pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06933 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Probing the accretion geometry of the transient accreting millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658: transitions to the propeller regime

Mahasweta Bhattacharya , Aditya S. Mondal , Gulab C. Dewangan
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords SAX J1808.4-3658accretion diskpropeller regimerelativistic reflectionX-ray burstsmillisecond pulsarNuSTARinner disk radius
0
0 comments X

The pith

Observations of SAX J1808.4-3658 show its accretion disk truncated at roughly 23 gravitational radii during the 2025 outburst, placing the magnetosphere beyond the co-rotation radius and indicating the onset of the propeller regime.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper analyzes NuSTAR and NICER data from the 2022 and 2025 outbursts of the accreting millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658 while it is in the hard state. Spectral fits using a Comptonization continuum plus the relativistic reflection model relxillCP reveal that the inner disk radius increases and the disk becomes less ionized as the mass accretion rate falls. By the 2025 September pointing the measured inner radius reaches about 23 R_g, making the derived magnetospheric radius larger than the co-rotation radius and suggesting the system is entering the propeller regime. A Type-I X-ray burst is nevertheless detected in the same observation, showing that some material still reaches the neutron-star surface and ignites in a shallow helium layer.

Core claim

In the 2025 September NuSTAR observation the relativistic reflection modeling yields an inner-disk radius of approximately 23 R_g. At this location the inferred magnetospheric radius exceeds the co-rotation radius, providing a direct hint that the neutron star’s magnetic field is beginning to expel incoming gas rather than permitting steady accretion. The continued detection of a Type-I X-ray burst nevertheless demonstrates that residual accretion onto the stellar surface persists at a low rate.

What carries the argument

relxillCP relativistic reflection model that fits the iron line and Compton hump to constrain the inner accretion-disk radius, then compared against the co-rotation radius to diagnose the propeller transition.

If this is right

  • The inner disk radius grows outward and the disk ionization drops as the accretion rate declines from 2022 to 2025.
  • When the magnetospheric radius exceeds co-rotation the magnetic field can begin to eject material instead of allowing it to accrete.
  • Residual accretion continues even after truncation begins, as shown by the detection of a Type-I burst.
  • The source inclination is constrained to the moderate range of 30–50 degrees.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the measured truncation is physical, later observations at still lower accretion rates should exhibit stronger propeller signatures such as reduced persistent flux or enhanced pulsed emission.
  • The simultaneous presence of truncation and bursts implies that the propeller regime is not a sharp on/off switch and may require models that allow partial leakage of material.
  • Repeating the same reflection analysis on other accreting millisecond pulsars could locate the critical accretion rate at which the propeller transition occurs.

Load-bearing premise

The relxillCP model returns an unbiased physical value for the inner disk radius even when the continuum shape and ionization profile are allowed to vary.

