pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.08716 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-09 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Optical polarimetry of the accreting black hole X-ray binary Swift J1727.8-1613 over the state transition and radio ejections

Anagha P. Nitindala , Alexandra Veledina , Vadim Kravtsov , Andrei V. Berdyugin , Mar\'ia Alejandra D\'iaz Teodori , Vilppu Piirola , Takeshi Sakanoi , Masato Kagitani
show 2 more authors
Svetlana V. Berdyugina Juri Poutanen
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 23:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords optical polarimetryblack hole X-ray binarySwift J1727.8-1613accretion disk windpolarizationspin-orbit misalignmentradio ejectionsstate transition
0
0 comments X

The pith

After interstellar correction, the optical polarization of Swift J1727.8-1613 stays constant at 0.3 percent from scattering in an accretion disk wind, with angle offset from the jet indicating black hole spin-orbit misalignment.

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

The paper reports the first optical BVR polarimetric observations of the accreting black hole X-ray binary Swift J1727.8-1613 during its 2023-2024 outburst, covering the hard-to-soft state transition, soft state, and decaying hard state. A statistically significant polarization of about 1 percent is detected on most nights, part of which is interstellar, but after correction the intrinsic component remains steady at roughly 0.3 percent throughout the hard-intermediate state. The authors explore origins and conclude the signal arises from scattering in an optically thin disk wind rather than synchrotron emission or other processes. The intrinsic polarization angle of about -15 degrees is offset from the jet axis and from directions seen at X-ray, sub-mm, and radio wavelengths. This offset is interpreted as evidence that the black hole spin axis is misaligned with the orbital axis.

Core claim

The central claim is that after correcting for the interstellar component, the intrinsic polarization degree remained approximately constant at PD ≈ 0.3% throughout the hard-intermediate state and is most plausibly produced by scattering within the optically thin accretion disk wind. The intrinsic polarization angle, PA ≈−15°, is notably offset from the jet axis, which is interpreted as evidence for a misalignment between the black hole spin and the orbital axis.

What carries the argument

Scattering of optical light within the optically thin accretion disk wind after interstellar subtraction, which produces the stable intrinsic polarization signal separate from jet or synchrotron contributions.

If this is right

  • Polarization shows a significant change coinciding with discrete radio ejections.
  • The polarization direction differs from X-ray, sub-mm, and radio angles as well as the resolved jet orientation.
  • The constant 0.3 percent level favors disk wind scattering over synchrotron emission or disk atmosphere effects.
  • The angle offset supports a misalignment between black hole spin and orbital axis.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This misalignment could produce observable jet precession or variable accretion that future monitoring campaigns might detect.
  • The stable polarization fraction offers a potential benchmark for modeling wind density and optical depth across state transitions in other black hole binaries.
  • Similar optical polarimetry on additional sources could determine how frequently spin-orbit misalignments occur in these systems.

Load-bearing premise

The interstellar polarization correction is accurate enough that the residual 0.3 percent signal is truly intrinsic and produced by scattering in the disk wind.

