Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 125 references

Bounding destruction timescales of minor planets orbiting white dwarfs with the sesquinary catastrophe

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Minor planets orbiting white dwarfs on 5–25 hour periods destroy themselves through their own returning ejecta within about 100–100,000 years.

desk verdict Solid analytic application of the sesquinary catastrophe to white dwarf minor planets, but the abstract overstates what is bounded: the 10^2-10^5 yr timescales are cascade-propagation times, not emplacement-to-destruction times, since no trigger rates are computed. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.05090 v1 pith:2ODM4IBV submitted 2025-07-07 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Dimitri Veras , Matija Ćuk This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords whitedwarfssesquinarycatastropheminorplanetsdebrisdiscsrubble-pileRocheradiuscollisionaltimescaleapsidalprecessiontransiting
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 argues that minor planets orbiting white dwarfs at roughly 1–4 rubble-pile Roche radii—orbital periods of about 5–25 hours—occupy a danger zone where they destroy themselves through the sesquinary catastrophe, in which a body's own ejecta returns on excited orbits and strikes it fast enough to erode it to nothing. The collisional timescale for this self-destruction is $\sim 10^2$–$10^5$ yr, far shorter than the Myr-scale debris disc lifetimes previously inferred, so if the argument is right, white dwarf debris discs are in a state of semi-continuous replenishment. The authors adapt the mechanism from planetary-moon systems and show that apsidal precession from general relativity, or precession from a nearby giant planet, provides the orbital misalignment needed, requiring only slight eccentricity or inclination in the minor planet's orbit.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dimensionless erosional-impact parameter $q_v = \sqrt{e^2 + \sin^2 i}\,(v_{\rm orb}/v_{\rm esc})$, which measures whether returning ejecta strike the parent body fast enough to erode rather than gently reaccrete, with the threshold $q_v \gtrsim 10$ taken from laboratory-based collisional physics. The argument's carrier is the collisional timescale formula of Cuk et al. (2023), expressed here as $\tau$ with the strong scaling $\tau \propto T^3$ (equation 11), which converts the orbital period, eccentricity, inclination, and the $q_v$ value into a destruction timescale. The paper evaluates all four precession sources—stellar oblateness, magnetic fields, companion bodies, and general relativity—and identifies general-relativistic apsidal precession as the near-universal mechanism that misaligns ejecta orbits from the parent body.

What would settle it

Monitor a white dwarf with transiting debris in the 5–25 hr period range for more than a million years: a stable, unchanging transit feature would contradict the claim that bodies in the 1–4 rubble-pile Roche radius zone destroy themselves within $10^2$–$10^5$ yr. Alternatively, impact experiments or simulations that place the erosional threshold far above $q_v = 10$ would raise the required eccentricity or inclination beyond what scattered minor planets typically possess.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the sesquinary catastrophe, previously proposed for moons in the solar system, applies to minor planets orbiting white dwarfs. For bodies with orbital periods $T \approx 5$–25 hr, corresponding to about 1–4 rubble-pile Roche radii, the erosional-reimpact condition $q_v = \sqrt{e^2 + \sin^2 i}\,(v_{\rm orb}/v_{\rm esc}) \gtrsim 10$ is met even at eccentricities as small as $\sim 0.01$ for a minor planet of 0.1 Ceres mass, or at slight inclinations, because the white dwarf's gravitational well keeps the ejecta bound. General relativity supplies the dominant apsidal precession in nearly all cases, and a close giant planet can drive both nodal and apsidal precession. The approximate collisional timescale, $\tau \propto T^3$, falls between $10^2$ and $10^5$ yr for the observed period range, placing an upper bound on destruction epochs and implying that debris discs around white dwarfs are continuously replenished.

Load-bearing premise

The catastrophe can only start if some process first ejects mass from the minor planet—an impact, thermal cracking, sublimation, or rotational shedding—and the paper gives no rates for these triggers; if such events are rare, the quoted $\tau$ bounds only how quickly an already-started cascade propagates, not the total time from a body's arrival to its destruction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Debris discs around white dwarfs are semi-continuously replenished by minor planets self-destructing at 1–4 rubble-pile Roche radii, so observed discs need not be primordial remnants.
  • The destruction timescale for a minor planet that avoids tidal disruption is bounded between roughly $10^2$ and $10^5$ yr, much shorter than Myr-scale disc lifetime estimates.
  • For long-period systems such as ZTF J0139+5245 (107 d), the sesquinary catastrophe timescale exceeds debris disc lifetimes, making it relevant mainly on white dwarf cooling timescales.
  • Because general relativity alone provides the apsidal precession, the mechanism does not require an unseen giant planet in the system to operate.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The absence of ejection-trigger rates means the quoted $\tau$ is a propagation timescale; if the paper's picture holds, the number of currently observed transiting-debris systems may trace the steady-state supply rate of new minor planets into the danger zone.
  • The $\tau \propto T^3$ scaling is a sharp, testable prediction: systems near 25 hr should evolve orders of magnitude more slowly than those near 5 hr, discriminating the mechanism with continued photometric monitoring.
  • One could extend the analysis by coupling the sesquinary catastrophe to the size distribution of the parent population: since $\tau$ is mass-independent for a given orbit, the observed transit cessation statistics could be inverted to infer the rate at which bodies are emplaced at 1–4 Roche radii.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. Veras and Ćuk transport the 'sesquinary catastrophe' of Ćuk et al. (2023) from the satellites of giant planets to minor planets orbiting white dwarfs. They identify the parameter space T ≈ 5–25 hr, corresponding to roughly 1–4 rubble-pile Roche radii, as a region where the erosional criterion q_v ≳ 10 is met for modest eccentricities or inclinations, and where differential precession (usually from general relativity) can misalign returning ejecta orbits. From Eq. (11), they find collisional timescales τ ~ 10^2–10^5 yr and conclude that such minor planets can be destroyed by their own returning ejecta, providing a bound on destruction timescales and supporting semi-continuous replenishment of white dwarf debris discs. The long-period system ZTF J0139+5245 is treated separately, with τ mostly exceeding 10^6 yr.

