Astron. Astrophys. 349, 169-176 (1999)
3. Orbit of SY Mus
3.1. Orbital period
Pereira et al. (1995) determined an orbital period of
SY Mus based on about 2500 visual estimates by the observers of
the Variable Section of the Royal Astronomical Society of New Zealand
(RASNZ). Their data set covers
orbital cycles, and they derive a period of
.
In Fig. 1 we show IUE UV light curves corresponding to periods
, ,
and
days. For all four curves,
is set to the value derived in
Sect. 3.2. The IUE SWP10188L spectrum is separated by 9 orbits from
the spectra of similar phase. It is taken at ingress and shows already
a heavily attenuated stellar continuum. In the light curve
corresponding to , this spectrum is
flanked by spectra showing almost no continuum attenuation (see
Fig. 1). We find, that an orbital period of
is required to obtain a continuous
UV light curve. This is only larger
than the value derived by Pereira et
al. (1995). The upper limit for the period inferred by the UV
light curve is .
![[FIGURE]](img32.gif) |
Fig. 1. Continuum flux at versus phase. The four light curves correspond to 4 different orbital periods: , 624.5, 625.0 and 625.2 days. The obscuration of JD 2 444 503 (SWP10188L) is marked with a square.
|
The visual estimates of SY Mus do not show any erratic
variability. The mean visual magnitude
of the light curve also remained
stable during 40 years (Pereira et al. 1995). Different
atmospheric extensions due to stellar pulsations are therefore
unlikely to be the cause for the attenuation in the SWP10188L
spectrum.
We also analyzed the updated time series of the visual estimates
kindly provided by the RASNZ. Our sample has been collected in the
years 1954-1999 and covers 26 orbits, which is 4 orbits more than has
been analyzed by Pereira et al. (1995). The number of
measurements increased from to
. This is a significant improvement,
as the amplitude of the variability is only 1.6 times the
error of a single measurement. Based
on the visual estimates, we derive a new photometric period of
. The combination of
and
, leads us to adopt
.
3.2. Radial velocity curve of the M-giant
In order to derive an accurate time of mid-eclipse for SY Mus,
we perform a least squares fit including our new 21 RV-measurements
and the 9 RV-measurements of Schmutz et al. (1994). This yields
the orbital parameters listed in Table 4. The derived orbital
periods for the eccentric and the circular solutions are in good
agreement with a period of , as
derived in Sect. 3.1. The orbital solutions are consistent with the
previous analysis of Schmutz et al. (1994).
![[TABLE]](img45.gif)
Table 4. Orbital parameters of the M star in SY Mus. gives the Julian date when the M-giant is in front of the white dwarf. For the eccentric solution gives the time of periastron passage.
Notes:
1) from Schmutz et al. (1994)
2) see Sect. 3.1
To test whether the eccentric solution is significantly better than
the circular solution we compare the sum
with the expected value
. The number of free parameters for
the eccentric solution is , for the
circular solution it is . The number
of measurements is . The mean
deviations listed in Table 4
indicate an observational error of the radial velocities of
. The eccentric solution is thus not
significantly better than the circular solution. The circular solution
and the radial velocity data are shown in Fig. 2. As the theory of
tidal forces in binaries (Zahn 1977) also predicts the orbit to
be circular, we will calculate the phase of a given date JD according
to the circular fit with the period from Sect. 3.1:
![[EQUATION]](img55.gif)
To derive an error for the time of mid-eclipse,
, we have done a series of least
squares fits, where for each fit the period was set to a value in the
range . We find that fits where
differs by more than
from
JD lead to M-values
outside the expected range . The
phases of all attenuated IUE spectra in Table 2 (except
SWP10188L) have an uncertainty .
![[FIGURE]](img53.gif) |
Fig. 2. Radial velocity data of SY Mus derived from optical high resolution spectra, compared with the circular solution from Tab 4.
|
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: August 25, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |