Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Potential for life to exist and be detected on Earth-like planets orbiting white dwarfs

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that an Earth-like planet around a 0.6 solar-mass white dwarf at about 0.012 AU could stay in the habitable zone for nearly 7 Gyr, with enough light for photosynthesis and UV-driven prebiotic chemistry, and that JWST…

desk verdict Solid synthesis rather than a breakthrough: the PAR/UV overlap and JWST hour-scale timing are the new pieces; the 7 Gyr habitable lifetime mainly repackages Agol/Becker with a simpler HZ model. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18934 v1 pith:IQ6S6SQJ submitted 2024-11-28 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Caldon T. Whyte , L. H. Quiroga-Nuñez , Manasvi Lingam , Paola Pinilla This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords AstrobiologyHabitableplanetszoneWhitedwarfsPhotosynthesisPrebioticchemistryBiosignaturesJWST
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 asks whether a white dwarf, the cooling leftover of a Sun-like star, can be a long-lived home for life and not just a graveyard for planets. It tracks the habitable zone as the white dwarf cools and finds that an Earth-like planet on a circular orbit at about 0.012 AU around a typical 0.6 solar-mass white dwarf would remain inside the liquid-water region for nearly 7 Gyr, comparable to Earth's total habitable lifetime of about 6 Gyr. It then adds two biological filters that previous white-dwarf habitability studies did not impose together: the planet must receive enough photosynthetically active radiation for photosynthesis and enough UV-C photon flux for UV-mediated prebiotic chemistry, and the entire habitable zone passes both filters. It also estimates that JWST transmission spectroscopy could detect atmospheric biosignatures at signal-to-noise 5 in one hour or less of in-transit integration, which would make any discovered white-dwarf planet unusually cheap to study. If these claims hold, white dwarfs deserve a prominent place in the search for life and its signatures.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the time-dependent luminosity cooling function of a 0.6 $M_\odot$ white dwarf, combined with the habitable-zone temperature shortcut that sets inner and outer edges at equilibrium temperatures of 270 K and 175 K. From that shortcut, the orbital radius for a given equilibrium temperature follows $a[\mathrm{AU}] = 64818\, T_p^{-2}\, (L_{\rm WD}/L_\odot)^{1/2}$, and inverting it for the two edge temperatures gives the time any fixed orbit spends inside the zone. The same luminosity and effective temperature feed Planck photon-flux integrals over 400-750 nm (photosynthetically active radiation) and 200-280 nm (UV-C), whose critical fluxes set the maximum orbital radii for photosynthesis and prebiotic chemistry. The detection estimate is carried by a simplified JWST transmission-spectroscopy signal-to-noise formula applied to a white-dwarf host, assuming a 6.5 m telescope, throughput 0.4, and photon shot noise only.

