The theory of steady-state super-Eddington winds and its application to novae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a model for steady-state winds of systems with super-Eddington luminosities. These radiatively driven winds are expected to be optically thick and clumpy as they arise from an instability-driven porous atmosphere. The model is then applied to derive the mass loss observed in bright classical novae. The main results are as follows. A general relation between the mass-loss rate and the total luminosity in super-Eddington systems. A natural explanation of the long-duration super-Eddington outflows that are clearly observed in at least two cases (Novae LMC 1988 #1 and FH Serpentis). A qualitative agreement between the prediction and observations of the mass loss and temperature evolution. An agreement between the predicted average integrated mass loss of novae as a function of white dwarf mass and its observations. A natural explanation for the ‘transition phase’ of novae. Agreement with η Carinae, which was used to double check the theory: the prediction for the mass shed in the star's great eruption agrees with observations to within the measurement error.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".