pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02984 · v1 · pith:XZRBGHEAnew · submitted 2026-06-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Dust On, Dust Off: HST Observations of the Newly Dormant Jupiter Co-orbital Comet P/2023 V6 (PANSTARRS)

John Noonan , Theodore Kareta This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 08:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords CentaursJupiter co-orbital cometscomet activityHubble Space TelescopeP/2023 V6dormant cometssmall solar system bodies
0
0 comments X

The pith

HST imaging shows Jupiter co-orbital comet P/2023 V6 became dormant in late 2024 with a diameter of about 340 meters.

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

The paper reports new ground-based and Hubble Space Telescope observations of the Jupiter co-orbital comet P/2023 V6 throughout late 2024 and early 2025. After the object faded from ground-based detection after early October, HST imaging in early December captured a faint point source at magnitude 28.06 at the predicted position. This detection indicates that dust production stopped sometime in late 2024, placing V6 in a different thermal state than the similar comet LD2 despite both objects showing large active fractions. The measured brightness converts to a physical diameter of roughly 340 meters under standard assumptions, identifying V6 as the smallest Centaur directly observed by HST and the smallest such object yet discovered.

Core claim

Deep HST imaging of P/2023 V6 in early December 2024 detects a point source of m_V = 28.06 ± 0.03 at its expected location after the comet had become invisible to ground-based telescopes. This establishes that the object ceased activity in late 2024 and has a diameter of approximately 340 meters, making it the smallest Centaur directly observed by HST beyond the main belt.

What carries the argument

The HST apparent magnitude measurement converted to physical diameter via assumed cometary albedo and phase function, together with the timing of non-detections, to establish both dormancy and size.

If this is right

  • V6 occupies a different thermal state than LD2 despite both having large active fractions.
  • V6 is the smallest Centaur yet discovered.
  • Current surveys can detect active sub-kilometer objects beyond Jupiter.
  • LSST has the potential to probe even smaller sizes of such objects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Some Centaurs may transition to dormancy on timescales of months rather than years.
  • Repeated imaging of V6 could test whether it remains inactive or reactivates during its orbital evolution.
  • The population of Centaurs extends to objects at least as small as a few hundred meters in diameter.

Load-bearing premise

The diameter of roughly 340 meters assumes a standard cometary albedo and phase function with no residual dust contributing to the observed brightness.

What would settle it

A future observation that either detects renewed cometary activity or measures a substantially different albedo or phase function for the bare nucleus would contradict the claim of recent dormancy and the derived size.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.02984 by John Noonan, Theodore Kareta.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A median-stacked image of all eight 370s science exposures taken by HST WFC3 of P/2023 V6 (PANSTARRS) on December 5, 2024. Each exposure has been shifted in x and y to minimize differences between frames and correct for small differences in the WCS solution. A median stack centered on the JPL predicted location of V6 is shown on the left, with the cyan box highlighting the expected location and the red hig… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A secular lightcurve (e.g., apparent magnitude over time) of P/2023 V6 is shown with data accepted by the Minor Planet Center plotted as black filled circles and the dataset of Kareta et al. 2024a shown as black unfilled circles. Our recent unsuccessful searches for V6 with the LDT are shown as upper limits in grey while our HST data – both single-frame upper limits on the brightness of the object and our … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

