Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 32 references

In ultraluminous X-ray sources, relativistic protons may convert part of their energy into electron-positron pairs through Bethe-Heitler interactions, and those secondary pairs—not primary electrons—could dominate the MeV-to-GeV radiation.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

Secondary pairs from Bethe-Heitler interactions of relativistic protons in ULX funnels can produce 0.1-100 MeV emission at 10^34 to 10^38 erg/s, a testable hadronic signature.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Bethe-Heitler secondary pairs in ULX funnels is a testable idea worth engaging, but the printed luminosities rest on an undefined power reservoir L that must be fixed before the numbers can be trusted. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2509.03735 v1 pith:72UDCF6H submitted 2025-09-03 astro-ph.HE

Effects of Bethe-Heitler pair production in ultraluminous X-ray sources

Gustavo Esteban Romero , Lucas Manuel Pasquevich , Leandro Abaroa This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords ultraluminous X-ray sourcesBethe-Heitler pair productionsuper-Eddington accretionrelativistic protonsMeV gamma-ray emissionaccretion disk windsparticle accelerationNGC 4190 ULX-1
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that the nonthermal gamma-ray emission of ultraluminous X-ray sources is produced by secondary electron-positron pairs, created when relativistic protons in the source's inner funnel collide with the intense photon field, rather than by primary electrons, which strong radiation losses suppress. Using self-similar models of super-Eddington accretion disks with radiation-driven winds, the authors compute particle acceleration, energy losses, and pair injection, and find that Bethe-Heitler pairs outnumber primary electrons by several orders of magnitude. The predicted synchrotron and inverse-Compton radiation reaches 10^34–10^38 erg/s in the 0.1–100 MeV range—an observable window that current telescopes barely cover. If right, this gives a direct probe of relativistic protons in the funnels of super-Eddington accretors and would allow future MeV missions to find misaligned, X-ray-hidden ULXs in the Milky Way.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, this is the discovery: in the transparent funnel carved by the wind of a super-Eddington black hole binary, primary relativistic electrons cannot survive because synchrotron and inverse-Compton losses cut them off at low energy, and there is no stable corona. Relativistic protons, however, can be accelerated to 10 TeV–5 PeV, and their Bethe-Heitler collisions with the dense disk photon field inject electron-positron pairs with a threshold near 1 MeV in the proton rest frame. These secondary pairs then cool by synchrotron and inverse-Compton emission and become the dominant nonthermal channel, with luminosities from 10^34 to 10^38 erg/s across 0.1–100 MeV. Photomeson

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is Bethe-Heitler pair production, p + gamma -> p + e- + e+, the photo-pair channel in which a relativistic proton is scattered by an ambient photon and converts photon energy into an electron-positron pair; the paper uses the threshold near 1 MeV in the proton rest frame, the Maximon cross-section parametrization, and a delta-functional inelasticity of 2me/mp to inject pairs with energy (me/mp)Ep. This converts the proton spectrum, computed in a one-zone acceleration region fed by a self-similar supercritical disk model with toroidal magnetic fields, into a secondary pair population whose synchrotron and inverse-Compton losses produce the predicted spectral energy distr

Load-bearing premise

The funnel must actually contain a large population of relativistic protons—about 10 percent of the flow power going into relativistic particles, with protons carrying roughly a thousand times the electron power—and if baryon injection and acceleration do not reach that level, the predicted MeV emission disappears even though the rest of the disk-wind picture could survive.