What would settle it

A three-dimensional climate model of an Earth-like planet at 0.012 AU around a 0.6 $M_\odot$ white dwarf, run through the claimed 7 Gyr window with an Earth-like atmosphere, would settle whether the 270 K and 175 K equilibrium-temperature boundaries hold for close-in, UV-rich illumination; if the simulated climate cannot keep liquid water on the surface for the full window, the headline lifetime is wrong. A sharper observational check is to measure a JWST transmission spectrum of a transiting Earth-sized planet around a white dwarf: reaching signal-to-noise 5 on molecular features within one hour of in-transit integration would confirm the detection model, while needing many hours would show the model is optimistic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a canonical 0.6 $M_\odot$ white dwarf with radius 1.36 $R_\oplus$, the paper claims that an Earth-like planet at about 0.012 AU remains in the habitable zone for nearly 7 Gyr, because the habitable zone migrates inward as the star cools and this orbit stays inside it throughout the slow-cooling phase. The same calculation places the entire habitable zone inside the orbit where the white dwarf delivers the critical photosynthetic flux ($1.2 \times 10^{16}$ photons m$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) and the critical UV-C flux ($5.44 \times 10^{16}$ photons m$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) required for prebiotic chemistry, and the star's peak emission wavelength stays near 635 nm, close to the Sun's. For detection, the paper uses a photon-limited transmission-spectroscopy formula to claim that JWST can reach signal-to-noise 5 on an Earth-like atmosphere around a white dwarf with in-transit integration times of one hour or less until the white dwarf is about 10 Gyr old. The authors present this as the first joint assessment of the habitable zone, photosynthetic potential, abiogenic potential, and observability for white-dwarf planets.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's headline 7 Gyr habitable lifetime rests on applying a habitable-zone shortcut calibrated for main-sequence stars, with fixed inner and outer equilibrium temperatures of 270 K and 175 K, to a small, hot white dwarf whose habitable zone sits at about 0.012 AU; if those temperature boundaries are not accurate for such close-in, UV-rich illumination, the lifetime and the conclusion that the whole zone is biochemically lit would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, an Earth-like planet discovered near 0.012 AU around a 0.6 $M_\odot$ white dwarf would have a habitable window of billions of years, long enough for the major evolutionary transitions seen on Earth.
  • Any terrestrial planet found in a white dwarf's habitable zone should be prioritized for JWST transmission spectroscopy, because the predicted one-hour integration time makes biosignature searches feasible rather than expensive.
  • The inward-migrating habitable zone gives a falsifiable sequence: a fixed orbit should first enter the zone as the star cools, remain inside for roughly 7 Gyr, and then exit as the inner edge crosses it near the Roche limit.
  • The overlap of the photosynthesis and UV-abiogenesis zones around white dwarfs is an advantage over M-dwarf and brown-dwarf hosts, where the two zones separate, and it supports searching for the same O2/O3/CO2/CH4 biosignature gases as on Earth.
  • The result implies that younger white dwarfs, roughly 2-9 Gyr old, are the best targets, since their habitable zones are wider and their spectra peak near the solar value; most 0.6 $M_\odot$ white dwarfs are expected to fall in this age range.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The age-dependent curves could be inverted into a ranked target list: for each known white dwarf with an estimated age, one could compute the current habitable-zone radius and the leftover habitable lifetime, which is a natural input for JWST and future observatory planning.
  • A testable extension would be to run a three-dimensional climate model for a tidally locked Earth-like planet around a white dwarf, because the simplified 270 K and 175 K boundaries are globally averaged and day-night heat redistribution could move the actual inner and outer edges.
  • The paper assumes an optically thin atmosphere for the photosynthetically active and UV fluxes; a hazy or cloudy atmosphere would absorb some of the critical radiation, so the true photosynthesis and abiogenesis zones could be narrower, a difference that radiative-transfer models could quantify.
  • If debris-disk recycling can place planets in the habitable zone after the white dwarf has cooled, the starting point of the 7 Gyr clock would shift to later ages, which changes which orbital radii and stellar ages should be prioritized in surveys.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the potential habitability of Earth-like planets around a 0.6 solar-mass white dwarf. It defines a time-varying habitable zone from the white dwarf cooling luminosity, using fixed planetary equilibrium temperature limits of 270 K and 175 K from Kaltenegger & Sasselov (2011), and cross-checks these limits against the Kopparapu et al. (2013) flux-based model. The central quantitative claims are that a planet at about 0.012 AU remains in the evolving habitable zone for nearly 7 Gyr; that the entire habitable zone lies within the region receiving sufficient photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and sufficient UV-C flux for prebiotic chemistry; and that JWST transmission spectroscopy could detect atmospheric biosignatures with integration times of order one hour or less. The PAR and UV flux calculations are based on blackbody emission and critical photon flux thresholds from the literature, following the framework of Lingam et al. (2020).

