Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 126 references

The isolation of Luminous Blue Variables resembles aging B-type supergiants, not the most massive unevolved stars

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that a photometric sample of bright blue stars is contaminated by older, roughly 20-solar-mass B supergiants, so the apparent similarity to luminous blue variables reflects old comparison stars, not young LBVs.

desk verdict A convincing reanalysis showing the photometric BBS sample is dominated by aging B supergiants, not young O stars, so A19's comparison does not undermine the binary-blue-straggler case for LBVs—though the key SIMBAD comparison would benefit from a KS test and a completeness discussion. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06104 v1 pith:VDYU3VJE submitted 2019-08-16 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE

Nathan Smith This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.HE
keywords luminousbluevariablesmassivestarsbinaryevolutionsupergiantsstarclustersLargeMagellanicCloudstellaragesphotometricselection
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

The paper re-examines a recent claim that luminous blue variables (LBVs) are only marginally more isolated on the sky than a photometric sample of bright blue stars (BBS), a result that seemed to weaken the case that LBVs are binary products rather than the most massive single stars. It argues that the BBS sample does not trace young, massive, unevolved O-type stars at all: because O and early B stars have nearly identical visual colors, photometric selection admits many older B supergiants of roughly 20 solar masses. The separation distribution of the BBS sample matches spectroscopically confirmed early B supergiants and cluster-dispersal models for a roughly 10-million-year-old population, not the 3 to 4 million year old population of massive O stars. The paper concludes that the similarity between LBVs and the BBS sample arises because the BBS sample is old, not because LBVs are young, leaving the isolation of LBVs from O stars intact as evidence for binary evolution. If correct, the result matters for how astronomers identify young massive stars in resolved and unresolved galaxies.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the cumulative distribution of angular separation to the nearest neighbor in a reference stellar population, used as a relative age indicator: young massive stars are born in clusters that disperse with time, so larger separations signal older populations. The paper combines this with the observed color degeneracy of O and early B stars at visual wavelengths, the reddening-free index $Q = (U-B) - 0.72(B-V)$ used by the photometric selection, and a spectroscopically confirmed early B supergiant sample matched in magnitude and in the exclusion of the 30 Doradus region. The key comparison is that the photometric BBS separation distribution is indistinguishable from the early B supergiant distribution and matches cluster-dispersal predictions for roughly 20 $M_\odot$ stars at about 10 Myr, while known early O stars are about 10 times more clustered. This diagnosis isolates contamination by older B supergiants as the reason the BBS sample appears so dispersed.

