edgeworth 2001 Table of Contents 1: Introduction 2: Large external orbits 3: Small external orbits 4: Eccentric external orbits 5: Complex external orbits 6: Internal orbits 7: Conclusion Theoretical Orbits of Planets in Binary Star Systems 2 1: Introduction A binary star system consists of two stars which orbit around their joint centre of mass. A large proportion of stars belong to such systems. What sorts of orbits can planets have in a binary star system? To examine this question we use a computer program called a multi-body gravitational simulator. This enables us to create accurate simulations of binary star systems with planets, and to analyse how planets would really behave in this complex environment. Initially we examine the simplest type of binary star system, which satisfies these conditions:- 1. The two stars are of equal mass. 2, The two stars share a common circular orbit. 3. Planets orbit on the same plane as the stars. 4. Planets are of negligible mass. 5. There are no tidal effects. We use the following units:- One time unit = the orbital period of the star system. One distance unit = the distance between the two stars. We can classify possible planetary orbits into two types. A planet may have an internal orbit, which means that it orbits around just one of the two stars. Alternatively, a planet may have an external orbit, which means that its orbit takes it around both stars. Also a planet's orbit may be prograde (in the same direction as the stars' orbits ), or retrograde (in the opposite direction to the stars' orbits).
    [Show full text]
  • Binary and Multiple Systems of Asteroids
    Binary and Multiple Systems Andrew Cheng1, Andrew Rivkin2, Patrick Michel3, Carey Lisse4, Kevin Walsh5, Keith Noll6, Darin Ragozzine7, Clark Chapman8, William Merline9, Lance Benner10, Daniel Scheeres11 1JHU/APL [[email protected]] 2JHU/APL [[email protected]] 3University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis/CNRS/Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur [[email protected]] 4JHU/APL [[email protected]] 5University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis/CNRS/Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur [[email protected]] 6STScI [[email protected]] 7Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics [[email protected]] 8SwRI [[email protected]] 9SwRI [[email protected]] 10JPL [[email protected]] 11Univ Colorado [[email protected]] Abstract A sizable fraction of small bodies, including roughly 15% of NEOs, is found in binary or multiple systems. Understanding the formation processes of such systems is critical to understanding the collisional and dynamical evolution of small body systems, including even dwarf planets. Binary and multiple systems provide a means of determining critical physical properties (masses, densities, and rotations) with greater ease and higher precision than is available for single objects. Binaries and multiples provide a natural laboratory for dynamical and collisional investigations and may exhibit unique geologic processes such as mass transfer or even accretion disks. Missions to many classes of planetary bodies – asteroids, Trojans, TNOs, dwarf planets – can offer enhanced science return if they target binary or multiple systems. Introduction Asteroid lightcurves were often interpreted through the 1970s and 1980s as showing evidence for satellites, and occultations of stars by asteroids also provided tantalizing if inconclusive hints that asteroid satellites may exist.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 on the Origin of the Pluto System Robin M. Canup Southwest Research Institute Kaitlin M. Kratter University of Arizona Marc Ne
    On the Origin of the Pluto System Robin M. Canup Southwest Research Institute Kaitlin M. Kratter University of Arizona Marc Neveu NASA Goddard Space Flight Center / University of Maryland The goal of this chapter is to review hypotheses for the origin of the Pluto system in light of observational constraints that have been considerably refined over the 85-year interval between the discovery of Pluto and its exploration by spacecraft. We focus on the giant impact hypothesis currently understood as the likeliest origin for the Pluto-Charon binary, and devote particular attention to new models of planet formation and migration in the outer Solar System. We discuss the origins conundrum posed by the system’s four small moons. We also elaborate on implications of these scenarios for the dynamical environment of the early transneptunian disk, the likelihood of finding a Pluto collisional family, and the origin of other binary systems in the Kuiper belt. Finally, we highlight outstanding open issues regarding the origin of the Pluto system and suggest areas of future progress. 1. INTRODUCTION For six decades following its discovery, Pluto was the only known Sun-orbiting world in the dynamical vicinity of Neptune. An early origin concept postulated that Neptune originally had two large moons – Pluto and Neptune’s current moon, Triton – and that a dynamical event had both reversed the sense of Triton’s orbit relative to Neptune’s rotation and ejected Pluto onto its current heliocentric orbit (Lyttleton, 1936). This scenario remained in contention following the discovery of Charon, as it was then established that Pluto’s mass was similar to that of a large giant planet moon (Christy and Harrington, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2012.04712V1 [Astro-Ph.EP] 8 Dec 2020 Direct Evidence of the Presence of Planets (E.G., ALMA Part- Nership Et Al