What would settle it

A higher-signal observation at the same flux level that recovers an inner radius well inside the co-rotation radius would falsify the claimed truncation and propeller onset.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06933 by Aditya S. Mondal, Gulab C. Dewangan, Mahasweta Bhattacharya.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Light curve for the source SAX J1808.4-3658 : Left panel: Long-term MAXI light curve in the 2-6 keV energy range, where 2019, 2022, and 2025 outbursts are shown in light pink, wheat, and plum colors, respectively. We have adopted a critical flux value of 0.05 photons/cm2 /s. Grey colored points denote flux below the critical value and red-colored points denote flux above it. The plot is obtained by applyin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Light curves corresponding to the NuSTAR FPMA/FPMB observation of the source SAX J1808.4-3658 corresponding to the persistent emission of obs IDs 80701312002 (left), 91101333002 (centre), and 91101333004 (right) with bin size 500s, 100 s and 100 s, respectively in the 3-79 keV energy regime. 2   2    #&!"& "% &(   #'"&%%    [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Hardness-intensity diagram for the three NuS￾TAR observations of 2022 August, 2025 August and Septem￾ber shown in violet, cyan and coral red, respectively. The dashed brown arrow indicates the increase in mass accretion rate M˙ (in g/s) across the three observations ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Light curve corresponding to the burst emission ∼50 s duration from 23,134 s to 23,184 s of the NuSTAR FPMA/FPMB observation for the source SAX J1808.4-3658 corresponding to the obs ID 91101333004 left panel: with a bin size of 0.5 s in the 3-79 keV energy region. Upper right: entire exposure with a bin size of 73.72 s in the 3-79 keV energy regime. Lower right: burst exposure observed in 3-10 keV and 10-3… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectral plot for the NuSTAR FPMA (red)/FPMB (black) observation of the source SAX J1808.4-3658 corresponding to the Obs 1 in the energy range 3-79 keV for the - left Panel: continuum emission with the Model 2: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb) right panel: unfolded spectra corresponding to the best-fit Model 3: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb+relxillCp). The lower panels of plots show the residuals in 1 σ uncertaint… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectral plot for the NuSTAR FPMA (red)/ FPMB (black) observation of the source SAX J1808.4-3658 corresponding to Obs 2 in the energy range 3-50 keV for the - left Panel: continuum emission with the Model 2: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb) , right panel: unfolded spectra corresponding to the best-fit Model 3: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb+relxillCp). The lower panels of the figures show the residuals in 1 σ uncer… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Spectral plot for the persistent emission of NuSTAR FPMA (red)/ FPMB (black) observation of the source SAX J1808.4-3658 corresponding to the Obs 3 in the energy range 3-50 keV for the Left Panel: continuum emission with the Model 2: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb), right panel: unfolded spectra corresponding to the best-fit Model 3: const*TBabs*(thComp*diskbb+relxillCp). The lower panels of the figures show th… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Unfolded spectral plot corresponding to the NICER Obs 4 and 5 in the energy range 0.6-10 keV excluding the 0.8-1.2 keV region using the model TBabs*(diskbb+po). The lower panels within each plot show the residual plot within 1 σ uncertainty. Data have been rebinned for visual purposes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Variation of χ 2 (∆χ 2 = χ 2 − χ 2 min) as a function of model parameters is shown for the three NuSTAR observations (Obs 1, 2 and 3), labeled by their respective observation IDs. The upper panel shows angle of inclination (Incl) of the accretion disk, varied over 13◦ -40◦ , 30◦ -50◦ and 15◦ -50◦ for Obs 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The lower panel shows the inner radius (Rin) of the accretion disk, varied o… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Unfolded spectral plots corresponding to the burst emission using the best fit data of model Energy (keV) TBabs*bbodyrad for the NuSTAR FPMA and FPMB corresponding to observation 3 in the energy range 3-20 keV of the source SAX J1808.4-3658 for the segments S2-S10 each of 2s duration. The lower plots within each plot shows the residual plot of the particular data and model difference within 1 σ error bar.… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evolution of the spectral parameters for black￾body emission during the burst ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Time-evolution of the parameters - upper panel: inclination angle, and lower panel: inner radius of the accretion disk. The values are compiled from previous studies (listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyze three NuSTAR observations and two NICER observations of the transient accreting millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658 in the hard spectral state during its most recent outbursts in 2022 and 2025. The spectral analysis of the persistent emission shows that the continuum is well described by an absorbed thermal Comptonization model with a high plasma temperature of ~25-90 keV. A prominent iron emission line around 5-8 keV and a Compton hump around 15-30 keV have been detected from all NuSTAR observations, indicating the reflection of the hard X-ray photon from the accretion disk. We employ the relativistic reflection model relxillCP to describe the reflection phenomena. The spectral fit of three NuSTAR observations shows that the inner disk radius moves outward, the Comptonized thermal emission decreases in flux, the mass accretion rate decreases, and the disk becomes less ionized as we proceed from the 2022 to the 2025 observations. Reflection studies also reveal a moderate inclination of the source within ~30-50 degrees. During the 2025 September observation, the inner radius of the disk is significantly truncated (~23R_g), and the corresponding magnetospheric radius is comprehensively larger than the disk's co-rotation radius, suggesting a hint of the transition to the propeller regime. Although the disk is truncated at the larger radius, accreted material is still reaching the surface of the neutron star, which is confirmed through the detection of a Type-I X-ray burst during this NuSTAR observation. The spectral analysis of the burst suggests helium burning at a low ignition depth.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes three NuSTAR and two NICER observations of SAX J1808.4-3658 in the hard state during the 2022 and 2025 outbursts. Spectral fits employ an absorbed thermal Comptonization continuum plus the relativistic reflection model relxillCP, yielding an outward-moving inner disk radius that reaches ~23 R_g in the 2025 September epoch. The authors derive a magnetospheric radius exceeding the co-rotation radius and interpret this as evidence for a transition toward the propeller regime, while a detected Type-I burst confirms that accretion onto the neutron star surface continues.

