Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Gamma-ray lines, electron-positron annihilation, and possible radio emission in X-ray pulsars

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Accreting X-ray pulsars are predicted to produce detectable gamma-ray lines at 2.2-67.5 MeV plus a 511 keV annihilation line, with observability limited by magnetospheric absorption and radiative deceleration.

desk verdict Useful escape-fraction framework for nuclear gamma-ray lines in XRPs, but the omitted gamma-gamma absorption could materially change the predicted luminosities. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.05427 v1 pith:GEBRNWZQ submitted 2025-09-05 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Alexander A. Mushtukov , Emir Tataroglu , Alex J. Cooper , Sergey S. Tsygankov This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords gamma-rayemissionlinesannihilationmagneticx-rayaccretingaccretion
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

Material accreting onto a neutron star in an X-ray pulsar falls at roughly half the speed of light. When the infalling protons and helium nuclei crash into the star's atmosphere, a small fraction undergo nuclear reactions that release gamma-ray photons at discrete energies: 2.2 MeV after a neutron is captured by a proton, 5.5 MeV when a proton is captured by deuterium, and around 67.5 MeV from decaying neutral pions in very massive neutron stars. This paper asks whether those gamma-rays can actually escape. A neutron star's intense magnetic field converts gamma-ray photons into electron-positron pairs, absorbing the line before it leaves the magnetosphere, unless the photon travels nearly parallel to the magnetic axis. The authors trace millions of photon trajectories in curved spacetime, accounting for gravitational light bending and the changing magnetic field along each path, and compute how many photons escape as a function of field strength, photon energy, and accretion luminosity.

The main results are maps of the predicted line luminosity over the observable parameter space. The lines are brightest for moderate accretion rates: if the luminosity is too high, radiation pressure decelerates the infalling matter before it reaches the surface, suppressing nuclear collisions. Stronger magnetic fields also suppress the direct lines but convert some of the absorbed photons into a 511 keV annihilation line. The 67.5 MeV pion line is special because it requires a very compact neutron star with free-fall velocities above 0.65c, so a detection would directly probe the mass-radius relation. The paper also speculates that pair creation near the polar cap could produce coherent radio emission, but stresses that this is uncertain.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Gamma-ray photons with energies E > 2m_e c^2 can escape the XRP magnetosphere only within a cone aligned with the magnetic axis of the NS; for 2.2 MeV (5.5 MeV) photons the magnetosphere is effectively transparent only for surface fields B < 10^12 G (B < 10^11 G), and the escape fraction saturates at about 0.2 (0.03) in strong fields. The paper then predicts line luminosities L_2.2, L_5.5, L_67.5 and companion 511 keV luminosities as functions of B and L_X (Figs. 6-8), identifying the parameter space where future MeV missions could detect these lines and constrain M/R.

Load-bearing premise

The escape fraction calculation (Section 2.3, Eq. 30) includes only one-photon magnetic pair production. The paper itself notes in Eq. (8) and Section 2.3 that two-photon pair production, gamma gamma -> e+e-, operates in both magnetic and non-magnetic environments. Near the polar cap of a luminous X-ray pulsar the X-ray photon density is extreme, so gamma rays traversing that radiation field are also subject to gamma-gamma absorption, which is not included in the optical depth. If that opacity is comparable to or larger than the one-photon channel, the escape fractions in Figs. 5-8 shrink substantially and the central observable predictions change.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies gamma-ray line production in accreting X-ray pulsars (XRPs). It estimates intrinsic luminosities for nuclear lines at 2.2, 5.5, 19.8, and 67.5 MeV using earlier Q-factor fits and accretion theory, then computes photon escape fractions through the neutron-star magnetosphere by integrating one-photon magnetic pair-production opacity along curved Schwarzschild trajectories. Using these escape fractions, it predicts emergent line luminosities and associated 511 keV annihilation luminosities as functions of surface magnetic field, accretion luminosity, and compactness (Figs. 6-8), and identifies parameter space for detection by future MeV missions. A possible coherent-radio-emission mechanism from polar-cap pair creation is also discussed.

