Paper detail

PKS 1424+240: yet another masquerading BL Lac object as a possible IceCube neutrino source

We show that the blazar PKS 1424+240, which has been recently associated by IceCube with a neutrino excess at the $3.3\,σ$ level together with three other sources, is similar to the first plausible non-stellar neutrino source, TXS 0506+056, in being also a masquerading BL Lac object, i.e., intrinsically a flat-spectrum radio quasar with hidden broad lines and a standard accretion disk. We point out that these two sources share other properties, including spectral energy distribution, high powers, parsec scale properties, and possibly radio morphology. We speculate that the relatively rare combination of proton-loaded jets, possibly typical of high-excitation sources, and efficient particle acceleration processes, related to their relatively high synchrotron peak frequencies, might favour neutrino production in these two sources. GB6 J1542+6129, which has also recently appeared twice in a list of IceCube associations, seems also to belong to this rare blazar sub-class, which includes at most ~ 20 Fermi-4LAC blazars.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.