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a useful quantitative synthesis of three habitability constraints—liquid-water stability, photosynthesis, and UV-driven abiogenesis—for white dwarf planets, and it makes concrete, falsifiable observational predictions for JWST. The analytic derivations are transparent and reproducible, and the authors explicitly benchmark their habitable zone against earlier studies (Agol 2011; Barnes & Heller 2013; Becker et al. 2023) and against the Kopparapu et al. (2013) flux formalism. The application of PAR and UV-C thresholds to white dwarfs, rather than to main-sequence stars or brown dwarfs, is new and relevant for target prioritization in upcoming surveys.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3–2.4, Eq. (4)] The headline 7 Gyr habitable lifetime is a direct output of the fixed equilibrium-temperature boundaries Tp = 270 K and 175 K adopted from Kaltenegger & Sasselov (2011), which were calibrated for main-sequence stars. The consistency check against Kopparapu et al. (2013) shown in Figure 2 is reassuring, but it does not fully remove the concern because Eq. (5) is itself calibrated with main-sequence model atmospheres and is formally restricted to T★ < 7200 K, as the paper itself notes. A 20–25 K uncertainty in either HZ edge can shift the computed habitable lifetime by roughly one gigayear, so the authors should provide a sensitivity analysis that varies Tp across plausible values and discuss whether the 270/175 K limits are applicable to close-in, likely tidally locked planets around white dwarfs.
  2. [§2.3, Eqs. (5)–(6)] The flux-based HZ calculation is applied over a range of white dwarf ages that includes epochs where TWD exceeds 7200 K, outside the formal validity range of the Kopparapu et al. (2013) coefficients. The paper states this restriction but the figures and several comparisons use the model without marking the invalid region. The authors should explicitly identify which portions of Figures 1 and 2 are outside the formal range and quantify how much the early-time behavior influences the maximum habitable lifetime.
  3. [§4.1, Eq. (19)] The claim that JWST can detect biosignatures with integration times of one hour or less is based on a photon-noise-limited formula that neglects instrument systematics, stellar and telluric contamination, and the need to detect and confirm multiple spectral features. The text labels the estimate an idealization, but the abstract presents it as a headline result. The authors should add a brief quantitative discussion of realistic degradation (e.g., factors of a few to ten in required integration time) and state explicitly that the quoted times are best-case, shot-noise-limited values.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix A, Table of equations] The PAR and UV orbital-distance and radiation-flux entries in Appendix A use (RWD/R⊙) in the prefactor, whereas the main-text Eqs. (9), (13), and (15) use (RWD/R⊕). These normalizations are inconsistent and must be reconciled, since the numerical constants otherwise differ by a large factor.
  2. [§4.1, Eq. (19)] The photon spectral flux density nλ(λ; T★) in Eq. (19) is not defined; please specify its units, the wavelength at which it is evaluated, and the reference values used for the curves in the bottom panel of Figure 3.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'studied for the first time' overstates the novelty because the PAR/UV methodology is taken from Lingam et al. (2020); it would be more accurate to say 'for the first time for white dwarf planets'.
  4. [§4.1, Figure 3 caption] The bottom panel is described as showing 'the average in-transit integration time,' but the averaging procedure over wavelengths or spectral features is not described; please clarify how the single plotted value is derived from Eq. (19).
  5. [§2.4] The statement that the habitable range 'appears to stabilize' between roughly 2 and 9 Gyr would be more convincing with a quantitative measure, such as the time derivative of the HZ width or boundaries, rather than visual inspection of Figure 2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 7 Gyr habitable-lifetime claim and the PAR/UV overlap follow from external HZ thresholds, an external cooling function, and blackbody photon-flux integrals, not from fitted or self-defined inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain was inspected for each headline claim. The time-dependent HZ and the ~7 Gyr maximum habitable lifetime at ~0.012 AU are computed from the Barnes & Heller (2013) cooling function (Eq. 1), the equilibrium-temperature orbital-distance formula (Eq. 4), and the fixed 270 K/175 K HZ edges from Kaltenegger & Sasselov (2011). None of these inputs is fitted to the 7 Gyr output, and the paper explicitly cross-checks the simplified HZ against the Kopparapu et al. (2013) flux-based boundaries and against Agol (2011), Barnes & Heller (2013), and Becker et al. (2023). The photosynthesis and UV-abiogenesis limits are obtained by integrating a Planck blackbody photon flux (Eqs. 7-8) over fixed external wavelength ranges and comparing with external critical-flux thresholds (Wolstencroft & Raven 2002; Rimmer et al. 2018). The dimensionless integral construction is attributed to Lingam et al. (2020), a prior paper co-authored by one of the present authors, but the formula is stated explicitly in the present text and the thresholds and the white-dwarf application are independent of that prior work; this citation is not load-bearing. The JWST integration-time estimate uses the standard Fujii et al. (2018) S/N expression with adopted fixed parameters and is not a renamed fit or a predicted quantity derived from fitted data. The paper also states its genuine limitations (Kopparapu et al. valid for T_star < 7200 K, so results are more accurate for white-dwarf ages ≳1.5 Gyr; Earth-like atmosphere assumed; atmospheric absorption neglected), but these are caveats about model validity, not evidence that an output is equivalent to an input by construction. No equation or fitted parameter was found that reduces the paper's predictions to its own assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a chain of inputs from prior literature: the WD cooling function, the HZ temperature limits, the critical PAR/UV fluxes, and the JWST S/N formula. None of these are derived in this paper; they are assumed to hold for white dwarf planets. The paper introduces no new free parameters or invented entities, but the choices of these external parameters directly set the quoted numbers.

