Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A White Dwarf with Transiting Circumstellar Material Far Outside the Roche Limit

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A white dwarf shows deep, irregularly shaped transits every 107.2 days, caused by planetary debris on a highly eccentric orbit far beyond the Roche limit.

desk verdict Second white dwarf with transiting planetary debris, and the first with multi-week transits on a ~107-day period; the discovery is solid, and the main caveat is the period is derived from only three transits. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09839 v2 pith:UKTDZFO6 submitted 2019-08-26 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Z. Vanderbosch , J. J. Hermes , E. Dennihy , B. H. Dunlap , P. Izquierdo , P. E. Tremblay , P. B. Cho , B. T. Gaensicke
show 4 more authors
O. Toloza K. J. Bell M. H. Montgomery D. E. Winget
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords whitedwarftransitscircumstellardebrisplanetaryRochelimittidaldisruptioncalciumabsorptionZZCetipulsations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports the discovery that the white dwarf ZTF J0139+5245 is occulted by circumstellar planetary debris: deep, irregular flux dips recur every $\approx 107.2$ days, last $15$–$25$ days, and block $20$–$45\%$ of the star's light. The system is only the second white dwarf known to show transiting planetary debris, and its repeat time is roughly 500 times longer than the $4.5$–$4.9$ hour transits seen in the first such system. Taking the 107.2-day spacing as the debris's orbital period, the authors use Kepler's third law to place the material at a semimajor axis of $\approx 0.355$ AU, far outside the white dwarf's Roche limit, the distance inside which tides would tear a rocky body apart; reaching the Roche limit at periastron would then require an eccentricity $e > 0.97$. The discovery extends the known architectures of white dwarf debris systems and gives a much longer clock on which to watch the aftermath of planetary disruption.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the folded transit light curve. The authors align the start times of three full transits and one partial egress on a period of $P \approx 107.2$ d, then convert that period into a semimajor axis with Kepler's third law and bound the eccentricity by identifying the Roche limit, $r_R \approx 1.5\,R_\odot$, with the periastron distance. The irregular, event-to-event variation in transit depth ($20$–$45\%$), duration ($15$–$25$ days), and shape is the evidence that the transiting material is an extended debris stream rather than a coherent body. The Ca II K absorption line, present both in and out of transit and strongest near a $15\%$ transit depth, is the secondary mechanism linking the photometric dips to metallic circumstellar gas or enhanced photospheric accretion.