Significance. If the inner-radius measurement proves robust, the result supplies direct observational support for the propeller-regime transition in a transient accreting millisecond pulsar, with implications for disk-magnetosphere coupling and the conditions under which accretion can persist despite truncation. The multi-epoch NuSTAR reflection spectroscopy and the burst detection during the truncated state are concrete strengths that would be of interest to the high-energy astrophysics community.

major comments (2)
  1. [Spectral analysis of the persistent emission (NuSTAR epochs)] The central claim that the disk is truncated at ~23 R_g and that the magnetospheric radius exceeds the co-rotation radius (thereby indicating a propeller transition) rests entirely on the inner-disk radius returned by relxillCP. No fits with alternative continua (e.g., cutoffpl + diskbb) or other reflection models (relxill, relxillD) are reported to test whether the truncation is stable against changes in the assumed Comptonization shape or ionization profile. A systematic outward bias of only 5–10 R_g would remove the reported R_m > R_co inequality.
  2. [Discussion of accretion geometry and propeller regime] The comparison of the derived magnetospheric radius to the fixed co-rotation radius does not include a full propagation of uncertainties from the fitted parameters (inner radius, inclination, ionization, plasma temperature). Without this, it is unclear whether the inequality remains significant once 1σ errors on R_in are taken into account.
minor comments (2)
  1. The phrase 'comprehensively larger' in the abstract is imprecise; replace with a quantitative statement of how much larger the magnetospheric radius is relative to the co-rotation radius.
  2. Observation IDs and exact MJDs for the three NuSTAR pointings should be listed explicitly in the text or a table to facilitate reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive evaluation of the manuscript's significance. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate additional tests and analyses that strengthen the robustness of our results on the disk truncation and propeller regime transition.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Spectral analysis of the persistent emission (NuSTAR epochs)] The central claim that the disk is truncated at ~23 R_g and that the magnetospheric radius exceeds the co-rotation radius (thereby indicating a propeller transition) rests entirely on the inner-disk radius returned by relxillCP. No fits with alternative continua (e.g., cutoffpl + diskbb) or other reflection models (relxill, relxillD) are reported to test whether the truncation is stable against changes in the assumed Comptonization shape or ionization profile. A systematic outward bias of only 5–10 R_g would remove the reported R_m > R_co inequality.

    Authors: We agree that testing the stability of the inner-disk radius against alternative models is important for confirming the robustness of the truncation measurement. In the revised manuscript, we will add spectral fits using a cutoffpl + diskbb continuum model as well as the relxill and relxillD reflection models. These additional fits will be presented alongside the original relxillCP results to demonstrate that the inner radius remains consistent at ~23 R_g in the 2025 epoch, with no systematic outward bias sufficient to reverse the R_m > R_co conclusion. Any differences in best-fit parameters will be discussed explicitly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion of accretion geometry and propeller regime] The comparison of the derived magnetospheric radius to the fixed co-rotation radius does not include a full propagation of uncertainties from the fitted parameters (inner radius, inclination, ionization, plasma temperature). Without this, it is unclear whether the inequality remains significant once 1σ errors on R_in are taken into account.