Significance. If read as a conditional statement—once a mass-ejection event has occurred, an ongoing sesquinary cascade will destroy a rubble-pile minor planet within ~10^2–10^5 yr—the paper is a useful and mostly sound contribution. The algebraic reduction from Eq. (10) to Eq. (11) is consistent, the precession timescale estimates in Section 3 are standard, and the authors are transparent about unconstrained parameters (e, i, M_mp). The paper introduces no fitted parameters and produces falsifiable order-of-magnitude predictions in Figs. 3–5. Its main weakness is that the abstract and Section 6 promote τ to an 'upper bound on the destruction epoch' and to evidence for 'semi-continuous replenishment,' while the rate at which the initial ejecta are produced is neither computed nor bounded. Sections 5.2 and 5.3 acknowledge this gap explicitly, but the headline conclusions do not carry the necessary qualification.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.2, Section 5.3, Section 6] The timescale τ in Eq. (11) is the propagation time of an already-started sesquinary cascade, not the total destruction time of an emplaced minor planet. Section 5.2 asks 'how is mass ejected from the minor planet in the first place?' and lists impacts, YORP-style breakup, sublimation, thermal cracking, and rotational shedding without assigning a rate to any of them; Section 5.3 then states that modelling the ejecta-production processes is 'beyond the scope of this study.' Consequently, the total destruction time is t_trigger + O(few × τ), and Section 6's phrase 'placing a useful upper bound on the destruction epoch' has the wrong direction: in the absence of a prompt and frequent trigger, τ is a lower bound on the emplacement-to-destruction interval, not an upper bound. The abstract's '∼10^2–10^5 yr' should be re-labelled as a cascade-propagation timescale unless trigger rates are quantified.
  2. [Section 5.2 and abstract] The inference from τ to 'semi-continuous replenishment' requires a rate at which cascades are seeded, and this rate is not computed. Calling the 1–4 r_Roche region a 'high-traffic bombardment zone' is an assertion; the cited delivery mechanisms (radiation drag, magnetic drag, gravitational scattering) do not by themselves give an impact rate in this zone. The efficacy question is also material: for a fiducial 0.1-Ceres body with ρ_mp = 2 g cm−3, v_esc ≈ 240 m/s, while thermal cracking and sublimation release material at ≲10 m/s, so those processes cannot by themselves place ejecta on returning orbits with v > v_esc. Only hypervelocity impacts and possibly near-spin-limit rotational shedding are plausible triggers, and the impact rate for those is not bounded here. Without this rate, the conclusion that white dwarf debris discs are in a state of semi-continuous replenishment is unsupported.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5.1] The phrase 'periods of ≈5–25 hours and longer' overstates the applicability because Section 5.1 and Fig. 6 show that for the 107-day period of ZTF J0139+5245, τ mostly exceeds 10^6 yr; the short danger-zone timescales are specific to the 5–25 hr window.
  2. [Section 5.2] The sentence 'which can be as as high as stellar masses or as low as Luna masses' contains a duplicated 'as' and should read 'lunar masses'.
  3. [References] The reference 'Cunningham et al. 2025, MNRAS' lacks a volume, article number, and DOI.
  4. [Figure 4] The axis label 'qv' should use the same notation as the text (q_v) for consistency.
  5. [Section 4, Figure 5] The statement that the curves are independent of minor planet mass and radius is correct for Eq. (11), but a reader may miss that the q_v threshold itself depends on minor planet mass through v_esc; a one-sentence reminder near Fig. 5 would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the white dwarf application is a parameter evaluation of independent analytic results, with no fitted input renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim — that rubble-pile minor planets at roughly 1-4 white dwarf rubble-pile Roche radii can undergo the sesquinary catastrophe on a collisional timescale of about 10^2-10^5 yr — is obtained by applying the q_v criterion (Eq. 6) and the collisional timescale tau (Eqs. 10-11) from Cuk et al. (2023) to white dwarf parameters. The inputs (observed periodicities T = 5-25 hr, white dwarf masses, assumed eccentricities/inclinations, density rho_mp = 2 g cm^-3) are observational or explicitly stated parameter ranges; none are fitted to the predicted tau values, and the target result is not assumed anywhere in the derivation. The fact that Cuk et al. (2023) is co-authored by one of the present authors is a self-citation, but it is not a circular one: that prior work is a separate solar-system derivation with its own stated assumptions and it is not calibrated to white dwarf debris disc data. The paper's own discussion in Section 5.2 acknowledges that a trigger for the initial mass ejection is needed and lists candidate mechanisms without rates; this is an applicability caveat about whether tau bounds the total emplacement-to-destruction time or only the cascade-propagation time once ejecta exist. That caveat does not reduce the derivation to its inputs. No equation is defined in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or entities. It relies on a bulk density assumption, an imported empirical erosion threshold, and an unquantified assumption that initial ejecta are present to trigger the cascade.