What would settle it

Obtain spectra for all bright blue stars in a representative area of the LMC and compare the nearest-neighbor separation of only the confirmed O-type stars to the LBV sample; if the pure O-star subset retains a median separation near 31 pc and matches the LBV distribution, the contamination explanation would fail and LBV youth would become viable again.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the observed isolation of LBVs from the most massive unevolved stars is not an artifact of an incomplete O-star catalog, and that the photometric bright-blue-star sample used in the contrary analysis is dominated by older, lower-mass B supergiants. The LBV median nearest-neighbor separation is identical whether measured to spectroscopic O stars or to the photometric BBS sample (about 180 arcseconds), so incompleteness in the O-star list cannot fabricate LBV isolation; what differs is that the BBS sample is far more dispersed than known O stars (median 31 pc versus about 3 pc for early O stars). Spectral types show roughly half of the spectroscopically observed BBS stars are B supergiants, and the full BBS separation distribution matches known early B supergiants and a roughly 10 Myr dispersing population rather than a 3 to 4 Myr one. The conclusion is that the similarity between the BBS and LBV separation distributions arises because the BBS sample is old, not because the LBVs are young. This keeps LBVs' avoidance of O-star clusters as evidence that they are rejuvenated binary products, massive blue stragglers, rather than the most massive single stars.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the SIMBAD collection of spectroscopically confirmed early B stars is a fair spatial map of the B supergiants contaminating the photometric sample, even though the completeness of that spectral sample is unknown.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • LBVs' isolation from spectroscopically confirmed O-type stars remains a real signal: incomplete O-star catalogs cannot explain it, since the LBV median separation is identical when measured against the more complete photometric sample.
  • Photometric samples of bright blue stars in the LMC, M31, and M33 do not trace the youngest massive stars; they are dominated by evolved roughly 20 $M_\odot$ B supergiants, so their spatial dispersion cannot be used to infer LBV youth.
  • Visual-wavelength color cuts cannot reliably separate O stars from early B supergiants because the intrinsic color difference is smaller than reddening variations and photometric errors; spectral classification is required for such age-sensitive comparisons.
  • In unresolved galaxy populations, blue light will tend to trace ages around 10 to 15 Myr rather than 3 to 4 Myr, so bluer does not automatically mean younger, with consequences for interpreting supernova host environments.
  • The environments of LBVs remain consistent with binary evolution producing rejuvenated massive blue stragglers, rather than with the standard single-star scenario in which LBVs immediately follow the most massive O-type main-sequence stars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test of the paper's logic would be to rebuild a photometric blue-star sample after removing all spectroscopically confirmed B supergiants; the prediction is that the remaining O-dominated subset should show a much smaller median separation and restore the LBV-to-O-star contrast.
  • The same color-degeneracy problem likely affects other photometric searches for young massive stars, such as color-selected star-forming region surveys, so age estimates based on blue colors may need revision.
  • If bright blue light in galaxies mainly traces roughly 10 Myr old binary-rejuvenated supergiants, then correlations between supernova type and host-galaxy color may be partly measuring binary fraction rather than initial mass.
  • One could extend the analysis to the Milky Way by using Gaia parallaxes to build a volume-complete spectroscopic sample of early B supergiants and compare their isolation to LBVs.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper re-examines Aadland et al. (2019, A19), who used a photometrically selected sample of bright blue stars (BBS) in the LMC as a reference population and concluded that LBVs are not appreciably more isolated than massive young stars. The author argues the opposite: the BBS sample is not a clean tracer of the most massive unevolved stars. The paper presents three main lines of evidence: (i) LBVs have essentially the same median separation to BBS stars (181 arcsec) as to spectroscopically confirmed O-type stars (180 arcsec), so incompleteness in the O-star sample cannot explain LBV isolation (Section 2); (ii) the BBS sample is spatially far more dispersed than known O stars, with only ~4% of members closer than ~5 pc to a neighbor, and among the spectroscopically observed subset roughly 51% are early B stars rather than O stars (Sections 2 and 4.3); and (iii) the BBS separation distribution closely matches that of SIMBAD-selected early B supergiants and is consistent with a ~10 Myr dispersing-cluster population, not the 3-4 Myr population expected for the most massive single stars (Sections 5 and 7). The paper concludes that the BBS-LBV similarity arises because the BBS sample is old, not because LBVs are young, and that bright blue stars in general are unreliable tracers of the youngest massive stellar populations.

