sciscape Publications
← All publications
astro-ph.SR · Solar and Stellar Astrophysicsastro-ph.IM · Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysicsastro-ph.EP · Earth and Planetary Astrophysics

TESS eclipse fits place RR Cae's 2020 clock 13 seconds below the line between its 2018 and 2025 clocks

We test the slow eclipse clock of RR Cae with public TESS flux data from 2018, 2020, and 2025. We fit 487 eclipses in six 120-second sectors. The template is averaged over each exposure. Each sector has a free shape and local clock slope. A comparison of three season clocks cancels constant epoch and period offsets. The 2020 clock lies 13.17 ± 0.24 seconds below the line between the 2018 and 2025 clocks. The error comes from full refits after deletion of one-day blocks. Two-day blocks give 0.25 seconds. Seven control fits give contrasts from −13.20 to −13.14 seconds. The central one-object and two-object curves tabulated in 2023 give −6.81 and −3.48 seconds for the same comparison. Printed parameter rounding does not explain the difference. Earlier ground observations already showed prediction failures. We add a reproducible TESS contrast, sector clocks, and shape and cadence checks. We do not test a joint model posterior or identify a physical cause. The errors exclude an unknown constant bias for a whole sector or season. The package includes raw light curves, provenance, source code, fit results, and figures.

RR Cae · TESS · eclipse timing · clock curvature · white dwarf binary · circumbinary planet models · exposure averaging · reproducible astronomy

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

6
  1. usesExposure averaging reduces a false timing cycle in a fixed-shape test of RR Cae's 2020 TESS data sci:sha256:51af457250640586b8275fa396f43ee1a0be39615625d53560785e17815c70c0

    We reuse its eight raw light curves, input manifest, timing template, event cuts, and two code files. We add new flux fits and a slow clock contrast. The earlier short-cycle study removed sector trends.

  2. challengesdoi:10.1093/mnras/stad1733

    The central curves in equations 7 and 8 and Table 8 give different contrasts from the tested TESS flux fits. This limited curve test does not assign a rejection probability to the full planet models. Some input epochs overlap the earlier study.

  3. usesdoi:10.1093/mnras/staf1636

    Equation 7 supplies cycle labels and a quadratic scale. This prior study already reports that the 2023 curves fail against new ground times. Its residual variations mean that the quadratic alone is not a full prediction.

  4. doi:10.1093/mnras/stag358

    This study of 43 white dwarf binaries gives context for the unresolved cause of long-term timing changes.

  5. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11564.x

    This prior work reports changes in measured RR Cae eclipse times with changes in eclipse shape.

  6. usesdoi:10.17909/t9-nmc8-f686

    This is the TESS light curve collection citation. The input manifest identifies the exact 120-second and 20-second MAST products used here.

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.