PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Recent explorations of circumplanetary disks separate the disk evolution into two phases.

“Recent explorations of circumplanetary disks separate the disk evolution into two phases (Alibert et al. 2005;Ward & Canup 2010).”

• cites Alibert et al. 2005Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Ward & Canup 2010 sourcePartly supported

  The Abstract describes a transition from a spin-out disk to an accretion disk, supporting a broad two-phase description. But Section 3.2 (Inflow Stages) says the planet–disk configuration passes through three stages, and the Conclusion describes an intermediate period when both spin-out and direct inflow supply the disk. The paper therefore does not separate its full disk evolution into only two phases. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

The lack of differentiation of Callisto suggests that the accretion or formation timescale for all the Galilean satellites was prolonged and would have happened during the second phase of evolution after the circumstellar disk dissipated.

“The lack of differentiation of Callisto (Anderson et al. 1996) suggests that the accretion or formation timescale for all the Galilean satellites was prolonged (Canup & Ward 2002) and would have happened during the second phase of evolution after the circumstellar disk dissipated”

• cites Anderson et al. 1996 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Canup & Ward 2002 sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

For ξ = 0.2 this gives a planet mass ratio of 2 × 10^-5 and for ξ = 0.1 of 2 × 10^-4, hence ranging from Saturn to Neptune mass and lower than estimated by Chiang et al. (2009) but consistent with that predicted by Quillen (2006).

“For ξ = 0.2 this gives a planet mass ratio of 2 × 10 -5 and for ξ = 0.1 of 2 × 10 -4 , hence ranging from Saturn to Neptune mass and lower than estimated by Chiang et al. (2009) but consistent with that predicted by Quillen (2006).”

• cites Chiang et al. (2009) sourcePartly supported

  The Summary (section 4.1; page unavailable) gives Chiang et al.'s conservative constraint as less than 3 Jupiter masses, an upper limit above the Saturn-to-Neptune masses in the citing sentence. It does not estimate a specific mass above that range; the paper also models a 0.1-Jupiter-mass planet (Table 1). Thus the comparison with Chiang's upper limit is supported, but saying the proposed range is lower than Chiang's estimated mass overstates the source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Quillen (2006) sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

The spectral energy distribution for J1407 is consistent with a lightly reddened K5 star (E(B-V) = 0.09, A_V about 0.32 mag), with no evidence for infrared excess.

“The spectral energy distribution for the star (plotted in Figure 1) is consistent with a lightly reddened K5 star (E(B -V ) = 0.09, A V 0.32 mag), with no evidence for infrared excess”

• cites Skrutskie et al. 2006 sourceCould not verify

  Section 5.2.4, Photometric Accuracy, describes 2MASS stellar photometry, but does not analyze J1407. Searches for J1407, the stated reddening values, a K5 spectral-energy-distribution fit, and infrared excess found no passage addressing those conclusions in our copy; page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.76)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Wright et al. 2010 sourceCould not verify

  The Instrument section discusses WISE flux corrections for G–K dwarfs, but does not analyze J1407. Searches for J1407, the K5 classification, the stated reddening values, and infrared excess found no passage addressing this star. (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Sco-Cen is the nearest OB association to the Sun (mean subgroup distances d about 118-145 pc) and consists of three subgroups with ages of about 11-17 Myr.

“Sco-Cen is the nearest OB association to the Sun (mean subgroup distances of d 118-145 pc; de Zeeuw et al. 1999) and consists of three subgroups with ages of ∼11-17 Myr (Pecaut et al. 2011;Preibisch & Mamajek 2008).”

• cites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 sourceSupported
• cites Pecaut et al. 2011 sourceSupported
• cites Preibisch & Mamajek 2008Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

J1407 is located in the vicinity of the Upper Centaurus-Lupus subgroup of the Sco OB2 association, and its proper motion is statistically consistent with moving toward the UCL convergent point (peculiar velocity 0.9 ± 1.8 km s^-1), with a kinematic distance of 128 ± 13 pc.

“its proper motion is statistically consistent with moving toward the UCL convergent point (a negligible peculiar velocity of 0.9 ± 1.8 km s -1 ), with a kinematic distance of 128 ± 13 pc”

• cites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

A separation of 10 AU at a distance of 130 pc corresponds to 77 mas, resolvable perhaps with aperture-masking interferometry on large telescopes.

“For example, a separation of 10 AU at a distance of 130 pc corresponds to 77 mas, resolvable perhaps with aperture-masking interferometry on large telescopes (e.g., Ireland & Kraus 2008).”

• cites Ireland & Kraus 2008 sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

A K5-type star with rotation period 3.20 days would be predicted to have soft X-ray emission around the saturation level (log(L_X/L_bol) = -3.2 +/- 0.3), perfectly consistent with the observed ROSAT X-ray flux (log(L_X/L_bol) = -3.2), and consistent with other Sco-Cen pre-MS stars.

