Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 38 references

A MeerKAT view of the parsec-scale jets in the black-hole X-ray binary GRS 1758-258

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The radio lobes around the black-hole binary GRS 1758-258 are jet-driven bow shocks; calorimetric modelling yields ISM densities of 10-40 cm-3, lobe ages of 6-51 kyr, and jet powers of about 10^33-10^36 erg/s.

desk verdict Deep MeerKAT data resolve the jet-ISM lobes in GRS 1758-258 and measure a proper motion, but the quoted calorimetric ages and powers are internally inconsistent with the stated priors. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.10275 v1 pith:QHGDFYPM submitted 2025-09-12 astro-ph.HE

I. Mariani , S.E. Motta , P. Atri , J.H. Matthews , R.P. Fender , J. Martí , P. L. Luque-Escamilla , I. Heywood This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE PACS 95.85.Bh97.80.Jp
keywords GRS1758-258blackholeX-raybinariesrelativisticjetsjet-ISMinteractionMeerKATradioobservationssynchrotronemissionbremsstrahlungjetcalorimetry
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

GRS 1758-258, a black-hole X-ray binary some 8.5 kpc away towards the Galactic Centre, is flanked by two parsec-scale radio lobes that this paper argues are the working surfaces where its jets crash into the interstellar medium. Using roughly 7 hours of MeerKAT L-band data, the paper resolves each lobe into distinct regions, identifies synchrotron emission from the active northern jet (the bright spot and its tail) plus thermal bremsstrahlung at the northern bow shock, and finds the southern lobe dominated by thermal emission. Feeding the thermal fluxes through a jet-calorimetry model developed for AGN and already applied to other X-ray binaries, it derives pre-shock gas densities of $10$-$25$ cm$^{-3}$ in the north and $20$-$40$ cm$^{-3}$ in the south, lobe ages of $6$-$26$ kyr and $11$-$49$ kyr, and time-averaged jet powers of about $4.4\times10^{33}$ to $3.3\times10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$. Comparing new MeerKAT images with archival VLA data tracks a bright spot in the northern jet moving at roughly $130$ mas yr$^{-1}$, a deprojected speed of a few thousand km s$^{-1}$, which the authors take as evidence that the northern jet is still active. If the model holds, GRS 1758-258 becomes a rare case where both the approaching and the receding jet leave measurable, quantifiable imprints on two different patches of the interstellar medium.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing instrument is the Kaiser et al. (2004) self-similar jet calorimetry model, the picture in which a supersonic jet inflates an overpressured lobe that expands self-similarly, so the lobe length grows as $L_{\rm jet} = C_1\,(Q_0/\rho_0)^{1/5}\,t^{3/5}$. A measured lobe length and advance speed then give the lobe age $t = 3L_{\rm jet}/5\dot{L}_{\rm jet}$, and the ambient density converts this into the time-averaged jet power $Q_0$. The density is obtained by treating the bow-shock regions C, D and E as pure thermal bremsstrahlung from fully ionized hydrogen: the measured radio flux is converted to an electron density through the emissivity law (Eq. A.8-A.10) for gas temperatures of $10^4$-$10^6$ K, and the strong-shock compression factor of four turns the post-shock density into the pre-shock ISM density. The synchrotron regions A and B are handled separately under equipartition/minimum-energy assumptions, giving magnetic fields of at least a few $\times 10^{-5}$ G, and everything is scaled with an 8.5 kpc distance, a $61^\circ$ jet inclination, a 1-10 degree opening angle, and a uniform ambient medium ($\beta = 0$).