Significance. If correct, the paper offers a new route to measuring neutron-star compactness via redshifted nuclear lines and to probing magnetospheric opacity, and its predictions are falsifiable by future MeV observatories. Strengths include a physically explicit numerical treatment of general-relativistic light bending and magnetic pair-production attenuation, the use of external nuclear fits rather than fitting to the target observations, and explicit caveats on many approximations. However, two load-bearing approximations—the neglect of gamma-gamma absorption and the treatment of the buried thermonuclear 5.5 MeV channel—currently prevent the quantitative luminosity predictions and detectability claims from being accepted at face value.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (30)] The optical depth in Eq. (30) includes only one-photon magnetic pair production, even though Eq. (8) explicitly lists two-photon pair production. Near the polar cap of a luminous XRP the X-ray photon density is high: for E_gamma = 2.2, 5.5, and 67.5 MeV, the head-on thresholds for gamma+gamma -> e+e- are roughly 0.12, 0.05, and 0.004 MeV, respectively, so much of the X-ray band can serve as targets. With L_X ~ 1e37 erg/s and r ~ R, n_ph ~ 1e20 cm^-3 is plausible, giving tau_gamma-gamma ~ n_ph sigma l of order unity over l ~ 1e5 cm unless the relevant collision angles are strongly suppressed by beaming. Because f in Eq. (33) and all luminosities in Figs. 5-8 scale directly with the assumed opacity, this omission is load-bearing. The paper should add an order-of-magnitude estimate of gamma-gamma absorption along representative escape trajectories, or provide a concrete geometric argument t
  2. [§2.1.2 and §5.1] The treatment of the 5.5 MeV line is internally inconsistent. §2.1.2 states that stable nuclear burning occurs at very large optical depths where any produced gamma-ray photons are unlikely to escape, that Eq. (15) is an upper limit, and that the actual contribution is expected to be much smaller. Yet §5.1 and Fig. 7 use Eq. (15) as the basis for claiming that the 5.5 MeV line is dominated by thermonuclear burning even at super-critical accretion rates. If the burning photons are buried, the escaping 5.5 MeV luminosity is not Eq. (15) reduced only by magnetospheric absorption; atmospheric transport must be included. The 5.5 MeV predictions and associated detectability claims should be either removed or restricted until such a transport estimate is provided.
  3. [§2.1.4, Eq. (20), Fig. 8] The 67.5 MeV predictions rest on several unquantified choices: v_ff = 0.7c, ln Lambda = 5, sigma_pi0 ~ 1e-30 cm^2 near threshold, and Eq. (19) for the stopping column. The resulting L_67.5 in Eq. (20) scales with Sigma and hence inversely with the poorly constrained Coulomb logarithm, while sigma_pi0 near threshold also carries large uncertainty. In addition, 67.5 MeV photons are the most vulnerable to gamma-gamma absorption, with a threshold target energy of only a few keV. Fig. 8 and the claim that the 67.5 MeV annihilation signal can compete with lower-energy lines should therefore be presented as an illustrative upper envelope rather than a quantitative prediction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§1, Eq. (8)] Typo: 'two-proton pair production' should be 'two-photon pair production', and the gamma symbol in 'gamma- -> e- + e+' should be 'gamma' rather than 'gamma-'.
  2. [§1] Typo: 'gamma ray emission tents to be' should read 'tends to be'.
  3. [§2.1.2] Typo: 'resutls' should be 'results'.
  4. [Fig. 6 caption and Fig. 7 caption] The 511 keV panels are described as 'produced by electron-positron pairs generated by escaping 2.2 MeV photons'. Since pairs are generated by absorbed gamma-ray photons, the caption should say 'absorbed' rather than 'escaping'.
  5. [§4, Figs. 6-8] The figures quote isotropic luminosities, while the text emphasizes that escape is confined to narrow cones around the magnetic axis. A brief explanation of how to convert these isotropic values into orientation-dependent apparent fluxes (e.g., using the IXPE geometric constraints mentioned in §5.1) would strengthen the detectability discussion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the line luminosities are propagated from external nuclear data and independent QED/GR calculations, not fitted to the predicted observables.