    DRAFT VERSION DECEMBER 10, 2020 Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX63 First detection of orbital motion for HD 106906 b: A wide-separation exoplanet on a Planet Nine-like orbit MEIJI M. NGUYEN,1 ROBERT J. DE ROSA,2 AND PAUL KALAS1, 3, 4 1Department of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 2European Southern Observatory, Alonso de Cordova´ 3107, Vitacura, Santiago, Chile 3SETI Institute, Carl Sagan Center, 189 Bernardo Ave., Mountain View, CA 94043, USA 4Institute of Astrophysics, FORTH, GR-71110 Heraklion, Greece (Received August 26, 2020; Revised October 8, 2020; Accepted October 10, 2020) Submitted to AJ ABSTRACT HD 106906 is a 15 Myr old short-period (49 days) spectroscopic binary that hosts a wide-separation (737 au) planetary-mass ( 11 M ) common proper motion companion, HD 106906 b. Additionally, a circumbinary ∼ Jup debris disk is resolved at optical and near-infrared wavelengths that exhibits a significant asymmetry at wide separations that may be driven by gravitational perturbations from the planet. In this study we present the first detection of orbital motion of HD 106906 b using Hubble Space Telescope images spanning a 14 yr period. We achieve high astrometric precision by cross-registering the locations of background stars with the Gaia astromet- ric catalog, providing the subpixel location of HD 106906 that is either saturated or obscured by coronagraphic optical elements. We measure a statistically significant 31:8 7:0 mas eastward motion of the planet between ± the two most constraining measurements taken in 2004 and 2017. This motion enables a measurement of the +27 +27 inclination between the orbit of the planet and the inner debris disk of either 36 14 deg or 44 14 deg, depending on the true orientation of the orbit of the planet.
    [Show full text]
  • Astrophysics in 2006 3
    ASTROPHYSICS IN 2006 Virginia Trimble1, Markus J. Aschwanden2, and Carl J. Hansen3 1 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-4575, Las Cumbres Observatory, Santa Barbara, CA: ([email protected]) 2 Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center, Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Organization ADBS, Building 252, 3251 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, CA 94304: ([email protected]) 3 JILA, Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder CO 80309: ([email protected]) Received ... : accepted ... Abstract. The fastest pulsar and the slowest nova; the oldest galaxies and the youngest stars; the weirdest life forms and the commonest dwarfs; the highest energy particles and the lowest energy photons. These were some of the extremes of Astrophysics 2006. We attempt also to bring you updates on things of which there is currently only one (habitable planets, the Sun, and the universe) and others of which there are always many, like meteors and molecules, black holes and binaries. Keywords: cosmology: general, galaxies: general, ISM: general, stars: general, Sun: gen- eral, planets and satellites: general, astrobiology CONTENTS 1. Introduction 6 1.1 Up 6 1.2 Down 9 1.3 Around 10 2. Solar Physics 12 2.1 The solar interior 12 2.1.1 From neutrinos to neutralinos 12 2.1.2 Global helioseismology 12 2.1.3 Local helioseismology 12 2.1.4 Tachocline structure 13 arXiv:0705.1730v1 [astro-ph] 11 May 2007 2.1.5 Dynamo models 14 2.2 Photosphere 15 2.2.1 Solar radius and rotation 15 2.2.2 Distribution of magnetic fields 15 2.2.3 Magnetic flux emergence rate 15 2.2.4 Photospheric motion of magnetic fields 16 2.2.5 Faculae production 16 2.2.6 The photospheric boundary of magnetic fields 17 2.2.7 Flare prediction from photospheric fields 17 c 2008 Springer Science + Business Media.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:0908.2624V1 [Astro-Ph.SR] 18 Aug 2009
    Astronomy & Astrophysics Review manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Accurate masses and radii of normal stars: Modern results and applications G. Torres · J. Andersen · A. Gim´enez Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract This paper presents and discusses a critical compilation of accurate, fun- damental determinations of stellar masses and radii. We have identified 95 detached binary systems containing 190 stars (94 eclipsing systems, and α Centauri) that satisfy our criterion that the mass and radius of both stars be known to ±3% or better. All are non-interacting systems, so the stars should have evolved as if they were single. This sample more than doubles that of the earlier similar review by Andersen (1991), extends the mass range at both ends and, for the first time, includes an extragalactic binary. In every case, we have examined the original data and recomputed the stellar parameters with a consistent set of assumptions and physical constants. To these we add interstellar reddening, effective temperature, metal abundance, rotational velocity and apsidal motion determinations when available, and we compute a number of other physical parameters, notably luminosity and distance. These accurate physical parameters reveal the effects of stellar evolution with un- precedented clarity, and we discuss the use of the data in observational tests of stellar evolution models in some detail. Earlier findings of significant structural differences between moderately fast-rotating, mildly active stars and single stars, ascribed to the presence of strong magnetic and spot activity, are confirmed beyond doubt. We also show how the best data can be used to test prescriptions for the subtle interplay be- tween convection, diffusion, and other non-classical effects in stellar models.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Pluto Is Not a Planet Anymore Or How Astronomical Objects Get Named
