text:
Hot Take: Olivia Jade Was An Asset to USC.
She's done things no other high schooler has, and can answer questions you've never even thought to ask.
We've all heard the news about the #CollegeCheatingScandal. We've all seen the backlash and the outrage, which, sadly, is translating to shaming and bullying of students who may have had no idea their parents were involved in bribery, cheating, fraud, and other scandals.
Olivia Jade Giannulli, daughter of Lori Loughlin and Mossimo Giannulli, is one such student. It's unclear whether or not she had knowledge of her parents scheming.
If she did, obviously she did not deserve a spot at USC. Cheaters suck, and any kind of academic dishonesty should be held in the highest contempt. At best, it's unfair. At worst, it's dangerous. (Hi, Andrew Wakefield!)
But. Say she didn't know.
First, let's take a moment to practice a little empathy and perspective-taking. Set aside your "poor little rich girl" bias -- because, believe it or not, rich girls have feelings, too. Imagine thinking you made it to college on your own merit, then finding out it was all a lie. Imagine finding out your parents didn't believe in you -- and they lied to you about it.
How can that not be a blow?
Second... looking at everything she's accomplished, I'm actually a little surprised her parents felt the need to cheat on her application, because she's actually an astonishing and accomplished young woman.
Yes, she had a huge leg-up from being born to a rich family and privilege is a real thing.
But... how many teenagers do you know who have negotiated deals with companies like Amazon, Calvin Klein, Lulus, Boohoo, the Smile Direct Club, Tresemmé, GlassesUSA, and Marc Jacobs Beauty, among others?
From: Lulus Try On Clothing Haul, Olivia Jade
How many teenagers treat social media like a craft (which it is) and have turned it into an income -- versus all the millions of teens who merely use it for cyber bullying and passive entertainment?
How many teenagers have collaborated with Sephora, a multinational chain of luxury beauty and makeup products, on their own palette?
Olivia has shown maturity, dedication, resilience, and responsibility by devoting countless hours to her YouTube channel, artfully creating posts on Instagram to fulfill obligations to partners, all while remaining fresh, authentic, and engaging enough to grow her audience and drive sales. She frequently faces negative feedback and angry responses to her posts, which get amplified at least partly because she's a celebrity.
She is a makeup and hair expert... and if you think that's trivial or stupid, it's probably because you're sexist. Makeup is a legitimate art -- and it's a way many women either express themselves, or improve their self-esteem, or both. Why is it cool to be able to quote NBA stats or enthusiastically share trade rumors during F5 season, but vapid and frivolous and empty to be excited about Fenty's new Avalanche Loose Powder Eye Shadow set?
Given all these accomplishments, why does she necessarily deserve the spot any less than someone whose mom and dad spammed their coworkers to buy their daughter's Girl Scout cookies? (Hint: if you care about feminism, don't buy Girl Scout cookies online or from parents.)
Why does she deserve the spot less than someone who spent a comparable amount of time learning trumpet or waltz? Does a trumpet player bring any more value to the school than a social media star? If so... why?
Olivia is someone who has accomplished more at age 19 than many of us will in a lifetime. Her knowledge, experience and connections are valuable to those who know her -- that includes her USC classmates.
Her expertise could be just what it takes for a classmate who is struggling to make it as a musician, actor, entrepreneur, animator, fashion designer, sportscaster, or really anything. People like to think that social media is easy, the domain of unpaid college or high school interns. But, in reality, social media is really hard.
And, sure, she's publicly made statements that make it sound like she "doesn't care" about school.
Who among us didn't make some similar, dumbass comment when we were teenagers?
Who didn't brag about how we've totally only been to this class, like, four times this quarter? Who hasn't joked about hardly ever reading their textbooks?
"Effortless perfection" is so hot right now -- hot enough that schools like Duke and Harvard have actively warned students (especially female students) about this impossible standard. Nevertheless, students continue to think it's "cool" to look and be perfect and pretend they totally didn't study for the midterm at all, even if it's all they did all week.