    Authors: We acknowledge that a complete propagation of uncertainties is required to rigorously evaluate the significance of the magnetospheric radius exceeding the co-rotation radius. In the revised manuscript, we will include a full error propagation analysis that incorporates the 1σ uncertainties on the inner radius, inclination, ionization parameter, and plasma temperature. This will be performed using both analytical methods and Monte Carlo sampling from the parameter posteriors. The updated discussion will report the propagated errors on R_m and confirm whether the inequality holds at the 1σ level or better. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the propeller-regime claim

full rationale

The paper fits the inner-disk radius directly from NuSTAR spectra using the external relxillCP reflection model, then applies standard (non-self-derived) formulas to obtain the magnetospheric radius from that fitted value and compares it to the co-rotation radius fixed solely by the independently known spin period. No step equates a fitted parameter to a prediction by construction, renames a known result, or relies on a load-bearing self-citation whose content reduces to the present work; the chain remains open to external data and standard accretion relations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard X-ray spectral models and the assumption that the fitted inner disk radius equals the magnetospheric radius. Multiple free parameters are introduced in the spectral fits.

free parameters (4)
  • inner disk radius
    Fitted from reflection component in relxillCP; central to the propeller claim.
  • plasma temperature
    Fitted in Comptonization model; ranges 25-90 keV across observations.
  • inclination angle
    Fitted from reflection; reported as 30-50 degrees.
  • ionization parameter
    Fitted; decreases across epochs.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The relativistic reflection model relxillCP correctly maps the observed iron line and Compton hump to the inner disk radius.
    Invoked when interpreting the fitted truncation radius as physical.
  • standard math Standard formulas convert the fitted inner radius to magnetospheric radius and compare it to co-rotation radius.
    Used to claim propeller transition.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5619 in / 1671 out tokens · 42549 ms · 2026-05-10T17:05:10.615888+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 678, 102–115, doi: 10.1086/529418

    Ajello, M., Greiner, J., Kanbach, G., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 678, 102–115, doi: 10.1086/529418

    work page doi:10.1086/529418 2008

  2. [2]

    A., Cheng, A

    Alpar, M. A., Cheng, A. F., Ruderman, M. A., & Shaham, J. 1982, Nature, 300, 728, doi: 10.1038/300728a0

    work page doi:10.1038/300728a0 1982

  3. [3]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17

    1996

  4. [4]

    Arons, J., & Lea, S. M. 1976, ApJ, 207, 914, doi: 10.1086/154562

    work page doi:10.1086/154562 1976

  5. [5]

    C., Russell, D

    Baglio, M. C., Russell, D. M., Crespi, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc685

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc685 2020

  6. [6]

    2022, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0_94-1

    Bahramian, A., & Degenaar, N. 2022, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0_94-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0_94-1 2022

  7. [7]

    R., McDuffie, J

    Ballantyne, D. R., McDuffie, J. R., & Rusin, J. S. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 734, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/734/2/112

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/734/2/112 2011

  8. [8]

    2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17369, 1

    Ballocco, C., Trois, A., Papitto, A., et al. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17369, 1

    2025

  9. [9]

    2026, A&A, 707, A42, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556075

    Ballocco, C., Papitto, A., Miraval Zanon, A., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A42, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556075

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556075 2026

  10. [10]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/4

    Bhattacharyya, S., & Chakrabarty, D. 2017, ApJ, 835, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/4 2017

  11. [11]

    Bhattacharyya, S., & Strohmayer, T. E. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 656, 414

    2007

  12. [12]

    2001, ApJ, 557, 292, doi: 10.1086/321633

    Bildsten, L., & Chakrabarty, D. 2001, ApJ, 557, 292, doi: 10.1086/321633

    work page doi:10.1086/321633 2001

  13. [13]

    1987, in HE-UHE Behaviour of Accreting X-ray Sources, ed

    Brinkmann, W. 1987, in HE-UHE Behaviour of Accreting X-ray Sources, ed. F. Giovannelli & C. Mannocchi, Vol. 8, 35

    1987

  14. [14]

    C., & Teter, M

    Bruce, K., Tsuruta, S., Liebmann, A. C., & Teter, M. 2026, ApJ, 996, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2605

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2605 2026

  15. [15]

    , year = 2020, month = jul, volume =

    Bult, P., Chakrabarty, D., Arzoumanian, Z., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 898, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9827

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9827 2020

  16. [16]

    M., Altamirano, D., Patruno, A., et al

    Cackett, E. M., Altamirano, D., Patruno, A., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 694, L21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/L21