full rationale

The paper's central predictions are not circular. The intrinsic line luminosities are derived from external nuclear-physics inputs: the Q factors from Table 4 of Bildsten et al. (1993) (Eqs. 12, 14, 16) and the pp pion-production cross-section/stopping column (Eqs. 17-20). The escape fractions are obtained by integrating the Daugherty & Harding (1983) one-photon pair-production attenuation coefficient along Schwarzschild geodesics (Eqs. 23-33); this is a parameter-free propagation computation with no degrees of freedom tuned to the predicted gamma-ray lines. The 511 keV luminosity (Eq. 34) is a stated upper-limit conversion of absorbed gamma-ray power into annihilation photons, and is therefore a model consequence rather than a fitted outcome. Self-citations (Mushtukov et al. 2015a,b,c; Markozov & Mushtukov 2024; Tataroglu & Mushtukov 2025) supply supporting physics and a numerical scheme, but the present paper restates the relevant equations (free-fall velocity, critical luminosity, photon trajectory, absorption coefficients) and also anchors the critical luminosity in Basko & Sunyaev (1976); no load-bearing step reduces to an unverified self-citation. The skeptical concern that two-photon pair production is omitted from the opacity (the paper itself notes this channel in Eq. 8 and Section 2.3 while Eq. 30 includes only one-photon absorption) is a completeness/correctness limitation, not circularity: omitting an opacity source does not make the prediction identical to its input. Similarly, the acknowledged limitations on the 5.5 MeV thermonuclear line (Eq. 15) and uncertain radio emission are caveats, not circular derivations. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation is equivalent to its own input by construction.

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

The model introduces no new entities. It relies on canonical NS parameters, an assumed dipole field, external nuclear Q-factors, and several stated approximations. The most consequential implicit assumption is that two-photon pair production with the luminous X-ray field can be dropped from the escape-fraction calculation.