What would settle it

A search for the predicted MeV component in NGC 4190 ULX-1 with COSI (0.2–7 MeV) that finds no spectral slope change near 100 keV and no excess above the extrapolated X-ray power law would falsify the claim that Bethe-Heitler pairs dominate the nonthermal emission.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Future MeV instruments such as COSI (0.2–7 MeV) and e-ASTROGAM (0.3 MeV–3 GeV) should detect the predicted pair-synchrotron and inverse-Compton component from nearby ULXs, providing the first direct evidence of relativistic protons in their funnels.
  • NGC 4190 ULX-1 should show a spectral slope change near 100 keV; a NuSTAR power-law spectrum without an exponential cutoff would be a hadronic signature.
  • Misaligned ULXs, whose X-ray emission is absorbed by the wind, could appear as MeV-only sources in our Galaxy, making them detectable even though they are invisible in X-rays.
  • Bethe-Heitler radiation, not pion decay, is the dominant hadronic gamma-ray channel in these systems because gamma-gamma absorption suppresses photomeson emission.
  • Upper limits on nonthermal luminosity translate into constraints on the relativistic power and funnel density of these sources.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If MeV non-detections for face-on ULXs are obtained with COSI-like sensitivity, the assumption that 10% of the flow power goes into relativistic particles—with protons carrying roughly a thousand times the electron power—would have to be revised downward; the disk-wind model itself could survive with a weaker hadronic content.
  • The same Bethe-Heitler conversion could operate in other super-Eddington accretors with dense photon fields, such as narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies or tidal disruption events, whenever a relativistic proton population coexists with an intense thermal radiation field, even without a resolved jet.
  • A cleaner test of hadronic origin would combine MeV photometry with neutrino upper limits for the brightest nearby candidates: Bethe-Heitler pairs produce photons without neutrinos, whereas photomeson production would predict correlated neutrinos, so a gamma-only signal favors the Bethe-Heitler channel.
  • The predicted 100 keV slope break could be mimicked by a leptonic Comptonization model with a broken power-law electron distribution; distinguishing the two requires measuring the amplitude of the MeV tail, not just the break location.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies whether secondary electron-positron pairs produced by Bethe-Heitler interactions of relativistic protons with disk/wind photons can provide the nonthermal high-energy emission from the funnels of super-Eddington accretion disks in ULXs. The authors set up two disk scenarios (Mdot = 10 and 1000 Eddington), two acceleration mechanisms (diffusive shocks, A1/B1, and magnetic reconnection, A2/B2), solve a one-zone transport equation for primary electrons and protons, compute the Bethe-Heitler pair injection and the subsequent synchrotron and inverse-Compton emission, and present spectral energy distributions. They predict nonthermal MeV-GeV luminosities of order 1e34-1e38 erg/s dominated by secondary pairs, and a spectral break near 100 keV in NGC 4190 ULX-1 that could be tested with COSI/e-ASTROGAM.

