Norton, A. J.; Payne, S. G.; Evans, T.; West, R. G.; Wheatley, P. J.; Anderson, D. R.; Barros, S. C. C.; Butters, O. W.; Collier Cameron, A.; Christian-Prince, D. J.; Enoch, B.; Faedi, F.; Haswell, C. A.; Hellier, C.; Holmes, S.; Horne, K. D.; Kane, S. R.; Lister, T. A.; Maxted, P. F. L.; Parley, N.; Pollacco, D.; Simpson, E. K.; Skillen, I.; Smalley, B.; Southworth, J. and Street, R. A.
PDF (Version of Record)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201116448|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
We present light curves and periods of 53 candidates for short period eclipsing binary stars identified by SuperWASP. These include 48 newly identified objects with periods <2 × 104 s (~0.23 d), as well as the shortest period binary known with main sequence components (GSC2314-0530 = 1SWASP J022050.85 + 332047.6) and four other previously known W UMa stars (although the previously reported periods for two of these four are shown to be incorrect). The period distribution of main sequence contact binaries shows a sharp cut-off at a lower limit of around 0.22 d, but until now, very few systems were known close to this limit. These new candidates will therefore be important for understanding the evolution of low mass stars and to allow investigation of the cause of the period cut-off.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2011 ESO|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Physical Sciences
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Computing and Communications
Other Departments > Other Departments
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Earth, Planetary, Space and Astronomical Research (CEPSAR)|
|Depositing User:||Andrew Norton|
|Date Deposited:||08 Mar 2011 14:46|
|Last Modified:||08 Aug 2016 17:22|
|Share this page:|
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.