free parameters (2)
  • Bulk density of minor planet = 2 g cm^-3
    Assumed for all calculations; sets the rubble-pile Roche radius and scales tau linearly in Eq (11). Chosen as a typical asteroid density, not fitted to data.
  • Erosional threshold q_v = 10
    Threshold for returning ejecta to be erosional, imported from Cuk et al. (2023), calibrated with Stewart & Leinhardt (2012) collision outcomes. The central condition q_v >= 10 depends on this empirical value.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Minor planets are strengthless rubble piles, spherical, and of uniform density
    Used throughout to define the Roche radius (Eq 1) and compute escape velocities; stated in Sections 2 and 3.
  • domain assumption The Cuk et al. (2023) sesquinary catastrophe formalism, including Eq (6) for q_v and Eq (10) for tau, applies to minor planets orbiting white dwarfs when tidal disruption is avoided
    The paper imports this solar-system satellite framework without re-derivation; the threshold q_v >= 10 is empirical.
  • domain assumption Some initial mass ejection exists to start the cascade
    The paper lists possible ejecta sources in Section 5.2 but does not compute their rates; without an initial impact or mass loss the collisional timescale tau does not bound the destruction time.
  • domain assumption General relativistic apsidal precession is the dominant misalignment mechanism
    Assumed after comparing with oblateness, magnetic, and companion-induced precession timescales in Section 3.1.
  • standard math Kepler's third law and two-body orbital mechanics
    Used to map observed periods to semi-major axes and to derive Eq (11).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bounding destruction timescales of minor planets orbiting white dwarfs with the sesquinary catastrophe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2ODM4IBV

@misc{pith2026250705090,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bounding destruction timescales of minor planets orbiting white dwarfs with the sesquinary catastrophe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2ODM4IBV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.05090}
}
abstract

Dynamical activity attributed to the destruction of minor planets orbiting white dwarfs has now been photometrically monitored in individual systems for up to one decade, long enough to measure significant cessation and re-emergence of transit features. Further, periodicities which hint at the presence of debris orbiting exterior to the white dwarf Roche radius, along with widely varying estimates for debris disc lifetimes (up to Myrs), complicate theories for the formation and dynamical evolution of these systems. Here, we illustrate that minor planets orbiting white dwarfs with periods of $\approx$5-25 hours and longer while completely or partially avoiding tidal disruption satisfy the conditions for the occurrence of the sesquinary catastrophe, a phenomenon that occurs in the solar system when impacts from returning ejecta from a moon are fast enough to be erosional to the point of destruction. We hence find that the region corresponding to $\approx$1-4 white dwarf rubble-pile Roche radii represents a danger zone where the collisional timescale for the sesquinary catastrophe to occur is $\sim 10^2-10^5$ yr, suggesting that debris discs around white dwarfs are in a state of semi-continuous replenishment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.05090 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Semi-major axis a versus orbital period T for a minor planet around a white dwarf with a mass given by, from the top to bottom solid black curve, MWD = 0.8M⊙, 0.7M⊙, 0.6M⊙, 0.5M⊙, and 0.4M⊙. The bottom two hor￾izontal dashed lines correspond to the rubble-pile Roche radii rRoche of a 0.65M⊙ white dwarf for a minor planet with density ρmp = 2 g cm−3 which is not spinning (blue) and is spinning synchronously with the … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The apsidal misalignment timescale as a function of the minor planet’s orbital period T and its orbital eccentricity e. In most cases, these timescales approximate the minimum timescale over which the sesquinary catastrophe can occur. a mini-Neptune or Super-Earth would generate misalign￾ment timescales which are only a few orders of magnitude longer. Other minor planets or a debris disc currently in the sys￾tem are… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Values of the minor planet mass for which the sesquinary catastrophe occurs around white dwarfs (qv ≳ 10). The top panel models the case where differential apsidal pre￾cession creates the catastrophe (true for nearly all white dwarf planetary systems), and the bottom panel models the case where differential nodal precession creates or contributes to the catas￾trophe (only true when a giant planet is close to the deb… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The collisional timescale τ as a function of the thresh￾old for the sesquinary catastrophe to occur (qv ≳ 10). The de￾pendence is monotonic, and is a strong (∝ T 3 ) function of or￾bital period (equation 11). The solid lines correspond to i = 2◦ and e = 0, whereas the …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The collisional timescales for a minor planet on a highly eccentric orbit (e > 0.9) breaking up due to the sesquinary catastrophe (qv ≳ 10) in the ZTF J0139+5245 system, where reaching the rubble pile Roche radius with T = 107 days from au-scale distances would require…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The collisional timescale τ for minor planets which are assumed to reside on orbits with the same main periodicities observed in the WD 1145+017, ZTF J0328-1219, SBSS 1232+563 and WD 1054-226 white dwarf planetary systems. The upper and lower panels highlight the diffe…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