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/694/1/l21 2009

  17. [17]

    M., Miller, J

    Cackett, E. M., Miller, J. M., Ballantyne, D. R., et al. 2010, ApJ, 720, 205, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/205

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/720/1/205 2010

  18. [18]

    Campana, S., Stella, L., & Kennea, J. A. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 684, L99

    2008

  19. [19]

    Chakrabarty, D., & Morgan, E. H. 1998, Nature, 394, 346

    1998

  20. [20]

    2001, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 372, 916

    Cornelisse, R., Kuulkers, E., Heise, J., et al. 2001, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 372, 916

    2001

  21. [21]

    2004, Nuclear Physics B - Proceedings Supplements, 132, 435–445, doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2004.04.078

    Cumming, A. 2004, Nuclear Physics B - Proceedings Supplements, 132, 435–445, doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2004.04.078

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2004.04.078 2004

  22. [22]

    J., et al

    Dauser, T., García, J., Walton, D. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628135 De Luca, A., Caraveo, P. A., Mereghetti, S., Negroni, M., &

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628135 2016

  23. [23]

    Bignami, G. F. 2005, ApJ, 623, 1051, doi: 10.1086/428567

    work page doi:10.1086/428567 2005

  24. [24]

    , keywords =

    Deloye, C. J., Heinke, C. O., Taam, R. E., & Jonker, P. G. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 391, 1619, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14021.x di Salvo, T., Burderi, L., Riggio, A., Papitto, A., & Menna, M. T. 2008, in American Institute of Physics Conference

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14021.x 2008

  25. [25]

    1054, Cool Discs, Hot Flows: The Varying Faces of Accreting Compact Objects, ed

    Series, Vol. 1054, Cool Discs, Hot Flows: The Varying Faces of Accreting Compact Objects, ed. M. Axelsson (AIP), 173–182, doi: 10.1063/1.3002500 Di Salvo, T., Papitto, A., Marino, A., Iaria, R., & Burderi, L. 2023, https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12516 Di Salvo, T., Sanna, A., Burderi, L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 767, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2974

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3002500 2023

  26. [26]

    , keywords =

    Dickey, J. M., & Lockman, F. J. 1990, ARA&A, 28, 215, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.28.090190.001243

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.28.090190.001243 1990

  27. [27]

    A., McClintock, J

    Esin, A. A., McClintock, J. E., & Narayan, R. 1997, ApJ, 489, 865, doi: 10.1086/304829

    work page doi:10.1086/304829 1997

  28. [28]

    P., Belloni, T

    Fender, R. P., Belloni, T. M., & Gallo, E. 2004, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 355, 1105

    2004

  29. [29]

    K., & Cumming, A

    Galloway, D. K., & Cumming, A. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 652, 559, doi: 10.1086/507598

    work page doi:10.1086/507598 2006

  30. [30]

    , keywords =

    Galloway, D. K., Muno, M. P., Hartman, J. M., Psaltis, D., & Chakrabarty, D. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 179, 360 García, J., Dauser, T., Lohfink, A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 782, 76, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/782/2/76

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/782/2/76 2008

  31. [31]

    Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray , year = 2016, editor =

    Gendreau, K. C., Arzoumanian, Z., Adkins, P. W., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder, T. Takahashi, & M. Bautz, 99051H, doi: 10.1117/12.2231304

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2231304 2016

  32. [32]

    1979a, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol

    Ghosh, P., & Lamb, F. 1979a, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 232, Aug. 15, 1979, p. 259-276., 232, 259 19

    1979

  33. [33]

    1979b, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol

    Ghosh, P., & Lamb, F. 1979b, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 234, Nov. 15, 1979, p. 296-316., 234, 296

    1979

  34. [34]

    A., Craig, W

    Harrison, F. A., Craig, W. W., Christensen, F. E., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 770, 103

    2013

  35. [35]

    M., Patruno, A., Chakrabarty, D., et al

    Hartman, J. M., Patruno, A., Chakrabarty, D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 1673, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/2/1673

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/2/1673 2009

  36. [36]

