Search

Comments

Default_user
about 3 years ago in APHF1040631

Yes, regular dips, but probably #contamination by a nearby EB. KID 12121738

Default_user
about 3 years ago in APHF2081139

When looking at other quarters, it seems clear that it's #contamination

Default_user
about 3 years ago in APHF2104545

Of course #contamination, the eclipse depth is too small, see also http://talk.planethunters.org/objects/APH10104545

Default_user
about 3 years ago in APHF2040616

KID 6864569 , it looks like an RR_Lyrae star, but the change in magnitude is a bit small, maybe #contamination , see UKIRT image.

Default_user
about 3 years ago in APHF2008926

Probably #contamination by a BGEB, see also http://talk.planethunters.org/objects/APH10008926 , InCat=false in the EB catalog.

Default_user
over 3 years ago in APHF1844362

Heavy #contamination by KID 6543674. See http://talk.planethunters.org/discussions/DPH100ib1x

Default_user
over 3 years ago in APHF2020386

KID 8635938. Probably #contamination by a nearby EB. The TCE list gives P1=350.391 days, R1=4.15 R_Earth, P2=43.7996 days, R2=3.45 R_Earth.

Default_user
over 3 years ago in APHF2074431

Probably #contamination by a nearby EB. Confirmed "Kepler false-positive". KID 5816811

Default_user
over 3 years ago in APH10039395

@hiwayman

yes, the signature is certainly from an EB, but the eclipse depth is much too small to be a bona fide EB, it's #contamination.

Default_user
over 3 years ago in APHF2085358

InCat False in http://keplerebs.villanova.edu/overview/?k=6182846 , so it's very likely #contamination