“A K5-type star with rotation period of 3.20 days would be predicted to have soft X-ray emission around the saturation level (log(L X /L bol ) -3.2 ± 0.3; Pizzolato et al. 2003), perfectly consistent with the observed ROSAT X-ray flux (log(L X /L bol ) -3.2), and consistent with other Sco-Cen pre-MS stars (Mamajek et al. 2002).”

• cites Pizzolato et al. 2003 sourceSupported
• cites Mamajek et al. 2002 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

During some nights the SuperWASP photometry shows unphysical jumps between two photometric levels at the tenths of magnitude level, a systematic effect seen in other SuperWASP studies.

“During some nights the SuperWASP photometry shows (unphysical) jumps between two photometric levels at the tenths of magnitude level-a systematic effect seen in other SuperWASP studies (e.g., Norton et al. 2011).”

• cites Norton et al. 2011 sourcePartly supported

  The paper reports systematic contamination of SuperWASP light curves and spurious periodic signals (Section 2, p. 2). It does not describe nightly jumps between two photometric levels or establish their size as tenths of a magnitude, so it supports only the general point that SuperWASP photometry can have systematic effects. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Variations in eclipse depth in EE Cep are attributed to a possible third companion that tilts the orbital plane of the eclipsing system.

“Variations in eclipse depth in this system are attributed to a possible third companion that tilts the orbital plane of the eclipsing system (Torres & Stefanik 2000).”

• cites Torres & Stefanik 2000 sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion (§8; page unavailable) explains that a third star can change the inner orbit’s inclination and thereby alter eclipses. But the paper applies this explanation to SS Lac, not EE Cep; it does not establish the claimed cause of EE Cep’s eclipse-depth variations. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

The number of binaries is flat in log period or semi-major axis space, and young binaries are similar to the field population in this respect.

“The number of binaries is flat in log period or semi-major axis space (Halbwachs et al. 2003;Kraus et al. 2011), and young binaries are similar to field population in this respect (Duchêne et al. 2007).”

• cites Halbwachs et al. 2003Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kraus et al. 2011 sourcePartly supported

  Section 6.1 reports an approximately log-flat separation distribution for young solar-mass binaries in loose associations over 3–5000 AU, supporting the flat-distribution part attributed to Kraus et al. The citing sentence leaves out those population and separation limits. Its separate comparison with the field is cited to Duchêne et al., not Kraus et al. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Duchêne et al. 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The LSST survey design should enable estimation of sub-mas/yr proper motions that will allow kinematic membership assignments of newly discovered pre-MS stars to young clusters and associations of determinable distance and age.

“The LSST survey design should enable estimation of sub-mas/yr proper motions that will allow kinematic membership assignments of newly discovered pre-MS stars to young clusters and associations of determinable distance and age.”

• cites Ivezic et al. 2008 sourcePartly supported

  Section 2.1.4 (p. 7) gives a design target of 0.2 mas/yr proper-motion accuracy, supporting the sub-mas/yr estimate. Section 4.4 (pp. 33–35) says LSST will observe star-forming regions and survey faint populations there, but describes color and variability selection; it does not say that proper motions will enable kinematic membership assignments of newly discovered pre-main-sequence stars to young clusters or associations of determinable distance and age. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The existence of circumplanetary disks after the dissipation of the protosolar nebular disk has been postulated from formation scenarios for the Galilean satellites.

“The existence of circumplanetary disks after the dissipation of the protosolar (circumstellar) nebular disk has been postulated from formation scenarios for the Galilean satellites (Canup & Ward 2002;Magni & Coradini 2004;Ward & Canup 2010).”

• cites Canup & Ward 2002 sourceSupported
• cites Magni & Coradini 2004 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Ward & Canup 2010 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction (page not provided) links circumplanetary disks to the formation of Jupiter’s regular satellites and describes satellite-formation disk models. It does not establish that those disks existed after the protosolar nebula dissipated; it also describes an accretion-disk scenario in which the solar nebula is still present. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

Typical subgroups of OB associations have about 10^3 stars and ages of about 3-20 Myr.

“Typical subgroups of OB associations have ∼10 3 stars and ages of ∼3-20 Myr (e.g., de Zeeuw et al. 1999;Briceño et al. 2007), during which the majority of stars have just recently ceased accreting from circumstellar disks (e.g., Mamajek 2009).”

• cites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 sourcePartly supported

  Section 4.1 reports an age of about 5 Myr for Upper Scorpius and about 20 Myr for the Sco OB2 complex, broadly supporting the stated age range; the approximately 3 Myr age in §4.3 refers to stars associated with the Lupus clouds, not a typical subgroup. Section 10.1 estimates a few thousand solar masses for entire OB associations, not about 1,000 stars per subgroup. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Briceño et al. 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Binary identifications are not complete at mass ratios less than 0.1, and the number of secondaries hosting passive disks in the 10^7 year old age range is not well characterized.

“However, this is difficult to formulate as binary identifications are not complete at mass ratios less than 0.1 (e.g., Kraus et al. 2011) and the number of secondaries hosting passive disks in the 10 7 year old age range is not well characterized.”