At my alma mater, we called it "Stanford Duck Syndrome" (students are supposed to look like they are gliding effortlessly along, when, in fact, they are paddling furiously under the surface).
The other thing is, now that I've been out of school for a few years, I'm hearing more and more of my classmates lamenting that they "could have done more" at Stanford. As adults, as alumni of these great schools, I think we're all going to eventually realize that the things we thought were important -- football games, boat-building parties -- may not have been the best use of our time.
But at the time... it kind of felt like what made us who we were. "Late nights having discussions we won't remember with people we'll never forget" -- that sort of thing.
Of course, I haven't met Olivia. I haven't looked at her test scores or read her essays. Maybe there is something on her transcripts that makes it glaringly obvious that she is not intellectually comparable to her (former) classmates at USC.
But from where I'm standing, it's hard to reconcile her accomplishments with her being a dimwit.
And it's a shame her parents didn't have enough faith and respect in her to see that. While they were busy bribing people and breaking the law... they somehow missed that their daughter actually has a certain kind of genius.
Really -- how would you feel if you found out your parents didn't believe in you? That's a sting even money can't insulate you from.
(And, again, I take it all back if it turns out she was in on the scheme.)
Of course, Olivia isn't the real issue, here. The issue is wealth and opportunity inequality in this country. I grew up voting Republican -- although I never would now (the party has devolved into something cruel, ignorant, and hypocritical), I also never though I would even consider UBI, universal health care, or other measures that are clearly becoming necessary in our changing society.
The world has changed. Wealth inequality is a serious problem. That's a topic I'm not sure how to solve.
Instead, I'm writing about Olivia, because I want you to challenge your definition of "intelligence." Why are you worthy of admission if you code an app that gets a few thousand downloads, but not if you build a personal brand with millions of followers? Why is chess any more strategic or cerebral than social media? Why is painting considered a creative form of self-expression, but makeup is vapid? And do you really think retaking the SAT five times makes you more qualified than someone who demonstrated a genuine passion that she developed fully? Are you really going to hold it against someone that they didn't take AP Stats because they were busy analyzing their web traffic and Facebook Insights data?
As I wrote in Honestly, Who CARES Why You Got In? You Got In! Now Make The Most Of It (even though it's obvious from reading the article, I will point out for those of you who want to comment without reading it -- I'm not talking about cheaters. Cheaters don't deserve admission) :
Maybe being an athlete/POC/legacy/disabled/whatever student did push your application over the edge.
But I can guarantee that this was not the only consideration. Top schools have countless athlete/POC/legacy/disabled/whatever students to choose from... and they chose you.
Did you realize that 70% of applicants with perfect SAT scores still don't get in? Stanford and other competitive universities cares much more about what you do in four years of high school than how you performed on a four-hour test.
If you got in and they didn't, even though they had a better GPA or ACT score... maybe they should have developed a passion or talent or interest and become world-class at it.
Maybe they should have demonstrated more tenacity and resourcefulness than you. Maybe they should have shown such strong character and persistence that their letters of recommendation were impossible to ignore. (Fun fact: those letters matter just as much, if not more than, your essays.)
Do you have any idea how many more legacy students get rejected from Stanford than accepted? If you're a legacy student and you got accepted to a top school, you may have had an edge, but you're still in a minority.
No one (except cheaters) should "feel bad" about "why" they got in. No one should question their belonging, just because their story or intelligence is different from the conventional model. "Interdisciplinary" isn't just a hot buzzword in education right now -- it is the only way to innovate in a digital world with more knowledge and technology than ever before. Remember: achievement isn't normal - it's log normal. That is why we need students from all backgrounds and with all different skillsets at our top schools.
This isn't to say that Olivia was Stanford material... but I think she certainly could have thrived at USC. :P
Alhadi Travel link
When I read good content I like to make sure I thank the writer, so thank you.