What would settle it

Measure the spectral indices of regions C and E with uncertainties below about 0.2 across a wide frequency range (for example, combining MeerKAT UHF- and S-band images or VLA L- and C-band follow-up). A firmly steep spectrum ($\alpha \lesssim -0.6$) in either region would rule out the pure-bremsstrahlung interpretation and invalidate the electron densities, lobe ages, and jet powers derived from it, while a firmly flat spectrum ($\alpha \approx 0$) would confirm the thermal reading; the present data ($\alpha = -0.72 \pm 0.96$ for C, $0.07 \pm 0.66$ for E) settle neither. A complementary check is an X-ray observation of the bow shocks: a measured shocked-gas temperature above roughly $10^7$ K would break the $10^4$-$10^6$ K temperature assumption behind the velocity and age estimates.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the Z-shaped lobes around GRS 1758-258 are jet-ISM interaction structures whose radio emission splits into clearly identifiable components: regions A and B in the northern lobe are steep-spectrum synchrotron radiation ($\alpha \approx -0.7$) from active jet material, region C is the northern bow shock radiating thermal bremsstrahlung, and the southern lobe (regions D and E) is dominated by flat-spectrum thermal emission. With that decomposition and the Kaiser et al. (2004) self-similar calorimetry model, the paper infers post-shock electron densities of roughly $55$-$150$ cm$^{-3}$ in the three bow-shock regions, corresponding to pre-shock ISM densities of $10$-$25$ cm$^{-3}$ in the north and $20$-$40$ cm$^{-3}$ in the south; lobe ages of $6$-$26$ kyr (north) and $11$-$49$ kyr (south); and time-averaged jet powers of $4.4\times10^{33}$-$6.8\times10^{35}$ erg s$^{-1}$ (north) and $2.1\times10^{34}$-$3.3\times10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$ (south), with the north-south differences attributed to a gradient in the local ISM density. Tracking the northern bright spot across VLA epochs from 1992 to 2016 and the 2024 MeerKAT observation yields a proper motion of $100$-$160$ mas yr$^{-1}$, i.e. a deprojected speed of roughly $4600$-$7500$ km s$^{-1}$, which the authors read as a sign that the northern jet is currently injecting fresh electrons into the impact region. Comparing the morphology, size, and inferred age of these lobes with those around Cygnus X-1 and GRS 1915+105, the paper concludes that GRS 1758-258's jet-ISM structures are younger and represent an earlier stage of jet feedback, not a fundamentally different environment.

Load-bearing premise

Every quantitative result — the ISM densities, lobe ages, and jet powers — depends on the assumption that the bow-shock regions C, D, and E radiate purely thermal bremsstrahlung from fully ionized hydrogen at a temperature of $10^4$-$10^6$ K, and the measured spectral indices for C and E carry uncertainties large enough that a significant synchrotron contribution cannot be excluded, which would change the inferred densities and everything derived from them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • GRS 1758-258 becomes the third Galactic black-hole X-ray binary with a quantitative jet-ISM energy budget, and the only one observed on both the jet and counter-jet sides, yielding two independent probes of the local ISM around a single accreting black hole.
  • The inferred time-averaged jet powers, roughly $10^{33}$-$10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$, lie well below the powers estimated for small-scale transient jets, implying that only a fraction of the jet energy is deposited where the jet terminates, with the rest going into non-radiative dissipation or environment-dependent losses.
  • The young ages (6-51 kyr) and compact sizes of these lobes, compared with those of Cygnus X-1 and GRS 1915+105, indicate GRS 1758-258 is at an earlier evolutionary stage of jet feedback rather than embedded in an unusually dense or faint medium.
  • The proper motion of the northern bright spot (~130 mas yr$^{-1}$, i.e. 4600-7500 km s$^{-1}$ deprojected) shows that jet activity is ongoing and episodic: a young synchrotron hotspot can coexist with older, static bow-shock structures.
  • The inferred north-south differences in density and age support a genuine ISM density gradient around the source, which can be compared directly with the CO surveys and ALMA molecular-line results for the same field.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive test of the calorimetry is within reach of a multi-frequency radio campaign: if region C's spectral index is measured to be firmly steep ($\alpha \lesssim -0.6$), the pure-bremsstrahlung reading fails and the quoted densities, ages, and jet powers would have to be re-derived; the current measurement ($\alpha = -0.72 \pm 0.96$) cannot distinguish thermal from synchrotron emission.
  • The paper itself shows that using the hotspot's measured speed for the bow shock would give jet powers of $10^{39}$-$10^{40}$ erg s$^{-1}$ and gas temperatures of $10^8$-$10^9$ K, which it rejects; this internal gap suggests the self-similar model and the proper-motion measurement may be tracking different jet episodes, and reconciling them could test whether the model applies to an episodically a
  • An X-ray observation of the bow-shock regions could independently measure the shocked-gas temperature; a value above roughly $10^7$ K would invalidate the $10^4$-$10^6$ K bremsstrahlung assumption on which the density, age, and power estimates rest.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. Using ~7 hr of new MeerKAT L-band observations plus archival VLA data, the authors study the parsec-scale jet-ISM interaction structures of the black-hole X-ray binary GRS 1758-258. They decompose the northern lobe into a synchrotron hotspot (region A), a curved tail (region B), and a bow-shock region (region C), and the southern lobe into a compact spot (region D) and a bow-shock region (region E). They measure in-band spectral indices, detect proper motion of region A at ~130 mas/yr (deprojected velocity 4600-7500 km/s), and apply the Kaiser et al. (2004) self-similar calorimetry model to obtain ISM densities of 10-40 cm^-3, lobe ages of 6.4-26 kyr (north) and 11-49 kyr (south), time-averaged jet powers of ~4.4e33-6.8e35 erg/s (north) and ~2.1e34-3.3e36 erg/s (south), and lobe pressures of ~2e-12 to 3e-10 erg/cm^3. The results are compared with Cygnus X-1 and GRS 1915+105, and the authors conclude that the lobes are young and may result from several jet-activity phases, with the proper motion evidencing a recent, fast ejection in the northern lobe.

