> An ephemeris of predicted times of putative > eclipses is also provided; a comparison to recent photometry was not > done. > > P = 78.860 +/- 0.0017 days > T = JD 2442776.075 +/- 0.17 > e = 0.10 +/ -.17 > w = 254.9 +/- 95.04 > V0 = -12.2 +/- 1.5 km/sec > K = 10.3 +/- 2.4 km/sec > > T Min. I = JD 2427769.523 + 78.860*E > T Min. II = JD 2427728.773 + 78.860*E Hi, Thom: No trace of eclipses can be found in the PEP and visual recent photometry, and most important in the three year Hipparcos data. Although the lightcurve may have been affected by the eruption, certainly the eclipses wouldn't have appeared or disappeared because of this. However, maybe there IS an eclipse but not of a star but the ejected ring. Maybe that's the reason of the cyclic variations seen. The same goes for the BCEP possibility: how could the amplitude be increased that much? And, of course, a 78 days cycle has nothing to do with the less than a day periods of those stars. So the star is a BCEP variable but the 75 or 78 days cycle needs to be explained in other way. Cheers, Sebastian. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://vsnet.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.249 / Virus Database: 122 - Release Date: 13/04/01