free parameters (8)
  • Neutron star mass M = 1.4 M_sun (default), up to >2.1 M_sun for pion line
    Canonical values chosen for the model; the 67.5 MeV line only becomes efficient for M >= ~2.1 M_sun at R=10 km (Section 2.1.4).
  • Neutron star radius R = 10 km
    Canonical compact neutron star radius; affects light bending, gravitational redshift, and the pion production threshold.
  • Surface magnetic field B0 = scanned 10^10-10^13 G
    Controls the escape cone and pair-production opacity; it is the central scanned parameter in the predicted luminosity maps.
  • Accretion luminosity L_X = scanned 10^35-10^37 erg/s
    Scales the line production and the radiative deceleration in Eq. (21).
  • Critical luminosity L_crit = ~10^37 erg/s
    Taken from prior literature (Basko & Sunyaev 1976; Mushtukov et al. 2015a); sets the suppression scale in Eq. (21).
  • Q-factors Q2.2, Q5.5, Q19.8 = Approximations in Eqs. (12), (14), (16) from Bildsten et al. 1993
    External fits to nuclear models determine the number of escaping gamma photons per accreted nucleon; all line luminosities scale linearly with these factors.
  • Free-fall velocity for pion channel v_ff = 0.7c
    Assumed to reach the pion production threshold for Fig. 8; valid only for very compact, high-mass NSs.
  • Coulomb logarithm ln Lambda = 5 for the 67.5 MeV estimate
    Chosen in the strongly magnetized limit to compute the stopping column density Sigma in Eq. (19).
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Spacetime around the NS is described by the Schwarzschild metric
    Section 2 and Eq. (23): assumes non-rotating, spherically symmetric geometry, ignoring frame dragging and oblateness.
  • domain assumption Magnetic field is a pure dipole with no toroidal or higher-order components
    Eq. (9) in Section 2. The accretion flow near the polar cap likely distorts the field; the authors acknowledge this in the radio discussion.
  • domain assumption Radiative deceleration follows v ~ v_ff (1 - L/L_crit)^1/2
    Eq. (21) from Mushtukov et al. 2015c; a simplified interpolation used to compute the suppression of line production.
  • standard math One-photon pair-production opacity follows Daugherty & Harding 1983
    Section 2.3.1 and Appendix A; the escape fraction depends on these coefficients.
  • ad hoc to paper Two-photon pair production with the background X-ray field is negligible
    Section 2.3: the text acknowledges gamma gamma -> e+e- occurs, but the optical depth in Eq. (30) includes only the one-photon channel, with no quantitative justification for neglecting the intense X-ray radiation field.
  • domain assumption All electron-positron pairs created by absorbed gamma rays annihilate into 511 keV photons
    Section 2.4 and Section 4: 'we assume that all electron-positron pairs produced via gamma-ray absorption eventually annihilate, which makes our predictions for the 511 keV luminosity an upper limit.'
  • domain assumption The Q-factors from Bildsten et al. 1993 describe gamma-ray production in accreting NS atmospheres
    Eqs. (12), (14), (16): these are fits from earlier work and carry their own systematic uncertainties.
  • ad hoc to paper Stable nuclear burning 5.5 MeV flux is the dominant channel even at super-critical accretion rates
    Section 5.1 asserts this, but Section 2.1.2 says the actual contribution is expected to be much smaller and would require self-consistent atmosphere modeling; the paper uses the upper limit as the prediction in Fig. 7.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gamma-ray lines, electron-positron annihilation, and possible radio emission in X-ray pulsars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GEBRNWZQ

@misc{pith2026250905427,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gamma-ray lines, electron-positron annihilation, and possible radio emission in X-ray pulsars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GEBRNWZQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05427}
}
abstract

