Paper detail

Astrometric and photometric verification of faint blue white dwarfs in the Gaia catalogue of nearby stars

The Gaia catalogue of nearby stars (GCNS) divided all objects with parallaxes $>$10mas into GCNS-selected and GCNS-rejected 100pc samples. Below the white dwarf (WD) sequence in the complete GCNS color-magnitude diagram (CMD), at $Gabs>14.7+4.7(G-RP)$, there appear 60 GCNS-selected faint blue white dwarfs (FBWDs). However this CMD region is also populated by 411 GCNS-rejected objects, mainly from crowded regions towards the Galactic centre and the Magellanic Clouds. The WD catalog of Gentile Fusillo et al. (2021) lists only 47 GCNS-selected but also 8 GCNS-rejected objects. I confirm 59 of the GCNS-selected but none of the GCNS-rejected objects as FBWDs from visual inspection and a proper motion check using additional optical sky surveys. Hence FBWDs form an additional branch in the CMD. Compared to the full GCNS-selected 100pc sample, FBWDs have relatively high proper motions and tangential velocities. They represent interesting targets for studies of ultracool or infrared-faint, and possibly also ultramassive WDs.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.