Eclipses by Artificial Satellites to Measure the Angular Sizes of Stars

Albert Wai Kit Lau; George F. Smoot; Leo W.H. Fung; Richard Massey

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Eclipses by Artificial Satellites to Measure the Angular Sizes of Stars

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Eclipses of bright stars by artificial satellites and the Moon can measure stellar angular diameters below the optical diffraction limit, down to about 0.1 milliarcseconds for the brightest targets.

desk verdict A promising feasibility study for measuring stellar diameters via satellite occultations, but the headline numbers rest on an unvalidated straight-edge model for satellites that needs a careful check. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.11161 v1 pith:5E2FPPAT submitted 2026-08-11 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.SR

Leo W.H. Fung , Albert Wai Kit Lau , Richard Massey , George F. Smoot This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR

keywords occultationimagingstellarangulardiametersFresneldiffractionphotoncountingartificialsatelliteconstellationslunarsuper-resolutionastronomyBayesianinference

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

Most stars are too small and distant for even the largest telescopes to resolve, because the diffraction limit of a 10-metre telescope sits at tens of milliarcseconds at optical wavelengths. This paper argues that watching a star wink out behind a fast-moving foreground object bypasses that limit, because the star's angular size is encoded in the time-dependent diffraction pattern of the occulting edge. Using artificial satellites in low and medium Earth orbit, and the Moon, the authors estimate that sub-2-milliarcsecond resolution becomes available for roughly $10^4$ stars per year, with a few dozen to a hundred stellar diameters measured to better than 0.5 milliarcseconds. The practical requirement is microsecond-level photon counting, which fast silicon photomultiplier instruments have already demonstrated.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Fresnel diffraction integral for a straight-edged mask, which acts as a 'negative point-spread function': instead of forming an image, the occulting edge blocks light and imprints a damped oscillatory fringe pattern on the total detected flux. The angular Fresnel scale $\theta_F = \sqrt{\lambda D_{\mathrm{OM}}/2}/D_{\mathrm{OM}}$ sets the fringe spacing, and a star's angular diameter $\theta_*$ suppresses the fringe amplitudes through an amplitude-suppression factor and a small phase shift, approximated by a WKB expression. This converts spatial structure on the stellar disc into a temporal signal that an ultra-fast photon counter can record, with the fringe period fixing $\theta_F$ and the fringe damping fixing $\theta_*$.

What would settle it

Occult a bright star whose angular diameter is already known from long-baseline interferometry with a variety of satellites, using a microsecond photon counter; if the recovered diameters disagree between satellites, or if a point-like star produces fringes that deviate from the straight-edge Fresnel prediction, the edge model is falsified. A tabletop version would diffract a laser around a razor edge with added panel gaps and test whether the predicted high-order fringes survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that occultation imaging is no longer a rare-event technique: the thousands of artificial satellites now in orbit make it a population-scale survey tool. When a satellite edge crosses the line of sight, it casts a Fresnel diffraction pattern that sweeps past the observer on microsecond timescales, and the finite angular diameter of the background star damps the amplitude of the higher fringes in that pattern. The authors simulate photon-counting observations, analyse them with a Bayesian model that handles Poisson shot noise, and show that stellar diameters are recovered without bias. In their estimates, navigation satellites in medium Earth orbit deliver sub-milliarcsecond resolution for bright stars and outperform lunar occultations once the background star is dimmer than roughly tenth magnitude, while low-Earth-orbit satellites provide hundreds to thousands of intermediate-resolution events per night. The resolution limit is set by photon shot noise and the angular Fresnel scale, not by telescope aperture.

Load-bearing premise

The entire prediction rests on treating each satellite as a clean, opaque, straight-edged screen; a real satellite with solar panels, gaps, antennas, and changing orientation could distort the Fresnel fringe pattern from which the stellar diameter is read.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Occultations by medium-Earth-orbit navigation satellites yield about ten events per night at resolutions better than roughly 3 milliarcseconds, independent of lunar phase.
Lunar occultations reach about 0.1 milliarcsecond resolution for the brightest stars, at a rate of roughly once per week; navigation satellites take over for fainter stars, where the Moon's scattered light dominates the noise.
Low-Earth-orbit satellite constellations can in principle generate more than one hundred thousand sub-diffraction-limited events per day, with the practical rate limited by telescope pointing overhead to a few hundred per night.
The required detector speed already exists in demonstrated fast photon-counting imagers with nanosecond-scale timing, and in large Cherenkov telescope arrays.
Because precision scales with photon shot noise and the Fresnel scale, the method's resolution depends only weakly on aperture size and wavelength, so it complements rather than replaces diffraction-limited telescopes.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: if real satellites are not clean straight edges, the predicted fringe pattern would be corrupted; modelling each satellite as a compound mask with panels, gaps, antennas, and orientation would yield concrete predictions for how recovered diameters and event rates change.
Beyond the paper: the same time-domain logic applies to any artificial object with a known ephemeris, including debris and future constellations, so the survey power of the method will grow as the orbital population changes.
Beyond the paper: pairing these angular diameters with existing parallax measurements would turn the method into a physical-radius census for supergiants and binary stars, which is where the population-level payoff would be largest.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a solid feasibility study with one load-bearing assumption that worries me. The idea—using artificial satellites as occulting masks to measure stellar angular diameters via Fresnel diffraction—is genuinely new, and the authors do the work properly: clear formalism, a sensible statistical resolution definition, a Bayesian pipeline that recovers injected diameters without bias, and realistic detector parameters from SPINA. The event-rate estimates are a useful first cut. The lunar occultation part is on well-trodden ground.