What would settle it

Monitor the system across several predicted epochs: if the deep, irregular $15$–$25$ day flux dips do not begin at the phase-zero times predicted by the $107.2$-day ephemeris, or if those start times drift by more than the scatter among the three known transits, the claim that $107.2$ days is the orbital period fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is observational. ZTF J0139+5245 is a hydrogen-atmosphere white dwarf (spectral type DA) with $T_{\mathrm{eff}} = 10{,}530 \pm 140$ K, $\log(g) = 7.86 \pm 0.06$, and mass $\approx 0.52\,M_\odot$ at a distance of about $173$ pc. Its light curve, assembled from public survey photometry and follow-up monitoring, contains three full transits and one partial transit that phase-fold to a repeat spacing of $107.2$ days. The transits vary from event to event, with depths of roughly $20$–$45\%$ and durations of $15$–$25$ days, and the Ca II H and K lines are present at all phases, appearing stronger during transit. The star also lies in the ZZ Ceti instability strip, the region where hydrogen-atmosphere white dwarfs pulsate, and shows two pulsation periods near 900 and 1030 s. The authors argue that if the $107.2$-day spacing is the orbital period, Kepler's third law gives a semimajor axis $a \approx 76.4\,R_\odot$ ($0.355$ AU); using the Roche limit for an asteroid-density body, $r_R \approx 1.5\,R_\odot$, as the periastron distance forces an eccentricity $e > 0.97$ and an apastron near $150\,R_\odot$ ($0.70$ AU). The long, irregular transits cannot be produced by a single solid body, so the paper concludes the occulting material is an extended, evolving stream of debris, with the canonical tidal disruption of a small rocky body as one viable origin and rotational fission or late planetary-system unpacking as alternatives.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's orbital geometry rests on the assumption that the $\approx 107.2$-day spacing between transit starts is the true orbital period of the debris, an inference drawn from only three full transits and part of a fourth, with no formal uncertainty.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ZTF J0139+5245 becomes the second known white dwarf with transiting planetary debris, and the first whose transits recur on a timescale of months rather than hours.
  • If the $107.2$-day spacing is the true orbital period, the debris occupies a semimajor axis of $\approx 0.355$ AU, far outside the Roche limit, and must have eccentricity $e > 0.97$ to reach the Roche limit at periastron.
  • The observed transit-to-transit changes in depth, duration, and shape imply the debris stream is dynamically evolving on the orbital timescale, extending the behavior seen in the first transiting-debris white dwarf to a much longer period.
  • Because the star is also a ZZ Ceti pulsator, the system offers a rare chance to tie asteroseismic measurements of a white dwarf to an ongoing or recent debris-accretion episode.
  • The apparent strengthening of Ca II absorption during transit motivates high-resolution spectroscopy across a full orbital cycle to separate photospheric and circumstellar components.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Pith inference: if the $107.2$-day spacing is a precession or beat period rather than the true orbital period, the inferred semimajor axis and eccentricity do not describe the physical orbit; repeated monitoring of transit-start times for phase drift would settle this.
  • Pith inference: the $15$–$25$ day transit durations imply the occulting cloud spans a large azimuthal arc of the orbit, so multi-band photometry through ingress and egress could reveal whether larger and smaller grains are spatially sorted along the stream.
  • Pith inference: the $\approx 24$ km s$^{-1}$ gravitational redshift of this white dwarf offers a clean way to separate photospheric from circumstellar calcium; a high-resolution Ca II K time series across a transit should show a second velocity component if the extra absorption is truly circumstellar.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery of a DA white dwarf, ZTF J0139+5245, that exhibits deep (20-45%), long-duration (15-25 day) transit-like dips recurring approximately every 107.2 days in public ZTF DR2 photometry and follow-up LCOGT photometry. Spectroscopic follow-up yields Teff = 10,530 +/- 140 K, log(g) = 7.86 +/- 0.06, and M = 0.52 +/- 0.03 Msun, and reveals Ca II H and K absorption that varies in strength, with the strongest absorption observed during one in-transit spectrum. High-speed McDonald photometry shows variability at 900 and 1030 s, consistent with ZZ Ceti pulsations. The authors interpret the transits as circumstellar debris, derive a semi-major axis of 0.355 AU if the 107.2 d spacing is the orbital period, and infer a very high eccentricity (e > 0.97) if the material reaches the Roche limit at periastron. They discuss tidal disruption, rotational fission, and late planetary system unpacking as possible origins.

Significance. If correct, this is the second white dwarf known to host transiting planetary debris and the first with transits occurring far outside the Roche limit on a long (greater than about 100 d) period. The discovery is valuable because it extends the WD 1145+017 phenomenon to a very different orbital regime and provides a new observational window into debris disk evolution and tidal disruption. The paper uses public ZTF data and provides clear follow-up photometry and spectroscopy; the white dwarf identification from Balmer lines is solid. The main weakness is the lack of a formal period determination and the unaddressed 2:1 alias, which affects the derived orbital parameters but not the core discovery of transiting circumstellar material.