Significance. If correct, the paper removes a major empirical challenge to the binary-evolution interpretation of LBV isolation (Smith & Tombleson 2015) and sharpens the debate with A19. Its strongest evidence is partly external to the author's own models: A19's spectral data show that about half of the classified BBS stars are B-type (Section 4.3), and the BBS separation distribution resembles spectroscopically confirmed early B stars (Section 5). The paper also makes a useful quantitative check of the 30 Dor exclusion (Section 3), showing it does not drive the discrepancy. A falsifiable consequence is stated clearly: complete samples of early B supergiants should reproduce the BBS separation distribution, and unresolved blue light in galaxies should appear to trace ~10-15 Myr rather than ~3-4 Myr populations. The main caveat is that the key comparison in Section 5 rests on a SIMBAD sample of unknown completeness and selection, so the central empirical match is not yet formally established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Figure 1] The claim that the BBS separation distribution is 'indistinguishable' from the SIMBAD early B sample is presented without a quantitative statistical test. The abstract and the Figure 1 caption use the word 'indistinguishable,' but the text (Section 5) only says the distributions 'match' and shows a visual comparison. Because the conclusion that the BBS sample is old rests directly on this match, please report a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (or an equivalent) for the BBS versus early B cumulative distributions, both with and without the 10-arcmin 30 Dor exclusion, and give the sample sizes. Without such a test, the reader cannot judge whether the match is closer than the A19 KS comparison that the paper itself criticizes in Section 6.
  2. [Sections 4.2 and 5, footnote 4] The early B comparison sample is drawn from SIMBAD and has unknown completeness and selection properties, as the paper itself states in Section 4.2: 'we don't know the level of incompleteness for either.' This is load-bearing because the claim that the BBS sample is old requires that the SIMBAD early B stars be spatially representative of the B-type stars contaminating the BBS sample. The footnote in Section 5 only excludes one direction of bias, namely past spectroscopy being concentrated toward clusters; it does not address the opposite bias, in which the SIMBAD early B sample preferentially includes field stars because crowded regions are under-represented spectroscopically. Please quantify or bound this selection effect, for example by repeating the comparison with a homogeneous complete early B catalog or with an incompleteness model, and state explicitly how a bias toward or against clusters would shift the early B separation distribution and affect the conclusion.
  3. [Section 7 (Summary)] The quantitative statement that the BBS median separation corresponds to an age of 9-10 Myr is taken from Aghakhanloo et al. (2017), a dispersal model that includes one of the present authors as a co-author. The empirical match to spectroscopically confirmed early B stars is independent, but the specific age interpretation is not. Please make explicit which parts of the conclusion depend only on the observed early B separation distribution and which parts depend on Aghakhanloo et al.'s model, and quote the model's uncertainty when assigning a numerical age to the BBS sample.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5, sample definition] The text refers to the early B sample as 'early B supergiants' but the stated selection is 'O9.5 to B2, of any luminosity class'; please clarify whether the V < 13.9 mag cut effectively restricts the sample to supergiants, or give the luminosity-class distribution of the SIMBAD sample.
  2. [Section 6] The 'evenly spaced grid of blue stars' argument is heuristic; a brief simulation of the grid-spacing effect would make the point quantitative and would parallel the Aghakhanloo et al. models cited elsewhere in the paper.
  3. [Section 7] The broad statement that unresolved blue light in distant galaxies generally traces evolved blue supergiants akin to SN 1987A's progenitor goes beyond the LMC data analyzed here; consider qualifying this extrapolation or citing supporting evidence.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, for example 'suprisingly' in the Abstract and 'distribition' in Section 2, which should be corrected in a revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No material circularity: the central claim rests on external SIMBAD early-B data and A19's own spectral classifications, not on the author's models.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing comparison is that the A19 photometric BBS separation distribution matches spectroscopically confirmed early B supergiants drawn from SIMBAD, not O-type stars. That comparison is external to the author's modeling: the early-B sample is selected by spectral type and V magnitude, and the match is displayed directly rather than produced by a fitted parameter or an equation that assumes the conclusion. The 51% B-star fraction among BBS stars with spectra is taken from A19's own spectroscopic classifications, again independent of the author's models. The age interpretation does cite the author's prior work (Smith & Tombleson 2015; Aghakhanloo et al. 2017), but these citations are not load-bearing in a circular sense: Aghakhanloo et al. calibrated a dispersal model against O-star subtype distributions, not against the BBS sample, and the claim that BBS is old also stands on the independent match to known early B supergiants. The paper explicitly concedes incomplete knowledge of sample completeness in Section 4.2 ('we don't know the level of incompleteness for either') and the Section 5 footnote only excludes the bias where past spectroscopy targeted clusters; that is a legitimate empirical representativeness concern, not a circularity. No step reduces by construction, no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to external benchmarks, and no circular step is identified.