• cites Kraus et al. 2011 sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

J1407 is a solar-mass pre-main-sequence non-accreting star exhibiting a long, unusual eclipse similar to those seen in EE Cep and Aurigae.

“we present the discovery of a solar-mass premain-sequence (pre-MS) non-accreting star exhibiting a long, unusual eclipse similar to those seen in EE Cep and Aurigae.”

May combine two claims.

The SuperWASP DR1 photometry for J1407 contains approximately 29,000 epochs during 206 dates between HJD 2453860 and HJD 2455399, with median photometric precision of 0.023 mag.

“The SuperWASP DR1 photometry for J1407 contains photometry for approximately 29,000 epochs during 206 dates between HJD 2453860 (2006.34)and HJD 2455399 (2010.56),with median photometric precision of 0.023 mag.”

May combine two claims.

J1407 has a deep eclipse with maximum depth about 3 mag between HJD 2454213 (2007 April 23) and HJD 2454227 (2007 May 7), with a complex pattern of roughly symmetric dimming and brightening within ±26 days of 2007 April 29 HJD 2454220.

“a deep eclipse with maximum depth ∼3 mag between HJD 2454213 (2007 April 23) and HJD 2454227 (2007 May 7), with a complex pattern of roughly symmetric dimming and brightening within ±26 days of 2007 April 29 HJD 2454220.”

May combine two claims.

J1407's light curve is dominated by a quasi-sinusoidal component with amplitude about 0.1 mag in the WASP-V photometric band, with periodicity of 3.21 days (consistent with rotational modulation of starspots, typical for young active stars).

“The light curve is dominated by a quasi-sinusoidal component with amplitude ∼0.1 mag in the WASP-V photometric band, with periodicity of 3.21 days (consistent with rotational modulation of starspots, typical for young active stars)”

The quote only partly states this claim.

A comparison star J1407252.03-394415.1 of similar brightness (V = 12.24) situated 99.6 arcsec away shows no evidence for complex behavior similar to J1407.

“Despite the appearance of some discrepant photometric points (with correspondingly large photometric errors), there is no evidence for any complex behavior similar to that seen for J1407.”

May combine two claims.

Of about 350 Sco-Cen survey stars, at least 200 appear to be new bona fide pre-MS stars, and SuperWASP light curves were available for 138 of them.

“Of our ∼350 Sco-Cen survey stars, at least 200 appear to be new bona fide pre-MS stars, and SuperWASP light curves were available for 138 of them.”

May combine two claims.

The J1407 SuperWASP light curve is dominated by a sinusoidal component with amplitude about 0.1 mag in the WASP-V band and periodicity of 3.211 days.

“The light curve for J1407 from the SuperWASP datafoot_6 is dominated by (1) a sinusoidal component with amplitude ∼0.1 mag in the WASP-V photometric band, with periodicity of 3.211 days”

May combine two claims.

There is no hint from the spectrum of J1407 that it could contain a giant star, a hot component, or constitute a symbiotic binary.

“There is no hint from the spectrum of J1407 that it could contain a giant star, a hot component, or constitute a symbiotic binary.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

The tangential motion of J1407 on the sky is 32 mas yr^-1 or 20 km s^-1 at its predicted distance of 128 pc.

“As a UCL member, the tangential motion of J1407 on the sky is 32 mas yr -1 or 20 km s -1 at its predicted distance of 128 pc.”

May combine two claims.

SuperWASP light curves of neighboring stars of similar magnitude, as well as J1407 outside of eclipse, show no such hourly variations.

“We have examined SuperWASP light curves of neighboring stars of similar magnitude, as well as J1407 outside of eclipse, and seen no such variations”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Including the gradual dimming phase, the eclipse on J1407 lasted about 54 days.

“Including the gradual dimming phase, the eclipse on J1407 lasted about 54 days.”

May combine two claims.

J1407's spectral appearance is consistent with being dwarf or pre-MS, but not a giant.

“(5) spectral appearance consistent with being dwarf or pre-MS, but not a giant.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

We have not yet positively identified more than a single eclipse, so at present it is possible that the eclipse was a one-time occurrence.

“We have not yet positively identified more than a single eclipse, so at present it is possible that the eclipse was a one-time occurrence.”

May combine two claims.

There is no evidence for any eclipse events with photometric coverage up to 2330 days (6.4 years), and there are no eclipse events in any periods up to 850 days (2.3 years).

“We conclude that there is no evidence for any eclipse events with photometric coverage up to 2330 days (6.4 years), and that there are no eclipse events in any periods up to 850 days (2.3 years).”

May combine two claims.

Nightly averages of SuperWASP data exhibit two pairs of multiday dips, A1 and A2 separated by about 24 days, and B1 and B2 separated by about 51.5 days.

“Nightly averages of SuperWASP data (see Figure 5) exhibit two pairs of multiday dips, labeled A 1 and A 2 , separated by ∼24 days, and B 1 and B 2 , separated by ∼51.5 days.”