The soft spot is the straight-edge model for satellites (Section 2.1). The paper cites the standard straight-edge approximation, but that is derived for the Moon, where the Fresnel zone D_F ~ 0.01 m is tiny compared with the lunar limb. For GPS-class MEO satellites, D_F ~ 2 m, comparable to the satellite body, solar panels, and gaps. A real satellite is a finite, multi-edged, partly transparent object whose projected silhouette changes as it rotates. The diffraction pattern is a coherent sum of edge waves, not the half-plane pattern. The claimed 0.5 mas precision corresponds to roughly a 1% fringe-amplitude change at the photon rates used in Fig. 5; unmodelled shape features can plausibly produce distortions of that size. The authors note the straight-edge condition but never quantify it for satellites. This does not kill the lunar occultation results, and it may be fixable by modeling actual satellite shapes (or arguing that the first edge dominates and is straight over many D_F), but without that, the satellite resolution and rate numbers are conditional on an idealized mask.

Minor points: the event-rate calculation assumes circular non-overlapping orbits and an approximate star-count calibration; acceptable for a first estimate but worth tightening. The code is 'available on reasonable request'; for a simulation paper, that is a reproducibility barrier.

Bottom line: the paper deserves a serious referee. I would send it out, with the instruction that the straight-edge assumption needs a quantitative check or a revised claim. If the authors can show that the multi-edge structure does not bias the inferred diameters, this becomes a genuinely useful proposal. As it stands, it's a promising feasibility study whose headline numbers should be taken with a grain of salt.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. Fung et al. propose using high-speed photon-counting detectors to record Fresnel diffraction patterns during occultations of bright stars by artificial satellites (Starlink in LEO, GPS-like satellites in MEO) and by the Moon, and to infer stellar angular diameters below the telescope diffraction limit. They derive a straight-edge Fresnel model (Eq. 1), define the angular resolution as the 95% upper bound of the posterior for a point source (Eq. 7), simulate Poissonian light curves for MEO occultations, validate a Bayesian inference pipeline on injected diameters (Fig. 5), and compute event rates for LEO, MEO, and lunar masks (Eqs. 11-13). The headline claims are <2 milliarcsecond resolution for ~10^4 stars per year, with ~10^1-10^2 stellar diameters constrained to better than 0.5 milliarcseconds, using SPINA-type detectors with ~1 microsecond timing.

Significance. If the idealized edge model is adequate, this is a genuinely clever and potentially transformative route to population-scale stellar angular diameters, complementary to intensity interferometry and far cheaper than constructing very large diffraction-limited telescopes. The Bayesian treatment of the photon-starved regime, the explicit statistical definition of resolution, and the validation with injected signals are clear strengths. However, the significance of the artificial-satellite results is conditional on treating each satellite as an opaque straight half-plane; the paper does not yet demonstrate this for real spacecraft. The lunar-occultation component is on much firmer ground, since the lunar limb is a long-established straight-edge approximation.

major comments (3)

