trailX-ray absorption compared with CO and HI gas columns places HESS J1731-347 at least 3.2 kiloparsecs away
The optical star IRAS 17287-3443 is physically associated with the supernova remnant HESS J1731-347
The supernova remnant HESS J1731-347 lies at a distance of about 2.5 kiloparsecs
Absorption-gas column comparison· for
The X-ray absorption column density toward HESS J1731-347 exceeds the total foreground gas column in front of the Scutum-Crux arm
X-ray spectral fits toward HESS J1731-347 yield absorption columns of roughly 1.0 to 1.5 × 10^22 hydrogen atoms per square centimeter
CO and HI emission toward HESS J1731-347 arises predominantly from gas on the near side of the Galaxy
HI and CO surveys give a total gas column below about 1 × 10^22 hydrogen atoms per square centimeter in front of the Scutum-Crux arm toward HESS J1731-347
The Scutum-Crux spiral arm toward HESS J1731-347 lies at a kinematic distance of about 3.2 kiloparsecs
atomic
The spatial pattern of X-ray absorption across HESS J1731-347 correlates with Scutum-Crux arm molecular gas
atomic
Far-side atomic gas association· for
HESS J1731-347 is associated with atomic gas at a kinematic distance of 5.2 to 6 kiloparsecs
atomic
Line-of-sight distribution ambiguity· against
The X-ray-absorbing material toward HESS J1731-347 is distributed along the line of sight rather than concentrated near 3 kiloparsecs
atomic
claim · empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →claim page ↗︎
X-ray absorption compared with CO and HI gas columns places HESS J1731-347 at least 3.2 kiloparsecs away
⇄InconclusiveThe evidence and argument have been examined and do not come down on either side.constitution →credence 0.60Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →
2depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →quantityA box with a rule beneath its text is a quantity: a value the graph estimates rather than a proposition it affirms or denies. Its estimate stands where a claim's status would.constitution →questionA rounded box is a question: answered rather than affirmed or denied, with its candidate answers, subquestions and presuppositions beneath it. Its mark says how well answered it is.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Click one to see its reasoning and open its page.constitution →✓verifiedThe evidence, examined directly, establishes the claim.constitution →↑supportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →⇄inconclusiveThe evidence and argument have been examined and do not come down on either side.constitution →↓doubtfulThe evidence weighs against the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →✕contradictedThe evidence, examined directly, weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →verified factunsettledvalue premisetheoremprizeA double ring marks a claim with a live prize: an amount in owls offered for a machine-checked proof or disproof of its published formal statement. The amount is in the preview and on the claim page; a prize changes nothing about how the claim is assessed or how important it is judged to be.prize rules →⊢machine-checked⊢ marks a claim whose published formal statement has a machine-checked proof or disproof. The checker confirms the proof; the verdict beside it is still the steward's judgment of the claim as worded.prize rules →supportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →answersa candidate answer to the questionconstitution →Fig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.