source
stringlengths 1
2.05k
⌀ | target
stringlengths 1
11.7k
|
|---|---|
We summarize our results in 5.. | We summarize our results in \ref{sec:conc}. |
In order for the tidal gravity of a black hole to stronglv affect a star. the pericenter of the stars orbit cannot be much larger than | In order for the tidal gravity of a black hole to strongly affect a star, the pericenter of the star's orbit cannot be much larger than |
Particularly, we lack a solido understaudiug of the progenitor svstenis. | Particularly, we lack a solid understanding of the progenitor systems. |
There is couseusus that arise from the theinonuclear explosion of a carbon-oxveen (C-O) white cawarf (WD). but is the WD iu a binary system with a main sequence (MS) or red eiaut (RC) star. accreting mass from the companion to approach the Chandrasekhar limit SD scenario)? | There is consensus that arise from the thermonuclear explosion of a carbon-oxygen (C-O) white dwarf (WD), but is the WD in a binary system with a main sequence (MS) or red giant (RG) star, accreting mass from the companion to approach the Chandrasekhar limit –SD– scenario)? |
Or is the explosion caused. by the merger of two WDs iu a compact binary system DD scenario)7 | Or is the explosion caused by the merger of two WDs in a compact binary system –DD– scenario)? |
Coustraiine the progenitor scenarios is kev for learning the details of explosion plivsics. aud to inprove our understanding of the effects of euvirounmoeut ou explosions aud thus of the systematics that still affect the coustraints on cosmology derived from SN survevs (deessleroetal.2009:Cawet 2010.. Wood-Vasevctal. 2007: for a review of SN Ia cosmologv see Howell 20103). | Constraining the progenitor scenarios is key for learning the details of explosion physics, and to improve our understanding of the effects of environment on explosions and thus of the systematics that still affect the constraints on cosmology derived from SN surveys \citealt{2009ApJS..185...32K, Guy10}, , \citealt{2007ApJ...666..694W}; for a review of SN Ia cosmology see \citealt{HowellReview}) ). |
No progenitor svstem of à has vet been observed prior to explosion: these binary svstenis would be very faint aud undetectable. at this time. in extra-galactic survevs. | No progenitor system of a has yet been observed prior to explosion: these binary systems would be very faint and undetectable, at this time, in extra-galactic surveys. |
Population svuthesis aud cuviromment studies have not been able to firmly set coustraits on the progenitors. | Population synthesis and environment studies have not been able to firmly set constraints on the progenitors. |
From the theoretical poiut of view. generating iu the DD scenario presents difficultics. | From the theoretical point of view, generating in the DD scenario presents difficulties. |
The mass trausfer only successfully leads to a deflaeration if it occurs at a rate siguificautly slower than the Eddinetou lait. through the formation of a thick disk (Nomoto&Iben1985).. aud even then fine tunimg of various parameters nüeht be needed (see Tout2007 for a brief review. aud the references there). | The mass transfer only successfully leads to a deflagration if it occurs at a rate significantly slower than the Eddington limit, through the formation of a thick disk \citep{Nomoto85}, and even then fine tuning of various parameters might be needed (see \citealt{2007ASPC..372..375T} for a brief review, and the references therein). |
Some observational evidence might already disfavor SD progenitors. | Some observational evidence might already disfavor SD progenitors. |
While the WD aceretes mass from a companion m the SD scenario. the system should. emit N-rav radiation for an extended period of time. | While the WD accretes mass from a companion in the SD scenario, the system should emit X-ray radiation for an extended period of time. |
Under the assumptions of contiuuous duty cycle. aud that all SD progenitors would emit in theX-ray. the rate | Under the assumptions of continuous duty cycle, and that all SD progenitors would emit in theX-ray, the rate |
activity minimum in late 2008, shown in the bottom panel by the solar 10.7 cm radio flux, also as expected (Mewaldtetal.2009). | activity minimum in late 2008, shown in the bottom panel by the solar 10.7 cm radio flux, also as expected \citep{2009AGUFMSH13C..08M}. |
. The low-energy RHESSI analysis bands, excluding 6-12 keV, appear to show a similar upward trend; this band contains a discrete instrumental spectral feature at about 10 keV. This keV wide feature is present in all detectors during both sunlight and eclipse times and was speculated to be mostly due to the K-line emission from radioactive decay in the germanium detectors (Phillipsetal.2006). | The low-energy RHESSI analysis bands, excluding 6-12 keV, appear to show a similar upward trend; this band contains a discrete instrumental spectral feature at about 10 keV. This keV wide feature is present in all detectors during both sunlight and eclipse times and was speculated to be mostly due to the K-line emission from radioactive decay in the germanium detectors \citep{2006ApJ...647.1480P}. |