Significance. The question is relevant: ULX funnels are a natural site for hadronic acceleration, and the MeV band is poorly explored. The paper's qualitative scenario - protons survive radiative losses better than electrons, produce Bethe-Heitler pairs, and the pairs radiate in the MeV range - is original and testable, and the manuscript provides a detailed, self-contained calculation with explicit parameter tables and an application to a real source. If the power-budget problem is resolved, the work would give concrete forecasts for COSI/e-ASTROGAM. The strongest limitations are that the quantitative luminosities depend on an undefined/normalization-ambiguous total power L, partly on an ad hoc choice of reconnection densities to set p = 2, and on an unvalidated assumption that 10% of the funnel power is transferred to relativistic protons; these points must be made explicit and internally consistent. The paper does not provide machine-checked code or a full Monte Carlo description, but the analytic framework is sufficiently explicit that the central calculation can be reproduced once L is defined.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eqs. (18)-(22), Figs. 9-10] L in Eq. (18) is undefined; Sect. 2.4 defines neither a total nor a kinetic power, so L_rel is not auditable. With the natural reading L = L_gas for shock scenarios and L = L_mag for reconnection scenarios, L_p is about q_rel L = 1e35 (A1), 1e34 (B1), 5e37 (A2), 6e34 (B2) erg/s. The printed Bethe-Heitler pair peaks in Figs. 9-10 are about 1e34, 1e36, 1e38, and 5e35 erg/s, respectively, exceeding L_p by factors of about 1, 100, 2, and 8 at the peak; band-integrated values increase the discrepancy. Since the total Bethe-Heitler pair output is bounded by the proton power lost in that channel (which is at most L_p), the numbers as printed are internally inconsistent. Define L, recompute normalizations, and provide a power budget; if L is meant to be L_Edd, state it explicitly and justify why L_gas and L_mag are not the relevant reservoirs.
  2. [Table 2 vs. Fig. 5 captions] B1's z_acc is 100 rg in Table 2 but 200 rg in the Fig. 5 caption; B2's z_acc is 10 rg in Table 2 but 200 rg in the caption. The acceleration height sets B(z), photon energy densities, and the acceleration/escape balance, so the computed SEDs depend on which values were actually used. Please harmonize the captions with the table and rerun or confirm the calculations; if the captions are typos, state the correct values explicitly.
  3. [Sec. 7 and Eq. (24)] For A2/B2 the injection index is set to p about 2 by choosing rho_A2 = 0.1 rho_max and rho_B2 = 0.001 rho_max so that sigma_mag is about 10. The resulting spectral shape of the reconnection-scenario SEDs is therefore an input assumption, not an independent prediction. This is acknowledged in Sec. 7, but the abstract and conclusions present the MeV spectral shape as a model outcome. Please state this limitation at the point of the SED claims and show how the predicted luminosities and break energies respond to a plausible range of p, for example 1.5 to 4.
  4. [Fig. 12] The y-axis is labeled log10(E F_E / erg s^-1 cm^-2) with values 8-20. A 1e38 erg/s source at 15 kpc gives E F_E of about 1e-8 erg s^-1 cm^-2, i.e., log10 about -8. The plotted range appears to be missing a normalization factor (for example a 1e-20 or 1e-26 prefactor) or the axis label is wrong. As printed, the comparison with Fermi and e-ASTROGAM sensitivities is unreadable and cannot support the detectability claim. Please correct the axis and re-examine the sensitivity comparison.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Conclusions] The abstract quotes 0.1-100 MeV, the conclusions quote 1 MeV-10 GeV, and Sec. 7 quotes 0.1-10 MeV. Harmonize the energy range used for the central prediction.
  2. [Sec. 3 vs. Fig. 5] Text lists maximum electron energies of 80 GeV (A1), 5 GeV (B1), 5 GeV (A2), and 10 GeV (B2), while the Fig. 5 captions give about 50 GeV, 6 GeV, 3 GeV, and 20 GeV; similar discrepancies exist for proton maxima, e.g., ~10 TeV vs. ~50 TeV for A1. Please make the numbers agree and correspond to the computed distributions.
  3. [Sec. 2.2] The sentence about Monte Carlo simulations varying alpha, beta, gamma, and f is not documented: no parameter ranges, number of runs, or resulting distributions are given. Add enough detail or remove the claim.
  4. [Fig. 11] The comparison with NuSTAR/NICER data is qualitative. Please state how the model total SED was matched to the data (normalization, inclination, absorption) and provide residuals or a fit statistic; otherwise the claimed break near 100 keV remains a visual impression.
  5. [Sect. 5] The statement that secondary pairs exceed primary electrons by several orders of magnitude refers to number density (Fig. 8). Since the energy budget is carried by protons, please clarify that this is a number-count statement, not a statement of energy dominance.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the MeV-pair emission is a forward-modeled consequence of explicitly stated assumptions, not an output reused as an input.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that Bethe-Heitler secondary pairs from relativistic protons can produce 0.1–100 MeV luminosities of 10^34–10^38 erg/s—is obtained by a standard forward radiation-model chain. The proton and electron injection powers are set by Eqs. (18)–(20) with qrel = 0.1 and a = 10^3; these are labeled assumptions, not fitted parameters. The secondary-pair emissivity (Eq. 38) uses standard Bethe-Heitler cross-section parametrizations, and the resulting SEDs come from solving the transport equation (Eqs. 30–31). The claim that secondary pairs outnumber primary electrons is a computed consequence of the assumed proton dominance and the modeled B-H cooling, not a restatement of an input. The reconnection-scenario densities (rho_A2 = 0.1 rho_max, rho_B2 = 0.001 rho_max) are explicitly chosen to make sigma_mag ~ 10 and hence p = 2 via the cited Kagan et al. (2015) scaling; this is an open model parameterization, and the paper states that deviations would alter the spectra, so the spectral slope is not covertly fitted as a prediction. The NGC 4190 comparison adds the same group's Comptonization component (Combi et al. 2024) to reproduce the X-ray continuum, but that component is not used to derive the MeV B-H prediction. The paper acknowledges the uncertain baryon-injection mechanism, and the undefined 'L' in Eq. (18) is an ambiguity/internal-consistency concern, not circularity. No derivation step reduces an output to an input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