    3 Why Pluto Is Not a Planet Anymore or How Astronomical Objects Get Named Sethanne Howard USNO retired Abstract Everywhere I go people ask me why Pluto was kicked out of the Solar System. Poor Pluto, 76 years a planet and then summarily dismissed. The answer is not too complicated. It starts with the question how are astronomical objects named or classified; asks who is responsible for this; and ends with international treaties. Ultimately we learn that it makes sense to demote Pluto. Catalogs and Names WHO IS RESPONSIBLE for naming and classifying astronomical objects? The answer varies slightly with the object, and history plays an important part. Let us start with the stars. Most of the bright stars visible to the naked eye were named centuries ago. They generally have kept their old- fashioned names. Betelgeuse is just such an example. It is the eighth brightest star in the northern sky. The star’s name is thought to be derived ,”Yad al-Jauzā' meaning “the Hand of al-Jauzā يد الجوزاء from the Arabic i.e., Orion, with mistransliteration into Medieval Latin leading to the first character y being misread as a b. Betelgeuse is its historical name. The star is also known by its Bayer designation − ∝ Orionis. A Bayeri designation is a stellar designation in which a specific star is identified by a Greek letter followed by the genitive form of its parent constellation’s Latin name. The original list of Bayer designations contained 1,564 stars. The Bayer designation typically assigns the letter alpha to the brightest star in the constellation and moves through the Greek alphabet, with each letter representing the next fainter star.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Galaxies and Star Systems
    Chapter 5 Galaxies and Star Systems Section 5.1 Galaxies Terms: • Galaxy • Spiral Galaxy • Elliptical Galaxy • Irregular Galaxy • Milky Way Galaxy • Quasar • Black Hole Types of Galaxies A galaxy is a huge group of single stars, star systems, star clusters, dust, and gas bound together by gravity. There are billions of galaxies in the universe. The largest galaxies have more than a trillion stars! Astronomers classify most galaxies into the following types: spiral, elliptical, and irregular. Spiral galaxies are those that appear to have a bulge in the middle and arms that spiral outward, like pinwheels. The spiral arms contain many bright, young stars as well as gas and dust. Most new stars in the spiral galaxies form in theses spiral arms. Relatively few new stars form in the central bulge. Some spiral galaxies, called barred-spiral galaxies, have a huge bar-shaped region of stars and gas that passes through their center. Not all galaxies have spiral arms. Elliptical galaxies look like round or flattened balls. These galaxies contain billions of the stars but have little gas and dust between the stars. Because there is little gas or dust, stars are no longer forming. Most elliptical galaxies contain only old stars. Some galaxies do not have regular shapes, thus they are called irregular galaxies. These galaxies are typically smaller than other types of galaxies and generally have many bright, young stars. They contain a lot of gas a dust to from new stars. The Milky Way Galaxy Although it is difficult to know what the shape of the Milky Way Galaxy is because we are inside of it, astronomers have identified it as a typical spiral galaxy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Time of Perihelion Passage and the Longitude of Perihelion of Nemesis
    The Time of Perihelion Passage and the Longitude of Perihelion of Nemesis Glen W. Deen 820 Baxter Drive, Plano, TX 75025 phone (972) 517-6980, e-mail [email protected] Natural Philosophy Alliance Conference Albuquerque, N.M., April 9, 2008 Abstract If Nemesis, a hypothetical solar companion star, periodically passes through the asteroid belt, it should have perturbed the orbits of the planets substantially, especially near times of perihelion passage. Yet almost no such perturbations have been detected. This can be explained if Nemesis is comprised of two stars with complementary orbits such that their perturbing accelerations tend to cancel at the Sun. If these orbits are also inclined by 90° to the ecliptic plane, the planet orbit perturbations could have been minimal even if acceleration cancellation was not perfect. This would be especially true for planets that were all on the opposite side of the Sun from Nemesis during the passage. With this in mind, a search was made for significant planet alignments. On July 5, 2079 Mercury, Earth, Mars+180°, and Jupiter will align with each other at a mean polar longitude of 102.161°±0.206°. Nemesis A, a brown dwarf star, is expected to approach from the south and arrive 180° away at a perihelion longitude of 282.161°±0.206° and at a perihelion distance of 3.971 AU, the 3/2 resonance with Jupiter at that time. On July 13, 2079 Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune+180° will align at a mean polar longitude of 299.155°±0.008°. Nemesis B, a white dwarf star, is expected to approach from the north and arrive at that same longitude and at a perihelion distance of 67.25 AU, outside the Kuiper Belt.
