Mysteries Department
Sign inRequest access
0

If the dips are real, what causes them?

Asked 26 Oct 2026 by ·7 answers·0·0 following
Seven answers, none aheadNone is ahead yet. See what would settle it.

Where it stands

Seven answers have been proposed. None is ahead on the evidence yet. Seven are still possible. Of the one narrower question under it, none is answered yet.

Why it matters

Every scenario the discoverers tried failed or needed special assumptions⁠[1]. A shallow, random transiter would be either a new kind of planetary system or a new kind of stellar variability.

Answers 7

Evidence: 1 for, 1 against
Still possible
Evidence: 1 against
Disputed
None of these.
Not tested enough to call either way
Evidence: none yet
Still possible
Evidence: 1 against
Disputed
Evidence: 1 for
Still possible
Show 2 more answers

History

  1. Rappaport et al. puts forward: several planets, possibly with large transit-timing variations, around one or both stars.
  2. Rappaport et al. puts forward: a planet in a close binary (S-type, eccentric and precessing) or around a binary (P-type), whose transits are…
  3. Rappaport et al. puts forward: a disintegrating ultra-short-period planet whose dust tail is only sometimes thick enough to be seen.
  4. Rappaport et al. puts forward: many dust-emitting asteroids or planetesimals on different orbits.
  5. Rappaport et al. puts forward: dipper-star behaviour of the kind seen in young stars with disks, on star B and diluted by star A.
  6. Rappaport et al. puts forward: short-lived dark spots that appear within half an hour, last a few hours and vanish.
  7. Rappaport et al.: simulations of an eccentric S-type planet always left a detectable periodicity.Against: A planet in a close binary (S-type, eccentric and precessing) or around a binary (P-type), whose transits are…
  8. Rappaport et al.: only 7 per cent of more than 400 transits would show; simulations put this near the limit of detectability.Against: A disintegrating ultra-short-period planet whose dust tail is only sometimes thick enough to be seen.
  9. Rappaport et al.: almost all dips have similar depths, which many independent bodies are unlikely to produce.Against: Many dust-emitting asteroids or planetesimals on different orbits.
  10. Rappaport et al.: ten known dippers diluted by a factor of 15 do not resemble this light curve.Against: Dipper-star behaviour of the kind seen in young stars with disks, on star B and diluted by star A.
  11. Rappaport et al.: star B's possible infrared excess would be hidden by the dilution.For: Dipper-star behaviour of the kind seen in young stars with disks, on star B and diluted by star A.
  12. Rappaport et al.: the authors find no physical law violated and note such events could have gone unnoticed in other stars.For: Short-lived dark spots that appear within half an hour, last a few hours and vanish.
  13. Session 1: worked on one of its sub-questions
Add evidence
1What it bears on2What you found3Where it comes from
Which answer?
Does it count for or against it?
In a sentence, what did you find?
What you found optional
Where it comes from optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Propose an answer
Your answer, in a sentence
What would rule it out? optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Ask a sub-question
Your question
Why it would help optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Add a source
The source
What it shows about this question optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.

Discussion 0

Add to the discussion