Just finished reading the paper. It's worth reading - it's well written and they've already put a lot of effort into characterizing the star, and modelling/ruling out any explanations they could think of.
The thing that makes this star _really_ peculiar is the lack of any excess infrared - if there was as much material (dust, asteroids, debris) orbiting the star as you'd expect from how often/how much the star is being occulted (that is, there should be a lot more material on orbits that don't intersect with our line of sight) - then there should be quite a bit of excess infrared radiation from all that material, but we don't.
The most plausible explanation they could come up with is comets - but the profile of the occultation events doesn't match comets very well (sharp dip initially corresponding to the optically thick head of the comet, then a slower rise back to normal from the tail).
My question regarding the comet hypothesis is - could there even be enough material in the oort cloud to produce the amount of occultation we're seeing? Given that Jupiter apparently only occults our sun by 1% and we're seeing 22% occultation here, it seems unlikely.
You'd have to assume an average object size to calculate % occultation -> mass of occulting objects, but we should be able to make a reasonable assumption on that from observations in our own solar system. And apparently our own oort cloud has been estimated at a few earth masses, so if that's typical we've got a rough upper bound for the amount of material available. I wonder if anyone's done that calculation yet.
The thing that makes this star _really_ peculiar is the lack of any excess infrared - if there was as much material (dust, asteroids, debris) orbiting the star as you'd expect from how often/how much the star is being occulted (that is, there should be a lot more material on orbits that don't intersect with our line of sight) - then there should be quite a bit of excess infrared radiation from all that material, but we don't.
The most plausible explanation they could come up with is comets - but the profile of the occultation events doesn't match comets very well (sharp dip initially corresponding to the optically thick head of the comet, then a slower rise back to normal from the tail).
My question regarding the comet hypothesis is - could there even be enough material in the oort cloud to produce the amount of occultation we're seeing? Given that Jupiter apparently only occults our sun by 1% and we're seeing 22% occultation here, it seems unlikely.
You'd have to assume an average object size to calculate % occultation -> mass of occulting objects, but we should be able to make a reasonable assumption on that from observations in our own solar system. And apparently our own oort cloud has been estimated at a few earth masses, so if that's typical we've got a rough upper bound for the amount of material available. I wonder if anyone's done that calculation yet.