4.6 Article

EMCCD photometry reveals two new variable stars in the crowded central region of the globular cluster NGC 6981 (Research Note)

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 553, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321430

关键词

globular clusters: individual: NGC 6981; stars: variables: RR Lyrae; instrumentation: high angular resolution; stars: variables: general

资金

  1. Danish Natural Science Research Council
  2. European Community [229517, 268421, 274889]
  3. Center of Excellence Centre for Star and Planet Formation (StarPlan)
  4. Danish National Research Foundation
  5. Qatar National Research Fund (QNRF)
  6. Qatar Foundation [NPRP 09-476-1-078]
  7. Communaute francaise de Belgique - Actions de recherche concertees Academie universitaire
  8. Korea Research Council of Fundamental Science & Technology (KRCF) via the KRCF Young Scientist Research Fellowship Programme
  9. KASI [2013-9-400-00]
  10. FONDECYT [3120097]
  11. STFC [ST/I001131/1, ST/J001651/1, ST/J001562/1, ST/H005307/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  12. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/I001131/1, ST/J001562/1, ST/J001651/1, ST/H005307/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  13. National Research Council of Science & Technology (NST), Republic of Korea [2013971002] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two previously unknown variable stars in the crowded central region of the globular cluster NGC 6981 are presented. The observations were made using the electron multiplying CCD (EMCCD) camera at the Danish 1.54 m Telescope at La Silla, Chile. The two variables were not previously detected by conventional CCD imaging because of their proximity to a bright star. This discovery demonstrates that EMCCDs are a powerful tool for performing high-precision time-series photometry in crowded fields and near bright stars, especially when combined with difference image analysis.

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

4.6
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