. More specifically, via a private communication with A. Zoglauer and D. Smith, it seems to be a due to cosmic protons causing electron capture decay producing "!Ga fluorescence X-rays at about 10.4 keV. At the higher energies (above about 50 keV) this cosmic-ray dependence appears to decrease, and we speculate that the RHESSI background at these energies is more closely associated with the trapped radiation around the Earth than with the primary cosmic rays interacting in the Earth's atmosphere and producing secondary radiations detectable at the RHESSI orbital altitude of about 500 km. | More specifically, via a private communication with A. Zoglauer and D. Smith, it seems to be a due to cosmic protons causing electron capture decay producing $^{71}$ Ga fluorescence X-rays at about 10.4 keV. At the higher energies (above about 50 keV) this cosmic-ray dependence appears to decrease, and we speculate that the RHESSI background at these energies is more closely associated with the trapped radiation around the Earth than with the primary cosmic rays interacting in the Earth's atmosphere and producing secondary radiations detectable at the RHESSI orbital altitude of about 500 km. |
A further complication is the cumulative effect of radiation damage to RHESSI's unshielded detectors over this period of low solar activity, which increases background noise and reduces detector active volume. | A further complication is the cumulative effect of radiation damage to RHESSI's unshielded detectors over this period of low solar activity, which increases background noise and reduces detector active volume. |
Due to this no quiet Sun offpointing occurred in the second half of 2007, before a detector anneal was conducted in November 2007 after which the detector response recovered back to 2005 levels. | Due to this no quiet Sun offpointing occurred in the second half of 2007, before a detector anneal was conducted in November 2007 after which the detector response recovered back to 2005 levels. |
Similarly, no quiet-Sun offpointing was commanded after April 2009 due to the continued degradation of RHESSI’s detectors, despite the prolonged solar minimum. | Similarly, no quiet-Sun offpointing was commanded after April 2009 due to the continued degradation of RHESSI's detectors, despite the prolonged solar minimum. |
A second detector anneal in March 2010 greatly improved the performance of the detectors, returning it to early mission levels, but the Sun was no longer quiet. | A second detector anneal in March 2010 greatly improved the performance of the detectors, returning it to early mission levels, but the Sun was no longer quiet. |
For each energy band and detector the weighted mean and standard deviation of the fitted amplitudes with their associated errors is calculated for all the time intervals. | For each energy band and detector the weighted mean and standard deviation of the fitted amplitudes with their associated errors is calculated for all the time intervals. |
These values are then converted from counts flux to photon flux using the diagonal elements of RHESSI’s detector response matrix. | These values are then converted from counts flux to photon flux using the diagonal elements of RHESSI's detector response matrix. |
A final amplitude and statistical error is then calculated, again using the weighted mean, from the four values with errors per energy band. | A final amplitude and statistical error is then calculated, again using the weighted mean, from the four values with errors per energy band. |
We find no significant signal in any energy channel. | We find no significant signal in any energy channel. |
Table 1 gives the results in comparison with the initial data of Hannahetal.(2007b).. | Table \ref{tab:results} gives the results in comparison with the initial data of \cite{2007ApJ...659L..77H}. |
As expected, the further observations has substantially reduced the derived limits, and the >1 c detection found previously in the lowest (3-6 keV) band has become simply a limit. | As expected, the further observations has substantially reduced the derived limits, and the $>$ 1 $\sigma$ detection found previously in the lowest (3-6 keV) band has become simply a limit. |
Figure 2 shows these results graphically, in comparison with the earlier results (Petersonetal.1966;Feffer1997). | Figure \ref{fig:ph3200spec} shows these results graphically, in comparison with the earlier results \citep{peterson1966,feffer1997}. |