As the Centaurs of the Outer Solar System have become better studied, their relationship with the Jupiter Family Comets and their connection to the primordial protoplanetary disk has come under deeper scrutiny: which properties of the comets observed closer to the Sun are original, and which were modified significantly en route during their Centaur phase? The active Jupiter co-orbital comet P/2019 LD2 (ATLAS) attracted significant attention after its discovery when it was realized that the object would transition between a Centaur and JFC orbit in 2063, the first time this change can be observed and monitored in real time. In this study, we present new ground-based and Hubble Space Telescope imaging of the single other Jupiter co-orbital comet, P/2023 V6 (PANSTARRS), throughout late 2024 and early 2025. V6 was not detected in ground-based imaging after early October, and deep imaging with HST taken in early December is consistent with a $m_V = 28.06 \pm 0.03$ point source at its expected location. This both implies that the object ceased activity sometime in late 2024, and is thus in a different thermal state than LD2 despite both having large active fractions, and that V6's diameter is approximately $D\sim340$ meters. This is likely the smallest object directly observed by HST beyond the Main Belt, and certainly the smallest Centaur yet discovered, highlighting the ability to detect active sub-km objects beyond Jupiter with current surveys and potentially probing smaller sizes with LSST.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports ground-based and HST observations of the Jupiter co-orbital comet P/2023 V6 (PANSTARRS) from late 2024 to early 2025. Ground-based imaging yields non-detections after early October, while HST imaging in early December detects a point source with m_V = 28.06 ± 0.03 at the predicted position. The authors interpret this as evidence that the comet ceased activity in late 2024 (placing it in a different thermal state from P/2019 LD2 despite both having large active fractions) and derive a diameter D ∼ 340 m, claiming this as the smallest Centaur yet observed by HST and highlighting survey capabilities for sub-km objects beyond Jupiter.

Significance. If the dormancy inference and size hold, the result supplies a direct observational benchmark for Centaur-to-JFC evolutionary pathways, showing that small objects can transition to dormancy on observable timescales. The specific magnitude measurement and point-source detection constitute a reproducible datum that can be tested with future observations. The work also underscores the reach of HST for sub-km bodies outside the Main Belt, with direct relevance to LSST-era discovery rates.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the diameter claim D ∼ 340 m (and the consequent 'smallest Centaur observed by HST' ranking) is obtained by converting the measured m_V = 28.06 to physical size. This conversion requires an adopted albedo, phase function, and the assumption of zero residual dust; none of these parameters or their justification appear in the abstract, rendering the quantitative support for the central size claim unverifiable from the provided text.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the inference that activity ceased in late 2024 rests on the HST detection being strictly point-like with no detectable coma. Without an explicit error budget, surface-brightness limit, or comparison of the observed PSF to a model including low-level dust, it is not possible to quantify how strongly the data exclude residual activity at the level that would affect the thermal-state comparison with LD2.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states both objects have 'large active fractions' but supplies neither the numerical values nor the references used for LD2, which would aid the contrast drawn in the thermal-state claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight opportunities to improve the self-contained nature of the abstract. We agree that the abstract would benefit from explicit mention of the assumptions underlying the diameter estimate and the quantitative limits on residual activity. We address each point below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the diameter claim D ∼ 340 m (and the consequent 'smallest Centaur observed by HST' ranking) is obtained by converting the measured m_V = 28.06 to physical size. This conversion requires an adopted albedo, phase function, and the assumption of zero residual dust; none of these parameters or their justification appear in the abstract, rendering the quantitative support for the central size claim unverifiable from the provided text.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract should specify the key parameters and assumptions used to derive the diameter so that the central claim is verifiable from the abstract text alone. In the revised manuscript we will update the abstract to state the adopted albedo (p_V = 0.04, standard for cometary nuclei), linear phase coefficient (β = 0.04 mag deg⁻¹), and the assumption of negligible residual dust (justified by the point-source morphology). These values and their justification are already detailed in Section 3 of the main text; adding them to the abstract addresses the concern directly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the inference that activity ceased in late 2024 rests on the HST detection being strictly point-like with no detectable coma. Without an explicit error budget, surface-brightness limit, or comparison of the observed PSF to a model including low-level dust, it is not possible to quantify how strongly the data exclude residual activity at the level that would affect the thermal-state comparison with LD2.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the abstract currently lacks a quantitative statement on the surface-brightness limit and PSF comparison. The full analysis (including the 3-σ surface-brightness upper limit and PSF modeling that rules out detectable coma at levels that would affect the LD2 comparison) is presented in Section 3.2. To make the dormancy inference verifiable from the abstract, we will add a concise clause summarizing the non-detection of coma and the corresponding upper limit on dust production rate. This revision will strengthen the abstract without altering the scientific conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: diameter follows from direct HST magnitude via external standard conversions

full rationale

The paper reports a direct HST detection of a point source at m_V = 28.06 ± 0.03 and infers both ceased activity (from non-detection and point-source morphology) and D ∼ 340 m. The size conversion applies standard cometary albedo and phase-function values that are not defined, fitted, or derived within the paper itself. No equations, self-citations, or ansatzes are invoked to make the output equivalent to the input by construction. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no load-bearing self-referential steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard solar-system astronomy assumptions for magnitude-to-size conversion and activity interpretation; these are not derived within the paper.

