discov_num |
notes |
refcode |
JNN 118 |
The primary star has two candidate companions in the field of view. |
|
|
The fainter candidate C is most likely a background star, since its |
|
|
color is entirely inconsistent with a late M-type star. The brighter |
|
|
candidate B is more uncertain. It's colors are fully consistent with |
|
|
the brightness contrast to the primary for a physical companion, |
|
|
implying a spectral type of M5. It is also visible in 2MASS (Skrutskie |
|
|
et al. 2006 AJ 131, 1163), which enables to perform a rough CPM test. |
|
|
The test indicates that B is inconsistent with a static background |
|
|
object, again implying physical companionship. However, the motion is |
|
|
also poorly consistent with orbitalmotion, with a sky-projected speed |
|
|
of order 2 au per year - highly unlikely for such a wide and low-mass |
|
|
binary. This implies either under-estimated uncertainties in the data, |
|
|
or an unusual astronomical coincidence. With the small separation and |
|
|
relatively high brightness difference of the candidate companion, it |
|
|
is just at the detection limit of 2MASS, and is only reliably |
|
|
detectable in K-band. Perhaps there is a systematic noise component |
|
|
beyond the quoted astrometric 2MASS error in this circumstance. If all |
|
|
the data are taken at face value, another possible interpretation is |
|
|
an unfortunate chance alignment with a local M-dwarf, which has a |
|
|
signficant proper motion of its own. In any case, due to all these |
|
|
uncertainties, we tentatively treat the pair as a candidate binary |
|
|
here, but emphasize that more data is needed to test physical |
|
|
companionship. |
Jnn2012 |
refcode |
metd |
author |
reference |
Jnn2012 |
Cl j |
Janson, M., Hormuth, F., Bergfors, C., Brandner, W., Hippler, S., Daemgen, S., |
2012ApJ...754...44J |
Jnn2012 |
+E2 |
Kudryavtseva, N., Schmalzl, E., Schnupp, C., & Henning, T. |
|
Jnn2012 |
|
ApJ 754, 44, 2012 (some recalibrated measures published in Jnn2014b) |
2014ApJS..214...17J |