. These limits now become the deepest limits for solar hard X-ray emission yet reported. | These limits now become the deepest limits for solar hard X-ray emission yet reported. |
'The most natural interpretation of these observations would be as limits on thermal sources in the corona, mainly free-free and free-bound continuum in the HXR range. | The most natural interpretation of these observations would be as limits on thermal sources in the corona, mainly free-free and free-bound continuum in the HXR range. |
RHESSI also detects bound-bound emissions of Fe and Ni in the 6-8 keV range Phillips2004).. | RHESSI also detects bound-bound emissions of Fe and Ni in the 6-8 keV range \citep[e.g.][]{2004ApJ...605..921P}. |
Although the bulk of the corona is(e.g. too cool to produce thermal emission in the RHESSI range above 3 keV, localised higher temperature emission (i.e. from bright points) could easily provide emission in this energy range. | Although the bulk of the corona is too cool to produce thermal emission in the RHESSI range above 3 keV, localised higher temperature emission (i.e. from bright points) could easily provide emission in this energy range. |
In the left panel of Figure 3 we show the new RHESSI upper limits in the context of previous quiet Sun and non-flaring active region observations. | In the left panel of Figure \ref{fig:emvst} we show the new RHESSI upper limits in the context of previous quiet Sun and non-flaring active region observations. |
produced limiting value forthe SXR quiet Yohkoh/SXTSun (Pevtsov&Actona2001) and this was used to find suitable isothermal model fits (Peresetal.2000).. | Yohkoh/SXT produced a limiting value forthe SXR quiet Sun \citep{pevtsov2001}
and this was used to find suitable isothermal model fits \citep{2000ApJ...528..537P}. |
The SphinX observations of the end of Solar Cycle 23 have given preliminary estimates of a low, steady level of X-ray emission that may provide the best characterisation of the background coronal emission (Sylwesteretal. 2010).. | The SphinX observations of the end of Solar Cycle 23 have given preliminary estimates of a low, steady level of X-ray emission that may provide the best characterisation of the background coronal emission \citep{2010EOSTr..91...73S}. |
An isothermal fit was also made to this emission, again shown in Figure 3.. | An isothermal fit was also made to this emission, again shown in Figure \ref{fig:emvst}. |
In both cases these quiet Sun isothermal models are consistently lower than the RHESSI upper limits. | In both cases these quiet Sun isothermal models are consistently lower than the RHESSI upper limits. |
Also shown are the isothermal models fits during non-flaring quiescent active region times from SphinX (Sylwesteretal.2010) and RHESSI (McTiernan2009). | Also shown are the isothermal models fits during non-flaring quiescent active region times from SphinX \citep{2010EOSTr..91...73S} and RHESSI \citep{2009ApJ...697...94M}. |
As expected, the RHESSI upper limits are lower than the quiescent active region emission. | As expected, the RHESSI upper limits are lower than the quiescent active region emission. |
In the right panel of Figure 3 we have calculated the maximum emission measure as a function of isothermal temperature which is consistent with the RHESSI quiet Sun limits and the SXT constraint 2001).. | In the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:emvst} we have calculated the maximum emission measure as a function of isothermal temperature which is consistent with the RHESSI quiet Sun limits and the SXT constraint \citep{pevtsov2001}. . |
We find that this can be fitted with a (Pevtsovpolynomial of form | We find that this can be fitted with a polynomial of form |
located in the bulee of the galaxy. | located in the bulge of the galaxy. |
These sources. aud the excess bulge x-ray enudsson. follow an exponoeutial radial distribution about the nucleus with au 71 kpe scale leneth. | These sources, and the excess bulge x-ray emission, follow an exponential radial distribution about the nucleus with an $\sim$ 1 kpc scale length. |
This is simular to that of optical light aud suggests the excess bulge cussion is from unresolved point sources and that the point sources trace the old stellar bulee population. | This is similar to that of optical light and suggests the excess bulge emission is from unresolved point sources and that the point sources trace the old stellar bulge population. |
However. extrapolating the bulee ddistribution towards weaker sources predicts ~0.022 source | from sources «0.001. countses1 JL | However, extrapolating the bulge distribution towards weaker sources predicts $\sim$ 0.022 source $^{-1}$ from sources $<$ 0.001 $^{-1}$ $^{-1}$. |
, Thus. weak sources can only account for of the total excess bulge enüssiou (70.002. +), | Thus, weak sources can only account for of the total excess bulge emission $\sim$ 0.092 $^{-1}$ ). |