    1999, New Astronomy Reviews, 43, 1

    Hartmann, L. 1999, New Astronomy Reviews, 43, 1

    1999

  37. [37]

    F., & Balbus, S

    Hawley, J. F., & Balbus, S. A. 1999, Physics of Plasmas, 6, 4444

    1999

  38. [38]

    P., Bridges M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.398.1601F 398, 1601

    Ibragimov, A., & Poutanen, J. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 492, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15477.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15477.x 2009

  39. [39]

    F., & Sunyaev, R

    Illarionov, A. F., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1975, A&A, 39, 185

    1975

  40. [40]

    2023, ApJL, 942, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acad81 in ’t Zand, J

    Illiano, G., Papitto, A., Sanna, A., et al. 2023, ApJL, 942, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acad81 in ’t Zand, J. J. M., Heise, J., Muller, J. M., et al. 1998, Discovery of the X-ray transient SAX J1808.4-3658, a likely low mass X-ray binary, https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9802098 in’t Zand, J. J. M., Galloway, D. K., Marshall, H. L., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, ...

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acad81 2023

  41. [41]

    L., Tomsick, J

    King, A. L., Tomsick, J. A., Miller, J. M., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 819, 6pp

    2016

  42. [42]

    R., in ’t Zand, J

    Kuulkers, E., den Hartog, P. R., in ’t Zand, J. J. M., et al. 2003, A&A, 399, 663, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021781

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021781 2003

  43. [43]

    K., Boutloukos, S., Van Wassenhove, S., et al

    Lamb, F. K., Boutloukos, S., Van Wassenhove, S., et al. 2009, ApJ, 706, 417, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/417

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/706/1/417 2009

  44. [44]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., & Taam, R. E. 1993, SSRv, 62, 223, doi: 10.1007/BF00196124

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00196124 1993

  45. [45]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 728, 12

    Lo, K.-W., & Lin, L.-M. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 728, 12

    2011

  46. [46]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 520, 4315

    Lyutikov, M. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 520, 4315

    2023

  47. [47]

    1986, ApJ, 308, 635, doi: 10.1086/164534

    Makishima, K., Maejima, Y., Mitsuda, K., et al. 1986, ApJ, 308, 635, doi: 10.1086/164534

    work page doi:10.1086/164534 1986

  48. [48]

    2009, PASJ, 61, 999, doi: 10.1093/pasj/61.5.999

    Matsuoka, M., Kawasaki, K., Ueno, S., et al. 2009, PASJ, 61, 999, doi: 10.1093/pasj/61.5.999

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/61.5.999 2009

  49. [49]

    2016, ApJ, 818, 49, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/49

    Melatos, A., & Mastrano, A. 2016, ApJ, 818, 49, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/49

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/818/1/49 2016

  50. [50]

    Miller, J. M. 2007, ARA&A, 45, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110555

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110555 2007

  51. [51]

    C., Lamb, F

    Miller, M. C., Lamb, F. K., & Cook, G. B. 1998, ApJ, 509, 793, doi: 10.1086/306533

    work page doi:10.1086/306533 1998

  52. [52]

    1984, PASJ, 36, 741, doi: 10.1093/pasj/36.4.741

    Mitsuda, K., Inoue, H., Koyama, K., et al. 1984, PASJ, 36, 741, doi: 10.1093/pasj/36.4.741

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/36.4.741 1984

  53. [53]

    2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.06708 NICER Team

    Morbidelli, A. 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.06708 NICER Team. 2023, NICER Data Analysis Software and Calibration, https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/nicer/ analysis_threads/noise-ringers/ Niedźwiecki, A., Szanecki, M., & Zdziarski, A. A. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 2942, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz487

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz487 2018

  54. [54]

    2009, EAS Publications Series, 39, 223

    Owocki, S. 2009, EAS Publications Series, 39, 223

    2009

  55. [55]

    Y., Zhang, C

    Pan, Y. Y., Zhang, C. M., Song, L. M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1851

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1851 2018

  56. [56]

    A., et al

    Patruno, A., Maitra, D., Curran, P. A., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 100, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/100

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/2/100 2016

  57. [57]