[§2.1, Eq. (1); Table 1] The half-plane Fresnel model is not justified for artificial satellites. For GPS-like MEO, the Fresnel scale D_F = sqrt(lambda*D_OM/2) is about 2 m at lambda = 500 nm, comparable to the bus, solar panels, and gaps of a navigation satellite; for LEO, D_F is roughly 0.3-0.4 m, comparable to Starlink dimensions. A finite, multi-edged, partially transparent screen produces a coherent superposition of edge waves rather than the single-edge pattern of Eq. (1), and the projected silhouette changes with attitude on the ~100 microsecond timescale of the event. Since the claimed <0.5 mas precision corresponds to a small change in fringe amplitude, unmodelled three-dimensional structure can plausibly bias the inferred stellar diameter. The authors should simulate Fresnel diffraction from realistic satellite silhouettes (or at least from rectangular or gapped screens) over a range of orientations and show that the inferred diameter bias is below the quoted precision.
[§3.1, Eq. (8); Fig. 5] The validation pipeline assumes theta(t) = omega*t with the angular speed known from external tracking, and it does not marginalize over the projected edge velocity or orientation. Section 2.2 notes that omega*cos(phi) can be determined empirically, but this is not implemented in the likelihood (Eq. 8) or in the bias check (Fig. 5). For satellite events, an error in the assumed angular rate or a time-varying attitude directly shifts the phase of the diffraction fringes and can mimic the amplitude suppression that constrains theta_*. The reported sigma_theta values are therefore conditional on exactly known kinematics; a sensitivity analysis or marginalization over omega*cos(phi) is needed before the quoted precision can be taken as realistic.
[§4.2, Eqs. (12)-(13); Fig. 8] The event-rate calculation assumes circular non-overlapping orbits and multiplies the single-satellite swept solid angle by N_mask. Real LEO constellations have many satellites in shared orbital planes, so track overlap can be substantial, and visibility effects such as Earth shadow, sky background near the Moon, and satellite illumination are not included. The authors correctly label this as a coarse estimate, but the abstract's '~10^4 stars every year' and the cumulative rate curves in Fig. 8 are headline numbers. A rate estimate using current ephemerides and accounting for orbit overlap would calibrate the claim; alternatively the numbers should be presented as upper limits or order-of-magnitude estimates.

minor comments (5)

[§2.1, Eq. (5)] The phase-misalignment term 'pi*theta_*^2/8' is dimensionally inconsistent as written; it should be pi*theta_*^2/(8*theta_F^2) in angular units, or the equation should be expressed using normalized variables x = theta/theta_F and a = theta_*/theta_F.
[§2.3] The statement that occultation resolution is independent of wavelength relies on a flat SED with f_lambda proportional to lambda and on a cancellation between the Fresnel-scale growth and photon-counting SNR; this should be presented as a special illustrative case, not as a general property of the method.
[§2.2] The text contains a typo: 'Kelper's law' should read 'Kepler's law'.
[Fig. 5] The middle panel states that bias is consistent with zero, but no error bars or numeric bias values are shown; please include the measured bias and scatter so the reader can verify the claim.
[Code and Data Availability] The source code is available only 'on reasonable request'; since the paper presents reproducible simulations, making the code public would strengthen the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a forward model from stated physical assumptions, and the claimed resolution and event-rate numbers are not fitted inputs relabelled as predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain starts from the Fresnel straight-edge model (Eq. 1), integrates it over a stellar disc (Eq. 3), treats n0, thetaF, DeltaT, and the Moon flux as known or chosen inputs, simulates Poisson light curves (Eq. 8), and then performs a Bayesian inversion for theta* (Eq. 10). The resolution theta_res is defined (Eq. 7) as the 95% upper bound of the posterior for a point source, and the numbers quoted in the abstract are outputs of this simulated forward model, not quantities fitted to data and then re-reported as predictions. The star-count calibration (Eq. 11) uses the external Gaia catalogue, and the SPINA detector parameters come from prior instrument papers by the same group, but those self-citations supply hardware performance numbers rather than the central physics claim; the Fresnel diffraction and occultation formalism is standard and independently citable. The validation in Section 3.3 recovers injected theta* values with the same generative model used to create the mock data; that tests the statistical pipeline, not the physical model, and the paper does not claim otherwise. The main residual concern is physical fidelity: real satellites are finite, partially transparent, multi-edged bodies rather than ideal half-planes, and an unmodelled 3D silhouette could distort the fringe amplitudes (Section 2.1, Eq. 1). That is a modelling and correctness risk, not a circularity, because the prediction does not reduce to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central feasibility numbers rest on several hand-chosen parameters and modeling axioms. The forward diffraction model is standard, but the application to satellites depends on the straight-edge assumption, Poisson noise assumptions, and the event-rate inputs (satellite counts, sizes, and the Gaia luminosity function). No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are inputs to a forward model, not fitted to the target result, so the circularity burden is low.

free parameters (6)

Moon residual brightness after masking = V = 2
Assumed that 93% of the new Moon's area can be masked or subtracted, leaving a residual apparent magnitude of 2. This strongly affects the lunar occultation noise budget and the resolution and rate curves in Figs 6-8.
Observing bandwidth = +/-50 nm at 500 nm
Chosen to avoid over-fitting unphysically high-order Fresnel fringes; truncates the fringe pattern and affects simulated light curves and resolution.
Telescope throughput x quantum efficiency = 30%
Assumed end-to-end efficiency at 500 nm; sets the photon rate n0 for a given magnitude and aperture (Fig 4), which directly drives the resolution and rate numbers.
Satellite geometric angular sizes = Starlink 3.8e3 mas; GPS-like 1.0e2 mas
Adopted typical satellite sizes at their orbital distances; directly sets the swept solid angle in the event-rate estimate (Eq 12).
Number of masks = Starlink 1e4; GPS-like 1e2
Adopted current and planned constellation counts; scales the event rate linearly in Eq 13 and is a major driver of the headline annual rate.
Stellar luminosity function normalization = 3.139e-4 (10^{0.414 m*} - 1) deg^-2
Calibrated power law using Gaia data (Eq 11); used to convert swept solid angle into occultation event rates. Gaia is incomplete for the bright stars that matter most for high-resolution events.