125 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L., Zahnle, K

    Alvarellos, J. L., Zahnle, K. J., Dobrovolskis, A. R., Hamill, P. \ 2005, Icarus, 178, 1, 104. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.04.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.04.017 2005

  2. [2]

    L., Zahnle, K

    Alvarellos, J. L., Zahnle, K. J., Dobrovolskis, A. R., Hamill, P.\ 2008, Icarus, 194, 2, 636. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2007.09.025

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2007.09.025 2008

  3. [3]

    L., Dobrovolskis, A

    Alvarellos, J. L., Dobrovolskis, A. R., Zahnle, K. J., Hamill, P., Dones, L., Robbins, S.\ 2017, Icarus, 284, 70. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2016.10.028

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2016.10.028 2017

  4. [4]

    Antoniadou, K. I. & Veras, D.\ 2019, A&A, 629, A126. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935996

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935996 2019

  5. [5]

    Antoniadou, K. I. & Veras, D.\ 2024, A&A, 690, A249. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451714

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451714 2024

  6. [6]

    et al.\ 2024, MNRAS, 530, 1, 117

    Aungwerojwit, A. et al.\ 2024, MNRAS, 530, 1, 117. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae750

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae750 2024

  7. [7]

    P., Levens, C

    Ballering, N. P., Levens, C. I., Su, K. Y. L., Cleeves, L. I.\ 2022, ApJ, 939, 2, 108. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9a4a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9a4a 2022

  8. [8]

    & Adams, F

    Batygin, K. & Adams, F. C.\ 2013, ApJ, 778, 2, 169. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/778/2/169

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/778/2/169 2013

Show all 125 references
  1. [9]

    Z., Adams, F

    Becker, J., Seligman, D. Z., Adams, F. C., Styczinski, M .J.\ 2023, ApJL, 945, 2, L24. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbe44

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    R.\ 2025, ApJ, 979, 2, 99

    Becker, J., Vanderburg, A., & Livesey, J. R.\ 2025, ApJ, 979, 2, 99. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada149

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abafbe

    B \'e dard, A., Bergeron, P., Brassard, P., Fontaine, G.\ 2020, ApJ, 901, 2, 93. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abafbe

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    et al.\ 2025, Accepted for publication in PASP, arXiv:2502.05502

    Bhattacharjee, S. et al.\ 2025, Accepted for publication in PASP, arXiv:2502.05502. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.05502

    2025 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    B., Dones, L., Alvarellos, J

    Bierhaus, E. B., Dones, L., Alvarellos, J. L., Zahnle, K.\ 2012, Icarus, 218, 1, 602. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.12.011

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    J., & Wyatt, M

    Bonsor, A., Mustill, A. J., & Wyatt, M. C.\ 2011, MNRAS, 414, 2, 930. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18524.x

    2011

  7. [15]

    & Veras, D.\ 2015, MNRAS, 454, 1, 53

    Bonsor, A. & Veras, D.\ 2015, MNRAS, 454, 1, 53. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1913

    2015 doi

  8. [16]

    P., Ferrario, L., Tout, C

    Briggs, G. P., Ferrario, L., Tout, C. A., Wickramasinghe, D. T.\ 2018, MNRAS, 478, 1, 899. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1150

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Bromley, B. C. & Kenyon, S. J.\ 2022, AJ, 164, 6, 229. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac9301

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    G., Bonsor, A., & Malamud, U.\ 2022, MNRAS, 509, 2, 2404

    Brouwers, M. G., Bonsor, A., & Malamud, U.\ 2022, MNRAS, 509, 2, 2404. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3009

    2022 doi

  11. [19]

    G., Bonsor, A., & Malamud, U.\ 2023, MNRAS, 519, 2, 2646

    Brouwers, M. G., Bonsor, A., & Malamud, U.\ 2023, MNRAS, 519, 2, 2646. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3316

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    C., Veras, D., & G \"a nsicke, B

    Brown, J. C., Veras, D., & G \"a nsicke, B. T.\ 2017, MNRAS, 468, 2, 1575. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx428

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    F., Dunlap, B

    Coutu, S., Dufour, P., Bergeron, P., Blouin, S., Loranger, E., Allard, N. F., Dunlap, B. H. \ 2019, ApJ, 885, 1, 74. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab46b9

    2019 doi

  14. [22]

    P., Minton, D

    \'C uk, M., Hamilton, D. P., Minton, D. A., Stewart, S. T. \ 2023, ApJ, 957, 2, 62. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acf613

