Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T11:20:20.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A highly flattened Secondary Star in the Young Eclipsing Binary BM Orionis*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Douglas S. Hall

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A model is proposed for BM Ori to explain why DOREMUS saw only the early B star in the spectrum, whereas the light curve seemed to predict an equally bright cooler star which should have been seen alone at supposed totality. The cool star is assumed to be a disk-shaped object, similar in shape to that proposed by HUANG for ε Aur, seen nearly edge-on. By means of various restraints, it is estimated that the disk covers about 55% of the B star at primary eclipse. This leads to the relative luminosities (Lh = 0.74, 0.87 and 0.92 in V, B, and U), the color of the disk (the opposite side of the disk has the color of a G or F giant), the relative geometrical dimensions (rB = 0.09, rD = 0.25, and the height of the disk h≈0.1), and the orbital inclination (i ≈ 90°). The model with these parameters predicts a theoretical light curve which represents the observations as well as did the solution of HALL and GARRISON, which was based on spherical stars.

Type
IV. Duplicity and its Consequences among the Intrinsic Variable Stars
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 15: New Directions and Frontiers in Variable Stars Research , 1971 , pp. 217 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

Footnotes

*

Reprints of the Arthur J. Dyer Observatory, Ser. XX, No. XX.

References

Batten, A. H., 1970. P.A.S.P. 82, 574.Google Scholar
Berlage, H. P., 1988, The Origin of the Solar System (Oxford: Pergamon Press), p. 64.Google Scholar
Bodenheimer, P., and Ostriker, J. P., 1970, Ap. J. 161, 1101.Google Scholar
Devinney, E. J. Jr., Hall, D. S., and Ward, D. H., 1970, P.A.S.P. 82, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doremus, C., 1970, P.A.S.P. 82, 745.Google Scholar
Hall, D. S., and Garrison, L. M. Jr., 1969, P.A.S.P. 81, 771 (Paper I).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, D. S., and Hubbard, G. S., 1971, P.A.S.P. 83, in press.Google Scholar
Harris, D. L. III, 1983, in Basic Astronomical Data, Strand, K. Aa., ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), p. 269.Google Scholar
Huang, S. S., 1963, Ap. J. 138, 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. S., 1965, Ap. J. 141, 976.Google Scholar
Iben, I., 1965, Ap. J. 141, 993.Google Scholar
Iben, I., 1967, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 5, 571.Google Scholar
Johnson, H. M., 1965, Ap. J. 142, 964.Google Scholar
Larson, R. B., 1969, M. N. 145, 271.Google Scholar
Marks, D. W., and Clement, M. J., 1971, Ap. J. 166, L27.Google Scholar
Merrill, J. E., 1953, Princeton Obs. Contr. No. 23, p. 370.Google Scholar
Murphy, R. E., 1971, preprint.Google Scholar
Parenago, P. P., 1947, Peremennye Zvezdy 6, 217.Google Scholar
Parsons, S. B., 1971, preprint.Google Scholar
Plavec, M., 1968, in Advances in Astronomy and Astrophysics 6, Kopal, Z., ed. (New York: Academic Press), p. 216.Google Scholar
Plavec, M., 1970, P.A.S.P. 82, 957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plavec, M., and Kratochvil, P., 1984, Bull. Astr. Inst. Czechoslovakia 15, 165.Google Scholar
Russell, H. N., and Merrill, J. E., 1952, Princeton Obs. Contr. No. 26, p. 44.Google Scholar
Sharpless, S., 1966, in Vistas in Astronomy, Vol. 8, Beer, A. and Strand, K. Aa., eds. (Oxford: Pergamon Press), p. 127.Google Scholar
Struve, O., and Titus, J., 1944, Ap. J. 99, 84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, M. T., 1969, Ap. J. 155, 447.Google Scholar