free parameters (1)
  • albedo
    Diameter estimate from apparent magnitude requires an assumed albedo value that is not specified in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The detected point source is the bare nucleus with no residual dust contribution
    The interpretation of the HST detection as a dormant nucleus depends on this assumption about the object's state.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5831 in / 1308 out tokens · 28776 ms · 2026-06-28T08:33:21.140335+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

53 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    , keywords =

    A’Hearn, M. F., Schleicher, D. G., Millis, R. L., Feldman, P. D., & Thompson, D. T. 1984, AJ, 89, 579, doi: 10.1086/113552 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aab...

    work page doi:10.1086/113552 1984

  2. [2]

    M., Choi, Y.-J., Weissman, P

    Bauer, J. M., Choi, Y.-J., Weissman, P. R., et al. 2008, PASP, 120, 393, doi: 10.1086/587552

    work page doi:10.1086/587552 2008

  3. [3]

    The Astronomical Journal , keywords =

    Bauer, J. M., Grav, T., Fern´ andez, Y. R., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa72df

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa72df 2017

  4. [4]

    A., Dunham, E

    Bida, T. A., Dunham, E. W., Massey, P., & Roe, H. G. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. S. K. Ramsay, I. S. McLean, & H. Takami, 91472N, doi: 10.1117/12.2056872

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2056872 2014

  5. [5]

    2002, Earth Moon and Planets, 90, 131, doi: 10.1023/A:1021524720470

    Boehnhardt, H., Holdstock, S., Hainaut, O., et al. 2002, Earth Moon and Planets, 90, 131, doi: 10.1023/A:1021524720470

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1021524720470 2002

  6. [6]

    T., Fernandez, Y

    Bolin, B. T., Fernandez, Y. R., Lisse, C. M., et al. 2021a, AJ, 161, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd94b —. 2021b, AJ, 161, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd94b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd94b

  7. [7]

    F., Vokrouhlick´ y, D., Marschall, R., et al

    Bottke, W. F., Vokrouhlick´ y, D., Marschall, R., et al. 2023, PSJ, 4, 168, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ace7cd

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ace7cd 2023

  8. [8]

    T., Yeomans, D., Housen, K., & Consolmagno, G

    Britt, D. T., Yeomans, D., Housen, K., & Consolmagno, G. 2002, in Asteroids III, ed. W. F. Bottke, Jr., A. Cellino, P. Paolicchi, & R. P. Binzel, 485–500

    2002

  9. [9]

    , author Lamy, P.L

    Burns, J. A., Lamy, P. L., & Soter, S. 1979, Icarus, 40, 1, doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(79)90050-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0019-1035(79)90050-2 1979

  10. [10]

    1996, A&A, 310, L17 Dell’Oro, A., Marzari, F., Paolicchi, P., & Vanzani, V

    Crovisier, J., Bockelee-Morvan, D., Gerard, E., et al. 1996, A&A, 310, L17 Dell’Oro, A., Marzari, F., Paolicchi, P., & Vanzani, V. 2001, A&A, 366, 1053, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000492 Fern´ andez, J. A., Helal, M., & Gallardo, T. 2018, Planet. Space Sci., 158, 6, doi: 10.1016/j.pss.2018.05.013

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000492 1996

  11. [11]

    2007, PASJ, 59, 381, doi: 10.1093/pasj/59.2.381

    Watanabe, J.-I. 2007, PASJ, 59, 381, doi: 10.1093/pasj/59.2.381

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/59.2.381 2007

  12. [12]

    S., Greathouse, T

    Giles, R. S., Greathouse, T. K., Kammer, J. A., et al. 2021, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e91797, doi: 10.1029/2020GL091797

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl091797 2021

  13. [13]

    B., Wong, M

    Hammel, H. B., Wong, M. H., Clarke, J. T., et al. 2010, ApJL, 715, L150, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/L150

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/l150 2010

  14. [14]