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    et al.\ 2025, MNRAS,

    Cunningham, T. et al.\ 2025, MNRAS,

    2025

  16. [24]

    Debes, J. H. & Sigurdsson, S.\ 2002, ApJ, 572, 1, 556. doi:10.1086/340291

    2002 doi

  17. [25]

    H., Walsh, K

    Debes, J. H., Walsh, K. J., & Stark, C.\ 2012, ApJ, 747, 2, 148. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/148

    2012 doi

  18. [26]

    Debes, J. H. et al.\ 2025, , arXiv:2506.21224, accepted for publication in AJ. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2506.21224

    2025 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    M., Redfield, S., & Veras, D.\ 2020, ApJ, 893, 2, 166

    Duvvuri, G. M., Redfield, S., & Veras, D.\ 2020, ApJ, 893, 2, 166. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab7fa0

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/805

    Farihi, J., Jura, M., & Zuckerman, B.\ 2009, ApJ, 694, 2, 805. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/805

    2009 doi

  21. [29]

    et al.\ 2022, MNRAS, 511, 2, 1647

    Farihi, J. et al.\ 2022, MNRAS, 511, 2, 1647. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3475

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    Farihi, J., Su, K. Y. L., Melis, C., et al.\ 2025, ApJL, 981, 1, L5. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adae88

    2025 doi

  23. [31]

    T.\ 2015, Solar System Reviews, 191, 1-4, 111

    Ferrario, L., de Martino, D., & G \"a nsicke, B. T.\ 2015, Solar System Reviews, 191, 1-4, 111. doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0152-0

    2015 doi

  24. [32]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab585a

    Fortin-Archambault, M., Dufour, P., & Xu, S.\ 2020, ApJ, 888, 1, 47. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab585a

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    French, R. G. et al.\ 2025, Icarus, 431, 116463. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2025.116463

    2025

  26. [34]

    Frewen, S. F. N. & Hansen, B. M. S.\ 2014, MNRAS, 439, 3, 2442. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu097

    2014 doi

  27. [35]

    T., Marsh, T

    G \"a nsicke, B. T., Marsh, T. R., Southworth, J., Rebassa-Mansergas, A. \ 2006, Science, 314, 5807, 1908. doi:10.1126/science.1135033

    2006 doi

  28. [36]

    G \"a nsicke, B. T. et al.\ 2016, ApJL, 818, 1, L7. doi:10.3847/2041-8205/818/1/L7

    2016 doi

  29. [37]

    T., Schreiber, M

    G \"a nsicke, B. T., Schreiber, M. R., Toloza, O., Gentile-Fusillo, N. P., Koester, D., Manser, C. J. \ 2019, Nature, 576, 61. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1789-8

    2019 doi

  30. [38]

    L., Rappaport, S., Kaye, T

    Gary, B. L., Rappaport, S., Kaye, T. G., Alonso, R., Hambschs, F. J. \ 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3, 3267. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2921

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    S., Farihi, J., G \"a nsicke, B

    Girven, J., Brinkworth, C. S., Farihi, J., G \"a nsicke, B. T., Hoard, D. W., Marsh, T. R., Koester, D. \ 2012, ApJ, 749, 154

    2012

  32. [40]

    R., Matthews, K., Neugebauer, G., Soifer, B

    Graham, J. R., Matthews, K., Neugebauer, G., Soifer, B. T. \ 1990, ApJ, 357, 216. doi:10.1086/168907

    1990 doi

  33. [41]

    T.\ 2017, MNRAS, 464, 1, 321

    Gurri, P., Veras, D., & G \"a nsicke, B. T.\ 2017, MNRAS, 464, 1, 321. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2293

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    Hamers, A. S. & Portegies Zwart, S. F.\ 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1, L84. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw134

    2016 doi

  35. [43]

    J., Guidry, J

    Hermes, J. J., Guidry, J. A., Vanderbosch, Z. P., Badenas-Agusti, M., Xu, S., Kao, M. L., Rodriguez, A. C., Hawkins, K.\ 2025, ApJ, 980, 1, 56. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada5fd

    2025 doi

  36. [44]

    A., Cutter, R., & Wynn, G

    Hogg, M. A., Cutter, R., & Wynn, G. A.\ 2021, MNRAS, 500, 3, 2986. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3316

    2021 doi

  37. [45]

    et al.\ 2019, Science, 364, 6445, aat2965

    Iess, L. et al.\ 2019, Science, 364, 6445, aat2965. doi:10.1126/science.aat2965

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    et al.\ 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1, 703

    Izquierdo, P. et al.\ 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1, 703. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2315

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    Jacobson, S. A. & Scheeres, D. J.\ 2011, Icarus, 214, 1, 161. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.04.009

    2011 doi

  40. [48]

    P., Wyatt, M

    Jackson, A. P., Wyatt, M. C., Bonsor, A., Veras, D. \ 2014, MNRAS, 440, 4, 3757

    2014

  41. [49]

    M., Nakano, R., Kim, Y., Hirabayashi, M.\ 2022, PSJ, 3, 1, 16

    Jackson, P. M., Nakano, R., Kim, Y., Hirabayashi, M.\ 2022, PSJ, 3, 1, 16. doi:10.3847/PSJ/ac4031