free parameters (4)
  • HZ inner/outer equilibrium temperature limits = 270 K / 175 K
    Taken from Kaltenegger & Sasselov (2011) as a shortcut for the habitable zone; the 7 Gyr habitable lifetime depends directly on these values.
  • Critical PAR photon flux = 1.2e16 m^-2 s^-1
    Threshold for photosynthesis from Wolstencroft & Raven (2002); used to define the photosynthetic habitable zone.
  • Critical UV-C photon flux = 5.44e16 m^-2 s^-1
    Threshold for UV-mediated prebiotic chemistry from Rimmer et al. (2018).
  • White dwarf cooling function coefficients = -2.478, -0.7505, 0.1199, -6.686e-3
    Polynomial fit to WD cooling models from Barnes & Heller (2013), used to compute luminosity as a function of age.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The Barnes & Heller (2013) cooling function accurately describes the luminosity evolution of a 0.6 M_sun white dwarf.
    Used in Eq (1) to compute the time-dependent luminosity that drives the habitable zone migration.
  • domain assumption The equilibrium temperature shortcut for the HZ (T_p = 270 K and 175 K) accurately reproduces the standard flux-based HZ for white dwarfs.
    Section 2.3 adopts this shortcut; the 7 Gyr habitable lifetime is a direct consequence.
  • standard math The white dwarf emits as a blackbody over the PAR (400-750 nm) and UV (200-280 nm) wavelength ranges.
    Used in Eqs (8)-(18) to compute photon fluxes; a standard physics approximation for white dwarf atmospheres.
  • domain assumption The critical PAR and UV fluxes derived from Earth-based studies apply to exoplanets around white dwarfs.
    Section 3 uses thresholds from Wolstencroft & Raven (2002) and Rimmer et al. (2018) to define the PAR and UV zones.
  • domain assumption The planet's atmosphere is optically thin over PAR and UV ranges, and atmospheric absorption is neglected.
    Section 3 states this explicitly; it makes the calculated flux radii upper bounds.
  • domain assumption The planet has an Earth-like Bond albedo (0.3), radius, and mass.
    Used in Eqs (3), (4), and the S/N estimate; the paper assumes an Earth analog throughout.
  • domain assumption The Fujii et al. (2018) S/N formula for transmission spectroscopy is valid for white dwarf hosts.
    Section 4.1 uses Eq (19) to estimate JWST integration times for biosignature detection.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Potential for life to exist and be detected on Earth-like planets orbiting white dwarfs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IQ6S6SQJ

@misc{pith2026241118934,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Potential for life to exist and be detected on Earth-like planets orbiting white dwarfs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IQ6S6SQJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18934}
}
abstract

With recent observations confirming exoplanets orbiting white dwarfs, there is growing interest in exploring and quantifying the habitability of temperate rocky planets around white dwarfs. In this work, the limits of the habitable zone of an Earth-like planet around a white dwarf are computed based on the incident stellar flux, and these limits are utilized to assess the duration of habitability at a given orbital distance. For a typical $0.6 M_\odot$ white dwarf an Earth-like planet at $\sim 0.012$ AU could remain in the temporally evolving habitable zone, maintaining conditions to support life, for nearly 7 Gyr. In addition, additional constraints on habitability are studied for the first time by imposing the requirement of receiving sufficient photon fluxes for UV-mediated prebiotic chemistry and photosynthesis. We demonstrate that these thresholds are comfortably exceeded by planets in the habitable zone. The prospects for detecting atmospheric biosignatures are also evaluated, and shown to require integration times on the order of one hour or less for ongoing space observations with JWST.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18934 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Habitable zone for a white dwarf (blue region) at ages of 2, 6, and 10 Gyr compared to the habitable zone of the red dwarf TRAPPIST-1 (orange region). The inset shows the size comparison of a typical 0.6M⊙ white dwarf (cyan region) to that of TRAPPIST-1 (pink region). The optimistic habitable zone for TRAPPIST-1 is calculated from the recent Venus and early Mars limits from Kopparapu et al. (2013) using the luminosi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Shaded blue region shows a simplified habitable zone (HZ) explained in Section 2.3. This is compared against the standard approach of determining the HZ limits based on the stellar flux (described in Section 2.3): inner limits of the HZ are the moist-greenhouse (black dash-dotted), runaway greenhouse (black dashed), and recent Venus (black solid) thresholds, whereas outer limits are the maximum green￾house (magenta … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Top Panel) The orbital radius (a [AU]) at which the flux of photosynthetically active photons and UV ra￾diation reaches their critical flux of 1.2 × 1016m−2 s −1 and 5.44×1016m−2 s −1 respectively (Lingam & Loeb 2021, Chap￾ter 4). Boundaries for the critical PAR and UV fluxes are the dash-dotted and dotted lines, respectively. Orbital dis￾tances below these curves may receive the appropriate flux to support photosy… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Long-lived Habitable Zones around White Dwarfs undergoing Neon-22 Distillation