assumptions (8)

standard math Fresnel near-field diffraction integral describes the negative PSF of the mask
Standard scalar diffraction theory; Eq 1 is used with the near-field approximation D_OM/D_MS << 1.
ad hoc to paper The mask can be approximated as an opaque infinite straight edge
Section 2.1: 'If the angular size of the mask is much larger than the star, the geometry of the mask can be approximated as a straight edge [44].' Real satellites have finite, complex, possibly non-opaque shapes.
standard math Wavefronts from different regions of the stellar disc are uncorrelated, so intensities add
Footnote 4 in Section 2.1; holds because the relevant optical path difference is set by the wavelength, not the Fresnel scale.
domain assumption The angular speed of the mask is known with high precision from external tracking
Section 3.1: 'we assume the angular speed of the occulting mask is known from external constraints with high precision [45].' This fixes theta(t)=omega t in the likelihood.
domain assumption Photon counts follow Poisson statistics with negligible dark current and negligible satellite-reflected light
Section 3.1, Eq 8 and surrounding text; assumes other photon sources are negligible for satellite occultations when the Sun is below the horizon.
domain assumption Satellite orbits are circular and their projected sky ribbons do not overlap
Section 4.2: assumed for the simple solid-angle sweep estimate of event rates (Eqs 12-13).
domain assumption A uniform circular disc or a uniform box describes the stellar surface brightness
Section 2.1, Eq 4; ignores limb darkening and other realistic intensity profiles.
domain assumption The Gaia-calibrated luminosity function gives the correct number density of bright stars
Section 4.2, Eq 11; the paper notes Gaia is incomplete at the bright end, yet the event-rate estimates rely on this power law.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Eclipses by Artificial Satellites to Measure the Angular Sizes of Stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5E2FPPAT

@misc{pith2026260811161,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Eclipses by Artificial Satellites to Measure the Angular Sizes of Stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5E2FPPAT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.11161}
}

abstract

Direct measurements of the angular sizes of stars (other than our Sun) are inherently limited by telescopes' optical diffraction limit. The spatial diffraction limit can be overcome by using time-domain information when stars are `eclipsed' by anything moving in the foreground: artificial satellites or the Moon (known as `lunar occultation imaging'). Here we analyse the angular resolution achievable by high-speed photon counting devices, when stars are eclipsed for several microseconds by one of the thousands of satellites now in low or mid-Earth orbit. We also build a full Bayesian statistical treatment for analysing simulated observations. We show that eclipses by the moon and satellites deliver $<2$ milliarcsecond resolution for $\sim$$10^4$ stars every year, with the diameters of $\sim$$10^1 - 10^2$ stars constrained to better than $0.5$ milliarcseconds. The application of satellites requires an ultra-fast, photon-resolving detector, capable of continuous readout with inter-frame delay controlled within $\lesssim 1$ $\mu$s. Such a fast rate can easily be handled by the SPINA instrument, which has demonstrated $8$ ns inter-frame delay, and potentially by the Cherenkov Telescope Array.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.11161 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Top panel: Light curves of a distant object of diameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The unnormalised posterior probability of the inferred size of a star that is genuinely [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The mean number of photons n0 received from a star per microsecond (before or after an occultation), as a function of the star’s Gaia G-band magnitude [46] and the telescope’s effective aperture. This assumes telescope throughput and detector quantum efficiency of 30% …

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Validation that the proposed Bayesian inference pipeline can measure stellar di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The attainable resolution limit θres with the occultation method on stars of different magnitudes, compared to the optical diffraction limit. Here, the diffraction limit of optical telescopes is defined at the observing wavelength λ500 ≡ 500 nm. The occultation-based r…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The occultation event rate of different foreground mask choices as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: The cumulative number of events observable every day as a function of angular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

[1]

On stars, their evolution and their stability,

S. Chandrasekhar, “On stars, their evolution and their stability,” Science, vol. 226, no. 4674, pp. 497–505, 1984

work page 1984
[2]

The evolution of massive stars with mass loss,

C. Chiosi and A. Maeder, “The evolution of massive stars with mass loss,” IN: Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics. Volume 24 (A87-26730 10-90). Palo Alto, CA, Annual Reviews, Inc., 1986, p. 329-375. CNR-SNSF-supported research., vol. 24, pp. 329–375, 1986

work page 1986
[3]

Structure and evolution of stars,

M. Schwarzschild, “Structure and evolution of stars,” 2015

work page 2015
[4]