May combine two claims.

J1407's proper motion is statistically consistent with Sco-Cen membership, and its predicted kinematic distance is harmonious with pre-MS status.

“(4) proper motion statistically consistent with Sco-Cen membership, and predicted kinematic distance harmonious with pre-MS status”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Long-term median magnitudes outside eclipse are V = 12.29 for ASAS and V = 12.45 for SuperWASP.

“Long-term median magnitudes outside of eclipse are plotted with dotted lines (V = 12.29 for ASAS, V = 12.45 for SuperWASP).”

May combine two claims.

The eclipse was deep for about 14 days but bookended by a gradual dimming covering about ±54 days.

“The eclipse was deep for about 14 days but is bookended by a gradual dimming covering a period of about ±54 days.”

May combine two claims.

The complex eclipse of J1407 that took place in 2007 is slightly asymmetric and contains significant substructure.

“The complex eclipse of J1407 that took place in 2007 is slightly asymmetric and contains significant substructure, similar to the eclipses of the Be star EE Cep that have been interpreted in terms of an occulting planetary system (Galan et al. 2010).”

• cites Galan et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A preliminary good fit (but by no means unique) to the daily averaged light curve for J1407 is shown in Figure 12.

“A preliminary good fit (but by no means unique) to the daily averaged light curve for J1407 is shown in Figure 12”

May combine two claims.

Integrating over the masses gives dN = C P^0.26 d log P with C = 4.5×10^-3.

“Integrating over the masses, we find dN = C P 0.26 d log P with C = 4.5×10 -3 .”

May combine two claims.

The distribution gives a probability of an FGK star hosting a gas giant between 1-5 AU (365-1825 days), interior to this (2-365 days), and from 5-20 AU, in each case of about f_g ~ 0.05 or 5%.

“The distribution gives a probability of an FGK star hosting a gas giant between 1-5 AU (365-1825 days), interior to this (2-365 days), and from 5-20 AU, in each case of about f g ∼ 0.05 or 5%.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

We have had success modeling the primary eclipse; however, the peripheral dips have been more difficult to model.

“We have had success modeling the primary eclipse; however, the peripheral dips have been more difficult to model.”

May combine two claims.

Dips A1 and A2 are about 51.5 days apart, and dips B1 and B2 are about 24 days apart.

“Dips A 1 and A 2 are ∼51.5 days apart, and dips B 1 and B 2 are ∼24 days apart.”

The quote only partly states this claim.

The midway dates for both the A and B dips coincide within a day of HJD 2454220 (2007 April 29).

“The midway dates for both the”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Mosqueira et al. suggest that Iapetus' large separation from Saturn's principal satellite Titan is suggestive that the remnant circum-Saturnian nebula may have had two components: a dense inner disk that spawned most of Saturn's regular satellites, out to the centrifugal radius near Titan, and a disk of much lower density beyond the centrifugal radius.

“Mosqueira et al. (2010) suggest that Iapetus' large separation from Saturn's principal satellite Titan is suggestive that the remnant circum-Saturnian nebula may have had two components: a dense inner disk that spawned most of Saturn's regular satellites, out to the centrifugal radius near Titan, and a disk of much lower density beyond the centrifugal radius-perhaps”

• cites Mosqueira et al. 2010 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Relaxing the assumptions about the size, mass, composition, and structure of the disk in the back-of-the-envelope calculation has little impact on the feasibility of the idea that dusty disks of high optical depth may be a common feature of young gas giant planets, and such objects may be observable via deep eclipses of young stars.

“Relaxing the assumptions about the size, mass, composition, and structure of the disk in our back-of-theenvelope calculation has little impact on the feasibility of the idea that dusty disks of high optical depth may be a common feature of young gas giant planets, and such objects may be observable via deep eclipses of young stars.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Because of the extended estimated circumplanetary disk lifetime, circumplanetary disks can be seen in eclipse against a young central star after the dissipation of the circumstellar disk.

“Because of the extended estimated circumplanetary disk lifetime, we can consider the possibility that circumplanetary disks can be seen in eclipse against a young central star after the dissipation of the circumstellar disk.”

May combine two claims.

In the first phase the circumplanetary disk is fed by material from the circumstellar disk and acts like an accretion disk.

“In the first phase the circumplanetary disk is fed by material from the circumstellar disk and the circumplanetary disk acts like an accretion disk.”

May combine two claims.

The size of such a proto-moon disk would be a few solar radii, large enough and optically thick enough to potentially eclipse a star's light.

“The size of such a proto-moon disk in this case would be a few solar radii-i.e., large enough and optically thick enough to potentially eclipse a star's light.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Emission lines and UV emission suggest that Aurigae's hidden object is a B-type star.

“emission lines and UV emission suggest that the hidden object is a B-type star (see discussion by Chadima et al. 2011).”

• cites Chadima et al. 2011 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

In the second phase the circumstellar disk has dissipated, and the viscosity of the circumplanetary disk both drives accretion onto the planet and causes the disk to spread outward.