    astro-ph.EP 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Neon-22 distillation cooling pauses in massive white dwarfs can extend continuous habitable zone durations by a factor of 2-3 and push the habitable zone farther from the star.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 731, L31

    Agol, E. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 731, L31

    2011

  2. [2]

    P., Fromont, E

    Ahlers, J. P., Fromont, E. F., Kopparappu, R., Cauley, P. W., & Haqq-Misra, J. 2022, Astrophys. J., 928, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5596

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5596 2022

  3. [3]

    G., C´ orsico, A

    Althaus, L. G., C´ orsico, A. H., Isern, J., & Garc ´ ıa-Berro, E. 2010, A&A Rv, 18, 471, doi: 10.1007/s00159-010-0033-1

    doi:10.1007/s00159-010-0033-1 2010

  4. [4]

    2013, Astrobiology, 13, 279

    Barnes, R., & Heller, R. 2013, Astrobiology, 13, 279

    2013

  5. [5]

    Z., Adams, F

    Becker, J., Seligman, D. Z., Adams, F. C., & Styczinski, M. J. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbe44

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbe44 2023

  6. [6]

    W., Beaulieu, J

    Blackman, J. W., Beaulieu, J. P., Bennett, D. P., et al. 2021, Nature, 598, 272, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03869-6

    doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03869-6 2021

  7. [7]

    2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed

    Burgett, W., Bernstein, R., Ashby, D., et al. 2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K

    2024

  8. [8]

    Spyromilio, & T

    Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, Vol. 13094, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 1309417, doi: 10.1117/12.3020733

    work page doi:10.1117/12.3020733

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    Caldeira, K., & Kasting, J. F. 1992, Nature, 360, 721, doi: 10.1038/360721a0 Carri´ on-Gonz´ alez,´O., Garc ´ ıa Mu˜ noz, A., Santos, N. C., et al. 2021, A&A, 651, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039993

    1992 doi

  2. [10]

    B., Greene, T., Angerhausen, D., et al

    Cowan, N. B., Greene, T., Angerhausen, D., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 311, doi: 10.1086/680855 de Sousa Mello, F., & Santos Fria¸ ca, A. C. 2020, International Journal of Astrobiology, 19, 25, doi: 10.1017/S1473550419000120

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    Dole, S. H. 1964, Habitable planets for man (New York: Blaisdell Pub. Co.)

    1964

  4. [12]

    2016, New Astronomy Reviews, 71, 9–34, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2016.03.001

    Farihi, J. 2016, New Astronomy Reviews, 71, 9–34, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2016.03.001

    2016 doi

  5. [13]

    2001, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 113, 409, doi: 10.1086/319535

    Fontaine, G., Brassard, P., & Bergeron, P. 2001, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 113, 409, doi: 10.1086/319535

    2001 doi

  6. [14]

    A., et al

    Fossati, L., Bagnulo, S., Haswell, C. A., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 757, L15, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/757/1/l15

    2012 doi

  7. [15]

    2018, Astrobiology, 18, 739–778, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1733

    Fujii, Y., Angerhausen, D., Deitrick, R., et al. 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 739–778, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1733

    2018

  8. [16]

    2024, ApJL, 966, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3ae3

    Gallo, E., Caldiroli, A., Spinelli, R., et al. 2024, ApJL, 966, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3ae3

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    Gillon, M., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Demory, B.-O., et al. 2017, Nature, 542, 456, doi: 10.1038/nature21360

    2017 doi

  10. [18]

    Goldblatt, C., & Watson, A. J. 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 4197, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2012.0004 G¨ ansicke, B. T., Schreiber, M. R., Toloza, O., et al. 2019, Nature, 576, 61–64, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1789-8

    2012

  11. [19]