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

This paper introduces no new free parameters or entities. It adopts A19's photometric cuts (V<13.9, Q<-0.88) and tests robustness to the 30 Dor exclusion radius, but fits no numbers to data. The main additional inputs are the SIMBAD early B sample and the Aghakhanloo et al. age mapping, both treated as external.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Massive stars are predominantly born in clusters and their spatial separation grows as clusters disperse with age.
    Section 2 states the second requirement for the separation method; the entire LBV isolation argument depends on this premise.
  • domain assumption O-type and early B-type stars have nearly identical intrinsic UBV colors, so photometric color cuts cannot reliably separate them.
    Section 4.1 and Figure 2; this is the basis for claiming the BBS sample is contaminated by B supergiants, and it is supported by stellar atmosphere models.
  • domain assumption The SIMBAD sample of spectroscopically confirmed early B stars is spatially representative of the B-type stars contaminating the BBS sample.
    Sections 4.3 and 5 use this sample as the external benchmark; no completeness correction is applied.
  • domain assumption The Aghakhanloo et al. (2017) cluster dispersal model correctly converts a median separation of ~30 pc into an age of ~10 Myr and initial masses of ~20 solar masses.
    Sections 2 and 7 use this mapping to infer the age of the BBS population; the model is from the author's group.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The isolation of Luminous Blue Variables resembles aging B-type supergiants, not the most massive unevolved stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VDYU3VJE

@misc{pith2026190806104,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The isolation of Luminous Blue Variables resembles aging B-type supergiants, not the most massive unevolved stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VDYU3VJE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06104}
}
read the original abstract

Luminous blue variables (LBVs) are suprisingly isolated from the massive O-type stars that are their putative progenitors in single-star evolution, implicating LBVs as binary evolution products. Aadland et al. (A19) found that LBVs are, however, only marginally more dispersed than a photometrically selected sample of bright blue stars (BBS) in the LMC, leading them to suggest that LBV environments may not exclude a single-star origin. In both comparisons, LBVs have the same median separation, confirming that any incompleteness in the O-star sample does not fabricate LBV isolation. Instead, the relative difference arises because the photometric BBS sample is far more dispersed than known O-type stars. Evidence suggests that the large BBS separation arises because it traces less massive (~20 Msun), aging blue supergiants. Although photometric criteria used by A19 aimed to select only the most massive unevolved stars, visual-wavelength color selection cannot avoid contamination because O and early B stars have almost the same intrinsic color. Spectral types confirm that the BBS sample contains many B supergiants. Moreover, the observed BBS separation distribution matches that of spectroscopically confirmed early B supergiants, not O-type stars, and matches predictions for a ~10 Myr population, not a 3-4 Myr population. A broader implication for ages of stellar populations is that bright blue stars are not a good tracer of the youngest massive O-type stars. Bright blue stars in nearby galaxies (and unresolved blue light in distant galaxies) generally trace evolved blue supergiants akin to SN 1987A's progenitor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.06104 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Cumulative distribution of separations from the nearest O star (or B star). The thin distributions of early, mid, and late-type O stars (green, orange, and blue, respectively), as well as the dashed purple distribution of LBVs, are the same as in Smith & Tombleson (2015). These are distributions of separations on the sky to the nearest spectroscopically confirmed O star of any subtype or luminosity class. The thicke… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. HR Diagrams comparing LBVs to inferred properties of OB stars derived from photometric colors. The Teff value used to plot each OB star is the temperature one would infer by converting the apparent B − V color to a temperature, and the luminosity comes from the bolometric correction for that Teff value (relations adopted from Torres 2010 and Flower 1996) and its apparent V magnitude. The left panel (a) shows the res… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

126 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2018, AJ, 156, 294 (A19)

    Aadland E, Massey P, Neugent KF, Drout MR. 2018, AJ, 156, 294 (A19)

    2018

  2. [2]