“In the second phase the circumstellar disk has dissipated, and the viscosity of the circumplanetary disk both drives accretion onto the planet and causes the disk to spread outward.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

These circumplanetary disks would then evolve passively after the circumstellar reservoir was depleted, with matter accreting onto the planet, grain growth and proto-satellite accretion, and depletion through other mechanisms.

“These disks would then evolve passively after the circumstellar reservoir was depleted (Section 2), with matter accreting onto the planet, grain growth and proto-satellite accretion, and depletion through other mechanisms”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The primary object of EE Cep is a B5e giant star, and only primary eclipses are seen.

“The primary object is a B5e giant star, and only primary eclipses are seen (Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999).”

• cites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Modeling of Iapetus suggests that it formed 3-5 Myr after the formation of Ca-Al inclusions.

“modeling of Iapetus, the outermost regular satellite of Saturn, suggests that it formed 3-5 Myr after the formation of Ca-Al inclusions (Castillo-Rogez et al. 2009).”

• cites Castillo-Rogez et al. 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Callisto currently has a semi-major axis that is only a small fraction of Jupiter's Hill radius (a ≈ 0.0355 r_H).

“Callisto, currently has a semi-major axis that is only a small fraction of Jupiter's Hill radius a ≈ 0.0355r H .”

May combine two claims.

These circumplanetary disks likely had outer radii of ξ > 0.01-0.05 and could have been detectable by eclipses with about 1-10 day timescales to observers along opportune lines of sight.

“These circumplanetary disks likely had outer radii of ξ > 0.01-0.05and could have been detectable by eclipses with ∼1-10 day timescales to observers along opportune lines of sight.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The large relative sizes of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks imply that they might be seen in eclipse in stellar light curves.

“The large relative sizes of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks imply that they might be seen in eclipse in stellar light curves.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

Such a disk need not be face-on; more likely the disk would have a non-zero inclination with respect to the planet-star orbital plane, so the star need not be completely geometrically eclipsed by such a circumplanetary disk.

“Of course, such a disk need not be face-on-more likely the disk would have a non-zero inclination with respect to the planet-star orbital plane, so the star need not be completely geometrically eclipsed by such a circumplanetary disk.”

May combine two claims.

EE Cep exhibits long (30-90 day) asymmetric eclipses with a period of 5.6 years and depth of about 0.6-2.1 mag.

“EE Cep exhibits long (30-90 day) asymmetric eclipses with a period of 5.6 years and depth of ∼0.6-2.1 mag.”

• cites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

Presumably a disk of much higher optical depth and significant radial substructure existed during the epoch of satellite formation.

“Presumably a disk of much higher optical depth and significant radial substructure existed during the epoch of satellite formation.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Infrared emission from Aurigae's disk was detected with IRAS.

“Infrared emission from the disk was detected with IRAS (Backman & Gillett 1985).”

• cites Backman & Gillett 1985 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

J1407 is being eclipsed by a low-mass object orbited by a dense inner disk, further girded by at least three dusty rings of optical depths near unity.

“We suspect that this new star is being eclipsed by a low-mass object orbited by a dense inner disk, further girded by at least three dusty rings of optical depths near unity.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The large fraction of binary systems in young associations and clusters suggests that long-period eclipsing circumsecondary disk systems may be discovered in lower mass systems.

“the large fraction of binary systems in young associations and clusters suggests that long-period eclipsing circumsecondary disk systems may be discovered in lower mass systems.”

May combine two claims.

The mass of J1407 and the lack of detected infrared emission suggest that the host object for the eclipsing disk is low mass, possibly a low-mass star, brown dwarf, or giant planet.

“The mass of the star and the lack of detected infrared emission suggest that the host object for the eclipsing disk is low mass, possibly a low-mass star, brown dwarf, or giant planet.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Jupiter's Hill radius is about 743 Jupiter radii.

“Jupiter's Hill radius is about 743R Jup”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Discovering and characterizing eclipses by circumplanetary and circumsecondary disks will provide observational constraints on the conditions that spawn satellite systems around gas giant planets and planetary systems around stars.

“discovering and characterizing eclipses by circumplanetary and circumsecondary disks will provide us with observational constraints on the conditions that spawn satellite systems around gas giant planets and planetary systems around stars.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Structure seen in the wings of EE Cep's eclipse has recently been interpreted in terms of rings and gaps in a forming planetary system around a lower mass secondary.

“Structure seen in the wings of the eclipse has recently been interpreted in terms of rings and gaps in a forming planetary system around a lower mass secondary (Galan et al. 2010).”

• cites Galan et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

A good rough guideline covering a wide range of conditions is aspect ratio h/r about 0.05-0.1.

“A good rough guideline covering a wide range of conditions is aspect ratio h/r ∼ 0.05-0.1”

• cites Edgar et al. 2007 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Kalas et al. suggest that Fomalhaut b hosts a circumplanetary ring akin to Saturn's, which would extend to at least 20 Jupiter radii for an assumed albedo of 0.4 to recover the observed fluxes.