    C., Terry, J

    Hall, C., Stancil, P. C., Terry, J. P., & Ellison, C. K. 2023, ApJL, 948, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acccfb

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    M., Lichtenberg, T., et al

    Hammond, M., Guimond, C. M., Lichtenberg, T., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.04386, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.04386

    2024 doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    2004, PhR, 399, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2004.07.001

    Hansen, B. 2004, PhR, 399, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2004.07.001

    2004 doi

  14. [22]

    K., & Wolf, E

    Haqq-Misra, J., Kopparapu, R. K., & Wolf, E. T. 2018, International Journal of Astrobiology, 17, 77, doi: 10.1017/S1473550417000118

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    K., Dressing, C

    Harada, C. K., Dressing, C. D., Kane, S. R., & Ardestani, B. A. 2024, ApJS, 272, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad3e81

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  17. [25]

    P., & Toonen, S

    Gentile-Fusillo, N. P., & Toonen, S. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 3942, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2057

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  19. [27]

    R., Pols, O

    Hurley, J. R., Pols, O. R., & Tout, C. A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 543, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x

    2000

  20. [28]

    J., Kozakis, T., et al

    Kaltenegger, L., MacDonald, R. J., Kozakis, T., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 901, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba9d3

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 736, L25

    Kaltenegger, L., & Sasselov, D. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 736, L25

    2011

  22. [30]

    F., Whitmire, D

    Kasting, J. F., Whitmire, D. P., & Reynolds, R. T. 1993, Icarus, 101, 108, doi: 10.1006/icar.1993.1010

    1993

  23. [31]

    Kempton, E. M. R., & Knutson, H. A. 2024, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 90, 411, doi: 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.12

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    O., Kleinman, S

    Kepler, S. O., Kleinman, S. J., Nitta, A., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 1315, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11388.x

    2007

  25. [33]

    Y., Segura, A., Tinetti, G., et al

    Kiang, N. Y., Segura, A., Tinetti, G., et al. 2007, Astrobiology, 7, 252, doi: 10.1089/ast.2006.0108

    2007

  26. [34]

    A., Harris, H

    Kilic, M., Munn, J. A., Harris, H. C., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 837, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa62a5

    2017 doi

  27. [35]

    2012, Stellar Structure and Evolution, Astronomy and Astrophysics Library (Springer Berlin Heidelberg)

    Kippenhahn, R., Weigert, A., & Weiss, A. 2012, Stellar Structure and Evolution, Astronomy and Astrophysics Library (Springer Berlin Heidelberg). https://books.google.com/books?id=wdSFB4B pMUC

    2012

  28. [36]

    J., Kepler, S

    Kleinman, S. J., Kepler, S. O., Koester, D., et al. 2013, ApJS, 204, 5, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/5

    2013 doi

  29. [37]

    H., & Nowak, M

    Knoll, A. H., & Nowak, M. A. 2017, Science Advances, 3, e1603076, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1603076 13

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    T., & Farihi, J

    Koester, D., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Farihi, J. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 566, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423691

    2014 doi

  31. [39]

    K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J. F., et al. 2013, ApJ, 765, 131, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131

    2013 doi

  32. [40]

    Kozakis, T., Kaltenegger, L., & Hoard, D. W. 2018, ApJ, 862, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aacbc7

    2018 doi

  33. [41]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 894, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab6f6a

    Kozakis, T., Lin, Z., & Kaltenegger, L. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 894, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab6f6a

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    L., & Thomas, S

    Krabbendam, V. L., & Thomas, S. 2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 13094, Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K. Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, 130940J, doi: 10.1117/12.3021028

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    R., Zorotovic, M., et al

    Lagos, F., Schreiber, M. R., Zorotovic, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 676, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3703

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    Lamers, H. J., & M. Levesque, E. 2017, Understanding Stellar Evolution, 2514-3433 (IOP Publishing), doi: 10.1088/978-0-7503-1278-3

    2017 doi

  37. [45]

    2013, Origin and Evolution of Planetary Atmospheres (Berlin: Springer), doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-32087-3

    Lammer, H. 2013, Origin and Evolution of Planetary Atmospheres (Berlin: Springer), doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-32087-3

    2013 doi

  38. [46]

    R., Catling, D

    Lehmer, O. R., Catling, D. C., Parenteau, M. N., Kiang, N. Y., & Hoehler, T. M. 2021, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 8, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2021.689441

    2021

  39. [47]