12 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The predicted MeV luminosity scales with the assumed relativistic-proton power (qrel = 0.1, a = 10^3), the chosen acceleration-region location, and the funnel density, which is fixed at the transparency maximum. The A2/B2 densities are hand-set to reproduce the assumed injection index p = 2 (admitted in Sect. 7). No new particles or forces are introduced. The external anchors (cross sections, standard cooling formulae, Bethe-Heitler physics) are standard.

free parameters (12)
  • alpha = 0.01
    Viscosity parameter, chosen in Table 1; sets the radial inflow speed and accretion structure.
  • f = 0.5
    Advection parameter, chosen in Table 1; sets the temperature and photon fields of the inner disk.
  • beta = 5
    Disk magnetization, chosen in Table 1; sets the toroidal B field (Eq. 14) and hence the pair synchrotron luminosity.
  • gamma = 4/3
    Adiabatic index, chosen in Table 1.
  • funnel half-opening angle theta = 15 deg (A), 5 deg (B)
    Assumed in Sect. 2.4; sets funnel density and beaming, and the misaligned-source absorption.
  • funnel gas velocity v_gas = 0.2c
    Assumed in Sect. 2.4 from ultrafast-outflow literature; sets gas density via the tau = 1 condition.
  • qrel = 0.1
    Fraction of flow power transferred to relativistic particles (Eq. 18); directly scales all predicted luminosities.
  • a = 10^3
    Assumed proton-to-electron power ratio (Eq. 20); routes about 99.9 percent of relativistic power to protons.
  • p = 2 (all scenarios)
    Injection power-law index assumed in Sect. 3 (Eq. 23); for A2/B2 the gas density is then tuned so sigma_mag ~ 10 gives p = 2.
  • z_acc = 2000 rg (A1); 100 rg (B1); 10 rg (A2/B2)
    Chosen acceleration-region heights in Sect. 3; A1 is placed at 2000 rg though the ep > em condition gives ~200 rg; sets B(zacc) and photon fields.
  • rho_A2, rho_B2 = 0.1 rho_max (A2); 0.001 rho_max (B2)
    Post-hoc densities chosen so sigma_mag ~ 10 yields the assumed p = 2 (Eq. 24, Sect. 7).
  • magnetic flux Phi = 10^-13 pc^2 G
    Magnetic flux near the BH assumed in Eq. (15); sets rmag ~ 117 rg.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Self-similar critical-disk solutions (Narayan and Yi 1994; Fukue 2004; Akizuki and Fukue 2006) describe the super-Eddington inner disk with Mdot(r) proportional to r and s = 1/2.
    Invoked throughout Sect. 2.2 (Eqs. 9-14, Eq. 13). The entire radiation field, wind structure, and magnetic field profile derive from these solutions; no MHD simulation verifies them for the specific ULX regime.
  • domain assumption The magnetic field in the inner disk is purely toroidal, with B(r) given by Eq. (14).
    Sect. 2.2. Sets the field strengths in the funnel (5e6 to 5e7 G) that power the predicted pair synchrotron emission; the actual field geometry in ULX funnels is not established.
  • domain assumption The funnel is conical, homogeneous, and optically thin, with gas density at the maximum allowed by tau = 1 (Eq. 17).
    Sect. 2.4. The paper states this makes all results upper limits; lower densities (which the authors call more realistic in Sect. 7) reduce the predicted emission.
  • ad hoc to paper Relativistic protons are present in the funnel and are accelerated by shocks or reconnection.
    Sect. 2.4, Sect. 3, Sect. 7. The paper repeatedly states the baryon injection mechanism is uncertain and unmodeled, citing Romero and Gutierrez (2020); if this fails, the central claim fails.
  • domain assumption Bethe-Heitler pair injection is computed in the delta-functional approximation with inelasticity K = 2me/mp (Eq. 38).
    Sect. 4, Eq. (38), following Romero and Vila (2008). The true pair spectrum is broader; this approximation sets the mapping E_e± = (me/mp) E_p used for the pair distribution.
  • domain assumption The acceleration region is a homogeneous one-zone volume; transport is one-dimensional in energy (Eq. 30).
    Sect. 3. Standard for this kind of estimate but ignores spatial gradients of B and photon fields across the funnel.
  • domain assumption The wind is spherical, smooth, isothermal, at constant speed, with Mdot_w approx Mdot_input (Eq. 39).
    Sect. 2.3 and Sect. 6. Used for the wind SED and for gamma-ray absorption of misaligned sources; real winds from supercritical disks are clumpy and time variable.
  • standard math Standard radiative formulae (Blumenthal and Gould 1970; Kelner et al. 2006; Romero and Vila 2008) for all cooling and emission processes.
    Sect. 3, Sect. 5. External, standard physics; not a source of circularity.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Effects of Bethe-Heitler pair production in ultraluminous X-ray sources." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/72UDCF6H