“These observations led Kalas et al. to suggest that the planet hosts a circumplanetary ring akin to Saturn's (see Arnold & Schneider 2004), which would extend to at least 20 Jupiter radii for an assumed albedo of 0.4 to recover the observed fluxes.”

• cites Kalas et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Arnold & Schneider 2004Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The lifetime of a circumplanetary disk at 25 AU could be about 10 times longer (of order 10^7 years) and at 100 AU (such as Fomalhaut b) 100 times longer (of order 10^8 years).

“We estimate that the lifetime of a circumplanetary disk at 25 AU could be about 10 times longer (or of order 10foot_3 years) and at 100 AU (such as Fomalhaut b) 100 times longer (or of order 10 8 years).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Other environmental factors such as dispersal of the host molecular cloud, birth cluster density, and disk evaporation can influence multiplicity and disperse disks.

“however, there are other environmental factors such as dispersal of the host molecular cloud, birth cluster density, and disk evaporation that can influence multiplicity and disperse disks (Monin et al. 2007;Prato & Weinberger 2010).”

• cites Monin et al. 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Prato & Weinberger 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The quote only partly states this claim.

The difference in magnitude between the reflected light of the disk and the star is about 9.8.

“δm ∼ 9.8”

May combine two claims.

This level of magnitude difference is not extremely high, suggesting that it may be feasible to detect reflected light from circumplanetary disks with an adaptive optics system.

“This level of magnitude difference is not extremely high, suggesting that it may be feasible to detect reflected light from circumplanetary disks with an adaptive optics system.”

May combine two claims.

Because of the large size of a circumplanetary or circumsecondary disk, the fraction f_orient of objects capable of giving eclipses, and that such eclipses will be seen, is not low.

“Because of the large size of a circumplanetary or circumsecondary disk, the fraction f orient of objects capable of giving eclipses, and that such eclipses will be seen, is not low.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

If J1407 were a K5 supergiant with M_V about -4.3, it would represent a young, massive star about 18 kpc away, about 6 kpc above the Galactic disk midplane, with a tangential velocity of about 2800 km s^-1.

“If it shared the absolute magnitude of the K5Ib standard σ CMa (M V -4.3), then J1407 would represent a young, massive star ≈18 kpc away, ≈6 kpc above the Galactic disk midplane, with a tangential velocity of ≈2800 km s -1 .”

May combine two claims.

The period analysis suggests that the orbital period P > 850 days (2.33 yr), so the ratio of eclipse duration to orbital period must be less than 0.06.

“As discussed in the previous section, the period analysis suggests that the orbital period P > 850 days (2.33 yr), so the ratio of eclipse duration to orbital period must be less than 0.06.”

May combine two claims.

The hypothetical disk appears to produce some obscuration during a minimum of Delta t about 54 days, and hence the obscuration occurs during a fraction f_eclipse < 6.3% of the period.

“The hypothetical disk appears to produce some obscuration during a minimum of Δt ≈ 54 days, and hence the obscuration occurs during a faction f eclipse < 6.3% of the period.”

May combine two claims.

Both mass estimates suggest that the mass of the companion must be low and in the brown dwarf or low-mass M star regime.

“Both this mass estimate and the previous one estimated from the 850 day period limit suggest that the mass of the companion must be low and in the brown dwarf or low-mass M star regime.”

May combine two claims.

EE Cep has a similar period and duration to J1407 and also exhibits variations in eclipse depth.

“EE Cep has a similar period and duration and also exhibits variations in eclipse depth (Galan et al. 2010).”

• cites Galan et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

J1407's total proper motion (32 mas yr^-1) would imply a tangential velocity of about 670 km s^-1 if it were a K5 giant at about 4.3 kpc, faster than the local Galactic escape velocity.

“J1407's total proper motion (32 mas yr -1 ) would then imply a tangential velocity of ≈670 km s -1 , i.e., faster than the local Galactic escape velocity.”

May combine two claims.

The period analysis suggests P > 850 days, which for m1 = 0.9 M_sun suggests an orbital radius of >1.7 AU and an orbital velocity of <21.7 km s^-1.

“The period analysis above suggests that the orbital period P > 850 days (2.33 yr), which for m 1 = 0.9 M suggests an orbital radius of >1.7 AU and an orbital velocity of <21.7 km s -1 .”

May combine two claims.

If the shallow depression seen in early 2001 is an eclipse, then the period is 6.12 years and just about at the 2330 day limit.

“If the shallow depression seen in early 2001 (see Figure 7) is an eclipse, then the period is 6.12 years and just about at the 2330 day limit.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

If the 2001 dip was a true secondary eclipse, then the period should be 12.24 years and the next secondary eclipse would take place around 2013.46.

“If it was a true secondary eclipse, then the period should be 12.24 years and the next secondary eclipse would take place around 2013.46.”

May combine two claims.