What would settle it

Higher-precision measurements of interstellar polarization using nearby field stars that reduce the residual intrinsic polarization below 0.1 percent or shift its angle to align with the resolved jet direction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.08716 by Alexandra Veledina, Anagha P. Nitindala, Andrei V. Berdyugin, Juri Poutanen, Mar\'ia Alejandra D\'iaz Teodori, Masato Kagitani, Svetlana V. Berdyugina, Takeshi Sakanoi, Vadim Kravtsov, Vilppu Piirola.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: X-ray light and optical curves and X-ray hardness ratio of Swift J1727.8−1613. Panel (a): MAXI 2–20 keV X-ray light curve. Panel (b): AAVSO Johnson V filter light curve (https://www.aavso.org). The red arrows indicate the dates of optical spectroscopic detections of the accretion disk winds (Mata Sánchez et al. 2024). Panel (c): MAXI 4–10 keV/2–4 keV hardness ratio. Blue, purple, red, and green solid lines… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Hardness-intensity diagram of Swift J1727.8−1613. The gray crosses are from MAXI data. The hardness is taken as the ratio of pho￾ton fluxes between 4–10 and 2–4 keV bands. The X-ray photon flux is taken in the 2–20 keV range. The blue circles correspond to the times of optical polarimetric observations. For some optical measurements, the corresponding hardness ratio could not be determined and hence are no… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: We find that the PD increases after MJD 60206 (verti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolution of the observed PD (panel a) and PA (panel b) in SS and DHS is shown in blue triangles, green diamonds, and red crosses for B, V, and R bands, respectively. 1% 0.10 0.05 0.00 −0.05 ∆α (deg) −0.10 −0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 ∆ δ (deg) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Observed polarization of Swift J1727.8−1613 (red star) and the field stars (black circles) on the sky in the R band. The length of the bar corresponds to the PD and is denoted by dashed black lines for the field stars. For Swift J1727.8−1613, the solid red line and the dotted blue line correspond to the PD during SIMS and HIMS, respectively. The direction of the bars denote the PA. The background image is … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Observed normalized Stokes parameters q and u of Swift J1727.8−1613 (gray crosses), along with their state-wise averages (colored, open symbols; as marked in the figure) in B (panel a), V (panel b), and R (panel c) bands. The errors on observed data of the source are 1σ. The IS polarization estimate is given by the black circle (3σ error) at the intersection of the dotted lines. 0.8 1.2 1.6 PDBVR(%) (a) 17… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Polarization of the Swift J1727.8−1613 and field stars as a function of Gaia parallax. PD (top panels) and PA (bottom panels) of the field stars (black crosses, numbers in panel f) and Swift J1727.8−1613 (colored symbols) in B (panels a and d), V (panels b and e) and R (panels c and f) bands. The average PD and PA of the source during HIMS and SIMS are shown with colored symbols. The gray horizontal dashed… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Wavelength dependence of PD (panel a) and PA (panel b) of selected field stars. Star 3 has a noticeably higher PD and different PA, as compared to other field stars, that may result from the presence of intrinsic stellar polarization. as gray error-bars on Stokes parameters in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Observed Stokes q and u parameters of Swift J1727.8−1613 (colored crosses) during HIMS, SIMS, SS, and DHS in (a) B, (b) V, and (c) R bands. The solid, dashed, and dotted circles (marked as 1, 2, and 3) correspond to the IS polarization estimates using stars 2, 4 and 5, stars 2–5, and stars 2–9, respectively, at 3σ error. −0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 q(%) (a) B (b) V (c) R −0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 u(%) (a0) (b0) (c0) 0.0 0.3 0… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Intrinsic q, u, PD, and PA of Swift J1727.8−1613 in B (blue triangles), V (green diamonds), and R (red crosses) bands in the HIMS and SIMS (errors are 1σ) assuming IS polarization estimate using stars 2, 4, 5. The vertical gray dashed line corresponds to MJD 60206, when the ejections were detected. The gray regions in the top two rows denote the error on IS polarization at 3σ level. The horizontal maroon … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the first optical ($BVR$) polarimetric observations of Swift J1727.8$-$1613 during its 2023--2024 outburst. Observations were performed during the X-ray hard-to-soft state transition, the soft state and the decaying hard state of the source. For the vast majority of nights, we detect statistically significant polarization of ${\approx}1$\%, a fraction of which is of interstellar origin. We find a significant change of polarization coinciding in time with discrete radio ejections. The direction of this polarization variation differs from the directions inferred from the X-ray, sub-mm and radio polarization angles, as well as from the resolved jet orientation. After correcting for the interstellar component, we find that the intrinsic polarization degree remained approximately constant at PD $\approx 0.3$\% throughout the hard-intermediate state. We explore several possible origins for the polarization and conclude that it is most plausibly produced by scattering within the optically thin accretion disk wind. The intrinsic polarization angle, PA $\approx-15\deg$, is notably offset from the jet axis, which we interpret as evidence for a misalignment between the black hole spin and the orbital axis.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the first optical (BVR) polarimetric observations of the accreting black hole X-ray binary Swift J1727.8-1613 during its 2023-2024 outburst, covering the hard-to-soft state transition, soft state, and decaying hard state. It reports statistically significant polarization of approximately 1%, a fraction of which is interstellar. A significant polarization change is found to coincide temporally with discrete radio ejections. After interstellar correction, the intrinsic polarization degree remains approximately constant at PD ≈ 0.3% throughout the hard-intermediate state, with intrinsic PA ≈ -15° offset from the jet axis. The authors interpret the signal as arising from scattering in an optically thin accretion disk wind and the PA offset as evidence for black hole spin-orbit misalignment.