Significance. The observational content is strong: the stacked MeerKAT image is the deepest L-band map of this source, the region decomposition and flux measurements look careful, the spectral-index errors are quoted honestly, and the proper-motion measurement of region A is a concrete, falsifiable result. The calorimetric analysis uses a published external model (Kaiser et al. 2004) rather than a fit to the target, so the derived quantities are not circular in a damaging sense. If the derived densities, ages, and powers are correct, GRS 1758-258 becomes the third Galactic black-hole XRB (after Cygnus X-1 and GRS 1915+105) with quantitative jet-ISM feedback estimates, which is a worthwhile contribution. However, the headline ages and powers contain an internal inconsistency with the stated temperature prior (Major Comment 1), and the northern calorimetry rests on a pure-bremsstrahlung interpretation of region C that the measured spectral index does not strongly support (Major Comment 3). These issues are fixable but must be resolved before the quantitative conclusions can be adopted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.3, Eqs. A.15-A.16] The reported lobe ages do not follow from the stated temperature prior. With the stated prior T = 10^4-10^6 K, Eq. A.16 gives a lobe advance speed dL/dt = sqrt(16 k_B T / 3 m_p) = 21-210 km/s. Combined with Eq. A.15 and the deprojected lengths L_N = 3.36 pc and L_S = 4.41 pc, this yields t_N = 94-9.4 kyr and t_S = 123-12.3 kyr. The paper instead reports t_N = 6.4-26 kyr and t_S = 11-49 kyr (Section 4.3, Table A.3). The reported lower bounds imply T ~ 2.2e6 K (north) and T ~ 1.3e6 K (south), both above the stated upper prior bound, and the reported upper bounds are ~3.6 and ~2.5 times below the prior-based values. The velocity range 21-360 km/s quoted in Section 4.1.2 is itself wider than Eq. A.16 permits at T = 10^6 K (360 km/s corresponds to T ~ 2.9e6 K). Because Q_jet is proportional to (dL/dt)^3 (Eq. A.17), the inconsistency propagates into the headline power range. The authors should specify the actual temperature range and sampling distribution used in the MCMC and recompute the ages and powers consistently, or correct the reported values.
  2. [Sections 4.4 and 5.2, Eq. A.17] The calorimetry adopts a single-episode self-similar model while the paper's own data indicate a multi-episode jet. The measured proper motion of region A (deprojected 4600-7500 km/s, Section 4.1.1) exceeds the adopted lobe advance speed of 21-360 km/s by factors of roughly 15-360, and since Q_jet is proportional to (dL/dt)^3, adopting the measured speed would raise the derived power by roughly five orders of magnitude; the authors' own alternative calculation in Section 4.4 gives Q ~ 3e39-6e40 erg/s, compared with the quoted 4e33-7e35 erg/s. The defense that region A is a recent, separate ejection (age ~400-650 yr from back-projection) is plausible, and I acknowledge that the authors are transparent about this choice. However, the abstract concludes that the lobes 'may result from different jet activity phases', and applying a single-episode model to such a structure makes the derived ages and powers conditional on an interpretation that is not independently tested. I ask for an explicit statement of this conditionality in Sections 4.3-4.4 and, if possible, a test of the interpretation (e.g., checking in future epochs whether regions B, C, D, and E are indeed stationary while region A moves).
  3. [Section 4.1.2 and Table 1] The pure-bremsstrahlung assumption for region C is not securely established by the data. The measured spectral index of region C is alpha = -0.72 +/- 0.96, nominally steep; a flat (thermal) spectrum is admitted only at the ~1-sigma level, so this measurement alone cannot identify the emission mechanism. The entire northern calorimetric chain depends on this assumption: the density enters through Eq. A.10, the temperature prior sets the advance speed through Eq. A.16, and both feed the jet power through Eq. A.17. If a significant synchrotron component is present in region C, the northern density, age, and power would not be derivable with the present method. The paper should provide additional support for the thermal interpretation (e.g., a spectral-index map or polarization limits) or quantify how the derived quantities change under mixed-emission scenarios. The same concern applies with lower weight to regions D and E, whose spectral indices are consistent with flat within about 1 sigma.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4.3, Table A.3, Abstract] The southern lobe age is quoted as 11-49 kyr in the text, 11-46 kyr in Table A.3, and the abstract's overall range '6-51 kyr' matches neither; the numbers should be harmonized.
  2. [Table 1] The core row is garbled ('Core 0.42±0.02 -0.14±0.19 C * 0.14±0.02 0.15±0.02 0.1±0.4'), with the VLA flux columns clearly misaligned relative to the region labels; please reformat the table.
  3. [Eq. A.8] The exponential in the bremsstrahlung emissivity should be exp(-h nu / k_B T); the sign is numerically negligible at L-band frequencies (h nu/k_B ~ 0.06 K) but should be corrected for consistency with standard references.
  4. [Section 2.1] The core position uncertainty is printed as '±40.06′′', which appears to be a formatting error for '±0.06′′'.
  5. [Section 4.4] The word 'taht' should be 'that' in the sentence beginning 'These significantly larger values arise...'.
  6. [Section 4 and Appendix A] The priors used in the MCMC (ranges and distributions for temperature, jet opening angle, filling factor, and all nuisance parameters) are never stated; given that all quoted ranges are 16th-84th percentiles, specifying the priors is required for reproducibility and is directly relevant to Major Comment 1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the jet calorimetry applies an external self-similar model (Kaiser et al. 2004) to independent MeerKAT/VLA measurements; no derived quantity is also an input to the model.