The error at 12 microns is only 3% of the flux, so at best a disk could be emitting with a 12 micron infrared flux of lambda F_lambda about 5 x 10^-17 W m^-2.

“The error at 12 μm is only 3% of the flux, so at best a disk could be emitting with a 12 μm infrared flux of λF λ ∼ 5 × 10 -17 W m -2 .”

May combine two claims.

If the dimming seen in 2001 corresponds to a secondary eclipse, then the fraction of the period spent in eclipse is f_eclipse about 0.024, corresponding to m2 about 1.2 M_J xi^-3.

“m 2 ∼ 1.2M J ξ -3 . (9”

May combine two claims.

The ratio of the width of these gaps to one-half of the eclipse time is approximately 3/26 or 0.11, suggesting that the disk must have an aspect ratio h/r smaller than this ratio.

“The ratio of the width of these gaps to one-half of the eclipse time is approximately 3/26 or 0.11, suggesting that the disk must have an aspect ratio h/r smaller than this ratio.”

May combine two claims.

The longer the period, the lower f_eclipse, and the lower the estimated mass of the secondary.

“The longer the period, the lower f eclipse , and the lower the estimated mass of the secondary.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Future detection of another similar eclipse would negate the one-time circumstellar disk idea.

“(3) the future detection of another similar eclipse would obviously negate the idea.”

May combine two claims.

The disk radius is only weakly dependent on the period (proportional to P^-1/3) and would be smaller for a more distant companion.

“The disk radius is only weakly dependent on the period (proportional to P -1/3 ) and would be smaller for a more distant companion.”

May combine two claims.

No plausible stellar or substellar companion can be responsible for dimming the K5 pre-MS star J1407 by more than 3 mag (>95% dimming), and eclipses by such an object would not explain the irregular shape, depth, and duration of the eclipse.

“No plausible stellar or substellar companion can be responsible for dimming the K5 pre-MS star J1407 by more than 3 mag (>95% dimming), and eclipses by such an object would not explain the irregular shape, depth, and duration of the eclipse.”

May combine two claims.

The eclipse-duration-to-period ratio is significantly lower than the ratios for either V718 Persei or KH 15D (0.2 and 0.3, respectively) and suggests that a circumbinary or circumstellar disk about the K star cannot account for the eclipse.

“This is significantly lower than the ratios for either V718 Persei or KH 15D (0.2 and 0.3, respectively) and suggests that a circumbinary or circumstellar disk about the K star cannot account for the eclipse.”

May combine two claims.

For xi about 0.2 expected for circumplanetary disks, this gives m2 about 0.1 M_sun and an M dwarf.

“For ξ ∼ 0.2 expected for circumplanetary disks this gives m 2 ∼ 0.1 M and an M dwarf.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

J1407 may also exhibit large variations in eclipse duration and depth.

“Hence, we should consider the possibility that J1407 also exhibits large variations in eclipse duration and depth.”

May combine two claims.

Using the energy conversion factor of Fleming et al. (1995), the ROSAT X-ray flux translates to f_X = 2.9 x 10^-13 erg s^-1 cm^-2, and L_X = 10^29.8 erg s^-1 and log(L_X/L_bol) = -3.4 dex.

“Using the energy conversion factor of Fleming et al. (1995), this translates to an X-ray flux in the ROSAT band of f X = 2.9 × 10 -13 erg s -1 cm -2 , and using our previous distance and bolometric luminosity estimates, L X = 10 29.8 erg s -1 and log(L X /L bol ) -3.4 dex.”

• cites Fleming et al. (1995) sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

If the secondary has a mass of 1 M_J, then the satellites in the disk could have mass lower than that of Earth, and if the secondary is an M star of mass 0.1 M_sun, then the gap opening satellites could have mass lower than Saturn.

“If the secondary has a mass of 1 M J , then the satellites in the disk could have mass lower than that of Earth, and if the secondary is an M star of mass 0.1 M , then the gap opening satellites could have mass lower than Saturn.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Assuming the disk to be of similar size to typical planetary orbits (about 10 AU), this translates to sweeping the disk in the z-direction approximately 4(r_disk/10 AU) km per week.

“Assuming the disk to be of similar size to typical planetary orbits (∼10 AU), this would translate to sweeping the disk in the z-direction approximately ∼4(r disk /10 AU) km per week.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The disk is of similar size to typical planetary orbits (about 10 AU) in the one-time occultation scenario.

May combine two claims.

Substructure in the eclipse suggests that the disk is thin h/r 0.01 and has gaps that may contain satellites with mass ~10^-3 times that of the secondary.

“Substructure in the eclipse suggests that the disk is thin h/r 0.01 and has gaps that may contain satellites with mass ∼10 -3 times that of the secondary.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Because the lifetime of a circumplanetary disk could be longer for planets at large semi-major axis, light detected from outer exoplanets such as Fomalhaut b may arise from such a disk.

“Because the lifetime of a circumplanetary disk could be longer for planets at large semi-major axis, light detected from outer exoplanets such as Fomalhaut b may arise from such a disk.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Regardless of the nature of the disked companion of J1407, detailed observations of future eclipses should provide useful constraints on either circumsecondary or circumplanetary disk structure and the early evolution of planets and/or satellites.