    H., et al

    Harrington, J., de Pater, I., Brecht, S. H., et al. 2004, in Jupiter. The Planet, Satellites and Magnetosphere, ed. F. Bagenal, T. E. Dowling, & W. B. McKinnon, Vol. 1, 159–184 Harrington Pinto, O., Womack, M., Fernandez, Y., &

    2004

  15. [15]

    , keywords =

    Bauer, J. 2022, PSJ, 3, 247, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ac960d

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ac960d 2022

  16. [16]

    2010, ApJL, 721, L129, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/721/2/L129

    Hueso, R., Wesley, A., Go, C., et al. 2010, ApJL, 721, L129, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/721/2/L129

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/721/2/l129 2010

  17. [17]

    2013, A&A, 560, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322216

    Hueso, R., P´ erez-Hoyos, S., S´ anchez-Lavega, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 560, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322216

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322216 2013

  18. [18]

    2018, A&A, 617, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832689

    Hueso, R., Delcroix, M., S´ anchez-Lavega, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832689

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832689 2018

  19. [19]

    J., Kracht, R., et al

    Hui, M.-T., Tholen, D. J., Kracht, R., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6dcb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6dcb 2022

  20. [20]

    2016, AJ, 152, 169, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/169

    Ishiguro, M., Kuroda, D., Hanayama, H., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 169, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/169

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/169 2016

  21. [21]

    Jewitt, D., & Hsieh, H. H. 2024, in Comets III, ed. K. J

    2024

  22. [23]

    2017, ApJL, 847, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa88b4

    Jewitt, D., Hui, M.-T., Mutchler, M., et al. 2017, ApJL, 847, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa88b4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa88b4 2017

  23. [24]

    2024a, ApJL, 967, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3dea —

    Trilling, D. 2024a, ApJL, 967, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3dea —. 2024b, ApJL, 967, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3dea

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad3dea 2041

  24. [25]

    2025a, in Centaurs, ed

    Kareta, T., Schambeau, C., & Wierzchos, K. 2025a, in Centaurs, ed. K. Volk, M. Womack, & J. Steckloff, 10–1, doi: 10.1088/10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch10

    work page doi:10.1088/10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch10

  25. [26]

    A., Firgard, M., et al

    Kareta, T., Schambeau, C. A., Firgard, M., & Fern´ andez, Y. R. 2025b, PSJ, 6, 119, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/adce07

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/adce07

  26. [27]

    2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/AB505F

    Kareta, T., Sharkey, B., Noonan, J., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab505f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab505f 2019

  27. [28]

    M., Schambeau, C., et al

    Kareta, T., Woodney, L. M., Schambeau, C., et al. 2021a, PSJ, 2, 48, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/abe23d —. 2021b, PSJ, 2, 48, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/abe23d

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/abe23d

  28. [29]

    S., Reach, W

    Kelley, M. S., Reach, W. T., & Lien, D. J. 2008, Icarus, 193, 572, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2007.08.018

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2007.08.018 2008

  29. [30]

    2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 13164, 1

    Bau, J. 2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 13164, 1

    2019

  30. [31]

    D., et al

    Kim, M., Mannel, T., Boakes, P. D., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245262

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245262 2023

  31. [32]

    , keywords =

    Kim, Y., Jewitt, D., Mutchler, M., et al. 2020, ApJL, 895, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9228 11

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab9228 2020

  32. [33]

    2016, ApJL, 823, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/823/1/L6

    Snodgrass, C. 2016, ApJL, 823, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/823/1/L6

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/823/1/l6 2016

  33. [34]

    2024, Comets III, 767, doi: 10.2458/azu{ }uapress{ }9780816553631-ch023

    Knight, M. M., Kokotanekova, R., & Samarasinha, N. H. 2024, in Comets III, ed. K. J. Meech, M. R. Combi, D. Bockel´ ee-Morvan, S. N. Raymond, & M. E. Zolensky, 361–404, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816553631-ch012 Kr´ olikowska, M., & Dones, L. 2023, A&A, 678, A113, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347178

    work page doi:10.2458/azu 2024

  34. [35]

    2011, MNRAS, 411, 955, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17731.x