The Accretion Disk Size Problem in AGN Disk Reverberation Mapping Is an Obscuration Effect: A Uniform AGN Sample Study with Swift,

C. Lewin, E. Kara, C. Panagiotou, E. M. Cackett, J. Gelbord, J. V. Hern´ andez San- tisteban, K. Horne, and G. A. Kriss, “The Accretion Disk Size Problem in AGN Disk Reverberation Mapping Is an Obscuration Effect: A Uniform AGN Sample Study with Swift,” ApJ, vol. 993, p. 245, Nov. 2025

work page 2025
[5]

Exploring the AGN Accretion Disks Using Continuum Reverberation Mapping,

V. K. Jha, R. Joshi, J. Saraswat, H. Chand, S. Barway, and A. K. Mandal, “Exploring the AGN Accretion Disks Using Continuum Reverberation Mapping,” Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, vol. 93, pp. 766–779, June 2024

work page 2024
[6]

The Size of the Continuum Emission Region and Its Scaling Relations with Active Galactic Nucleus Luminosity and the Broad-line Region Size,

A. K. Mandal, J.-H. Woo, and S. Wang, “The Size of the Continuum Emission Region and Its Scaling Relations with Active Galactic Nucleus Luminosity and the Broad-line Region Size,” ApJ, vol. 985, p. 30, May 2025

work page 2025
[7]

Discovering intermediate-mass black hole lenses through gravitational wave lensing,

K.-H. Lai, O. A. Hannuksela, A. Herrera-Mart ´ ın, J. M. Diego, T. Broadhurst, and T. G. F. Li, “Discovering intermediate-mass black hole lenses through gravitational wave lensing,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 98, p. 083005, Oct. 2018

work page 2018
[8]

Detection of intermediate-mass black holes in globular clusters using gravitational lensing,

T. Tatekawa and Y. Okamura, “Detection of intermediate-mass black holes in globular clusters using gravitational lensing,” Stars and Galaxies, vol. 3, p. 3, Dec. 2020. 19

work page 2020

Show all 49 references

[9]

Cost-Scaling Laws Applicable To Very Large Optical Telescopes,

A. B. Meinel, “Cost-Scaling Laws Applicable To Very Large Optical Telescopes,”Optical Engineering, vol. 18, no. 6, p. 186645, 1979

1979
[10]

Adaptive Optics for Astronomy,

R. Davies and M. Kasper, “Adaptive Optics for Astronomy,” ARA&A, vol. 50, pp. 305– 351, Sept. 2012

2012
[11]

Adaptive optics for high-resolution imaging,

K. M. Hampson, R. Turcotte, D. T. Miller, K. Kurokawa, J. R. Males, N. Ji, and M. J. Booth, “Adaptive optics for high-resolution imaging,”Nature Reviews Methods Primers, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 68, 2021

2021
[12]

First Light Adaptive Optics Images from the Keck II Telescope: A New Era of High Angular Resolution Imagery,

P. Wizinowich, D. S. Acton, C. Shelton, P. Stomski, J. Gathright, K. Ho, W. Lup- ton, K. Tsubota, O. Lai, C. Max, J. Brase, J. An, K. Avicola, S. Olivier, D. Gavel, B. Macintosh, A. Ghez, and J. Larkin, “First Light Adaptive Optics Images from the Keck II Telescope: A New Era ...

2000
[13]

The Subaru Coronagraphic Extreme Adaptive Optics System: Enabling High-Contrast Imaging on Solar-System Scales,

N. Jovanovic, F. Martinache, O. Guyon, C. Clergeon, G. Singh, T. Kudo, V. Garrel, K. Newman, D. Doughty, J. Lozi, J. Males, Y. Minowa, Y. Hayano, N. Takato, J. Morino, J. Kuhn, E. Serabyn, B. Norris, P. Tuthill, G. Schworer, P. Stewart, L. Close, E. Huby, G. Perrin, S. Lacour,...

2015
[14]

The Active Optics System on the Vera C. Rubin Observatory: Optimal Control of Degeneracy among the Large Number of Degrees of Freedom,

G. Megias Homar, S. M. Kahn, J. M. Meyers, J. F. Crenshaw, and S. J. Thomas, “The Active Optics System on the Vera C. Rubin Observatory: Optimal Control of Degeneracy among the Large Number of Degrees of Freedom,” ApJ, vol. 974, p. 108, Oct. 2024

2024
[15]

Efficient imple- mentation of pseudo open-loop control for adaptive optics on extremely large telescopes,

A. G. Basden, D. Jenkins, T. J. Morris, J. Osborn, and M. J. Townson, “Efficient imple- mentation of pseudo open-loop control for adaptive optics on extremely large telescopes,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 486, pp. 1774–1780, 03 2019

2019
[16]

