Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.06936

Catching Up with the Fastest Star in the Galaxy: A Two-Passage GRAVITY+ Campaign to Detect S301's Schwarzschild Precession

Abstract

S301 is the fastest known star in the Galaxy. It orbits Sgr A* every 8.68 yr on an e = 0.9832 orbit that carries it within 136 Schwarzschild radii at 25,600 km/s (GRAVITY Collaboration 2026). An orbit like that must precess, by the same Schwarzschild effect that turns Mercury's perihelion, whatever the spin of the black hole. We ask whether an astrometry-only GRAVITY+ campaign covering the 2031.8 and 2040.5 periapsis passages can catch it. We validate a relativistic light-curve model, design a 131-epoch Fisher-optimal cadence with a periapsis floor, fit a seven-parameter orbit including the light-travel-time delay, and build a systematic error budget. With white noise at the 207 microarcseconds achieved on S301, the fit recovers the injected rate, 0.2307 deg/yr, as 0.2324 +/- 0.0023 deg/yr (+/-0.0012 at the forecast 100 microarcseconds). Real astrometric noise is not white. We add per-run calibration offsets and a wandering Sgr A* photocentre at GRAVITY's published amplitudes, marginalize over the reference zero point, mass and distance, add the bounded systematics in quadrature, and inflate by the excess scatter of real GRAVITY orbit fits. What survives is 0.0074 deg/yr, a 31 sigma detection. The Sun hides the first periapsis for 153 d, at a cost to the period and periapsis epoch but not to the precession rate. Radial velocities are out of reach at S301's magnitude; photometry only validates the light-curve model. The spin of Sgr A* could shift the rate by 5.17-5.74 per cent and cannot be bounded, so the campaign is a spin-agnostic test of general relativity, and a forecast until the star comes round.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joseph Catanzarite. 2026-09-07. Catching Up with the Fastest Star in the Galaxy: A Two-Passage GRAVITY+ Campaign to Detect S301's Schwarzschild Precession. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.06936

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The Entangling of Supernova Feedback Impacts with Coarsening Simulation Resolution

It is often understood that supernova (SN) feedback in galaxies is responsible for regulating star formation (SF) and generating gaseous outflows. However, a detailed look at the small-scale effects of SNe on the interstellar medium (ISM) in simulations shows that the macroscopic processes of SF suppression and outflow generation proceed in distinct channels. We demonstrate this finding in two independent simulations of isolated dwarf galaxies with very high (m_gas ~ Msun) numerical resolution, LYRA and RIGEL. Our findings suggest that the macroscopic effect of a given SN on the galaxy is best predicted by its local density. Outflows are driven by SNe in diffuse regions expanding to their cooling radii on large (~kpc) scales, while dense SF regions are disrupted in a localized (~pc) manner. However, these separate feedback channels are only distinguishable at very high resolutions capable of following mass scales \lesssim 10^2 \msun. When averaging on coarser scales, ISM densities are greatly mis-estimated, and variations between different SF and SNe-affected regions are severely washed out. It therefore cannot be __self-consistently__ determined, from coarse-resolution information __alone__, (1) whether a SN tends to contribute to outflows or direct SF suppression, and (2) the rate of SF in a given region. In particular, commonly used parameters in coarse-resolution (subgrid) models, such as the SN cooling radius and SF density threshold, may require more detailed treatments informed by high-resolution studies.

astro-ph.GA

Computational advances and challenges in simulations of turbulence and star formation

We review recent advances in the numerical modeling of turbulent flows and star formation. An overview of the most widely used simulation codes and their core capabilities is provided. We then examine methods for achieving the highest-resolution magnetohydrodynamical turbulence simulations to date, highlighting challenges related to numerical viscosity and resistivity. State-of-the-art approaches to modeling gravity and star formation are discussed in detail, including implementations of star particles and feedback from jets, winds, heating, ionization, and supernovae. We review the latest techniques for radiation hydrodynamics, including ray tracing, Monte Carlo, and moment methods, with comparisons between the flux-limited diffusion, moment-1, and variable Eddington tensor methods. The final chapter summarizes advances in cosmic-ray transport schemes, emphasizing their growing importance for connecting small-scale star formation physics with galaxy-scale evolution.

astro-ph.GA

How significant is the lensing interpretation of GW231123?

GW231123 is one of the most unusual gravitational-wave (GW) events, with exceptionally large inferred masses and near-extremal spins, offering an opportunity to test whether propagation effects contribute to these properties. We therefore examine whether the data support wave-optics microlensing embedded in a strong-lensing galaxy, whose detection becomes increasingly likely as observations accumulate, whether this interpretation can explain these properties, and how significant the preference remains under detector noise and waveform systematics. We compare six hypotheses: unlensed, isolated point mass, and embedded point-mass (EPM) and binary-lens (EB) effective models in Type-I (minimum) and Type-II (saddle) macro images. The EB Type-I model is most favored. For the most accurate waveform model NRSur7dq4, it gives $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm U}=2.60$, versus $0.89$ for Type II, indicating sensitivity to macro-image geometry. Within Type I, however, the binary improves over the point mass by only $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm EPM-I}=0.16$ and $Δ\ln\mathcal{L}_{\max}=0.56$, providing no clear evidence for structure beyond a single effective perturber. Moreover, under embedded lensing, waveform-template discrepancies and inferred masses and spins are reduced. However, real O4a backgrounds from numerical-relativity injections show that the apparent lensing evidence is sensitive to waveform systematics and realistic detector noise: although the commonly used waveform IMRPhenomXPHM gives the largest Bayes factor, $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm U}=4.52$, it is less exceptional relative to its own background, with a false-alarm probability of $6.5$--$8\%$, whereas NRSur7dq4 gives only $2$--$3\%$. Thus, waveform systematics can amplify apparent lensing evidence, but GW231123 remains an intriguing lensing candidate.

astro-ph.GA