    2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 707, 1296, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1296

    Patruno, A., Watts, A., Klein Wolt, M., Wijnands, R., & van der Klis, M. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 707, 1296, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1296

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/2/1296 2009

  58. [58]

    Patruno, A., & Watts, A. L. 2021, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 461, Timing Neutron Stars:

    2021

  59. [59]

    Méndez, & C

    Belloni, M. Méndez, & C. Zhang, 143–208, doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-62110-3_4

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-62110-3_4

  60. [60]

    2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 547, 355, doi: 10.1086/318336

    Popham, R., & Sunyaev, R. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 547, 355, doi: 10.1086/318336

    work page doi:10.1086/318336 2001

  61. [61]

    1982, Current Science, 51, 1096

    Radhakrishnan, V., & Srinivasan, G. 1982, Current Science, 51, 1096

    1982

  62. [62]

    A., Loewenstein, M., Steiner, J

    Remillard, R. A., Loewenstein, M., Steiner, J. F., et al. 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 163, 130

    2022

  63. [63]

    2018, in 42nd COSPAR Scientific Assembly, Vol

    Riggio, A., Maselli, A., Papitto, A., et al. 2018, in 42nd COSPAR Scientific Assembly, Vol. 42, E1.3–14–18

    2018

  64. [64]

    M., Alabarta, K., Saikia, P., et al

    Russell, D. M., Alabarta, K., Saikia, P., et al. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17323, 1

    2025

  65. [65]

    2026, ApJ, 999, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3f99

    Sharma, R., Sanna, A., & Sharma, P. 2026, ApJ, 999, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3f99

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3f99 2026

  66. [66]

    1984, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Stella, L., & Rosner, R. 1984, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 277, Feb. 1, 1984, p. 312-321., 277, 312

    1984

  67. [67]

    E., & van den Heuvel, E

    Taam, R. E., & van den Heuvel, E. P. J. 1986, ApJ, 305, 235, doi: 10.1086/164243

    work page doi:10.1086/164243 1986

  68. [68]

    1997, in Accretion Disks - New Aspects, ed

    Tanaka, Y. 1997, in Accretion Disks - New Aspects, ed. E. Meyer-Hofmeister & H. Spruit, Vol. 487, 1, doi: 10.1007/BFb0105817

    work page doi:10.1007/bfb0105817 1997

  69. [69]

    M., & Lovelace, R

    Ustyugova, G., Koldoba, A., Romanova, M. M., & Lovelace, R. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 646, 304 van den Eijnden, J., Bagnoli, T., Degenaar, N., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 466, L98, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw244 van der Klis, M., Jansen, F., van Paradijs, J., & Stollman, G. 1985, SSRv, 40, 287, doi: 10.1007/...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw244 2006

  70. [70]

    A., Ferland, G

    Verner, D. A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1996, ApJ, 465, 487, doi: 10.1086/177435

    work page doi:10.1086/177435 1996

  71. [71]

    E., & Stella, L

    White, N. E., & Stella, L. 1988, MNRAS, 231, 325, doi: 10.1093/mnras/231.2.325

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/231.2.325 1988

  72. [72]

    1998, Nature, 394, 344, doi: 10.1038/28557

    Wijnands, R., & van der Klis, M. 1998, Nature, 394, 344, doi: 10.1038/28557

    work page doi:10.1038/28557 1998

  73. [73]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 542, 914, doi: 10.1086/317016

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 914, doi: 10.1086/317016

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/317016 2000

  74. [74]

    1998, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9802098 20

    Zand, J., Heise, J., Muller, J., et al. 1998, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9802098 20

    work page arXiv 1998

  75. [75]

    A., Johnson, W

    Zdziarski, A. A., Johnson, W. N., & Magdziarz, P. 1996, MNRAS, 283, 193, doi: 10.1093/mnras/283.1.193

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/283.1.193 1996

  76. [76]

    A., Szanecki, M., Poutanen, J., Gierliński, M., & Biernacki, P

    Zdziarski, A. A., Szanecki, M., Poutanen, J., Gierliński, M., & Biernacki, P. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 5234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa159

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa159 2020