    2017, MNRAS, 472, 591

    Aghakhanloo M, Murphy J, Smith Nm Hlozek R. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 591

    2017

  3. [3]

    Anderson J, James PA. 2008,

    2008

  4. [4]

    Anderson J, et al.\ 2012,

    2012

  5. [5]

    1989, ARA&A, 27, 629

    Arnett WD, Bahcall JN, Kirshner RP, Woosley SE. 1989, ARA&A, 27, 629

    1989

  6. [6]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 266

    Beasor, ER, Davies, B, Smith N, Bastian, N. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 266

    2019

  7. [7]

    1961, BAN, 15, 265

    Blaauw A. 1961, BAN, 15, 265

    1961

  8. [8]

    1964, ARAA, 2, 213

    Blaauw A. 1964, ARAA, 2, 213

    1964

Show all 126 references
  1. [9]

    2016, MNRAS, 458, 1999

    Blagovest P, Vink JS, Gr\"afener G. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 1999

    2016

  2. [10]

    1959, ApJ, 130, 482

    Blanco VM, Williams AD. 1959, ApJ, 130, 482

    1959

  3. [11]

    1997, in

    Bohannan B. 1997, in

    1997

  4. [12]

    2005, A&A, 438, 301

    Bouret JC, Lanz T, Hillier DJ. 2005, A&A, 438, 301

    2005

  5. [13]

    J., Hunter, I., et al

    Brott, I., Evans, C. J., Hunter, I., et al. 2011, A&A, 530, A115

    2011

  6. [14]

    1976, Mem.\ Soc.\ R.\ Sci.\ Lie'ge, 9, 193

    Conti PS. 1976, Mem.\ Soc.\ R.\ Sci.\ Lie'ge, 9, 193

    1976

  7. [15]

    Conti PS. 1984. IAUS, 105: 233

    1984

  8. [16]

    2006, A&A, 446, 279

    Crowther PA, Lennon DA, Walborn NR. 2006, A&A, 446, 279

    2006

  9. [17]

    2007, ARAA, 45, 177

    Crowther PA. 2007, ARAA, 45, 177

    2007

  10. [18]

    2008, Asp Conf Ser, 388, 109

    Crowther PA, Lennon DA, Walborn NR, Smartt SJ. 2008, Asp Conf Ser, 388, 109

    2008

  11. [19]

    Dalcanton et al. 2012

    2012

  12. [20]

    Phys., Conf.\ Ser., 318, 012022

    de Koter A, et al.\ 2011, J. Phys., Conf.\ Ser., 318, 012022

    2011

  13. [21]

    de Mink SE, et al.\ 2014, ApJ, 782, 7

    2014

  14. [22]

    Dwarkadas VV, Owocki

  15. [23]

    2012, A&A, 537, A146

    Ekstr\''om, S., Georgy, C., Eggenberger, P., et al. 2012, A&A, 537, A146

    2012

  16. [24]

    2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109

    Eldridge JJ, Izzard RG, Tout, CA. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109

    2008

  17. [25]

    2011, MNRAS, 414, 3501

    Eldridge JJ, Langer N, Tout CA. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 3501

    2011

  18. [26]

    2017, PASA, 34, 58

    Eldridge JJ, Stanway ER, Xiao L, et al. 2017, PASA, 34, 58

    2017

  19. [27]

    2007, A&A, 464, 289

    Evans CJ, Lennon DJ, Dufton PL, Trundle C. 2007, A&A, 464, 289

    2007

  20. [28]

    2019, A&A, 621, A22

    Farrell EJ, Groh JH, Meynet G, Kudritzki RP, Eldridge JJ, Georgy C, Ekstrom S, Yoon SC. 2019, A&A, 621, A22

    2019

  21. [29]

    1990, ApJ, 363, 119

    Fitzpatrick EL, Garmany CD. 1990, ApJ, 363, 119

    1990

  22. [30]

    1996, ApJ, 469, 355

    Flower PJ. 1996, ApJ, 469, 355

    1996

  23. [31]