    A., Vanderburg, A., Venner, A., et al

    Limbach, M. A., Vanderburg, A., Venner, A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 973, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad74ed

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 332–336, doi: 10.1017/S1473550421000203

    Lingam, M. 2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 332–336, doi: 10.1017/S1473550421000203

    2021 doi

  41. [49]

    2024, From Stars to Life: A Quantitative Approach to Astrobiology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

    Lingam, M., & Balbi, A. 2024, From Stars to Life: A Quantitative Approach to Astrobiology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). https://cambridge.org/9781009411219

    2024

  42. [50]

    Lingam, M., Balbi, A., & Mahajan, S. M. 2021, ApJL, 921, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac3478

    2021 doi

  43. [51]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 888, 102

    Lingam, M., Ginsburg, I., & Loeb, A. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 888, 102

    2020

  44. [52]

    2018, JCAP, 2018, 020, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/05/020 —

    Lingam, M., & Loeb, A. 2018, JCAP, 2018, 020, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/05/020 —. 2019, ApJ, 883, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3f35

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    2021, Life in the cosmos: From biosignatures to technosignatures (Harvard University Press)

    Lingam, M., & Loeb, A. 2021, Life in the cosmos: From biosignatures to technosignatures (Harvard University Press)

    2021

  46. [54]

    2024, Astrobiology, 24, 813, doi: 10.1089/ast.2024.0037

    Lingam, M., Nichols, R., & Balbi, A. 2024, Astrobiology, 24, 813, doi: 10.1089/ast.2024.0037

    2024

  47. [55]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 432, L11, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt026

    Loeb, A., & Maoz, D. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 432, L11, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt026

    2013 doi

  48. [56]

    L., Burgasser, A

    Luhman, K. L., Burgasser, A. J., & Bochanski, J. J. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 730, L9, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/730/1/L9

    2011 doi

  49. [57]

    MacDonald, R., Team, J. W. b., Mullens, E., et al. 2024, Bulletin of the AAS, 56

    2024

  50. [58]

    Matsumura, S., Takeda, G., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, ApJL, 686, L29, doi: 10.1086/592818

    2008 doi

  51. [59]

    2021, ApJL, 915, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f7d

    Merlov, A., Bear, E., & Soker, N. 2021, ApJL, 915, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f7d

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    M., Heng, K., Brandeker, A., Swan, A., & Lendl, M

    Morris, B. M., Heng, K., Brandeker, A., Swan, A., & Lendl, M. 2021, A&A, 651, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140913

    2021 doi

  53. [61]

    E., Debes, J., Cracraft, M., et al

    Mullally, S. E., Debes, J., Cracraft, M., et al. 2024, ApJL, 962, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2348

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    D., & Dermott, S

    Murray, C. D., & Dermott, S. F. 1999, Solar System Dynamics (Cambridge University Press), doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139174817

    1999 doi

  55. [63]

    J., & Villaver, E

    Mustill, A. J., & Villaver, E. 2012, ApJ, 761, 121, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/121 O’Connor, C. E., Liu, B., & Lai, D. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 507, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3723

    2012 doi

  56. [64]

    2011, ApJL, 734, L13, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/734/1/L13

    Pierrehumbert, R., & Gaidos, E. 2011, ApJL, 734, L13, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/734/1/L13

    2011 doi

  57. [65]

    T., & Hammond, M

    Pierrehumbert, R. T., & Hammond, M. 2019, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 51, 275, doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010518-040516

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    H., & Ryden, B

    Pinsonneault, M. H., & Ryden, B. S. 2023, Stellar structure and evolution, The Ohio State Astrophysics Series (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), doi: 10.1017/9781108869249

    2023 doi

  59. [67]

    Ramirez, R. M. 2018, Geosciences, 8, 280, doi: 10.3390/geosciences8080280

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    2018, A&A, 618, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833107

    Rao, S., Meynet, G., Eggenberger, P., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833107

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    B., Xu, J., Thompson, S

    Rimmer, P. B., Xu, J., Thompson, S. J., et al. 2018, Science Advances, 4, eaar3302, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aar3302

    2018 doi

  62. [70]

    2024, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1859

    Robert, A., Farihi, J., Van Eylen, V., et al. 2024, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1859

    2024 doi

  63. [71]

    P., Schreiber, M

    Ronco, M. P., Schreiber, M. R., Giuppone, C. A., et al. 2020, ApJL, 898, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba35f