Enhancement of axial resolution in fluorescence microscopy by standing-wave excitation,

B. Bailey, D. L. Farkas, D. L. Taylor, and F. Lanni, “Enhancement of axial resolution in fluorescence microscopy by standing-wave excitation,” Nature, vol. 366, pp. 44–48, Nov. 1993

1993
[17]

Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,

M. G. L. Gustafsson, “Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,” Journal of Microscopy, vol. 198, no. 2, pp. 82–87, 2000

2000
[18]

Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,

S. W. Hell and J. Wichmann, “Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett., vol. 19, pp. 780–782, Jun 1994

1994
[19]

Stimulated emission depletion microscopy,

H. Blom and J. Widengren, “Stimulated emission depletion microscopy,” Chemical Reviews, vol. 117, no. 11, pp. 7377–7427, 2017. PMID: 28262022. 20

2017
[20]

Super-resolution structured illumination microscopy,

R. Heintzmann and T. Huser, “Super-resolution structured illumination microscopy,” Chemical Reviews, vol. 117, no. 23, pp. 13890–13908, 2017. PMID: 29125755

2017
[21]

An overview of structured illumination microscopy: recent advances and perspectives,

K. Samanta and J. Joseph, “An overview of structured illumination microscopy: recent advances and perspectives,” Journal of Optics, vol. 23, p. 123002, Dec. 2021

2021
[22]

Correlation between Photons in two Coherent Beams of Light,

R. H. Brown and R. Q. Twiss, “Correlation between Photons in two Coherent Beams of Light,” Nature, vol. 177, pp. 27–29, Jan. 1956

1956
[23]

A Test of a New Type of Stellar Interferometer on Sirius,

R. Hanbury Brown, “A Test of a New Type of Stellar Interferometer on Sirius,” Nature, vol. 178, pp. 1046–1048, Nov. 1956

1956
[24]

High angular resolution imaging with stellar intensity interferometry using air Cherenkov telescope arrays,

P. D. Nu˜ nez, R. Holmes, D. Kieda, and S. Lebohec, “High angular resolution imaging with stellar intensity interferometry using air Cherenkov telescope arrays,” MNRAS, vol. 419, pp. 172–183, Jan. 2012

2012
[25]

Performance and first measurements of the MAGIC stellar intensity interferometer,

S. Abe, J. Abhir, V. A. Acciari, A. Aguasca-Cabot, I. Agudo, T. Aniello, S. Ansoldi, L. A. Antonelli, A. Arbet Engels, C. Arcaro, M. Artero, K. Asano, A. Babi´ c, A. Ba- quero, U. B. de Almeida, J. A. Barrio, I. Batkovi´ c, A. Bautista, J. Baxter, J. B. Gonz´ alez, E. Bernardi...

2024
[26]

Intensity interferometry with Aqueye+ and Iqueye in Asi- ago,

L. Zampieri, G. Naletto, C. Barbieri, M. Barbieri, E. Verroi, G. Umbriaco, P. Favazza, L. Lessio, and G. Farisato, “Intensity interferometry with Aqueye+ and Iqueye in Asi- ago,” in Optical and Infrared Interferometry and Imaging V (F. Malbet, M. J. Creech- Eakman, and P. G. T...

2016
[27]

Demonstration of stellar intensity interferometry with the four VERITAS telescopes,

A. U. Abeysekara, W. Benbow, A. Brill, J. H. Buckley, J. L. Christiansen, A. J. Chromey, M. K. Daniel, J. Davis, A. Falcone, Q. Feng, J. P. Finley, L. Fortson, A. Furniss, A. Gent, C. Giuri, O. Gueta, D. Hanna, T. Hassan, O. Hervet, J. Holder, G. Hughes, T. B. Humensky, P. Kaa...

2020
[28]

Photoelectric Observations of Lunar Occultations,

B. Stecklum, “Photoelectric Observations of Lunar Occultations,” Astronomical Journal, vol. 94, p. 201, July 1987

1987
[29]

Lunar occultations of southern near-infrared stellar sources.,

A. Richichi, F. Lisi, and A. di Giacomo, “Lunar occultations of southern near-infrared stellar sources.,” A&A, vol. 254, pp. 149–166, Feb. 1992

1992
[30]

Lunar Occultations of Eighteen Stellar Sources from the 2.4-m Thai National Tele- scope,

A. Richichi, O. Tasuya, P. Irawati, B. Soonthornthum, V. S. Dhillon, and T. R. Marsh, “Lunar Occultations of Eighteen Stellar Sources from the 2.4-m Thai National Tele- scope,” arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1512.06506, Dec. 2015

2015 arXiv
[31]

Milliarcsecond angular resolution of reddened stellar sources in the vicinity of the Galactic center,