@misc{pith2026250903735,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Effects of Bethe-Heitler pair production in ultraluminous X-ray sources},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/72UDCF6H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.03735}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

Some black holes in X-ray binaries accrete at rates far above the Eddington limit. In this supercritical regime, photons are trapped in a radiation-dominated, geometrically thick disk. The innermost regions form a complex environment of intense radiation, strong magnetic fields, and powerful outflows, where radiation-driven winds expel large amounts of mass. These conditions suppress primary relativistic electrons within the transparent funnel along the black hole's spin axis. We show that high-energy electrons can instead arise as secondary pairs from Bethe-Heitler interactions between relativistic protons and ambient photons. Using self-similar models of accretion disks with strong winds of ultraluminous X-ray sources (ULXs), we compute particle acceleration via magnetic reconnection and diffusive shocks, evaluate energy losses, and assess the efficiency and spectral imprint of Bethe-Heitler pair production. Our results suggest that secondary pairs can yield nonthermal radiation in the 0.1-100 MeV range with luminosities from $10^{34}$ up to $10^{38}$ erg s$^{-1}$. This emission could be detectable by future MeV instruments from Galactic ULXs, offering evidence of relativistic protons in their inner funnels and revealing misaligned, otherwise hidden, super-Eddington sources in the Milky Way.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03735 by Gustavo Esteban Romero, Leandro Abaroa, Lucas Manuel Pasquevich.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Diagram of the inner region of a ULX system. The dotted region is the funnel formed by the wind around the rotation axis of the BH. Not to scale. 2.2. Disk model We assume a steady and axisymmetric disk where all phys￾ical quantities depend only on the distance to the BH on the equatorial plane, r. The continuity equation for the accreted gas is 1 r d dr (rΣvr) = 2˙ρH, (3) where Σ = Σ0r s is the surface de… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Radial distribution of the thickness (top left), radial velocity (top right), temperature (bottom left), and toroidal magnetic field (bottom right) of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Unabsorbed and unbeamed thermal SEDs of the supercritical mag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Timescales for the acceleration, cooling, and escape of relativistic electrons. Top left: Electron rates for ˙m = 10 at z = 2000 rg (A1), where the acceleration mechanism is diffusive shock acceleration. The dominant cooling process is IC at low energies and synchrotron radiation at higher energies. The maximum electron energy is ∼ 50 GeV. Top right: Electron rates for ˙m = 1000 at z = 200 rg (B1), with di… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Timescales for acceleration, cooling, and escape of relativistic protons. Scenarios as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distribution of primary relativistic particles for the various models. Left: Distribution of primary electrons. Right: Distribution of protons. 7 8 9 10 11 12 log10 (Ee ± / eV) 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 lo g 1 0 (E 2 e ± N e ± / e r g c m 3 ) A1 B1 A2 B2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distribution of secondary e ±pairs produced via the Bethe-Heitler mechanism for all scenarios. Bethe-Heitler secondary pairs are the dominant nonthermal processes. In scenario A2, synchrotron radiation from sec￾ondary pairs dominates the high-energy spectrum, with a max￾imum luminosity of approximately 1038 erg s−1 , and a cut-off around 5 GeV due to γγ annihilation. In scenario B2, the max￾imum luminositi… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: SEDs of the entire system for both accretion rates in the scenario of particle acceleration by diffusive shocks. Absorption effects are significant only above 100 GeV. The solid black line is the overall emission. 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 log10 (Eph / eV) 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 lo g 1 0 (L p h E p h / e r g s 1 ) Disk Wind Synchrotron e primary IC e primary wind IC e primary disk IC e ± B-H disk IC e ± B-H wind S… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: SED of the source NGC 4190 ULX-1, shown on a logarithmic scale. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Predicted gamma-ray flux for a ULX with an inclination angle of i = 45◦ and a distance of d = 15 kpc. Sensitivities of the space-based telescopes Fermi and e-ASTROGAM are shown with dashed lines. The solid black line is the overall emission. MeV band—which have not been possible since the decom￾missioning of COMPTEL on board the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory—are essential to probe the presence of relativi… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · 10 internal anchors