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    J., Claire, M

    Rushby, A. J., Claire, M. W., Osborn, H., & Watson, A. J. 2013, Astrobiology, 13, 833, doi: 10.1089/ast.2012.0938

    2013

  65. [73]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 5835, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2867

    Sanderson, H., Bonsor, A., & Mustill, A. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5835, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2867

    2022 doi

  66. [74]

    2022, PhR, 988, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.09.001

    Saumon, D., Blouin, S., & Tremblay, P.-E. 2022, PhR, 988, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.09.001

    2022 doi

  67. [75]

    L., Ballard, S., & Johnson, J

    Shields, A. L., Ballard, S., & Johnson, J. A. 2016, PhR, 663, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2016.10.003 14

    2016 doi

  68. [76]

    Thorsett, S. E. 2003, Science, 301, 193 . https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:39446560

    2003

  69. [77]

    Suh, I., & Mathews, G. J. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 530, 949–954, doi: 10.1086/308403

    2000 doi

  70. [78]

    2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed

    Tamai, R., Koehler, B., Cirasuolo, M., et al. 2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K

    2024

  71. [79]

    Spyromilio, & T

    Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, Vol. 13094, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 1309415, doi: 10.1117/12.3017380

    doi

  72. [80]

    S., & Dressing, C

    Tamburo, P., Muirhead, P. S., & Dressing, C. D. 2023, AJ, 165, 251, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acd1de

    2023 doi

  73. [81]

    C., Backus, P

    Tarter, J. C., Backus, P. R., Mancinelli, R. L., et al. 2007, Astrobiology, 7, 30, doi: 10.1089/ast.2006.0124 TRAPPIST-1 JWST Community Initiative, de Wit, J.,

    2007

  74. [82]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 810, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02298-5 Van Grootel, V., Fernandes, C

    Doyon, R., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 810, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02298-5 Van Grootel, V., Fernandes, C. S., Gillon, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 853, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa023 van Lieshout, R., Kral, Q., Charnoz, S., Wyatt, M. C., &

    2024 doi

  75. [83]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 2784, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1271 van Sluijs, L., & Van Eylen, V

    Shannon, A. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2784, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1271 van Sluijs, L., & Van Eylen, V. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 4603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3068

    2018 doi

  76. [84]

    A., Xu, S., et al

    Vanderburg, A., Rappaport, S. A., Xu, S., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 363, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2713-y

    2020 doi

  77. [85]

    A., Mˆ alin, M., et al

    Venner, A., Limbach, M. A., Mˆ alin, M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.11568, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.11568

    2024 doi arXiv

  78. [86]

    J., & Bonsor, A

    Veras, D., Mustill, A. J., & Bonsor, A. 2024, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 90, 141, doi: 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.05

    2024 doi

  79. [87]

    2007, ApJ, 661, 1192, doi: 10.1086/516746

    Villaver, E., & Livio, M. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1192, doi: 10.1086/516746

    2007 doi

  80. [88]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  81. [89]

    2013, ApJ, 767, 65, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/65

    Vladilo, G., Murante, G., Silva, L., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 65, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/65

    2013 doi

  82. [90]

    D., Robinson, T

    Windsor, J. D., Robinson, T. D., Kopparapu, R. k., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.12204, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.12204

    2024 doi arXiv

  83. [91]

    T., & Toon, O

    Wolf, E. T., & Toon, O. B. 2015, Journal of Geophysical Research (Atmospheres), 120, 5775, doi: 10.1002/2015JD023302

    2015 doi

  84. [92]

    2002, Icarus, 157, 535, doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/icar.2002.6854

    Wolstencroft, R., & Raven, J. 2002, Icarus, 157, 535, doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/icar.2002.6854

    2002

  85. [93]

    C., & Abbot, D

    Yang, J., Bou´ e, G., Fabrycky, D. C., & Abbot, D. S. 2014, ApJL, 787, L2, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/787/1/L2

    2014 doi

  86. [94]

    Zhan, R., Koll, D. D. B., & Ding, F. 2024, ApJ, 971, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad54c1

    2024 doi

  87. [95]

    2024, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 48, 413

    Zi-xin, C., & Jiang-hui, J. 2024, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 48, 413

    2024

  88. [96]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 722, 725, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    Zuckerman, B., Melis, C., Klein, B., Koester, D., & Jura, M. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 722, 725, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    2010 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.