There remains a significant flux in the bulge unaccounted. for bv unresolved sources. particularly at lower cucreics. indicative of a truly diffuse. hot iuterstellar eas. | There remains a significant flux in the bulge unaccounted for by unresolved sources, particularly at lower energies, indicative of a truly diffuse, hot interstellar gas. |
If all the excess bulge emission arises from) a diffuse thermal bremsstrahlung at Af~0.2 keV. uniformly distributed throughout the bulec. thou there is ~1.«109 AL. of hot eas. | If all the excess bulge emission arises from a diffuse thermal bremsstrahlung at $kT \sim 0.2$ keV, uniformly distributed throughout the bulge, then there is $\sim 4 \times 10^6$ $M_{\odot}$ of hot gas. |
The average harduess ratio of the sources can be described by a power law of iudex E—1.6 with a Galactic absorbing colui deusity of Ny,=LsL078 cni7. | The average hardness ratio of the sources can be described by a power law of index $\Gamma=1.6$ with a Galactic absorbing column density of $N_H = 4 \times 10^{20}$ $^{-2}$. |
This is typical of x-ray binaries. | This is typical of x-ray binaries. |
Asstunine thic canonical spectrum applies to all sources. the backerouud source subtracted dadistriibution of the disk sources follows au NX50.50 profile extending to the most Iuninous sources at Lay>10°? 1, | Assuming thie canonical spectrum applies to all sources, the background source subtracted distribution of the disk sources follows an $N \propto S^{-0.50}$ profile extending to the most luminous sources at $L_X > 10^{39}$ $^{-1}$. |
The distribution of bulee sources. however. shows a break at Ey~dos1075 |. | The distribution of bulge sources, however, shows a break at $L_X \sim 4 \times 10^{37}$ $^{-1}$. |
Thus the bulee sources are predomunautly low-mass x-ray binaries. consistent with au old bulge stellar population. while the disk has an additional population of ιο brighter sources. | Thus the bulge sources are predominantly low-mass x-ray binaries, consistent with an old bulge stellar population, while the disk has an additional population of much brighter sources. |
Seven of the 10 brightest ddisk sources lie within spiral aris. cousisteut with previous oobservatious (Fass), but the entire sample of disk sources. down to the limitine Ihuninositv of ~23«1079 ft. aro distributed throughout the disk without preference to spiral arius. | Seven of the 10 brightest disk sources lie within spiral arms, consistent with previous observations (F88), but the entire sample of disk sources, down to the limiting luminosity of $\sim 3 \times 10^{36}$ $^{-1}$, are distributed throughout the disk without preference to spiral arms. |
Some of these brighter sources may be black hole candidates with hielhiauass companuious. | Some of these brighter sources may be black hole candidates with high-mass companions. |
We thank Martin Weisskopf for deriving the expression for the uncertziutv in the source flux used iu the source-finding algorithm. | We thank Martin Weisskopf for deriving the expression for the uncertainty in the source flux used in the source-finding algorithm. |
The digital sky survey nuage used iu Figure 1b is from the “Palomar Observatory - Space Telescope Scicuce Institute Digital ον Survey” of the northern sky. based on scaus of the Second Palomar Skv Survey. and was produced under NASA Contract NÀS5- | The digital sky survey image used in Figure 1b is from the “Palomar Observatory - Space Telescope Science Institute Digital Sky Survey” of the northern sky, based on scans of the Second Palomar Sky Survey, and was produced under NASA Contract NAS5-2555. |
and the central star features an elegant debris disk that was first imaged in the near-infrared (?) and in visible scattered light (?).. | and the central star features an elegant debris disk that was first imaged in the near-infrared \citep{1999A&A...350L..51A} and in visible scattered light \citep{2003AJ....126..385C}. |
The two other components of the system form an M2-MA binary, ~775 away from the centralstar. | The two other components of the system form an M2-M4 binary, $\sim7\farcs5$ away from the central star. |
? give an overview of the rich disk structure. | \citet{2009A&A...493..661R} give an overview of the rich disk structure. |
It is composed of two annuli with peak luminosity in scattered light at ~200 and ~325 ffrom the star. | It is composed of two annuli with peak luminosity in scattered light at $\sim200$ and $\sim325$ from the star. |
These two rings have azimuthal brightness asymmetries (factors 2 to 3). | These two rings have azimuthal brightness asymmetries (factors 2 to 3). |
The outer ring shows a tightly wound spiral structure. | The outer ring shows a tightly wound spiral structure. |