major comments (1)
  1. [Sec. 3.4 and Fig. 5] The 107.2 d period is determined by eye from three full transits (2018-07-25, 2018-11-10, 2019-06-12) and a partial egress near 2019-09-27, with no formal uncertainty and no period search. The observed spacings are approximately 108 d, 214 d, and 107 d, so the data are equally consistent with P approximately 107.2 d (with one inconclusive event near 2019-02-25) or with P approximately 214.4 d (with two transits per orbit at two nodes). Because Sec. 4.1 uses P = 107.2 d to derive a = 0.355 AU and e > 0.97, this is a load-bearing assumption. Please either (a) present a periodogram or chi-square scan over a plausible period range (for example 50-300 d) and quote a period with an uncertainty, or (b) explicitly state that the recurrence time is not uniquely determined, that the 2:1 alias cannot be excluded, and that the orbital parameters in Sec. 4.1 are therefore provisional. The qualitative conclusion that the transiting material lies far outside the Roche limit is unaffected by a factor-of-two change in period, but the numerical values should be presented with this caveat.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. 3.2] The phrase 'line of site' appears in the abstract and in Sec. 3.2; it should be 'line of sight.'
  2. [Fig. 5] The folded light curve in Fig. 5 is vertically shifted for each transit, which makes quantitative comparison of depths difficult; consider also showing an unshifted phase-folded light curve in a single band so readers can assess the actual depth variations.
  3. [Sec. 3.1] The systematic uncertainty statement '1.2 % Teff' is ambiguous; it should be written as '1.2% of Teff' or '0.012 Teff' to avoid confusion.
  4. [Sec. 4.1] The text would benefit from an explicit statement that the eccentricity e > 0.97 is derived under the assumption that the debris reaches the Roche limit at periastron; while this is stated, making it more prominent would help readers distinguish the measured quantities from the adopted model.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the transits, depths, and durations are observed quantities; the orbital interpretation uses standard Keplerian mechanics and is not fed back as a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are observational: deep, irregular transits recur every ≈107.2 d, with measured depths and durations, identified from ZTF and LCOGT photometry. The orbital period is inferred by phase-folding observed transit start times, a direct measurement rather than a model output. The semi-major axis and eccentricity follow from Kepler's third law and an adopted Roche-limit periastron assumption; these are standard mechanics applied after the fact, not fit parameters used to generate the transits. The mass estimate is a scaling relation depending on assumed grain properties and explicitly does not feed back into any prediction of transit timing or depth. The Ca II absorption analysis uses standard atmosphere modeling, and the authors explicitly flag the 2-sigma significance and unresolved photospheric-versus-circumstellar interpretation. No load-bearing step reduces to a fitted input or to a self-citation chain. The paper even hedges the eccentricity as 'cannot yet be confirmed,' further confirming that the orbital interpretation is speculative rather than circular. Thus no circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The transit discovery itself is model-independent. The mass estimate and orbital configuration rely on stated assumptions about particle properties and periastron location. No new physical entities are introduced; the debris is directly inferred from photometry.

free parameters (3)
  • Particle radius r_d in mass estimate = 1 micron (assumed)
    Assumed in Sec 4.1 to convert the equivalent-width transit depth into a mass; the estimate scales linearly with r_d. Not fitted to data and not needed for the central discovery.
  • Particle density rho_d in mass estimate = 2 g/cm^3 (assumed)
    Assumed in Sec 4.1; mass estimate scales linearly. Not central to the transit discovery.
  • Interstellar extinction E(B-V), A_V = 0.12, 0.38
    Adopted in Sec 3.1 to fit the SED, higher than distance-based maps; possibly includes circumstellar extinction. Not load-bearing for the transit discovery.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The 107.2-day transit spacing is the orbital period of the transiting material.
    Sec 3.4 states this is inferred from three full transits and a partial egress. The semi-major axis, eccentricity, and 'far outside the Roche limit' conclusions in Sec 4.1 rest on this assumption. If the spacing reflects a different clock (e.g., precession or multiple clumps), the orbital parameters change.
  • domain assumption The transiting material is on a highly eccentric orbit that brings it near or within the Roche limit at periastron.
    Sec 4.1 assumes periastron near r_R (1.5 R_sun) to derive e>0.97 and apastron ~150 R_sun. Alternative geometries (e.g., a circular orbit at 0.355 AU) are not ruled out by the data, though they would require a different debris-production mechanism.
  • domain assumption The dips are caused by a flat rectangular cloud of non-overlapping opaque spheres for the mass estimate.
    Sec 4.1 uses this model to estimate the mass of the transiting material; the result is highly model-dependent and not central to the discovery.
  • standard math The white dwarf atmospheric parameters are derived using 1D LTE models with 3D corrections and standard cooling models.
    Used in Sec 3.1 to identify the star as a DA and place it in the ZZ Ceti instability strip. These are standard models in the field.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A White Dwarf with Transiting Circumstellar Material Far Outside the Roche Limit." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UKTDZFO6

@misc{pith2026190809839,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A White Dwarf with Transiting Circumstellar Material Far Outside the Roche Limit},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UKTDZFO6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09839}
}
abstract