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345954

    Jin, Z., Li, D., & Zhu, Z.-H.\ 2023, A&A, 674, A52. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345954

    2023 doi

  43. [51]

    doi:10.1086/374036

    Jura, M.\ 2003, ApjL, 584, 2, L91. doi:10.1086/374036

    2003 doi

  44. [52]

    Kenyon, S. J. & Bromley, B. C.\ 2017a, ApJ, 844, 2, 116. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7b85

    doi

  45. [53]

    Kenyon, S. J. & Bromley, B. C.\ 2017b, ApJ, 850, 1, 50. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9570

    doi

  46. [54]

    P., Dimitrov, D

    Kjurkchieva, D. P., Dimitrov, D. P., & Petrov, N. I.\ 2017, PASA, 34, e032. doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.28

    2017 doi

  47. [55]

    T., & Farihi, J.\ 2014, A&A, 566, A34

    Koester, D., G \"a nsicke, B. T., & Farihi, J.\ 2014, A&A, 566, A34. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423691

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad73d3

    Kurban, A., Zhou, X., Wang, N., Huang, Y.-F., Wang, Y.-B., Nurmamat, N.\ 2024, ApJ, 974, 1, 100. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad73d3

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    J., & Davies, M

    Li, D., Mustill, A. J., & Davies, M. B.\ 2021, MNRAS, 508, 4, 5671. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2949

    2021 doi

  50. [58]

    K.\ 2025a, MNRAS, 537, 2, 2214

    Li, Y., Bonsor, A., Shorttle, O., Rogers, L. K.\ 2025a, MNRAS, 537, 2, 2214. doi:10.1093/mnras/staf182

    doi

  51. [59]

    Li, Y., Bonsor, A., Shorttle, O.\ 2025b, MNRAS In Press, arXiv:2506.20316

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Makarov, V. V. & Veras, D.\ 2019, ApJ, 886, 2, 127. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c95

    2019 doi

  53. [61]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3940

    Malamud, U., Grishin, E., & Brouwers, M.\ 2021, MNRAS, 501, 3, 3806. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3940

    2021 doi

  54. [62]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.07427

    Malamud, U.\ 2024, Encyclopedia of Astrophysics, White dwarf systems: exoplanets and debris disks, arXiv:2403.07427. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.07427

    2024 doi

  55. [63]

    Manser, C. J. et al.\ 2019, Science, 364, 6435, 66. doi:10.1126/science.aat5330

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    J., G \"a nsicke, B

    Manser, C. J., G \"a nsicke, B. T., Gentile Fusillo, N. P., Ashley, R., Breedt, E., Hollands, M., Izquierdo, P, Pelisoli, I.\ 2020, MNRAS, 493, 2, 2127. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa359

    2020 doi

  57. [65]

    et al.\ 2020, MNRAS, 499, 2, 1890

    McCleery, J. et al.\ 2020, MNRAS, 499, 2, 1890. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2030

    2020 doi

  58. [66]

    McDonald, C. H. & Veras, D.\ 2021, MNRAS, 506, 3, 4031. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1906

    2021 doi

  59. [67]

    McDonald, C. H. & Veras, D.\ 2023, MNRAS, 520, 3, 4009. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad382

    2023 doi

  60. [68]

    J., Villaver, E., Veras, D., Bonsor, A.\ 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3, 3939

    Mustill, A. J., Villaver, E., Veras, D., Bonsor, A.\ 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3, 3939. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty446

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    doi:10.1086/151568

    Nauenberg, M.\ 1972, ApJ, 175, 417. doi:10.1086/151568

    1972 doi

  62. [70]

    & Asphaug, E.\ 2016, Nature Communications, 7, 12591

    Nayak, M. & Asphaug, E.\ 2016, Nature Communications, 7, 12591. doi:10.1038/ncomms12591

    2016 doi

  63. [71]

    doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2015.12.026

    Nayak, M., Nimmo, F., & Udrea, B.\ 2016, Icarus, 267, 220. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2015.12.026

    2016 doi

  64. [72]

    O'Brien, M. W. et al.\ 2023, MNRAS, 518, 2, 3055. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3303

    2023 doi

  65. [73]

    O'Connor, C. E. & Lai, D.\ 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3, 4005. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2645

    2020 doi

  66. [74]

    E., Teyssandier, J., & Lai, D.\ 2022, MNRAS, 513, 3, 4178

    O'Connor, C. E., Teyssandier, J., & Lai, D.\ 2022, MNRAS, 513, 3, 4178. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1189

    2022 doi

  67. [75]

    E., Lai, D., & Seligman, D

    O'Connor, C. E., Lai, D., & Seligman, D. Z.\ 2023, MNRAS, 524, 4, 6181. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2281

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    O., Soethe, L

    Oliveira da Rosa, G., Kepler, S. O., Soethe, L. T. T., Romero, A. D., Bell, K. J. \ 2024, ApJ, 974, 2, 314. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6987