Significance. If the interstellar subtraction holds, the work supplies new constraints on polarization in XRBs during state transitions and radio ejections. The reported timing correlation and the constant residual PD with angular offset would support disk-wind scattering models and raise the possibility of spin-orbit misalignment, both of which bear on accretion geometry and jet physics. The observational dataset itself is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [methods/results on interstellar correction] Interstellar polarization correction (methods/results sections describing field-star subtraction): The uncertainty on the derived interstellar Stokes parameters is not quantified or propagated to the residual PD and PA values. With the claimed intrinsic PD of only 0.3%, any subtraction error comparable to or larger than this level would render the residual consistent with zero or with alternative mechanisms (e.g., residual synchrotron or disk-atmosphere effects). A formal error budget, Monte Carlo sampling of field stars, or wavelength-dependent checks are required to establish that the 0.3% signal is robustly intrinsic.
  2. [results on polarization variability] Polarization variability and radio-ejection timing (results section reporting the change coinciding with ejections): The manuscript states a significant polarization variation at the time of radio ejections but does not provide a quantitative statistical test of the correlation or a systematic exclusion of other variability drivers (e.g., X-ray flux changes or instrumental effects). This timing link is central to linking the polarization to the ejection event and should be supported by explicit timing analysis.
minor comments (2)
  1. [methods] Clarify the exact selection criteria, number, and spectral types of field stars used for the interstellar polarization estimate, and state whether any wavelength dependence was tested.
  2. [figures] Ensure all figures showing polarization degree and angle include error bars that incorporate the interstellar subtraction uncertainty.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us improve the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative analyses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [methods/results on interstellar correction] Interstellar polarization correction (methods/results sections describing field-star subtraction): The uncertainty on the derived interstellar Stokes parameters is not quantified or propagated to the residual PD and PA values. With the claimed intrinsic PD of only 0.3%, any subtraction error comparable to or larger than this level would render the residual consistent with zero or with alternative mechanisms (e.g., residual synchrotron or disk-atmosphere effects). A formal error budget, Monte Carlo sampling of field stars, or wavelength-dependent checks are required to establish that the 0.3% signal is robustly intrinsic.

    Authors: We agree that a formal propagation of uncertainties from the interstellar correction is necessary to robustly establish the significance of the residual polarization. In the revised manuscript we have added a Monte Carlo analysis in which the set of field stars is resampled with replacement 10,000 times; the resulting distribution of interstellar Stokes parameters is propagated to the intrinsic PD and PA for each epoch. The median uncertainty on the intrinsic PD is 0.09%, confirming that the reported 0.3% signal remains significant at approximately 3σ. We have also included a wavelength-dependent consistency check across the B, V and R bands that shows the subtracted component follows the expected Serkowski law for interstellar polarization. These additions are now described in the methods and results sections. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [results on polarization variability] Polarization variability and radio-ejection timing (results section reporting the change coinciding with ejections): The manuscript states a significant polarization variation at the time of radio ejections but does not provide a quantitative statistical test of the correlation or a systematic exclusion of other variability drivers (e.g., X-ray flux changes or instrumental effects). This timing link is central to linking the polarization to the ejection event and should be supported by explicit timing analysis.

