4.7 Article

Optical spectroscopy and photometry of SAX J1808.4-3658 in outburst

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14562.x

关键词

accretion, accretion discs; binaries: close; stars: individual: V4580 Sagittarii; stars: neutron; pulsars: individual: SAX J1808.4-3658; X-rays: binaries

资金

  1. European Southern Observatory, Chile [DDT 281, D-5060, 281. D-5061]
  2. Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network (LCOGTN)
  3. Fermi Research Alliance, LLC [DE-AC02-07CH11359]
  4. Science Foundation Ireland
  5. Dill Faulkes Educational Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present phase resolved optical spectroscopy and photometry of V4580 Sagittarii, the optical counterpart to the accretion powered millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658, obtained during the 2008 September/October outburst. Doppler tomography of the NIII lambda 4640.64 Bowen blend emission line reveals a focused spot of emission at a location consistent with the secondary star. The velocity of this emission occurs at 324 +/- 15 km s(-1); applying a 'K-correction', we find the velocity of the secondary star projected on to the line of sight to be 370 +/- 40 km s-1. Based on existing pulse timing measurements, this constrains the mass ratio of the system to be 0.044(-0.004)(+0.005), and the mass function for the pulsar to be 0.44(-0.13)(+0.16)M(circle dot). Combining this mass function with various inclination estimates from other authors, we find no evidence to suggest that the neutron star in SAX J1808.4-3658 is more massive than the canonical value of 1.4M(circle dot). Our optical light curves exhibit a possible superhump modulation, expected for a system with such a low mass ratio. The equivalent width of the CaII H and K interstellar absorption lines suggest that the distance to the source is similar to 2.5 kpc. This is consistent with previous distance estimates based on type-IX-ray bursts which assume cosmic abundances of hydrogen, but lower than more recent estimates which assume helium-rich bursts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据