full rationale

The paper's chain of inference starts from independently measured radio fluxes, sizes, and proper motions (Sections 3 and 4.1.1). The ISM density is obtained from bremsstrahlung emissivity (Eqs. A.8-A.10) using observed surface brightness and an assumed temperature interval; the jet age follows from measured lobe length L and the strong-shock velocity-temperature relation (Eqs. A.15-A.16); and the time-averaged jet power follows from the Kaiser et al. (2004) self-similar scaling Q0 = (5/3)^3 rho0 L^2 Ldot^3 / C1^5 (Eq. A.17). None of these quantities is fitted to the headline result; the external model's constants are taken from Kaiser et al. (2004), parameter-free with stated assumptions (uniform ISM, beta = 0, adiabatic indices 5/3, opening angle 1-10 deg). The paper explicitly checks the adopted bremsstrahlung-temperature velocity against the measured proper motion of region A and does not hide the discrepancy; it adopts the model-consistent velocity to remain within the Kaiser framework, which is a modeling choice, not a circular reduction. Citations to Motta et al. (2025) and Atri et al. (2025) are methodological (same external model) and are not load-bearing for the numerical results. The skeptic's arithmetic concern that the quoted ages (6.4-26 kyr north, 11-49 kyr south) do not follow from the stated 1e4-1e6 K prior via Eqs. A.15-A.16 is a quantitative self-consistency and correctness issue, not a case of the derivation feeding its own output back as input. No step reduces to its own inputs by construction. Hence no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. It draws on an established external model (Kaiser et al. 2004) and standard emission mechanisms. The key postulates are the interpretive assignments of emission mechanisms to regions, the assumed parameter ranges (temperature, opening angle, filling factor), and the adopted source distance/inclination. These are not fitted to data in the paper and they drive the order-of-magnitude spans of the derived quantities. The paper states its assumptions explicitly in most cases, which is good practice, but the assumptions themselves are not independently supported beyond prior literature.

