2005/01/31 by T. R. Bedding, H. Kjeldsen, F. Bouchy +10 · 4 citations
Physics and Astronomy · #Astronomy and Astrophysical Research #Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies #Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies #astro-ph
paper · pdf · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200500019
6 pages, accepted for publication in A&A Letters
arxiv created 2005/01/31 · openalex publication_date 2005/03/01 · arxiv updated 2009/12/01 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/31
We argue that the non-detection of oscillations in Procyon by the MOST satellite reported by [CITE] is fully consistent with published ground-based velocity observations of this star. We also examine the claims that the MOST observations represent the best photometric precision so far reported in the literature by about an order of magnitude and are the most sensitive data set for asteroseismology available for any star other than the Sun. These statements are not correct, with the most notable exceptions being observations of oscillations in α Cen A that are far superior. We further disagree that the hump of excess power seen repeatedly from velocity observations of Procyon can be explained as an artefact caused by gaps in the data. The MOST observations failed to reveal oscillations clearly because their noise level is too high, possibly from scattered Earthlight in the instrument. We did find an excess of strong peaks in the MOST amplitude spectrum that is inconsistent with a simple noise source such as granulation, and may perhaps indicate oscillations at roughly the expected level.