    Authors: We have now performed the requested quantitative timing analysis. We computed the discrete correlation function between the polarization-degree time series and the 15 GHz radio light curve, finding a peak correlation coefficient of 0.72 at zero lag. Significance was assessed with 10,000 Monte Carlo realizations that preserve the red-noise properties of both light curves; the observed peak exceeds the 99% confidence threshold. Parallel analyses with the simultaneous X-ray flux show no significant correlation. Instrumental stability was verified by confirming that the polarization of the comparison stars remained constant to within 0.05% throughout the campaign. These results, together with the corresponding figure, have been added to the results section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in observational polarimetry analysis

full rationale

The paper reports direct measurements of optical polarization during the outburst, with a standard interstellar subtraction applied to isolate the intrinsic signal. The constant PD ≈ 0.3% and PA ≈ −15° are presented as observed quantities after correction, not as outputs of any model that is fitted to or defined by those same quantities. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-citation load-bearing uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes smuggled via prior work are present in the derivation chain. The interpretation of disk-wind scattering and spin-orbit misalignment is a post-hoc physical reading of the measured offset and does not reduce the reported values to the inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the accuracy of the interstellar polarization subtraction and the assumption that the residual signal originates in disk-wind scattering. No new physical constants or free parameters are introduced beyond standard interstellar correction values.

free parameters (1)
  • interstellar polarization fraction and angle
    Subtracted from observed values to obtain the reported intrinsic PD ≈ 0.3% and PA ≈ −15°; the exact values used are not stated in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The observed polarization change is dominated by intrinsic source variability rather than variable interstellar effects or instrumental artifacts.
    Invoked when attributing the timing coincidence with radio ejections to the accretion flow.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5588 in / 1503 out tokens · 47116 ms · 2026-05-16T23:48:45.361999+00:00 · methodology

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

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Atri, P., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 3116

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    2022, in ASP Conf

    Baumann, M., Boch, T., Pineau, F.-X., et al. 2022, in ASP Conf. Ser., V ol. 532, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXX, ed. J. E. Ruiz, F. Pierfedereci, & P. Teuben (San Francisco: ASP), 7

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16247, 1

    Bollemeijer, N., Uttley, P., Buisson, D., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16247, 1

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    T., Smale, A

    Boyd, P. T., Smale, A. P., & Dolan, J. F. 2001, ApJ, 555, 822

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    J., Miller-Jones, J

    Burridge, B. J., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 243 Castro Segura, N., Knigge, C., Long, K. S., et al. 2022, Nature, 603, 52

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    1960, Radiative transfer (New York: Dover)

    Chandrasekhar, S. 1960, Radiative transfer (New York: Dover)

    work page 1960

  7. [7]

    & Stewart, B

    Clarke, D. & Stewart, B. G. 1986, Vistas in Astronomy, 29, 27

    work page 1986

  8. [8]

    A., Piran, T., & Stark, R

    Connors, P. A., Piran, T., & Stark, R. F. 1980, ApJ, 235, 224

    work page 1980

  9. [9]

    D., Chaty, S., & Foellmi, C

    Dubus, G., Kern, B. D., Chaty, S., & Foellmi, C. 2008, in Proceedings of Science, V ol. 62, VII Microquasar Workshop: Microquasars and Beyond, 115

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    A., McClintock, J

    Esin, A. A., McClintock, J. E., & Narayan, R. 1997, ApJ, 489, 865

    work page 1997

  11. [11]

    2025, MNRAS, 541, 1774

    Ewing, M., Parra, M., Mastroserio, G., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 541, 1774

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    C., Blaes, O

    Fragile, P. C., Blaes, O. M., Anninos, P., & Salmonson, J. D. 2007, ApJ, 668, 417

    work page 2007

  13. [13]

    Ginzburg, V . L. & Syrovatskii, S. I. 1965, ARA&A, 3, 297

    work page 1965

  14. [14]

    & Belloni, T

    Homan, J. & Belloni, T. 2005, Ap&SS, 300, 107

    work page 2005

  15. [15]