  1. [2]

    The remarkable microquasar S26: a super-Eddington PeVatron?

    1051/0004-6361/202450202, arXiv:2409.16315. Abaroa, L., Romero, G.E., Sotomayor, P.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [10]

    Electromagnetic signatures of black hole clusters in the center of super-Eddington galaxies

    1051/0004-6361/202451903, arXiv:2409.06787. Abaroa, L., Romero, G.E., 2024b. Super Winds and Radio Emission in X- ray Binary Systems. RMAA Conf. Ser. 56, 39–44. doi: 10.22201/ia. 14052059p.2024.56.04, arXiv:2311.15050. Abaroa, L., Romero, G.E., Mancuso, G.C., Rizzo, F.N.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [11]

    MNRAS 504, 974–982

    Super-Eddington accretion on to a stellar mass 14 ultraluminous X-ray source NGC 4190 ULX1. MNRAS 504, 974–982. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab774, arXiv:2103.10265. Ginzburg, V .L., Syrovatskii, S.I.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [15]

    King, A.R.,

    1016/j.newar.2008.03.005. King, A.R.,

    work page 2008

  5. [16]

    Kitaki, T., Mineshige, S., Ohsuga, K., Kawashima, T.,

    1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16013.x, arXiv:0911.1639. Kitaki, T., Mineshige, S., Ohsuga, K., Kawashima, T.,

    arXiv 2009

  6. [17]

    Outflow from super-Eddington flow: where it originates from and how much impact it gives?