“Regardless of the nature of the disked companion of J1407 (low-mass star, brown dwarf, or gas giant planet), detailed observations of future eclipses should provide useful constraints on either circumsecondary or circumplanetary disk structure and the early evolution of planets and/or satellites.”

May combine two claims.

The densest of Saturn's named rings, the B ring, has a radially averaged optical depth of order unity and surface density of about 50 g cm^-2, implying an approximate opacity of kappa about 0.02 cm^2 g^-1.

“The densest of Saturn's named rings-the B ring-has a radially averaged optical depth of order unity and surface density of ∼50 g cm -2 (Zebker et al. 1985;de Pater & Lissauer 2001;Tiscareno 2012), implying an approximate opacity of κ ∼ 0.02 cm 2 g -1 .”

• cites Zebker et al. 1985 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites de Pater & Lissauer 2001Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Tiscareno 2012Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Even given LSST's proposed field revisit time (~3 days, but twice per night), a J1407-like eclipse would have been easily detected.

“Even given LSST's proposed field revisit time (∼3 days, but twice per night), a J1407-like eclipse would have been easily detected.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The asymmetry of the eclipse could be due to the impact parameter of the disk with respect to the line of sight.

“As has been proposed for this system, the asymmetry of the eclipse could be due to the impact parameter of the disk with respect to the line of sight (Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999).”

• cites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Such eclipses seen among young stars may provide remarkable laboratories for testing satellite and planet formation scenarios.

“Such eclipses seen among young stars may provide remarkable laboratories for testing satellite and planet formation scenarios.”

May combine two claims.

J1407 was selected to be in the appropriate age range and could host either a circumplanetary disk or a lower mass secondary star with a disk.

“This star was selected to be in the appropriate age range and could host either a circumplanetary disk or a lower mass secondary star with a disk.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The systematic difference between SuperWASP and ASAS is mostly due to SuperWASP-V being calibrated to the Tycho V_T band and ASAS being converted to the Johnson V system via Hipparcos.

“The systematic difference is mostly due to SuperWASP-V being calibrated to the Tycho V T band(Pollacco et al. 2006), whereas the ASAS is converted to the Johnson V system via Hipparcos(Pojmanski 2002).”

• cites Pollacco et al. 2006Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Pojmanski 2002Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The ratio of a few hours (or a quarter day) to the half eclipse length is about 0.01, suggesting that the disk has an extremely low aspect ratio of h/r about 0.01.

“The ratio of a few hours (or a quarter day) to the half eclipse length is about 0.01, suggesting that the disk has an extremely low aspect ratio of h/r 0.01.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

To estimate the probability of detecting a circumplanetary disk eclipse, one must consider the number of stars that host gas giant planets.

“To estimate the probability of detecting a circumplanetary disk eclipse, we must consider the number of stars that host gas giant planets.”

May combine two claims.

Adopting this mass opacity for J1407's dust annuli, the thick inner disk would have a mass of about 0.8 M_Moon, the two rings shown would have masses of about 0.2 and 0.1 M_Moon, and the outermost ring would contain about 0.5 M_Moon of dust mass.

“Adopting this mass opacity for J1407's dust annuli, the thick inner disk would have a mass of ∼0.8 M Moon , the two rings shown would have masses of ∼0.2 and ∼0.1 M Moon , and the outermost ring would contain ∼0.5 M Moon of dust mass.”

May combine two claims.

Eclipses from thick inner circumplanetary disks that spawn regular satellite systems around gas giants may last for days; tenuous outer disks of lower optical depths to larger fractions of the Hill radius could persist for weeks, depending on the planet's mass and semi-major axis.

“We estimate that eclipses from the thick inner circumplanetary disks that spawn regular satellite systems around gas giants may last for days; however, tenuous outer disks of lower optical depths to larger fractions of the Hill radius could persist for weeks, depending on the planet's mass and semi-major axis.”

May combine two claims.

This probability is very low and implies that high-cadence monitoring of many stars is required to detect circumplanetary disk eclipses.

“This probability is very low and implies that high-cadence monitoring of many stars is required to detect circumplanetary disk eclipses.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A system with a recurring circumplanetary eclipse would make it possible to study eclipses in depth.

“A system with a recurring circumplanetary eclipse would make it possible to study eclipses in depth, so discovery of systems with short orbital periods is important.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Constraints from gas giant satellite systems in our own solar system suggest that their circumplanetary disk structures could have produced quite complex eclipses if seen in transit, with dense inner regions, gaps where satellite formation is taking place, and low-density disks possibly extending to large fractions of the Hill radius.

“Constraints from the gas giant satellite systems in our own solar system suggest that their circumplanetary disk structures could have produced quite complex eclipses if seen in transit, with dense inner regions, gaps where satellite formation is taking place, and low-density disks possibly extending to large fractions of the Hill radius.”