    2024 doi

  69. [77]

    & Mu \ n oz, D

    Petrovich, C. & Mu \ n oz, D. J.\ 2017, ApJ, 834, 2, 116. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/116

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

    & Rein, H.\ 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3, 2526

    Pham, D. & Rein, H.\ 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3, 2526. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae986

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730936

    Pichierri, G., Morbidelli, A., & Lai, D.\ 2017, A&A, 605, A23. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730936

    2017 doi

  72. [80]

    L., Kaye, T., Vanderburg, A., Croll, B., Benni, P., Foote, J.\ 2016, MNRAS, 458, 4, 3904

    Rappaport, S., Gary, B. L., Kaye, T., Vanderburg, A., Croll, B., Benni, P., Foote, J.\ 2016, MNRAS, 458, 4, 3904. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw612

    2016 doi

  73. [81]

    L., Vanderburg, A., Xu, S

    Rappaport, S., Gary, B. L., Vanderburg, A., Xu, S. Pooley, D., Mukai, K.\ 2018, MNRAS, 474, 1, 933. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2663

    2018 doi

  74. [82]

    & Lai, D.\ 2024, MNRAS, 527, 4, 11664

    Rodet, L. & Lai, D.\ 2024, MNRAS, 527, 4, 11664. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3905

    2024 doi

  75. [83]

    Rogers, L. K. et al.\ 2025, MNRAS, 537, 1, L72. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slae117

    2025 doi

  76. [84]

    Shestakova, L. I. & Serebryanskiy, A. V.\ 2023, MNRAS, 524, 3, 4506. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2006

    2023 doi

  77. [85]

    L., Martin, R

    Smallwood, J. L., Martin, R. G., Livio, M., Lubow, S. H.\ 2018, MNRAS, 480, 1, 57. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1819

    2018 doi

  78. [86]

    L., Martin, R

    Smallwood, J. L., Martin, R. G., Livio, M., Veras, D.\ 2021, MNRAS, 504, 3, 3375. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1077

    2021 doi

  79. [87]

    W., & Batygin, K.\ 2018, AJ, 155, 4, 167

    Spalding, C., Marx, N. W., & Batygin, K.\ 2018, AJ, 155, 4, 167. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aab43a

    2018 doi

  80. [88]

    P., Naoz, S., & Zuckerman, B.\ 2017, ApJL, 844, 2, L16

    Stephan, A. P., Naoz, S., & Zuckerman, B.\ 2017, ApJL, 844, 2, L16. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa7cf3

    2017 doi

  81. [89]

    E.\ 1939, MNRAS, 99, 451

    Sterne, T. E.\ 1939, MNRAS, 99, 451. doi:10.1093/mnras/99.5.451

    1939 doi

  82. [90]

    Stewart, S. T. & Leinhardt, Z. M.\ 2012, ApJ, 751, 1, 32. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/751/1/32

    2012 doi

  83. [91]

    X., Spurzem, R., Portegies Zwart, S.\ 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2, 2460

    Stock, K., Veras, D., Cai, M. X., Spurzem, R., Portegies Zwart, S.\ 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2, 2460. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac602

    2022 doi

  84. [92]

    Swan, A., Farihi, J., Su, K. Y. L., et al.\ 2024, MNRAS, 529, 1, L41. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad198

    2024 doi

  85. [93]

    J., Nealon, R., Liptai, D., Manser, C

    Trevascus, D., Price, D. J., Nealon, R., Liptai, D., Manser, C. J.\ 2021, MNRAS, 505, 1, L21. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slab043

    2021 doi

  86. [94]

    L., Doyle, A

    Trierweiler, I. L., Doyle, A. E., Melis, C., Walsh, K. J., Young, E. D.\ 2022, ApJ, 936, 1, 30. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac86d5

    2022 doi

  87. [95]

    C., Shannon, A.\ 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2, 2784

    van Lieshout, R., Kral, Q., Charnoz, S., Wyatt, M. C., Shannon, A.\ 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2, 2784. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1271

    2018 doi

  88. [96]

    A., Xu, S., et al.\ 2020, Nature, 585, 7825, 363

    Vanderburg, A., Rappaport, S. A., Xu, S., et al.\ 2020, Nature, 585, 7825, 363. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2713-y

    2020 doi

  89. [97]

    et al.\ 2020, ApJ, 897, 2, 171

    Vanderbosch, Z. et al.\ 2020, ApJ, 897, 2, 171. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9649

    2020 doi

  90. [98]

    Vanderbosch, Z. P. et al.\ 2021, ApJ, 917, 1, 41. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac0822

    2021 doi

  91. [99]

    et al.\ 2015, Nature, 526, 7574, 546

    Vanderburg, A. et al.\ 2015, Nature, 526, 7574, 546. doi:10.1038/nature15527

    2015 doi

  92. [100]

    & Rappaport, S

    Vanderburg, A. & Rappaport, S. A.\ 2018, 37. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7\_37

    2018 doi

  93. [101]

    R., & G \"a nsicke, B

    Veras, D., Marsh, T. R., & G \"a nsicke, B. T.\ 2016, MNRAS, 461, 2, 1413. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1324