    1093/pasj/psab011, arXiv:2101.11028. Kosec, P., Pinto, C., Walton, D.J., Fabian, A.C., Bachetti, M., Brightman, M., Fürst, F., Grefenstette, B.W.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [18]

    MNRAS 479, 3978–3986

    Evidence for a variable Ultrafast Outflow in the newly discovered Ultraluminous Pulsar NGC 300 ULX-1. MNRAS 479, 3978–3986. doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1626, arXiv:1803.02367. Liang, E.P.T., Price, R.H.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [19]

    ApJ 218, 247–252

    Accretion disk coronae and Cygnus X-1. ApJ 218, 247–252. doi: 10.1086/155677. Lipunova, G.V .,

    doi:10.1086/155677

  9. [22]

    MNRAS 454, L6–L10

    E fficiency of super-Eddington magnetically-arrested accretion. MNRAS 454, L6–L10. doi: 10.1093/ mnrasl/slv115, arXiv:1508.02433. McKinney, J.C., Tchekhovskoy, A., Blandford, R.D.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [25]

    Reynoso, M.M., Romero, G.E., Christiansen, H.R.,

    1038/nature17417, arXiv:1604.08593. Reynoso, M.M., Romero, G.E., Christiansen, H.R.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [27]

    The content of astrophysical jets

    The content of astrophysical jets. Astronomis- che Nachrichten 342, 727–734. doi: 10.1002/asna.202113989, arXiv:2106.14346. Romero, G.E., Vila, G.S.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [28]

    MNRAS 453, 3213–3221

    Powerful radiative jets in supercritical ac- cretion discs around non-spinning black holes. MNRAS 453, 3213–3221. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1802, arXiv:1503.00654. S˛ adowski, A., Narayan, R., McKinney, J.C., Tchekhovskoy, A.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [30]

    URL:https://arxiv.org/ abs/2308.12362, arXiv:2308.12362

    The compton spectrometer and imager. URL:https://arxiv.org/ abs/2308.12362, arXiv:2308.12362. Veledina, A., Muleri, F., Poutanen, J., Podgorný, J., Dov ˇciak, M., Capitanio, F., Churazov, E., De Rosa, A., Di Marco, A., Forsblom, S.V ., Kaaret, P., Krawczynski, H., La Monaca, F., Loktev, V ., Lutovinov, A.A., Molkov, S.V ., Mushtukov, A.A., Ratheesh, A., R...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [31]

    Nature Astron- omy doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9

    Cygnus X-3 re- vealed as a Galactic ultraluminous X-ray source by IXPE. Nature Astron- omy doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9 . Vieyro, F.L., Romero, G.E.,

    doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9

  15. [32]

    Particle transport in magnetized media around black holes and associated radiation

    Particle transport in magnetized media around black holes and associated radiation. A&A 542, A7. doi: 10.1051/ 0004-6361/201218886, arXiv:1204.4469. 16

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [115]

    Are T Tauri stars gamma-ray emitters?

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/738/1/115, arXiv:1107.0645. Drury, L.O.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [1968]

    Simple analytic expressions for the total born approx- imation cross section for pair production in a coulomb field. J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand., B, 72: 79-88(Jan.-Mar. 1968). URL: https://www.osti. gov/biblio/4503338, doi:10.6028/jres.072B.011. McKinney, J.C., Blandford, R.D.,

    work page arXiv 1968

  18. [1976]

    Old models for Cygnus X-1 and AGN

    A hot corona around a black- hole accretion disk as a model for CYG X-1. Soviet Astronomy Letters 2, 191–193. arXiv:astro-ph/0003275. Blumenthal, G.R., Gould, R.J.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  19. [1977]

    ApJ 214, 840–855

    Bimodal behavior of accretion disks: theory and application to Cygnus X-1 transitions. ApJ 214, 840–855. doi: 10.1086/155314. Jaroszynski, M., Abramowicz, M.A., Paczynski, B.,

    doi:10.1086/155314

  20. [2000]

    Computer Physics Communications 124, 290–314

    Monte Carlo simulations of photohadronic processes in astrophysics. Computer Physics Communications 124, 290–314. doi: 10.1016/S0010-4655(99) 00446-4, arXiv:astro-ph/9903478. Narayan, R., Igumenshchev, I.V ., Abramowicz, M.A.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [2006]