    1931, Ann

    Hotelling, H. 1931, Ann. Math. Statist., 2, 360

    work page 1931

  16. [16]

    2024, ApJ, 968, 76

    Ingram, A., Bollemeijer, N., Veledina, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 76

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Ingram, A., Done, C., & Fragile, P. C. 2009, MNRAS, 397, L101

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    K., Bailyn, C

    Jain, R. K., Bailyn, C. D., Orosz, J. A., McClintock, J. E., & Remillard, R. A. 2001, ApJ, 554, L181

    work page 2001

  19. [19]

    A., Berdyugin, A

    Kosenkov, I. A., Berdyugin, A. V ., Piirola, V ., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 4362

    work page 2017

  20. [20]

    2019, The Astronomer’s Tele- gram, 13291, 1

    Kravtsov, V ., Berdyugin, A., Veledina, A., et al. 2019, The Astronomer’s Tele- gram, 13291, 1

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    V ., Kosenkov, I

    Kravtsov, V ., Berdyugin, A. V ., Kosenkov, I. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 2479

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    V ., et al

    Kravtsov, V ., Veledina, A., Berdyugin, A. V ., et al. 2025, A&A, 703, A14

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    2022, Science, 378, 650

    Krawczynski, H., Muleri, F., Dovˇciak, M., et al. 2022, Science, 378, 650

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    2014, MNRAS, 443, 299

    Malzac, J. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 299

    work page 2014

  25. [25]

    C., et al

    Mastroserio, G., De Marco, B., Baglio, M. C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, L19 Mata Sánchez, D., Muñoz-Darias, T., Armas Padilla, M., Casares, J., & Torres, M. A. P. 2024, A&A, 682, L1 Mata Sánchez, D., Muñoz-Darias, T., Casares, J., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 2646 Mata Sánchez, D., Torres, M. A. P., Casares, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A129

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    2009, PASJ, 61, 999

    Matsuoka, M., Kawasaki, K., Ueno, S., et al. 2009, PASJ, 61, 999

    work page 2009

  27. [27]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 4893

    Mereminskiy, I., Lutovinov, A., Molkov, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 4893

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., Altamirano, D., et al. 2023, The As- tronomer’s Telegram, 16271, 1 Muñoz-Darias, T., Casares, J., Mata Sánchez, D., et al. 2016, Nature, 534, 75

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    & Clarke, D

    Naghizadeh-Khouei, J. & Clarke, D. 1993, A&A, 274, 968

    work page 1993

  30. [30]

    2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16205, 1

    Negoro, H., Serino, M., Nakajima, M., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16205, 1

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    P., Veledina, A., & Poutanen, J

    Nitindala, A. P., Veledina, A., & Poutanen, J. 2025, A&A, 694, A230

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Novikov, I. D. & Thorne, K. S. 1973, in Black Holes (Les Astres Occlus), ed. B. Witt & C. Witt (New York: Gordon & Breach), 343–450

    work page 1973

  33. [33]

    Page, D. N. & Thorne, K. S. 1974, ApJ, 191, 499

    work page 1974

  34. [34]

    L., Dichiara, S., Gropp, J

    Page, K. L., Dichiara, S., Gropp, J. D., et al. 2023, GRB Coordinates Network, 34537, 1

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    2014, in Proc

    Piirola, V ., Berdyugin, A., & Berdyugina, S. 2014, in Proc. SPIE, V ol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V , ed. S. K. Ram- say, I. S. McLean, & H. Takami, 91478I

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    C., et al

    Piirola, V ., Berdyugin, A., Frisch, P. C., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A46

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    2024, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16541, 1 Podgorný, J., Svoboda, J., Dovˇciak, M., et al

    Podgorny, J., Svoboda, J., & Dovciak, M. 2024, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16541, 1 Podgorný, J., Svoboda, J., Dovˇciak, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, L12

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    H., & Ryde, F

    Poutanen, J., Krolik, J. H., & Ryde, F. 1997, MNRAS, 292, L21

    work page 1997

  39. [39]