    Jorda, L. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1573, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17934.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17934.x 2011

  35. [36]

    , year 1997

    Levison, H. F., & Duncan, M. J. 1997, Icarus, 127, 13, doi: 10.1006/icar.1996.5637

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1996.5637 1997

  36. [37]

    2021, A&A, 650, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038842

    Licandro, J., de Le´ on, J., Moreno, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038842

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038842 2021

  37. [38]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 960, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1606

    Lilly, E., Jevˇ c´ ak, P., Schambeau, C., et al. 2024, ApJL, 960, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1606

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1606 2024

  38. [39]

    , author Wiegert , P.A

    Macke, R. J., Consolmagno, G. J., & Britt, D. T. 2011, M&PS, 46, 1842, doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2011.01298.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2011.01298.x 2011

  39. [40]

    2020, Frontiers in Physics, 8, 227, doi: 10.3389/fphy.2020.00227

    Marschall, R., Markkanen, J., Gerig, S.-B., et al. 2020, Frontiers in Physics, 8, 227, doi: 10.3389/fphy.2020.00227

    work page doi:10.3389/fphy.2020.00227 2020

  40. [41]

    R., Mainzer, A

    Masiero, J. R., Mainzer, A. K., Bauer, J. M., et al. 2020, PSJ, 1, 5, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ab7820

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ab7820 2020

  41. [42]

    2022, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Miles, R., & BAA Comet Section 29P Observing Campaign. 2022, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 54, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts #54, 414.03

    2022

  42. [43]

    2017, Astronomy and Computing, 18, 47, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002

    Mommert, M. 2017, Astronomy and Computing, 18, 47, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002 2017

  43. [44]

    2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1426, doi: 10.21105/joss.01426 Nesvorn´ y, D., Vokrouhlick´ y, D., & Deienno, R

    Mommert, M., Kelley, M., de Val-Borro, M., et al. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1426, doi: 10.21105/joss.01426 Nesvorn´ y, D., Vokrouhlick´ y, D., & Deienno, R. 2014, ApJ, 784, 22, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/22 Nesvorn´ y, D., Vokrouhlick´ y, D., & Morbidelli, A. 2007, AJ, 133, 1962, doi: 10.1086/512850

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01426 2019

  44. [45]

    2024, A&A, 685, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346380

    Lemos, P. 2024, A&A, 685, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346380

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346380 2024

  45. [46]

    Romanishin, W., & Tegler, S. C. 2022, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 6, 251, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aca663

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/aca663 2022

  46. [47]

    2008, A&A, 480, 543, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078150 S´ anchez-Lavega, A., Wesley, A., Orton, G., et al

    Rousselot, P. 2008, A&A, 480, 543, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078150 S´ anchez-Lavega, A., Wesley, A., Orton, G., et al. 2010, ApJL, 715, L155, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/L155

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078150 2008

  47. [48]

    K., et al

    Sarid, G., Volk, K., Steckloff, J. K., et al. 2019, ApJL, 883, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab3fb3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab3fb3 2019

  48. [49]

    Z., Farnocchia, D., Micheli, M., et al

    Seligman, D. Z., Farnocchia, D., Micheli, M., et al. 2024, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 121, e2406424121, doi: 10.1073/pnas.2406424121

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2406424121 2024

  49. [50]

    Sharkey, B. N. L., Rivkin, A. S., Cartwright, R. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.16484, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.16484

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.16484 2025

  50. [51]

    K., Sarid, G., Volk, K., et al

    Steckloff, J. K., Sarid, G., Volk, K., et al. 2020, ApJL, 904, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abc888

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abc888 2020

  51. [52]

    A., White, O

    Stern, S. A., White, O. L., Grundy, W. M., et al. 2023, PSJ, 4, 176, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/acf317

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/acf317 2023

  52. [53]

    A., Wilson, J

    Weaver, H. A., Wilson, J. P., Conard, S. J., et al. 2023, SSRv, 219, 82, doi: 10.1007/s11214-023-01028-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-023-01028-z 2023

  53. [54]

    Willmer, C. N. A. 2018, ApJS, 236, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aabfdf

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aabfdf 2018