A. Richichi, O. Fors, E. Mason, J. Stegmeier, and T. Chandrasekhar, “Milliarcsecond angular resolution of reddened stellar sources in the vicinity of the Galactic center,” A&A, vol. 489, pp. 1399–1408, Oct. 2008

2008
[32]

New high-sensitivity, milliarcsecond resolution results from routine observations of lunar occultations at the ESO VLT,

A. Richichi, O. Fors, W.-P. Chen, and E. Mason, “New high-sensitivity, milliarcsecond resolution results from routine observations of lunar occultations at the ESO VLT,” A&A, vol. 522, p. A65, Nov. 2010

2010
[33]

Lunar occultations of 184 stellar sources in two crowded regions toward the Galactic bulge,

A. Richichi, W. P. Chen, O. Fors, and P. F. Wang, “Lunar occultations of 184 stellar sources in two crowded regions toward the Galactic bulge,” A&A, vol. 532, p. A101, Aug. 2011

2011
[34]

High-speed imaging system to detect stellar occul- tations by Kuiper belt and Oort cloud objects,

J. Hitchcock and R. H. Gomer, “High-speed imaging system to detect stellar occul- tations by Kuiper belt and Oort cloud objects,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, vol. 10, p. 016003, Jan. 2024. 22

2024
[35]

A Search for Occultations of Bright Stars by Small Kuiper Belt Objects Using Megacam on the MMT,

F. B. Bianco, P. Protopapas, B. A. McLeod, C. R. Alcock, M. J. Holman, and M. J. Lehner, “A Search for Occultations of Bright Stars by Small Kuiper Belt Objects Using Megacam on the MMT,” Astronomical Journal, vol. 138, pp. 568–578, Aug. 2009

2009
[36]

Direct measurement of stellar angular diameters by the VERITAS Cherenkov telescopes,

W. Benbow, R. Bird, A. Brill, R. Brose, A. J. Chromey, M. K. Daniel, Q. Feng, J. P. Finley, L. Fortson, A. Furniss, G. H. Gillanders, C. Giuri, O. Gueta, D. Hanna, J. P. Halpern, T. Hassan, J. Holder, G. Hughes, T. B. Humensky, A. M. Joyce, P. Kaaret, P. Kar, N. Kelley-Hoskins...

2019
[37]

The Low Earth Orbit Satellite Population and Impacts of the SpaceX Starlink Constellation,

J. C. McDowell, “The Low Earth Orbit Satellite Population and Impacts of the SpaceX Starlink Constellation,” ApJ, vol. 892, p. L36, Apr. 2020

2020
[38]

Cherenkov Telescope Array Consortium, B. S. Acharya, I. Agudo, I. Al Samarai, R. Al- faro, J. Alfaro, C. Alispach, R. Alves Batista, J.-P. Amans, E. Amato, G. Ambrosi, E. Antolini, L. A. Antonelli, C. Aramo, M. Araya, T. Armstrong, F. Arqueros, L. Arra- bito, K. Asano, M. Ashl...

2019
[39]

On-sky silicon photomultiplier detector performance measurements for millisecond to sub-microsecond optical source variability studies,

A. W. Lau, M. Shafiee, G. F. Smoot, B. Grossan, S. Li, and Z. Maksut, “On-sky silicon photomultiplier detector performance measurements for millisecond to sub-microsecond optical source variability studies,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, vol. 6,...

2020
[40]

Development of position-sensitive photon-counting imager for ultra-fast astronomy,

A. W. K. Lau, Y. Y. Chan, M. Shafiee, G. F. Smoot, and B. Grossan, “Development of position-sensitive photon-counting imager for ultra-fast astronomy,” in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy X, vol. 12191, pp. 312–329, SPIE, 2022

2022
[41]

Initial on-sky performance testing of the single-photon imager for nanosecond astrophysics (spina) system,

A. W. K. Lau, N. Shaimoldin, Z. Maksut, Y. Y. Chan, M. Shafiee, B. Grossan, and G. F. Smoot, “Initial on-sky performance testing of the single-photon imager for nanosecond astrophysics (spina) system,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 2023

2023
[42]

False alarm rate-based statistical detection limit for astronomical photon detectors,

A. W. K. Lau, L. W. H. Fung, and G. F. Smoot, “False alarm rate-based statistical detection limit for astronomical photon detectors,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, vol. 11, p. 028007, Apr. 2025

2025
[43]

Exoplanet Transits and Occultations,

J. N. Winn, “Exoplanet Transits and Occultations,” in Exoplanets (S. Seager, ed.), pp. 55–77, 2010

2010
[44]

Comparison of the Disk Diffraction Pat- tern with the Straight-Edge Diffraction Pattern in Occultations,

J. K. Jennings and C. H. McGruder, III, “Comparison of the Disk Diffraction Pat- tern with the Straight-Edge Diffraction Pattern in Occultations,” Astronomical Journal, vol. 118, pp. 3061–3067, Dec. 1999