We report the discovery of a white dwarf exhibiting deep, irregularly shaped transits, indicative of circumstellar planetary debris. Using Zwicky Transient Facility DR2 photometry of ZTF$\,$J013906.17+524536.89 and follow-up observations from the Las Cumbres Observatory, we identify multiple transit events that recur every ${\approx}\,107.2\,$d, much longer than the $4.5{-}4.9\,$h orbital periods observed in WD$\,$1145+017, the only other white dwarf known with transiting planetary debris. The transits vary in both depth and duration, lasting $15{-}25\,$d and reaching $20{-}45\,\%$ dips in flux. Optical spectra reveal strong Balmer lines, identifying the white dwarf as a DA with $T_{\mathrm{eff}}=10{,}530\pm140\,\mathrm{K}$ and $\log(g)=7.86\pm0.06$. A $\mathrm{Ca\,II\,K}$ absorption feature is present in all spectra both in and out of transit. Spectra obtained during one night at roughly $15\,\%$ transit depth show increased $\mathrm{Ca\,II\,K}$ absorption with a model atmospheric fit suggesting $[\mathrm{Ca/H}]=-4.6\pm0.3$, whereas spectra taken on three nights out of transit have $[\mathrm{Ca/H}]$ of -5.5, -5.3, and -4.9 with similar uncertainties. While the $\mathrm{Ca\,II\,K}$ line strength varies by only 2-sigma, we consider a predominantly interstellar origin for Ca absorption unlikely. We suggest a larger column density of circumstellar metallic gas along the line of site or increased accretion of material onto the white dwarf's surface are responsible for the Ca absorption, but further spectroscopic studies are required. In addition, high-speed time series photometry out of transit reveals variability with periods of 900 and 1030$\,$s, consistent with ZZ Ceti pulsations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09839 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The light curve for ZTF J0139+5245 from ZTF DR2 and LCOGT observations. Three full transits are observed along with a partial transit at the start of LCOGT monitoring (MJD ' 58650). While sparsely observed, an additional transit event may be seen near MJD ' 58540. Magnitudes in the ZTF-g and r bands are shown with blue circles and red squares, respectively, while magnitudes in the LCOGT-gp and rp bands and shown wit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The WHT/ISIS optical spectrum and SED of ZTF J0139+5245. The top left panel shows the combined spectrum for the first three nights of observations, taken out￾of-transit, with an inset plot highlighting the Ca ii K absorp￾tion feature at 3934˚A. The top right panel shows the fit to the six Balmer lines, Hβ −H9, from which we derive spectro￾scopic log(g) and Teff values (see Section 3.1). The bottom panel shows the SE… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The WHT/ISIS spectra in normalized flux units for each night, focused on the Ca ii H & K absorption fea￾tures. The top panels show zoomed in portions of the LCOGT gp (blue circles) and rp (red squares) photometry with the average MJD for each night’s combined spectrum labeled with a vertical dotted line. The middle panel shows a broader wavelength region with spectra vertically stacked for comparison, while the bott… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Nine nights of McDonald 2.1-m high speed photometry taken out of transit show variability indicative of ZZ Ceti pulsations. The top panel shows the g- and r -band photometry for each night, normalized relative to six comparison stars within the field of view. The botto…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The ZTF and LCOGT photometry folded on a period of 107.2 days and vertically shifted so each transit is visible. Shaded symbols denote ZTF-r and LCOGT-rp band data while open symbols denote ZTF-g and LCOGT-gp band data. The vertical grey line at phase = 0, with corresp…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. First planetesimals from DESI DR1: 12 highly metal-rich white dwarfs

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Twelve white dwarfs from DESI DR1 have accreted debris resembling inner-Solar-System rock, with two systems likely accreting water-rich planetesimals.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    P., Alexandroff, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al

    Ahn, C. P., Alexandroff, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2012, ApJS, 203, 21 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    2018, AJ, 156, 58

    Mantelet, G., & Andrae, R. 2018, AJ, 156, 58

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002

    2019

  4. [4]

    S., LaCourse, D

    Boyajian, T. S., LaCourse, D. M., Rappaport, S. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3988

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    2019, astropy/photutils: v0.6, , , doi:10.5281/zenodo.2533376

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2019, astropy/photutils: v0.6, , , doi:10.5281/zenodo.2533376. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2533376

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.2533376 2019

  6. [6]

    1993, A&A, 271, 482

    Breger, M., Stich, J., Garrido, R., et al. 1993, A&A, 271, 482

    1993

  7. [7]

    M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F

    Brown, T. M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 1031

    2013

  8. [8]

    2014, A&A, 566, A86

    Camacho, J., Torres, S., Garc´ ıa-Berro, E., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A86

    work page 2014

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    L., Elyajouri, M., & Monreal-Ibero, A

    Capitanio, L., Lallement, R., Vergely, J. L., Elyajouri, M., & Monreal-Ibero, A. 2017, A&A, 606, A65

    2017

  2. [10]