    2006, ApJ, 637, 1025

    Fullerton AW, Massa DL, Prinja RK. 2006, ApJ, 637, 1025

    2006

  24. [32]

    K.\ Davidson, A.F.J.\ Moffat, & H.J.G.L.M.\ Lamers (Dordrect: Kluwer), 185

    Gallagher, J.S.\ 1989, in Physics of Luminous Blue Variables, ed. K.\ Davidson, A.F.J.\ Moffat, & H.J.G.L.M.\ Lamers (Dordrect: Kluwer), 185

    1989

  25. [33]

    Gal-Yam, A., et al.\ 2007,

    2007

  26. [34]

    Gal-Yam A., Leonard C. D.,

  27. [35]

    1982, ApJ, 263, 777

    Garmany CD, Conti PS, Chiosi C. 1982, ApJ, 263, 777

    1982

  28. [36]

    1987, ApJS, 64, 545

    Gies DR. 1987, ApJS, 64, 545

    1987

  29. [37]

    2017, A&A, 608, 11

    G\"otberg Y, de Mink SE, Groh JS. 2017, A&A, 608, 11

    2017

  30. [38]

    2018, A&A, 615, A78

    G\"otberg Y, de Mink SE, Groh JS, Kupfer T, Crowther PA, Zapartas E, Renzo M. 2018, A&A, 615, A78

    2018

  31. [39]

    Gr\"afener G, Vink JS,

  32. [40]

    Gr\"afener G, Owocki SP,

  33. [41]

    Groh JH, Hillier DJ, Damineli A.\

  34. [42]

    Groh JH, Hillier DJ, Damineli A,

  35. [43]

    2013a, A&A, 558, A131

    Groh JS, Meynet G, Georgy C, Ekstr\" o m S. 2013a, A&A, 558, A131

  36. [44]

    2013b, A&A, 550, L7

    Groh JS, Meynet G, Ekstr\" o m S. 2013b, A&A, 550, L7

  37. [45]

    2009, AJ, 138, 1243

    Harris J, Zaritsky D. 2009, AJ, 138, 1243

    2009

  38. [46]

    L., Woosley S

    Heger A., Fryer C. L., Woosley S. E., Langer N., Hartmann D. H., 2003, ApJ, 591, 288

    2003

  39. [47]

    Hubble E, Sandage A.\ 1953, ApJ, 118, 353

    1953

  40. [48]

    Humphreys RM, Davidson K.\ 1994, PASP, 106, 1025

    1994

  41. [49]

    Humphreys RM, Davidson K,

  42. [50]

    2016, ApJ, 825, 64

    Humphreys RM, Weis K, Davidson K, GordonMS. 2016, ApJ, 825, 64

    2016

  43. [51]

    2014, ApJ, 796, 121

    Justham S, Podsiadlowski P, Vink JS. 2014, ApJ, 796, 121

    2014

  44. [52]

    2012, ApJ, 759, 107

    Kelly PL, Kirshner RP. 2012, ApJ, 759, 107

    2012

  45. [53]

    2016, ApJ, 831, 205

    Kelly et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 205

    2016

  46. [54]

    2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 334

    Kelly et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 334

    2018

  47. [55]

    Kenyon, S.J., & Gallagher, J.S.\ 1989, ApJ, 290, 542

    1989

  48. [56]

    King NL, Walterbos RAM, Gallagher

  49. [57]

    2000, Ph

    King NL. 2000, Ph. D.Thesis, NMSU

    2000

  50. [58]

    S.\ 2006,

    Kotak, R., & Vink, J. S.\ 2006,

    2006

  51. [59]

    1994, A&A, 290, 819

    Langer N, Hamann WR, Lennon MD, Najarro F, Pauldrach AWA, Puls J. 1994, A&A, 290, 819

    1994

  52. [60]