1999
[45]

Photometric charac- terization and trajectory accuracy of Starlink satellites: implications for ground-based astronomical surveys,

G. Halferty, V. Reddy, T. Campbell, A. Battle, and R. Furfaro, “Photometric charac- terization and trajectory accuracy of Starlink satellites: implications for ground-based astronomical surveys,” MNRAS, vol. 516, pp. 1502–1508, Oct. 2022

2022
[46]

Gaia Data Release 2. Summary of the contents and survey properties,

Gaia Collaboration, A. G. A. Brown, A. Vallenari, T. Prusti, J. H. J. de Bruijne, C. Babusiaux, C. A. L. Bailer-Jones, M. Biermann, D. W. Evans, L. Eyer, F. Jansen, C. Jordi, S. A. Klioner, U. Lammers, L. Lindegren, X. Luri, F. Mignard, C. Panem, D. Pourbaix, S. Randich, P. Sa...

2018
[47]

Impact of the SpaceX Starlink Satellites on the Zwicky Transient Facility Survey Observations,

P. Mr´ oz, A. Otarola, T. A. Prince, R. Dekany, D. A. Duev, M. J. Graham, S. L. Groom, F. J. Masci, and M. S. Medford, “Impact of the SpaceX Starlink Satellites on the Zwicky Transient Facility Survey Observations,” ApJ, vol. 924, p. L30, Jan. 2022

2022
[48]

Identifying and Mea- suring Satellite Streaks in DECam Images,

A. Serrano Mendoza, M. L. Rawls, and A. A. Plazas Malag´ on, “Identifying and Mea- suring Satellite Streaks in DECam Images,” arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:2603.10790, Mar. 2026

2026
[49]

The colour of the dark side of the Moon,

P. Thejll, C. Flynn, H. Gleisner, T. Andersen, A. Ulla, M. O-Petersen, A. Darudi, and H. Schwarz, “The colour of the dark side of the Moon,” A&A, vol. 563, p. A38, Mar. 2014. 25

2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

On stars, their evolution and their stability,

S. Chandrasekhar, “On stars, their evolution and their stability,” Science, vol. 226, no. 4674, pp. 497–505, 1984

work page 1984

[2] [2]

The evolution of massive stars with mass loss,

C. Chiosi and A. Maeder, “The evolution of massive stars with mass loss,” IN: Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics. Volume 24 (A87-26730 10-90). Palo Alto, CA, Annual Reviews, Inc., 1986, p. 329-375. CNR-SNSF-supported research., vol. 24, pp. 329–375, 1986

work page 1986

[3] [3]

Structure and evolution of stars,

M. Schwarzschild, “Structure and evolution of stars,” 2015

work page 2015

[4] [4]

The Accretion Disk Size Problem in AGN Disk Reverberation Mapping Is an Obscuration Effect: A Uniform AGN Sample Study with Swift,

C. Lewin, E. Kara, C. Panagiotou, E. M. Cackett, J. Gelbord, J. V. Hern´ andez San- tisteban, K. Horne, and G. A. Kriss, “The Accretion Disk Size Problem in AGN Disk Reverberation Mapping Is an Obscuration Effect: A Uniform AGN Sample Study with Swift,” ApJ, vol. 993, p. 245, Nov. 2025

work page 2025

[5] [5]

Exploring the AGN Accretion Disks Using Continuum Reverberation Mapping,

V. K. Jha, R. Joshi, J. Saraswat, H. Chand, S. Barway, and A. K. Mandal, “Exploring the AGN Accretion Disks Using Continuum Reverberation Mapping,” Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, vol. 93, pp. 766–779, June 2024

work page 2024

[6] [6]

The Size of the Continuum Emission Region and Its Scaling Relations with Active Galactic Nucleus Luminosity and the Broad-line Region Size,

A. K. Mandal, J.-H. Woo, and S. Wang, “The Size of the Continuum Emission Region and Its Scaling Relations with Active Galactic Nucleus Luminosity and the Broad-line Region Size,” ApJ, vol. 985, p. 30, May 2025

work page 2025

[7] [7]

Discovering intermediate-mass black hole lenses through gravitational wave lensing,

K.-H. Lai, O. A. Hannuksela, A. Herrera-Mart ´ ın, J. M. Diego, T. Broadhurst, and T. G. F. Li, “Discovering intermediate-mass black hole lenses through gravitational wave lensing,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 98, p. 083005, Oct. 2018

work page 2018

[8] [8]

Detection of intermediate-mass black holes in globular clusters using gravitational lensing,

T. Tatekawa and Y. Okamura, “Detection of intermediate-mass black holes in globular clusters using gravitational lensing,” Stars and Galaxies, vol. 3, p. 3, Dec. 2020. 19

work page 2020