    2012, Planet

    Carry, B. 2012, Planet. Space Sci., 73, 98

    2012

  3. [11]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    2019, MNRAS, 488, 2503

    Cunningham, T., Tremblay, P.-E., Freytag, B., Ludwig, H.-G., & Koester, D. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 2503

    2019

  5. [13]

    H., & L´ opez-Morales, M

    Debes, J. H., & L´ opez-Morales, M. 2008, ApJL, 677, L43

    2008

  6. [14]

    H., & Sigurdsson, S

    Debes, J. H., & Sigurdsson, S. 2002, ApJ, 572, 556

    2002

  7. [15]

    H., Walsh, K

    Debes, J. H., Walsh, K. J., & Stark, C. 2012, ApJ, 747, 148

    2012

  8. [16]

    J., & Liu, M

    Dupuy, T. J., & Liu, M. C. 2012, ApJS, 201, 19

    2012

  9. [17]

    A., et al

    Dye, S., Lawrence, A., Read, M. A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 5113

    2018

  10. [18]

    W., Riello, M., De Angeli, F., et al

    Evans, D. W., Riello, M., De Angeli, F., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A4

    2018

  11. [19]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63

    1999

  12. [20]

    2001, PASP, 113, 409

    Fontaine, G., Brassard, P., & Bergeron, P. 2001, PASP, 113, 409

    2001

  13. [21]

    Frewen, S. F. N., & Hansen, B. M. S. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 2442

    2014

  14. [22]

    J., Tonry, J

    Fulton, B. J., Tonry, J. L., Flewelling, H., et al. 2014, ApJ, 796, 114 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1 G¨ ansicke, B. T., Schreiber, M. R., Toloza, O., et al. 2019, Nature, 576, 61 G¨ ansicke, B. T., Aungwerojwit, A., Marsh, T. R....

    2014

  15. [23]

    Kenyon, S. J. 2015, ApJ, 812, 167

    2015

  16. [24]

    T., Steeghs, D., & Koester, D

    Girven, J., G¨ ansicke, B. T., Steeghs, D., & Koester, D. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 1210

    2011

  17. [25]

    C., Warren, S

    Hewett, P. C., Warren, S. J., Leggett, S. K., & Hodgkin, S. T. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 454

    2006

  18. [26]

    B., & Bergeron, P

    Holberg, J. B., & Bergeron, P. 2006, AJ, 132, 1221

    2006

  19. [27]

    S., Babler, B

    Indebetouw, R., Mathis, J. S., Babler, B. L., et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, 931

    2005

  20. [28]

    2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Kaiser, N., Burgett, W., Chambers, K., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7733, Proc. SPIE, 77330E

    2010

  21. [29]

    O., & Winget, D

    Kanaan, A., Kepler, S. O., & Winget, D. E. 2002, A&A, 389, 896 A White Dwarf with Transiting Circumstellar Material 11

    2002

  22. [30]

    J., & Bromley, B

    Kenyon, S. J., & Bromley, B. C. 2017, ApJ, 844, 116

    2017

  23. [31]

    2010, Mem

    Koester, D. 2010, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 81, 921

    2010

  24. [32]

    T., & Farihi, J

    Koester, D., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Farihi, J. 2014, A&A, 566, A34

    2014

  25. [33]

    2006, A&A, 453, 1051

    Koester, D., & Wilken, D. 2006, A&A, 453, 1051

    2006

  26. [34]

    1997, A&A, 328, 544

    Jenkner, H. 1997, A&A, 328, 544

    1997

  27. [35]

    Liebert, J., Bergeron, P., & Holberg, J. B. 2005, ApJS, 156, 47

    2005

  28. [36]

    2018, A&A, 616, A2

    Lindegren, L., Hern´ andez, J., Bombrun, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A2

    2018

  29. [37]

    1984, MNRAS, 208, 763

    Livio, M., & Soker, N. 1984, MNRAS, 208, 763

    1984

  30. [38]

    A., Schlafly, E., Finkbeiner, D., et al

    Magnier, E. A., Schlafly, E., Finkbeiner, D., et al. 2013, ApJS, 205, 20

    2013

  31. [39]

    V., & Veras, D

    Makarov, V. V., & Veras, D. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1908.04612

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Marsh, T. R. 1989, PASP, 101, 1032

    1989

  33. [41]

    C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al

    Martin, D. C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al. 2005, ApJL, 619, L1

    2005

  34. [42]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003

    2019

  35. [43]

