| Issue |
A&A
Volume 703, November 2025
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Article Number | L23 | |
| Number of page(s) | 6 | |
| Section | Letters to the Editor | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202557634 | |
| Published online | 24 November 2025 | |
Letter to the Editor
Eppur si eclissa: Eccentric low-mass companions and time-in-dust selection to explain long secondary periods
1
Institute of Astronomy, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200D, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
2
Astronomical Observatory, University of Warsaw, Al. Ujazdowskie 4, 00-478 Warsaw, Poland
3
Institut d’Astronomie et d’Astrophysique, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), CP 226, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
⋆ Corresponding author: leen.decin@kuleuven.be
Received:
10
October
2025
Accepted:
28
October
2025
Context. Long secondary periods (LSPs) are observed in about one-third of pulsating red giants, yet this phenomenon remains unexplained. Four key observational constraints anchor the discussion: (i) a ∼30% occurrence rate in semi-regular variable AGB stars (SRVs) with a much lower rate (or complete absence thereof) in regularly pulsating Mira-type AGB stars (Miras); (ii) ∼50% of LSP stars show a secondary mid-infrared (MIR) minimum; (iii) Keplerian fits to radial-velocity (RV) curves favour the argument of periastron ω > 180°; and (iv) the RV-light curve phase lag clusters around −π/2.
Aims. We test whether a close-in, eccentric low-mass companion that only spends part of its orbit within the giant’s dust-formation (wind-launching) zone can match all four empirical facts.
Methods. Guided by observed RV amplitudes and periods of ∼500–1500 days, we adopted a companion mass of M2 ∈ [0.08, 0.25] M⊙, orbital separation of a ∈ [1.5, 3] au, and eccentricty of e ≤ 0.6. Next, we took the dust condensation radius of Rcond ∼ 2.5 − 3 au for SRVs (larger for Miras when scaling with luminosity). We computed the time-in-dust fraction fdust (time with r ≥ Rcond) and applied line-of-sight criteria: an LSP requires an orbital inclination of i ≥ iLSP and fdust ≥ fmin, while a secondary MIR minimum interpreted as secondary eclipse further requires i ≥ iecl > iLSP and a superior conjunction. We tested the first three empirical facts analytically, then modelled the RV-light phase offset with 3D hydrodynamical simulations.
Results. Our proposed scenario explains the observed excess of ω > 180°. For SRV-like parameters, we obtained an LSP detectability of ∼31.6 ± 0.1%, while Mira-type conditions yield ∼3.0 ± 0.1%; for both scenarios, the conditional secondary MIR eclipse fraction is ∼44%. Our hydrodynamical models place the optical-depth peak just downstream of the companion near apastron, then shift it to ∼90 − 225° phase offsets later in the orbit. This result is consistent with the RV-light offsets.
Conclusions. A time-in-dust geometric selection for low-mass companions in close eccentric orbits is sufficient to explain the four key empirical facts constraining the LSP mechanism.
Key words: stars: AGB and post-AGB / binaries: eclipsing / binaries: general / circumstellar matter / stars: mass-loss / stars: variables: general
© The Authors 2025
Open Access article, published by EDP Sciences, under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This article is published in open access under the Subscribe to Open model. Subscribe to A&A to support open access publication.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.