    1989, in Physics of Luminous Blue Variables, ed

    Lortet MC. 1989, in Physics of Luminous Blue Variables, ed. K.\ Davidson, A.F.J.\ Moffat, & H.J.G.L.M.\ Lamers (Dordrect: Kluwer), 45

    1989

  53. [61]

    1974, ApJS, 255, 28

    Lucke PB. 1974, ApJS, 255, 28

    1974

  54. [62]

    1980, AJ, 85, 1046

    Lynds, B.T. 1980, AJ, 85, 1046

    1980

  55. [63]

    1989, in Physics of Luminous Blue Variables, ed

    Maeder A. 1989, in Physics of Luminous Blue Variables, ed. K.\ Davidson, A.F.J.\ Moffat, & H.J.G.L.M.\ Lamers (Dordrect: Kluwer), 15

    1989

  56. [64]

    2002, A&A, 382, 999

    Martins F, Schaerer D, Hillier DJ. 2002, A&A, 382, 999

    2002

  57. [65]

    1995, ApJ, 438, 188

    Massey P, Lang CC, Degioia-Eastwood K, Garmnany CD. 1995, ApJ, 438, 188

    1995

  58. [66]

    Massey P., et al.\ 2000, AJ,

    2000

  59. [67]

    Massey P., et al.\ 2007, AJ, 134, 2474

    2007

  60. [68]

    Massey P, Neugent KF, Morrell N, Hillier DJ, 2014, ApJ, 788, 83

    2014

  61. [69]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 4649

    Menon A, Heger A. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 4649

    2017

  62. [70]

    2003, A&A, 404,975

    Meynet G, Maeder A. 2003, A&A, 404,975

    2003

  63. [71]

    2011, Bull.\ Soc.\ R.\ Sci.\ Lie'ge, 80, 266

    Meynet G, Georgy C, Hirschi R, Maeder A, Massey P, Przybilla N, Nieva MF. 2011, Bull.\ Soc.\ R.\ Sci.\ Lie'ge, 80, 266

    2011

  64. [72]

    Moe M., Di Stefano R., 2017, ApJS, 230, 15

    2017

  65. [73]

    2018, ApJ, 863, 181

    Neugent KF, Massey P, Morrell N. 2018, ApJ, 863, 181

    2018

  66. [74]

    Nota A, et al.\ 1995, ApJ, 448,

    1995

  67. [75]

    Nota A, Lamers HJGLM. eds. 1997,

    1997

  68. [76]

    2016, A&A, 590,

    Oh S, Kroupa P. 2016, A&A, 590,

    2016

  69. [77]

    2005, in The Fate of the

    Owocki SP. 2005, in The Fate of the

    2005

  70. [78]

    1997, in

    Owocki SP, Gayley KG. 1997, in

    1997

  71. [79]

    Owocki SP, Cranmer SR, Gayley

  72. [80]

    2004, ApJ, 616, 525

    Owocki SP, et al. 2004, ApJ, 616, 525

    2004

  73. [81]

    Owocki SP, Townsend RHD,

  74. [82]

    1961, Acta Astron., 17, 355

    Paczynski B. 1961, Acta Astron., 17, 355

    1961

  75. [83]

    2010, New Astron

    Podsiadlowski P. 2010, New Astron. Rev., 54, 39

    2010

  76. [84]

    1992, ApJ, 391, 246

    Podsiadlowski P, Joss PC, Hsu JJL. 1992, ApJ, 391, 246

    1992

  77. [85]

    Poveda A, Ruiz J, Allen

  78. [86]

    1967, MNRAS, 135, 251

    Reddish VC. 1967, MNRAS, 135, 251

    1967

  79. [87]

    2019, A&A, 624, A66

    Renzo M, Zapartas E, de Mink SE, et al. 2019, A&A, 624, A66

    2019

  80. [88]

    2012, Science, 337, 444

    Sana H, de Mink SE, de Koter A, et al. 2012, Science, 337, 444

    2012

  81. [89]