Accretion onto neutron stars (NSs) in X-ray pulsars (XRPs) results in intense X-ray emission, and under specific conditions, high-energy nuclear interactions that produce gamma-ray photons at discrete energies. These interactions are enabled by the high free-fall velocities of accreting nuclei near the NS surface and give rise to characteristic gamma-ray lines, notably at 2.2 MeV, 5.5 MeV, and 67.5 MeV. We investigate the production mechanisms of these lines and estimate the resulting gamma-ray luminosities, accounting for the suppression effects of radiative deceleration in bright XRPs and the creation of electron-positron pairs in strong magnetic fields. The resulting annihilation of these pairs leads to a secondary emission line at $\sim 511$ keV. We also discuss the possibility that non-stationary pair creation in the polar cap region could drive coherent radio emission, though its detectability in accreting systems remains uncertain. Using a numerical framework incorporating general relativistic light bending and magnetic absorption, we compute the escape fraction of photons and distinguish between actual and apparent gamma-ray luminosities. Our results identify the parameter space - defined by magnetic field strength, accretion luminosity, and NS compactness - where these gamma-ray signatures may be observable by upcoming MeV gamma-ray missions. In particular, we highlight the diagnostic potential of detecting gravitationally redshifted gamma-ray lines and annihilation features for probing the mass-radius relation and magnetospheric structure of NSs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05427 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mass-radius relation for NS calculated under the as￾sumption of different EoS. Blue lines correspond to NSs with vari￾ous EoS of dense matter, while red lines show mass-radius relation for strange stars (see e.g. Lattimer & Prakash 2001). The region colored in orange corresponds the combinations of NS mass and ra￾dius, when the free-fall velocity vff ≥ 0.65c and the kinetic energy of accreting protons is high enough… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The expected original luminosity in the 2.2 MeV (black) and 5.5 MeV (red ) lines as functions of the total accretion luminos￾ity of X-ray pulsars, LX. Both axes are normalized by the critical accretion luminosity, Lcrit. At low mass accretion rates and lu￾minosities, the gamma-ray lines flux scale proportionally with the total accretion luminosity. However, at high mass accretion rates, radiative forces slow the acc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The absorption coefficient (averaged over the polarisa￾tion states) due to one-photon pair production in magnetic field as a function of photon’s energy. The absorption coefficients are calculated according to Daugherty & Harding 1983 for photons propagating across magnetic field lines (i.e., θ = π/2, solid red lines). Approximations (26) are shown by dashed grey lines. The lower, middle and upper panels show the re… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: ). For photons with energies of 2.2 MeV (5.5 MeV), the NS magnetosphere remains transparent only for surface fields B < 1012 G (B < 1011 G). For surface field strengths B > 5×1012 G, the opening angle of the escape cone stabilizes at approximately 30◦ (10◦ ) for 2.2 Me…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The fraction of photons that penetrate through the mag￾netosphere of a NS as a function of surface magnetic field strength. Different lines are given for different energy of gamma-ray photons: 2.2 MeV (solid red), 5.5 MeV (dashed blue), 19.8 MeV (dashed￾dotted black), …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Predicted isotropic luminosities of characteristic gamma￾ray lines as a function of NS magnetic field B and X-ray luminos￾ity LX. Top panel: Luminosity in the 2.2 MeV deuteron-capture line, accounting for photon attenuation due to one-photon pair production in the magn…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Predicted isotropic luminosities of gamma-ray lines as a function of NS magnetic field B and X-ray luminosity LX. Top panel: Luminosity in the 5.5 MeV line, accounting for photon at￾tenuation due to one-photon pair production in the magnetosphere of XRP. Bottom panel: …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archive author booktitle chapter collaboration edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn issn journal key month note number numpages organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

    work page

  3. [3]

    N., Katkov V

    Baier V. N., Katkov V. M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.073009 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PhRvD..75g3009B 75, 073009

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.75.073009 2007

  4. [4]

    G., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/235.1.51 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988MNRAS.235...51B 235, 51

    Baring M. G., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/235.1.51 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988MNRAS.235...51B 235, 51

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/235.1.51 1988

  5. [5]

    M., Sunyaev R

    Basko M. M., Sunyaev R. A., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/175.2.395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976MNRAS.175..395B 175, 395

    doi:10.1093/mnras/175.2.395 1976

  6. [6]

    F., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/303752 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...477..897B 477, 897

    Bildsten L., Brown E. F., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/303752 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...477..897B 477, 897

    work page doi:10.1086/303752 1997

  7. [7]

    E., Wasserman I., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/170860 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...384..143B 384, 143

    Bildsten L., Salpeter E. E., Wasserman I., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/170860 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...384..143B 384, 143

    work page doi:10.1086/170860 1992

  8. [8]

    E., Wasserman I., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...408..615B 408, 615

    Bildsten L., Salpeter E. E., Wasserman I., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...408..615B 408, 615

    work page doi:10.1086/172621 1993

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    R., Swaminathan S

    Blattnig S. R., Swaminathan S. R., Kruger A. T., Ngom M., Norbury J. W., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.62.094030 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000PhRvD..62i4030B 62, 094030

    2000 doi

  2. [10]

    L., 1979, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979A&A....78...53B 78, 53

    Bonazzola S., Heyvaerts J., Puget J. L., 1979, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979A&A....78...53B 78, 53

    1979

  3. [11]

    Chen K., Ruderman M., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172129 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...402..264C 402, 264

    1993 doi

  4. [12]

    J., Gupta O., Wadiasingh Z., Wijers R

    Cooper A. J., Gupta O., Wadiasingh Z., Wijers R. A. M. J., Boersma O. M., Andreoni I., Rowlinson A., Gourdji K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3580 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.3923C 519, 3923