free parameters (4)
  • Jet opening angle = 1-10 degrees
    Used in Eq. A.17 to compute Q_jet. The paper states the range is adopted from Motta et al. (2025), with the lower limit set by the assumption that smaller angles inhibit expansion, and the upper limit consistent with measured lobe aspect ratios. The jet power estimate is very sensitive to this parameter, spanning two orders of magnitude.
  • Filling factor f = 0.1
    Assumed for the synchrotron equipartition estimate in regions A and B. It sets the effective volume used in Eq. A.2. The paper calls it reasonable but it is a free choice that affects Beq and pressure.
  • Bremsstrahlung temperature range = 10^4-10^6 K
    Assumed for regions C, D, E. Sets the shock velocity via Eq. A.16 and therefore the density, age, and power. The paper justifies the range by requiring ionized hydrogen below and efficient bremsstrahlung above, but the exact range is chosen by hand.
  • Frequency integration range for synchrotron = 10^7-10^11 Hz
    Chosen in Section 4.1.1 to compute the synchrotron luminosity and equipartition quantities. The paper notes this narrower range compared to a prior work explains the much lower electron density estimate.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Kaiser et al. (2004) self-similar jet model with constant ambient density (beta=0) applies to the jet-ISM interaction regions of GRS 1758-258.
    The whole calorimetry section (Section 4.3-4.4) rests on this model. It assumes a self-similar expansion of an overpressured lobe, a uniform ISM, and that the jet length and bow-shock velocity are related by Eq. A.11-A.17. The paper does not verify that the observed lobe shapes satisfy the model's assumptions.
  • ad hoc to paper The observed flux in regions C, D and E is purely thermal bremsstrahlung from fully ionized hydrogen.
    Used in Sections 4.1.2 and 4.2 to convert emissivity to electron density via Eq. A.10. The spectral indices are consistent with flat spectra within large uncertainties, but the paper cannot rule out synchrotron contamination. If the bremsstrahlung assumption is wrong, the derived densities, ages, and jet powers are invalid.
  • domain assumption The jet and counter-jet are inclined at 61 degrees and the distance is 8.5 kpc.
    Taken from Bhuvana et al. (2023). The deprojected jet lengths, velocities, and therefore ages and powers scale with these assumptions. The paper does not propagate uncertainty in the distance.
  • domain assumption Regions A and B emit synchrotron radiation under equipartition conditions (minimum energy).
    Used in Section 4.1.1 and Appendix A.1. The paper explicitly invokes Longair (1994) equipartition. This is a common but unproven assumption, and the resulting electron density depends on the assumed frequency range and filling factor.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A MeerKAT view of the parsec-scale jets in the black-hole X-ray binary GRS 1758-258." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QHGDFYPM

@misc{pith2026250910275,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A MeerKAT view of the parsec-scale jets in the black-hole X-ray binary GRS 1758-258},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QHGDFYPM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.10275}
}
read the original abstract