    2014, ApJ, 780, 117

    Schneider FRN, Izzard RG, de Mink SE, et al. 2014, ApJ, 780, 117

    2014

  82. [90]

    Smith L, Crowther PA, Prinja RK. 1994,

    1994

  83. [91]

    2011, in Active OB Stars:

    Smith N. 2011, in Active OB Stars:

    2011

  84. [92]

    2014, ARAA, 52, 487

    Smith N. 2014, ARAA, 52, 487

    2014

  85. [93]

    2016, MNRAS, 461, 3353

    Smith N. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3353

    2016

  86. [94]

    Smith N, Arnett D., 2014, ApJ, 785, 82

    2014

  87. [95]

    2008, ApJ, 679, 1467

    Smith N, Conti PS. 2008, ApJ, 679, 1467

    2008

  88. [96]

    Smith N, McCray R.\ 2007, ApJ,

    2007

  89. [97]

    2006, ApJ, 645, L45

    Smith N, Owocki SP. 2006, ApJ, 645, L45

    2006

  90. [98]

    2015, MNRAS, 447, 602

    Smith N, Tombleson R. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 602

    2015

  91. [99]

    Smith N, Davidson, Gull TR,

  92. [100]

    Smith N, Vink JS, de Koter A

  93. [101]

    Smith N, Li W, Foley RJ, Wheeler

  94. [102]

    et al., 2010, AJ, 139, 1451

    Smith N. et al., 2010, AJ, 139, 1451

    2010

  95. [103]

    2011a, MNRAS, 415, 773

    Smith N, Li W, Silverman JM, Ganeshalingam M, Filippenko AV. 2011a, MNRAS, 415, 773

  96. [104]

    Smith N, Li W, Filippenko AV,

  97. [105]

    Smith N, Andrews JE, Mauerhan

  98. [106]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 772

    Smith N, G\"otberg Y, de Mink SE. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 772

    2018

  99. [107]

    Smith N, et al.\ 2019, MNRAS, in press (arXiv:1805.03298)

    2019 arXiv

  100. [108]

    1983, AA, 127, 49

    Stahl O, et al. 1983, AA, 127, 49

    1983

  101. [109]

    Stothers RB, Chin CW. 1996,

    1996

  102. [110]

    Tammann GA, & Sandage A 1968, APJ, 151, 825

    1968

  103. [111]

    2010, AJ, q40, 1158

    Torres G. 2010, AJ, q40, 1158

    2010

  104. [112]

    Trundle C., Kotak R., Vink

  105. [113]

    Vanbeveren D, De Loore C, van

  106. [114]

    Vanbeveren D, Van Bever J,

  107. [115]

    2013, A&A, 552, A105

    Vanbeveren D, Mennekens N, Van Rensbergen W, De Loore C. 2013, A&A, 552, A105

    2013

  108. [116]

    Van Dyk SD, et al.\ 2011, ApJ, 741, L28

    2011

  109. [117]

    Van Dyk SD, et al.\ 2014, AJ,

    2014

  110. [118]

    2001, A&A, 366, 508

    van Genderen AM. 2001, A&A, 366, 508

    2001

  111. [119]

    van Marle AJ, Owocki SP,

  112. [120]

    Vink JS, Gr\"afener G. 2012,

    2012

  113. [121]

    2003, A&A, 408, 205

    Weis K. 2003, A&A, 408, 205

    2003

  114. [122]

    Wolf & Stahl 82, AA, 112, 111

  115. [123]

    2001, MNRAS, 328, 370

    Yadav RKS, Sagar R. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 370

    2001

  116. [124]

    2002< AJ, 123, 855

    Zaritsky D, Harris J, Thompson IB, Grebel EK, Massey P. 2002< AJ, 123, 855

    2002

  117. [125]

    2004, AJ, 128, 1606

    Zaritsky D, Harris J, Thompson IB, Grebel EK. 2004, AJ, 128, 1606

    2004

  118. [126]

    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...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.