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    K., Bussard R

    Daugherty J. K., Bussard R. W., 1980, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157985 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...238..296D 238, 296

    1980 doi

  6. [14]

    K., Harding A

    Daugherty J. K., Harding A. K., 1983, @doi [ ] 10.1086/161411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983ApJ...273..761D 273, 761

    1983 doi

  7. [15]

    Doroshenko V., et al., 2022, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-022-01799-5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022NatAs...6.1433D 6, 1433

    2022 doi

  8. [16]

    Doroshenko V., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347088 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...677A..57D 677, A57

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Ducci L., Santangelo A., Tsygankov S., Mushtukov A., Ferrigno C., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202451248 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.309D 690, A309

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Erber T., 1966, @doi [Reviews of Modern Physics] 10.1103/RevModPhys.38.626 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1966RvMP...38..626E 38, 626

    1966 doi

  11. [19]

    V., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acc391 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...947L..20F 947, L20

    Forsblom S. V., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acc391 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...947L..20F 947, L20

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    V., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450937 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...691A.216F 691, A216

    Forsblom S. V., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450937 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...691A.216F 691, A216

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    K., Lai D., 2006, @doi [Reports on Progress in Physics] 10.1088/0034-4885/69/9/R03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006RPPh...69.2631H 69, 2631

    Harding A. K., Lai D., 2006, @doi [Reports on Progress in Physics] 10.1088/0034-4885/69/9/R03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006RPPh...69.2631H 69, 2631

    2006 doi

  14. [22]

    Heyl J., et al., 2024, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-024-02295-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024NatAs...8.1047H 8, 1047

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    G., Wadiasingh Z., Harding A

    Hu K., Baring M. G., Wadiasingh Z., Harding A. K., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz995 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.3327H 486, 3327

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    A., Mitrofanov I

    Kozlenkov A. A., Mitrofanov I. G., 1986, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986JETP...64.1173K 64, 1173

    1986

  17. [25]

    M., 2005, Plasma Physics for Astrophysics

    Kulsrud R. M., 2005, Plasma Physics for Astrophysics

    2005

  18. [26]

    Lai D., 2014, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences. p. 01001 ( @eprint arXiv 1402.1903 ), @doi 10.1051/epjconf/20136401001

    2014 arXiv

  19. [27]

    M., Prakash M., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/319702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...550..426L 550, 426

    Lattimer J. M., Prakash M., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/319702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...550..426L 550, 426

    2001 doi

  20. [28]

    M., Das S., Nandi A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad67e5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971L..21M 971, L21

    Majumder S., Chatterjee R., Jayasurya K. M., Das S., Nandi A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad67e5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971L..21M 971, L21

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    Malacaria C., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346581 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...675A..29M 675, A29

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    D., Mushtukov A

    Markozov I. D., Mushtukov A. A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3248 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.5374M 527, 5374

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    W., Thorne K

    Misner C. W., Thorne K. S., Wheeler J. A., 1973, Gravitation

    1973

  24. [32]

    M \"u ller B., Heger A., Powell J., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.071403 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025PhRvL.134g1403M 134, 071403

    2025 doi

  25. [33]

    arXiv:2204.14185

    Mushtukov A., Tsygankov S., 2022, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2204.14185 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220414185M p. arXiv:2204.14185

    2022 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    A., Suleimanov V

    Mushtukov A. A., Suleimanov V. F., Tsygankov S. S., Poutanen J., 2015a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2484 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.447.1847M 447, 1847

    doi

  27. [35]

    A., Suleimanov V

    Mushtukov A. A., Suleimanov V. F., Tsygankov S. S., Poutanen J., 2015b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2087 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454.2539M 454, 2539

    doi

  28. [36]

