English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A critical analysis of three methods of estimating distances to cataclysmicvariables (CVs) is performed. These methods, by Ak et al., Beuermann, andKnigge, all use near-infrared (JHK or Ks) magnitudes and the Barnes-Evansrelation. We compare all three methods to distances measured by trigonometricparallax by Thorstensen, with Hubble Space Telescope, and with the HIPPARCOSspacecraft.  We find that the method of Ak et al. works best overall for all CVs,predicting distances on the average 4% less than those measured bytrigonometric parallaxes. The method of Beuermann overestimates distances by52%. The method of Knigge underestimates distances by 26%, although this wasonly ever meant as a lower limit, since it assumes all light comes from thesecondary star.

A critical analysis of three near-infrared photometric methods of estimating distances to cataclysmic variables