    MNRAS 366, 1415–1423

    Magnetic brak- ing of Ap /Bp stars: application to compact black-hole X-ray binaries. MNRAS 366, 1415–1423. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09907.x, arXiv:astro-ph/0511760. Kagan, D., Sironi, L., Cerutti, B., Giannios, D.,

    arXiv 2005

  22. [2008]

    MNRAS 387, 1745–1754

    Production of gamma rays and neutrinos in the dark jets of the microquasar SS433. MNRAS 387, 1745–1754. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13364.x, arXiv:0801.2903. Romero, G., Gutiérrez, E.,

    arXiv 2008

  23. [2009]

    MNRAS 394, L126–L130

    Stability of relativistic jets from rotating, accreting black holes via fully three-dimensional magnetohy- drodynamic simulations. MNRAS 394, L126–L130. doi: 10.1111/j. 1745-3933.2009.00625.x, arXiv:0812.1060. McKinney, J.C., Dai, L., Avara, M.J.,

    arXiv 2009

  24. [2011]

    Absorption of high-energy gamma rays in Cygnus X-3

    Absorption of high-energy gamma rays in Cygnus X-3. A&A 529, A120. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116581, arXiv:1103.3875. Chodorowski, M.J., Zdziarski, A.A., Sikora, M.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [2012]

    MNRAS 423, 3083–3117

    General rela- tivistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations of magnetically choked accre- tion flows around black holes. MNRAS 423, 3083–3117. doi: 10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2012.21074.x, arXiv:1201.4163. Meier, D.L.,

    arXiv 2012

  26. [2014]

    MNRAS 439, 503–520

    Nu- merical simulations of super-critical black hole accretion flows in gen- eral relativity. MNRAS 439, 503–520. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2479, arXiv:1311.5900. Sotomayor Checa, P., Romero, G.E.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [2015]

    Space Sci

    Relativistic Mag- netic Reconnection in Pair Plasmas and Its Astrophysical Applications. Space Sci. Rev. 191, 545–573. doi: 10.1007/s11214-014-0132-9 , arXiv:1412.2451. Kelner, S.R., Aharonian, F.A.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [2018]

    Journal of High Energy Astrophysics 19, 1–106

    Science with e-astrogam: A space mission for mev–gev gamma-ray astrophysics. Journal of High Energy Astrophysics 19, 1–106. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S2214404818300168, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jheap. 2018.07.001. del Valle, M.V ., Romero, G.E., Luque-Escamilla, P.L., Martí, J., Ramón Sánchez-Sutil, J.,

    doi:10.1016/j.jheap 2018

  29. [2021]

    Astrophysical Bulletin 76, 6–38

    Ultra- luminous X-Ray Sources. Astrophysical Bulletin 76, 6–38. doi: 10.1134/ S1990341321010077, arXiv:2105.10537. Fukue, J.,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [2023]

    Supercritical colliding wind binaries

    Supercritical colliding wind binaries. A&A 671, A9. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245285, arXiv:2301.08635. Abramowicz, M.A., Calvani, M., Nobili, L.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [2024]

    Simultaneous NICER and NuSTAR observations of the Ultraluminous source NGC 4190 ULX-1

    Simulta- neous NICER and NuSTAR observations of the ultraluminous source NGC 4190 ULX-1. A&A 686, A121. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348895, arXiv:2403.12300. Cruz-Sanchez, N., Fogantini, F.A., Saavedra, E.A., Abaroa, L., García, F., Combi, J.A., Romero, G.E.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [5052]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452187

    A&A 693, A122. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452187. De Angelis, A., Tatische ff, V ., Grenier, I., McEnery, J., Mallamaci, M., Ta- vani, M., Oberlack, U., Hanlon, L., Walter, R., Argan, A., V on Ballmoos, P., Bulgarelli, A., Bykov, A., Hernanz, M., Kanbach, G., Kuvvetli, I., Pearce, M., Zdziarski, A., Conrad, J., Ghisellini, G., Harding, A., Isern, J., Leis-...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452187

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.