    [Show full text]
  • Lab 4: Eclipsing Binary Stars (Due: 2017 Apr 05)
    Phys 322, Observational Astronomy Lab 4 NJIT (Prof. Gary) Spring 2017 Lab 4: Eclipsing Binary Stars (Due: 2017 Apr 05) Binary Stars Binary stars are systems in which two stars orbit each other under their mutual gravitational interaction. It is commonly claimed that most stars are members of binary or multiple star systems, so they are very common. However, it may be easy or difficult to determine if a particular star as seen in the sky is a binary or multiple star system. The direct way to tell is if one sees two stars visually close to each other (visual binary), but even then they may only appear near to each other. Observations over several years or decades may be needed to tell that they are indeed orbiting each other. The orbits are such that each star travels in an ellipse with the center of mass in the common focus of both ellipses (the more massive star has the smaller orbit), as shown in Figure 1a, below. a) M Figure 1: Orbits of the two stars of a binary system. a) Focus One can consider the orbits relative to the center of mass Center of the two stars. The more of mass massive star M has a smaller orbit than the less massive star m, but both orbit with the m center of mass at one focus of their ellipses. b) The system can be considered equally well as one star (the b) secondary) orbiting the other (the primary), so long as the mass of the orbiting secondary is replaced by the “reduced mass” of the Primary system.
    [Show full text]
  • Observational Studies of X-Ray Binary Systems Observational Studies of X-Ray Binary Systems
    mmnML mmmm AWD DE» FIOWS INIS-mf—8690 "'•'..'..-. !' ..- -'. .^: C-^;/- V'-^ ^ ^'vV?*f,>4 "' :f ,.?;•• ..f..-XV., . '4*.> • OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES OF X-RAY BINARY SYSTEMS OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES OF X-RAY BINARY SYSTEMS PROPERTIES OF THE NEUTRON STAR AND ITS COMPANION ORBITAL MOTION AND MASS FLOWS ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor in de Wiskunde en Natuurwetenschappen aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, Dr. D.W. Bresters, hoogleraar in de Faculteit der Wiskunde en Natuurwetenschappen, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Aula der Universiteit (tijdelijk in de Lutherse Kerk, ingang Singel 411, hoek Spui) op woensdag 2 februari 1983 te 13:30 uur door Michiel Baidur Maximiliaan van der Klis geboren te 's Gravenhage PROMOTOR : Prof. Dr. E.P.J, van den Heuvel CO-REFERENT : Dr. Ir. J.A.H. Bieeker CONTENTS 0. Introduction and summary 7 1. Mass-Flux Induced Orbital-Period Changes In X-Ray Binaries 17 2. Cygnus X-3 2.1 A Change In Light Curve Asymmetry and the Ephemeris of Cygnus X-3 31 2.2 The X-Ray Modulation of Cygnus X-3 34 2.3 The Cycle-to-Cycle Variability of Cygnus X-3 40 3. Mass Transfer and Accretion in Centaurus X-3 and SMC X-l 3.1 The Accretion Picture of Cen X-3 as Inferred from One Month of Continuous X-Ray Observations 55 3.2 Long Term X-Ray Observations of SMC X-l Including a Turn-On 62 4. Pulsation and Orbital Parameters of Centaurus X-3 and Vela X-l 4.1 Characteristics of the Cen X-3 Neutron Star from Correlated Spin-Up and X-Ray Luminosity Measurements 69 4.2 The Orbital Parameters and the X-Ray Pulsation of Vela X-l (4U 0900-40) 76 5.
    [Show full text]