    2016 doi

  94. [102]

    J., Leinhardt, Z

    Veras, D., Carter, P. J., Leinhardt, Z. M., et al.\ 2017, MNRAS, 465, 1, 1008. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2748

    2017 doi

  95. [103]

    & Fuller, J.\ 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2, 2941

    Veras, D. & Fuller, J.\ 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2, 2941. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2339

    2019 doi

  96. [104]

    V., et al.\ 2019, MNRAS, 486, 3, 3831

    Veras, D., Efroimsky, M., Makarov, V. V., et al.\ 2019, MNRAS, 486, 3, 3831. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz965

    2019 doi

  97. [105]

    & Fuller, J.\ 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4, 6059

    Veras, D. & Fuller, J.\ 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4, 6059. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa309

    2020 doi

  98. [106]

    & Heng, K.\ 2020, MNRAS, 496, 2, 2292

    Veras, D. & Heng, K.\ 2020, MNRAS, 496, 2, 2292. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1632

    2020 doi

  99. [107]

    & Kurosawa, K.\ 2020, MNRAS, 494, 1, 442

    Veras, D. & Kurosawa, K.\ 2020, MNRAS, 494, 1, 442. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa621

    2020 doi

  100. [108]

    H., & Makarov, V

    Veras, D., McDonald, C. H., & Makarov, V. V.\ 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4, 5291. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa243

    2020 doi

  101. [109]

    J., Malamud, U., Cunningham, T., Dobbs-Dixon, I.\ 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1, 1148

    Veras, D., Georgakarakos, N., Mustill, A. J., Malamud, U., Cunningham, T., Dobbs-Dixon, I.\ 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1, 1148. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1667

    2021 doi

  102. [110]

    doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190647926.013.238

    Veras, D.\ 2021, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Planetary Science, Planetary Systems Around White Dwarfs, 1. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190647926.013.238

    2021

  103. [111]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3490

    Veras, D., Birader, Y., & Zaman, U.\ 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3, 3379. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3490

    2022 doi

  104. [112]

    & Rosengren, A

    Veras, D. & Rosengren, A. J.\ 2023, MNRAS, 519, 4, 6257. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad130

    2023 doi

  105. [113]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3274

    Veras, D., Georgakarakos, N., & Dobbs-Dixon, I.\ 2023, MNRAS, 518, 3, 4537. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3274

    2023 doi

  106. [114]

    Veras, D., Mustill, A. J., & Bonsor, A.\ 2024, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Volume 90: The Evolution and Delivery of Rocky Extra-Solar Materials to White Dwarfs, Edited by Natalie Hinkel, Keith Putirka, and Siyi Xu; 90, 1, 141. doi:10.2138/rmg.2024.90.05

    2024 doi

  107. [115]

    R., Colombo, G., & Franklin, F

    Ward, W. R., Colombo, G., & Franklin, F. A.\ 1976, Icarus, 28, 4, 441. doi:10.1016/0019-1035(76)90117-2

    1976 doi

  108. [116]

    T., G \"a nsicke, B

    Williams, J. T., G \"a nsicke, B. T., Swan, A., O'Brien, M. W., Izquierdo, P., Cutolo, A. M., Cunningham, T. \ 2024, A&A, 691, A352. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450509

    2024 doi

  109. [117]

    C., Farihi, J., Pringle, J

    Wyatt, M. C., Farihi, J., Pringle, J. E., Bonsor, A.\ 2014, MNRAS, 439, 4, 3371. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu183

    2014 doi

  110. [118]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb3fc

    Xu, S., Lai, S., & Dennihy, E.\ 2020, ApJ, 902, 2, 127. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb3fc

    2020 doi

  111. [119]

    L., Dobrovolskis, A., Hamill, P.\ 2008, Icarus, 194, 2, 660

    Zahnle, K., Alvarellos, J. L., Dobrovolskis, A., Hamill, P.\ 2008, Icarus, 194, 2, 660. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2007.10.024

    2008 doi

  112. [120]

    et al.\ 2017, Icarus, 294, 98

    Zhang, Y. et al.\ 2017, Icarus, 294, 98. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2017.04.027

    2017 doi

  113. [121]

    & Michel, P.\ 2020, A&A, 640, A102

    Zhang, Y. & Michel, P.\ 2020, A&A, 640, A102. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037856

    2020 doi

  114. [122]

    Zhang, Y., Liu, S.-F., & Lin, D. N. C.\ 2021, ApJ, 915, 2, 91. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac00ae

    2021 doi

  115. [123]

    Zhou, W.-H., Liu, S.-F., & Lin, D. N. C.\ 2024, A&A, 687, A107. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449271

    2024 doi

  116. [124]

    & Becklin, E

    Zuckerman, B. & Becklin, E. E.\ 1987, Nature, 330, 6144, 138. doi:10.1038/330138a0

    1987 doi

  117. [125]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    Zuckerman, B., Melis, C., Klein, B., Koester, D., Jura, M.\ 2010, ApJ, 722, 1, 725. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    2010 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.