Jets from accreting black hole (BH) X-ray binaries (XRBs) are powerful outflows that release a large fraction of the accretion energy to the surrounding environment, providing a feedback mechanism that may alter the interstellar medium (ISM) properties. Studying accretion and feedback together enables estimates of matter and energy input/output around accreting BHs. We focus on the extended jet structures of the BH-XRB GRS1758-258. First seen in VLA data, these parsec-scale jets arise from jet-ISM interaction and show a Z-shaped morphology. Using the MeerKAT telescope we observed GRS1758-258 in L-band for a total exposure of 7 hr. Applying a calorimetry-based method developed for AGN and later used for XRBs, we estimated the properties of the jets and of the surrounding ISM. We detect a jet and counter-jet terminating in bow-shocks. Within the northern jet lobe we identify synchrotron and bremsstrahlung emission, while the southern lobe is dominated by thermal emission. We measure ISM densities between 10-40 cm-3 across both jets, slightly lower in the northern region. The estimated ages of the two lobes range from 6-51 kyr. The time-averaged jet power lies between 4.4x10^33 and 3.3x10^36 erg/s, with differences between north and south likely due to different local ISM conditions. Comparing new MeerKAT with archival VLA data, we measured a proper motion of 130 mas/yr in a portion of the northern jet. Jet-ISM interaction structures on both sides of GRS1758-258 reveal different ISM properties. The comparison between these structures and those from other XRBs suggests that the lobes in GRS1758-258 are younger and may result from different jet activity phases. The time-averaged energy transferred to the environment is slightly lower than in other XRBs, consistent with the younger age of the lobes in GRS1758-258 relative to those of other systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.10275 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Panel a: MeerKAT image of the sky field (∼ 1.5 deg2 ) hosting GRS 1758-258. The image was obtained from ∼ 7 hours of observation on target at 1.28 GHz. Panel b: Zoom-in view of the source GRS 1758-258. GRS 1758-258 exhibits a rather complex structure: the sen￾sitivity achieved with the MeerKAT interferometer enables the identification of distinct emission regions within both the north￾ern and southern jets. In the f… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Zoomed-in view of GRS 1758-258 and its extended lobes. The different regions used to model the jetted structures are outlined with white contours and labelled with letters from A to E. resolved. We assumed a filling factor f = 0.1, which accounts for the volume effectively occupied by the gas. This is a reasonable assumption, considering the different spectral index values found within the northern lobe region, whic… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison between the VLA archival observations and the new MeerKAT observations of GRS 1758-258. Contours increase in eight steps, from 2 or 3 σ from rms level depending on the epoch, up to 8σ. For the 2016 and 2024 epochs, which have a local rms of 10 µJy, we adopted a threshold of 3σ. For the other epochs, which had higher local rms values (20 µJy, except for the 2001 one, where it is 40 µJy), a 2σ threshold was… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: In-band spectral index of GRS 1758-258 core and northern and southern lobe regions. matic emissivity (monochromatic luminosity per unit volume) and the gas temperature (Longair 1994). We considered a temperature range of T ∼ 104 − 106 K: for T ≲ 104 K the hydrogen woul…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E., van den Eijnden, J., et al

    Atri, P., Motta, S. E., van den Eijnden, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A223

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    R., U, A., D, R., et al

    Bhuvana, G. R., U, A., D, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 5828–5844

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    J., et al

    Carotenuto, F., Fender, R., Tetarenko, A. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 4188

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    J., & Corbel, S

    Carotenuto, F., Tetarenko, A. J., & Corbel, S. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 4826 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Cheung, C. C. 2007, AJ, 133, 2097

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    2019, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy

    Comrie, A., Wang, K.-S., Ford, P., et al. 2019, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Condon, J. J. 1997, PASP, 109, 166

    1997

  8. [8]

    J., Matthews, J

    Cooper, A. J., Matthews, J. H., Carotenuto, F., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.10804

    arXiv 2025

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    P., Tasse, C., et al

    Coriat, M., Fender, R. P., Tasse, C., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 1672

    2019

  2. [10]

    J., Springel, V ., White, S

    Croton, D. J., Springel, V ., White, S. D. M., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 11

    2006

  3. [11]

    M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P

    Dame, T. M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P. 2001, ApJ, 547, 792

    2001

  4. [12]

    2004, MNRAS, 349, 393

    Done, C., Wardzi´nski, G., & Gierli´nski, M. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 393

    2004

  5. [13]

    Fanaroff, B. L. & Riley, J. M. 1974, MNRAS, 167, 31P

    1974

  6. [14]

    P., Gallo, E., & Jonker, P

    Fender, R. P., Gallo, E., & Jonker, P. G. 2003, MNRAS, 343, L99

    2003

  7. [15]

    2005, Nature, 436, 819

    Gallo, E., Fender, R., Kaiser, C., et al. 2005, Nature, 436, 819

    2005

  8. [16]

    Gould, R. J. 1980, ApJ, 238, 1026

    1980

  9. [17]