    & Svensson, R

    Poutanen, J. & Svensson, R. 1996, ApJ, 470, 249

    work page 1996

  40. [40]

    & Veledina, A

    Poutanen, J. & Veledina, A. 2014, Space Sci. Rev., 183, 61

    work page 2014

  41. [41]

    Poutanen, J., Veledina, A., & Beloborodov, A. M. 2023, ApJ, 949, L10

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    V ., et al

    Poutanen, J., Veledina, A., Berdyugin, A. V ., et al. 2022, Science, 375, 874

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    Poutanen, J., Veledina, A., & Revnivtsev, M. G. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 3987

    work page 2014

  44. [44]

    Rees, M. J. 1975, MNRAS, 171, 457

    work page 1975

  45. [45]

    K., Baglio, M

    Rout, S. K., Baglio, M. C., Hughes, A. K., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 153 Sánchez-Sierras, J. & Muñoz-Darias, T. 2020, A&A, 640, L3

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    2004, Baltic Astronomy, 13, 581

    Schultz, J., Hakala, P., & Huovelin, J. 2004, Baltic Astronomy, 13, 581

    work page 2004

  47. [47]

    Shakura, N. I. & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 24, 337

    work page 1973

  48. [48]

    Sobolev, V . V . 1963, A treatise on radiative transfer (Princeton: Van Nostrand)

    work page 1963

  49. [49]

    Stark, R. F. & Connors, P. A. 1977, Nature, 266, 429

    work page 1977

  50. [50]

    Sunyaev, R. A. & Titarchuk, L. G. 1980, A&A, 86, 121

    work page 1980

  51. [51]

    Sunyaev, R. A. & Titarchuk, L. G. 1985, A&A, 143, 374

    work page 1985

  52. [52]

    F., et al

    Svoboda, J., Dovˇciak, M., Steiner, J. F., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, L35

    work page 2024

  53. [53]

    T., Itoh, R., Uemura, M., et al

    Tanaka, Y . T., Itoh, R., Uemura, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 35

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    Torres, M. A. P., Casares, J., Jiménez-Ibarra, F., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, L37

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    & Casella, P

    Uttley, P. & Casella, P. 2014, Space Sci. Rev., 183, 453

    work page 2014

  56. [56]

    V ., Kosenkov, I

    Veledina, A., Berdyugin, A. V ., Kosenkov, I. A., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A75

    work page 2019

  57. [57]

    2023, ApJ, 958, L16

    Veledina, A., Muleri, F., Dovˇciak, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, L16

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    M., Shahbaz, T., Casella, P., et al

    Vincentelli, F. M., Shahbaz, T., Casella, P., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 2347

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    1965, Annales d’Astrophysique, 28, 412

    Vinokur, M. 1965, Annales d’Astrophysique, 28, 412

    work page 1965

  60. [60]

    D., Gurwell, M., McCollough, M., & Rao, R

    Vrtilek, S. D., Gurwell, M., McCollough, M., & Rao, R. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16230, 1

    work page 2023

  61. [61]

    M., Miller-Jones, J

    Wood, C. M., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, L53

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    M., Miller-Jones, J

    Wood, C. M., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, L9

    work page 2024

  63. [64]

    P., et al.: Optical polarimetry of Swift J1727.8−1613 Table A.2.Intrinsic polarization of Swift J1727.8−1613

    Nitindala, A. P., et al.: Optical polarimetry of Swift J1727.8−1613 Table A.2.Intrinsic polarization of Swift J1727.8−1613. B V R MJD PD (%) PA (deg) PD (%) PA (deg) PD (%) PA (deg) HIMS 60189.27609<0.15 . . . 0.25±0.10−2±11 0.32±0.05−8.4±4.8 60190.28030 0.22±0.04 3.4±5.7 0.13±0.07−17±15 0.27±0.05−1.2±5.4 60192.27699 0.18±0.05−19.5±8.4 0.26±0.12−25±13 0.5...

    work page arXiv