    A., Tsygankov S

    Mushtukov A. A., Tsygankov S. S., Serber A. V., Suleimanov V. F., Poutanen J., 2015c, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2182 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454.2714M 454, 2714

    doi

  29. [37]

    A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1961 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.2004M 524, 2004

    Mushtukov A. A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1961 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.2004M 524, 2004

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    W., Wang J

    Nelson R. W., Wang J. C. L., Salpeter E. E., Wasserman I., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/187725 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...438L..99N 438, L99

    1995 doi

  31. [39]

    W., Townsend L

    Norbury J. W., Townsend L. W., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.034001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PhRvD..75c4001N 75, 034001

    2007 doi

  32. [40]

    Y., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909100 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A&A...351..787P 351, 787

    Potekhin A. Y., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909100 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A&A...351..787P 351, 787

    1999 doi arXiv

  33. [41]

    arXiv:2405.08107

    Poutanen J., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2405.08107 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240508107P p. arXiv:2405.08107

    doi arXiv

  34. [42]

    S., Forsblom S

    Poutanen J., Tsygankov S. S., Forsblom S. V., 2024b, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies12040046 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024Galax..12...46P 12, 46

    doi

  35. [43]

    A., Sutherland P

    Ruderman M. A., Sutherland P. G., 1975, @doi [ ] 10.1086/153393 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975ApJ...196...51R 196, 51

    1975 doi

  36. [44]

    Sheng X., Zhang L., Blaes O., Jiang Y.-F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2043 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.2431S 524, 2431

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    F., 1970, @doi [Astrophysics] 10.1007/BF01002575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1970Ap......6...56S 6, 56

    Shvartsman V. F., 1970, @doi [Astrophysics] 10.1007/BF01002575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1970Ap......6...56S 6, 56

    1970 doi

  38. [46]

    A., Baring M

    Story S. A., Baring M. G., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/61 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790...61S 790, 61

    2014 doi

  39. [47]

    F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346994 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...678A.119S 678, A119

    Suleimanov V. F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346994 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...678A.119S 678, A119

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    A., 2025, @doi [Journal of High Energy Astrophysics] 10.1016/j.jheap.2025.100420 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025JHEAp..4800420T 48, 100420

    Tataroglu E., Mushtukov A. A., 2025, @doi [Journal of High Energy Astrophysics] 10.1016/j.jheap.2025.100420 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025JHEAp..4800420T 48, 100420

    2025

  41. [49]

    N., Arons J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts298 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429...20T 429, 20

    Timokhin A. N., Arons J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts298 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429...20T 429, 20

    2013 doi

  42. [50]

    S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aca486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...941L..14T 941, L14

    Tsygankov S. S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aca486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...941L..14T 941, L14

    2022 doi

  43. [51]

    S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...675A..48T 675, A48

    Tsygankov S. S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...675A..48T 675, A48

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    M., Frank J., 1981, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981A&A....93..255W 93, 255

    Wang Y. M., Frank J., 1981, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981A&A....93..255W 93, 255

    1981

  45. [53]

    G., Urpin V

    Yakovlev D. G., Urpin V. A., 1980, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980SvA....24..303Y 24, 303

    1980

  46. [54]

    B., Shakura N

    Zel'dovich Y. B., Shakura N. I., 1969, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969SvA....13..175Z 13, 175

    1969

  47. [55]

    D., Miller-Jones J

    van den Eijnden J., Degenaar N., Russell T. D., Miller-Jones J. C. A., Wijnands R., Miller J. M., King A. L., Rupen M. P., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slx180 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473L.141V 473, L141

    doi

  48. [56]

    D., Wijnands R., Miller-Jones J

    van den Eijnden J., Degenaar N., Russell T. D., Wijnands R., Miller-Jones J. C. A., Sivakoff G. R., Hern \'a ndez Santisteban J. V., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0524-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.562..233V 562, 233

    doi

  49. [57]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

  50. [58]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

  51. [59]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.con...

  52. [60]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.