The rings are separated by an apparent gap wider than the rings. | The rings are separated by an apparent gap wider than the rings. |
An extended diffuse emission associated with a faint spiral arm is present in the northeast side of the disk, and is detected to more than 600Au. | An extended diffuse emission associated with a faint spiral arm is present in the northeast side of the disk, and is detected to more than 600. |
. Another spiral arm is possibly observed, pointing toward the binary companions. | Another spiral arm is possibly observed, pointing toward the binary companions. |
Finally, the disk brightness sharply decreases within 200AU,, suggesting a strong dust depletion in the innermost regions of the disk. | Finally, the disk brightness sharply decreases within 200, suggesting a strong dust depletion in the innermost regions of the disk. |
Establishing a high-contrast detection limit follows a different approach than establishing a detection. | Establishing a high-contrast detection limit follows a different approach than establishing a detection. |
The most important step is indeed to show that there is no significant detection in our data. | The most important step is indeed to show that there is no significant detection in our data. |
A practical approach is to analyze the y? maps (Fig. 8)). | A practical approach is to analyze the $\chi^2$ maps (Fig. \ref{chi2_map_nd}) ). |
If the minimum value of the x? does not significantly differ from the maximum y?, it means that the binary model does not significantly improve the fit to the data. | If the minimum value of the $\chi^2$ does not significantly differ from the maximum $\chi^2$, it means that the binary model does not significantly improve the fit to the data. |
The x? values at best fit are given in Table 3.. | The $\chi^2$ values at best fit are given in Table \ref{chi2r}. |
The detection for the binary system 1135549 discussed in the previous section is extremely clear with a normalized x? of 1.85. | The detection for the binary system 135549 discussed in the previous section is extremely clear with a normalized $\chi^2$ of 1.85. |
This dramatically improves the fit compared to the null hypothesis (no binary y?/Nfreedom= 423). | This dramatically improves the fit compared to the null hypothesis (no binary $\chi^2/n_{\rm freedom} = 423$ ). |
This is not the case for the two debris disk systems. | This is not the case for the two debris disk systems. |
At best fit, the binary model improves the x? by a factor of 1.24 for 992945 and 1.18 for 1141569. | At best fit, the binary model improves the $\chi^2$ by a factor of 1.24 for 92945 and 1.18 for 141569. |
Although the x? maps indicate a nondetection, robust statistical limits based on these data remain to be derived. | Although the $\chi^2$ maps indicate a nondetection, robust statistical limits based on these data remain to be derived. |
To accomplish this, we plot the x? in Fig. 9,, | To accomplish this, we plot the $\chi^2$ in Fig. \ref{fig:nond}, |
minimized over position angle, as a function of separation (Va?+67) and contrast (r). | minimized over position angle, as a function of separation $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\delta^2}$ ) and contrast $r$ ). |
The red solid contours correspond to 1, 2, and 3 o detection limits. | The red solid contours correspond to 1, 2, and 3 $\sigma$ detection limits. |
Several minima exist in the maps including two 3 o false detection: at mmas (contrast 0.16%)) and at mmas (contrast 0.2%)). | Several minima exist in the maps including two 3 $\sigma$ false detection: at mas (contrast ) and at mas (contrast ). |
It is noteworthy to point out that the absence of a companion (equivalent to a binary system with a separation of mmas) is within 5 o of the false detections. | It is noteworthy to point out that the absence of a companion (equivalent to a binary system with a separation of mas) is within 5 $\sigma$ of the false detections. |
This c limit corresponds to the red dashed curves. | This $\sigma $ limit corresponds to the red dashed curves. |
We define this curve as our 5c detection limits, hence excluding any detection on the two dataset. | We define this curve as our $\sigma$ detection limits, hence excluding any detection on the two dataset. |
This approach is coherent with the generally recognized 5c criterion to validate a detection. | This approach is coherent with the generally recognized $\sigma$ criterion to validate a detection. |
According to Fig. 9,, | According to Fig. \ref{fig:nond}, |
the average 5c detection limits of 992945 and 1141569 over the separation range mmas are respectively 2.5x107° and 4.6x107°, that is, AL’ of 6.5 and 5.8. | the average $5\,\sigma$ detection limits of 92945 and 141569 over the separation range mas are respectively $2.5\times10^{-3}$ and $4.6\times10^{-3}$, that is, $\Delta L'$ of 6.5 and 5.8. |
