Astrophysics: Finding the mass of a hidden star in a binary system

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the mass of an unseen binary companion to a low mass main sequence star, which exhibits sinusoidal velocity variations of 500 km/s over a 10-hour period. The calculations involve using orbital mechanics equations, where the radius of the star's orbit is determined to be approximately 28,274,334 km. An initial assumption was made that the hidden object is much more massive, leading to a calculated mass of 1.30x10^13 kg, which the poster later questioned. They suggested that instead of assuming mass ratios, it might be possible to use the known mass of the observed star to estimate the mass of the unseen companion. The discussion highlights the complexity of binary star systems and the need for careful assumptions in astrophysical calculations.
knowlewj01
Messages
100
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The spectral lines in a low mass main sequence star show sinusodal velocity variations with an amplitude of 500 km/s and a time period of 10 hours

calculate a lower limit to the mass of the unseen binary companion


Homework Equations



M1 + M2 = \frac{4\pi^2a^3}{GP^2}

M1r1 = M2r2

a = r1 + r2

The Attempt at a Solution



The redshifted and blueshifted spectral lines show that the star is traveling at 500km/s

in a time period of 10 hoiurs (= 36 000 seconds)

Distance traveled in 1 orbit = 18 000 000 km

radius of orbit = \frac{18 000 000}{2\pi} = 28274334 km

assume that the hidden object is much more massive.

so a = radius of this orbit = 28274334000 m

M1 >> M2 therefore r1 << r2

M1 = \frac{4\pi^2r^3}{GP^2}

M1 = 1.30x10^13 kg

this is wrong,

think i may have made a mistake when i said that the hidden object is much more massive, can this be solved without making an assumption?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you can calculate ratio of both masses, then use information about mass of the observed star ("low mass main sequence star") to estimate mass of the other one. But that's just intuition, I can be easily wrong.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top