    Hardcastle, M. J. 2005, A&A, 434, 35

    2005

  10. [18]

    J., Sunyaev, R

    Heinz, S., Grimm, H. J., Sunyaev, R. A., & Fender, R. P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1145

    2008

  11. [19]

    2020, oxkat: Semi-automated imaging of MeerKAT observations

    Heywood, I. 2020, oxkat: Semi-automated imaging of MeerKAT observations

    2020

  12. [20]

    A., Russell, D

    Hyde, E. A., Russell, D. M., Ritter, A., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 094201

    2017

  13. [21]

    Kaiser, C. R. & Alexander, P. 1997, MNRAS, 286, 215

    1997

  14. [22]

    R., Gunn, K

    Kaiser, C. R., Gunn, K. F., Brocksopp, C., & Sokoloski, J. L. 2004, ApJ, 612, 332

    2004

  15. [23]

    S., Smirnov, O

    Kenyon, J. S., Smirnov, O. M., Grobler, T. L., & Perkins, S. J. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 2399

    2018

  16. [24]

    Longair, M. S. 1994, High energy astrophysics. V ol.2: Stars, the galaxy and the interstellar medium, V ol. 2

    1994

  17. [25]

    L., Martí, J., & Martínez-Aroza, J

    Luque-Escamilla, P. L., Martí, J., & Martínez-Aroza, J. 2020, A&A, 643, A150

    2020

  18. [26]

    1998, AJ, 115, 2285 Martí, J., Luque-Escamilla, P

    Magorrian, J., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., et al. 1998, AJ, 115, 2285 Martí, J., Luque-Escamilla, P. L., Bosch-Ramon, V ., & Paredes, J. M. 2017, Nature Communications, 8, 1757 Martí, J., Luque-Escamilla, P. L., Bosch-Ramon, V ., & Paredes, J. M. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1...

    1998 arXiv

  19. [27]

    H., Bell, A

    Matthews, J. H., Bell, A. R., Blundell, K. M., & Araudo, A. T. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 4303

    2019

  20. [28]

    F., Chaty, S., Rodríguez, L

    Mirabel, I. F., Chaty, S., Rodríguez, L. F., & Sauvage, M. 2015, in Extragalactic Jets from Every Angle, ed. F. Massaro, C. C. Cheung, E. Lopez, & A. Siemigi- nowska, V ol. 313, 370–373

    2015

  21. [29]

    E., Atri, P., Matthews, J

    Motta, S. E., Atri, P., Matthews, J. H., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A222

    2025

  22. [30]

    R., van de Gronde, J

    Offringa, A. R., van de Gronde, J. J., & Roerdink, J. B. T. M. 2012, A&A, 539, A95

    2012

  23. [31]

    Pacholczyk, A. G. 1973, Radio astrophysics. Non-thermal processes in galactic and extragalactic sources

    1973

  24. [32]

    W., Soria, R., & Motch, C

    Pakull, M. W., Soria, R., & Motch, C. 2010, Nature, 466, 209

    2010

  25. [33]

    H., Fender, R., & Heywood, I

    Savard, K., Matthews, J. H., Fender, R., & Heywood, I. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 1084

    2025

  26. [34]

    H., Heinz, S., Calvelo, D

    Sell, P. H., Heinz, S., Calvelo, D. E., et al. 2010, ApJ, 719, L194

    2010

  27. [35]

    W., Broderick, J

    Soria, R., Pakull, M. W., Broderick, J. W., Corbel, S., & Motch, C. 2010, MNRAS, 409, 541

    2010

  28. [36]

    1991, A&A, 247, L29

    Sunyaev, R., Churazov, E., Gilfanov, M., et al. 1991, A&A, 247, L29

    1991

  29. [37]

    J., Rosolowsky, E

    Tetarenko, A. J., Rosolowsky, E. W., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., & Sivakoff, G. R. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 3504

    2020

  30. [38]

    W., et al

    Urquhart, R., Soria, R., Pakull, M. W., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 2389 Article number, page 10 of 14 I. Mariani et al.: MeerKAT GRS 1758 Appendix A: Additional informations Appendix A.1: Synchrotron emission at equipartition Synchrotron radiation is produced by a relativistic p...

    2004

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.