However, the nondetection limit is not completely uniform over the field of view and can have values that are nearly a factor of two worse. | However, the nondetection limit is not completely uniform over the field of view and can have values that are nearly a factor of two worse. |
We can observe the detection limit worsening by a factor 2 between A/D and 0.5A/D, with a precipitous drop for still lower spatial separations. | We can observe the detection limit worsening by a factor 2 between $\lambda/D$ and $0.5\,\lambda/D$, with a precipitous drop for still lower spatial separations. |
These results also confirm the Monte-Carlo simulations (presented in Fig. 4)), | These results also confirm the Monte-Carlo simulations (presented in Fig. \ref{Monte}) ), |
assuming error bars on the closure phase of 0.2 and 0.4 degrees. | assuming error bars on the closure phase of 0.2 and 0.4 degrees. |
To convert contrast limits into upper bounds for the mass of any possible companion, we must know the absolute magnitude corresponding to the detection limit in each system. | To convert contrast limits into upper bounds for the mass of any possible companion, we must know the absolute magnitude corresponding to the detection limit in each system. |
We derived the L’ band magnitudes from the K band magnitudes of the calibrators: 992933 | We derived the L' band magnitudes from the K band magnitudes of the calibrators: 92933 |
For the two PLANET ISIS models for99-BLG-47.. we obtain Q=3.10«10° for the close binary solution (dg)=(O13L0.310) and >=3.35«10? for the wide binary solution (οι)=(11.31.0.751). | For the two PLANET ISIS models for, we obtain $\hat Q = 3.40\times 10^{-3}$ for the close binary solution $(d_c,q_c)=(0.134,0.340)$ and $\gamma=3.35\times 10^{-3}$ for the wide binary solution $(d_w,q_w)=(11.31,0.751)$. |
Hence. the observed degeneracy between the two PLANET models (see 3 and Tables 2 and 3)) is the clearest example of this type of correspondence observed so far. | Hence, the observed degeneracy between the two PLANET models (see \ref{sec:model} and Tables \ref{tab:model} and \ref{tab:modelw}) ) is the clearest example of this type of correspondence observed so far. |
While reported that two different binary lens models. one of a close binary and the other of a wide binary. can fit the observed light curve of the (caustic-crossing) binary lens event.98-SMC-I.. one can infer from their figure 8. that the degeneracy between the two models exists only for the specific light curves (which is essentially a particular one dimensional slice of the magnification field over the source plane) but not for the magnification field in the neighborhood of the caustic as a whole. | While reported that two different binary lens models, one of a close binary and the other of a wide binary, can fit the observed light curve of the (caustic-crossing) binary lens event, one can infer from their figure 8, that the degeneracy between the two models exists only for the specific light curves (which is essentially a particular one dimensional slice of the magnification field over the source plane) but not for the magnification field in the neighborhood of the caustic as a whole. |
This is obvious from the relative rotation of the two caustics. | This is obvious from the relative rotation of the two caustics. |
In addition. the source magnitudes for the two models of ddiffer by ~0.18 mag. | In addition, the source magnitudes for the two models of differ by $\sim 0.18\ \mbox{mag}$ . |
By contrast. the difference of the predicted 7, between the two models of iis only ~0.02mag. | By contrast, the difference of the predicted $I_{\rm s}$ between the two models of is only $\sim 0.02\ \mbox{mag}$. |
In fact. we get Q=6.5«10.? (the close binary) and >=1.8«107 (the wide binary) for the two models of98-SMC-I.. and thus. although the degeneracy of the light curve is somehow related to the correspondence of d«»d.+. it cannot be completely explained simply by the argument in this appendix. and it should be investigated further for its origin. | In fact, we get $\hat Q=6.5 \times 10^{-2}$ (the close binary) and $\gamma=1.8 \times 10^{-2}$ (the wide binary) for the two models of, and thus, although the degeneracy of the light curve is somehow related to the correspondence of $d\leftrightarrow d^{-1}$, it cannot be completely explained simply by the argument in this appendix, and it should be investigated further for its origin. |
On the other hand. the degeneracy of iis the first definitive observational case of the correspondence between extreme separation binaries. | On the other hand, the degeneracy of is the first definitive observational case of the correspondence between extreme separation binaries. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.