Secondly, all new data are reduced in the same way. Additionally, the paper by Duquennoy et al. On the other hand, the difference between and , which were obtained with different instruments a month apart, is only 1.5 . For these reasons, we believe that the variation in is genuine and not caused by any instrumental effect. The period used is always the period in the restframe of the system.
All parameters are the same for all datasets, except .
2 standard deviation of a single RV of mean weight, separately for primary and secondary, respectively. Secondly, if is changing, so is the factor between the period in the observer's frame and the period in the restframe of the system. Given that there is no evidence for any change of the orbital parameters, except , we can assume that the period in the restframe of the system is constant, but not the one in the observer's frame. Given the small eccentricity found before, this fit is forced to be circular. The resulting orbit is given in Table 5 and shown in Fig. 1 .