[vsnet-alert 11012] re QZ Vir: superhump period - further updates from Bart Staels.

[varposts at Safe-mail.net]

Well, what can you say?  Bart Staels data is unfiltered, so unless the outburst is still white, can comparing the amplitude from it it to that of the V measures of the other observers be justified?

Digging out AVE and dusting it off it looks like the error range for periods derived from these data is about +/- 0.001 days, granted that's if I've remembered how to use it proper.

And Uncle KT will no doubt elucidate for us later what is actually probably the significant point, over the last two sets of days or so the lightcurve waveform has become more asymmetrical as secondary superhumps have kicked in, in fact it looks like the last batch might even have tertiary peaks, if not quaternary, and possiby even a pre-peak subpeak (is that negative superhumps?).

I'm not overly interested in superhumps so I've no idea of the physical significance of extra peaks, whether they're a further precession of the axis of precession itself or due to eccentric discs or what, no doubt someone will tell us all later, but multifrequency signals can sure mess up main period determination if not CLEANed up.

Data from the observers was downloaded via the AAVSO International Database, where all the mentioned ones have archived it.

John Greaves