    Burleigh, M. R. 2006, Nature, 442, 543

    2006

  36. [44]

    A., et al

    Morrissey, P., Schiminovich, D., Barlow, T. A., et al. 2005, ApJL, 619, L7

    2005

  37. [45]

    O., & Clemens, J

    Kepler, S. O., & Clemens, J. C. 2006, ApJ, 640, 956

    2006

  38. [46]

    J., & Villaver, E

    Mustill, A. J., & Villaver, E. 2012, ApJ, 761, 121

    2012

  39. [47]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 3939 Nebot G´ omez-Mor´ an, A., G¨ ansicke, B

    Bonsor, A. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3939 Nebot G´ omez-Mor´ an, A., G¨ ansicke, B. T., Schreiber, M. R., et al. 2011, A&A, 536, A43

    2018

  40. [48]

    Nelemans, G., & Tauris, T. M. 1998, A&A, 335, L85

    1998

  41. [49]

    T., Bellm, E

    Patterson, M. T., Bellm, E. C., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018001

    2019

  42. [50]

    L., Vanderburg, A., et al

    Rappaport, S., Gary, B. L., Vanderburg, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 933

    2018

  43. [51]

    A., Levine, A., & Winn, J

    Rappaport, S., Sanchis-Ojeda, R., Rogers, L. A., Levine, A., & Winn, J. N. 2013, ApJL, 773, L15

    2013

  44. [52]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 2681 Redfield, S., Farihi, J., Cauley, P

    Rappaport, S., Zhou, G., Vanderburg, A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 2681 Redfield, S., Farihi, J., Cauley, P. W., et al. 2017, ApJ, 839, 42

    2019

  45. [53]

    E., Bentley, R

    Schaefer, B. E., Bentley, R. O., Boyajian, T. S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 2235 Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103

    2018

  46. [54]

    L., Martin, R

    Smallwood, J. L., Martin, R. G., Livio, M., & Lubow, S. H. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 57

    2018

  47. [55]

    1984, MNRAS, 210, 189

    Soker, N., Livio, M., & Harpaz, A. 1984, MNRAS, 210, 189

    1984

  48. [56]

    2013, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:1304.004

    Thompson, S., & Mullally, F. 2013, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:1304.004

    2013

  49. [57]

    E., Montgomery, M

    Thompson, S. E., Montgomery, M. H., von Hippel, T., et al. 2010, ApJ, 714, 296

    2010

  50. [58]

    E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A

    Tremblay, P. E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A. 2011, ApJ, 730, 128

    2011

  51. [59]

    E., Ludwig, H

    Tremblay, P. E., Ludwig, H. G., Steffen, M., & Freytag, B. 2013, A&A, 559, A104

    2013

  52. [60]

    A., Rappaport, S., et al

    Vanderburg, A., Johnson, J. A., Rappaport, S., et al. 2015, Nature, 526, 546

    2015

  53. [61]

    2016, Royal Society Open Science, 3, 150571

    Veras, D. 2016, Royal Society Open Science, 3, 150571

    2016

  54. [62]

    Veras, D., & G¨ ansicke, B. T. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 1049

    2015

  55. [63]

    M., Bonsor, A., & G¨ ansicke, B

    Veras, D., Leinhardt, Z. M., Bonsor, A., & G¨ ansicke, B. T. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 2244

    2014

  56. [64]

    M., Eggl, S., & G¨ ansicke, B

    Veras, D., Leinhardt, Z. M., Eggl, S., & G¨ ansicke, B. T. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 3453

    2015

  57. [65]

    H., & Makarov, V

    Veras, D., McDonald, C. H., & Makarov, V. V. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 5291 von Hippel, T., & Thompson, S. E. 2007, ApJ, 661, 477

    2020

  58. [66]

    A., Bolte, M., & Koester, D

    Williams, K. A., Bolte, M., & Koester, D. 2009, ApJ, 693, 355

    2009

  59. [67]

    G., Farihi, J., G¨ ansicke, B

    Wilson, T. G., Farihi, J., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Swan, A. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 133

    2019

  60. [68]

    R., & Parsons, S

    Zorotovic, M., Schreiber, M. R., & Parsons, S. G. 2014, A&A, 568, L9

    2014

  61. [69]

    2010, ApJ, 722, 725

    Zuckerman, B., Melis, C., Klein, B., Koester, D., & Jura, M. 2010, ApJ, 722, 725

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.