This is an interesting perspective. But you can't really be sure. Who knows how much her parents were in charge of all of her accomplishments. They might have bribed her highschool teachers. The girl could be a genius or be a total moron. There is no way to tell.
Eva Glasrud link
That's true -- it's really hard to say. I tried to be careful with my language in this to emphasize that, assuming she's innocent of cheating, I don't think she's some dumb airhead, just because she likes makeup and clothes -- but that I'm happy to revise this opinion if new information comes to light. One thing I've heard (though I haven't been following the story closely) is that she is pissed with her parents and not really talking to them right now, which does suggest she was in the dark about a lot of this. But who knows? None of us can say we know her story just because she once made a flippant remark online, which she later apologized for.
By your logic why not just give her an honorary degree and then ask her for money. She made very clear she neither wanted nor needed the education. What rationale can there be to offer an adult an education they dont want or in her mind need?
There is a process for admissions which she violated. I'm pretty sure she knew she didnt ace the SAT.
That wasn't the logic at all. It's not about having her name in their books. It's about having a student who an share her experience working with lawyers and agents and collaborating with renowned makeup companies and building a successful brand on social media on campus who can share her expertise and experience with other students. Who wants to go to a college where all anyone's done is get a good score on the SATs?
Like I mentioned, I don't think we can take her at her word that attending USC or getting educated wasn't important to her. What college student hasn't make some flippant remark because it made them sound effortlessly cool, even if they didn't really mean it?
How do you know what she thought about her SAT score? She's a smart girl, and I'm sure she knows it. I don't think most students would question an SAT score that was higher than expected. There are lots of explanations (I work well under pressure; the studying I did helped; I got lucky) that would pop into MY mind before, "Oh, my mom must have bribed the proctor to change my score."
Considering I know her family and her personally since before she was born it is YOU who makes assumptions. Assuming that it is she who negotiated her deals etc etc.
If a rich parent wants to get a kid in to school they can offer a quid pro quo directly to the administrator or board.
The very fact that you dont care about the criminality of it reeks. If she is an asset despite her low score let her go sell USC on THAT in her essay. You presume to make an argument for her that either she or her parents were not capable of making or that USC would disagree with. Do YOU feel that your opinion should now be determining who gets in and out of universities?
"It's unclear whether or not she had knowledge of her parents scheming.
But. Say she didn't know..."
You are right. This is all based on an assumption, as clearly stated in the introduction. As it also clearly stated, of she cheated, she didn't deserve shit.
Babe, you can not condone criminals. USC is not better off filled with criminal students. I get the point you're tryna make but making YouTube videos, whether they have a lot of views or not is not the entry requirements for college.The entry requirements were good grades or dedication to a sport with good grades. Her parents probably sorted all her deals for her, she probably paid someone to edit her videos and maybe even give her ideas. If she was such a smart genius she would just apply like everyone else and get in. She was lazy and selfish and allegedly took someone else's spot. Another student who worked hard had their dreams crushed. She profited off her alleged crimes too. She has shown no remorse. If I want a tennis trophy, I can't just pay bribes for it and then say "oh well I was good at golf, still counts" Please view the affidavit showing her alleged deceit in detail, and then make up your mind. A lot of young girls read your blog and should not look up to this alleged criminal.
According to the affidavit by the FBI it appears that Olivia Jade was a willing participant in the criminal scheme. Please view the affidavit for yourself. The accusations start on page 88. https://www.justice.gov/file/1142876/download
Please also sign the petition to protect your girls from exposure to this alleged criminal.
https://www.change.org/p/oppose-olivia-jade-on-youtube-youtube-shouldn-t-support-this-share-deleteoliviajade
Like I said, if she's a participant in the scheme, she is a criminal and didn't deserve her spot. Academic honesty is one of the most important things in the world. Literally. Academia and research are all about finding truth, which you can't do when your departments are full of liars. Incorrect information is dangerous -- just look what's happening with measles and anti-vaxxers, all because some lying, scheming asshole published lies 20 years ago.
However, the real point is, her knowledge and expertise isn't worthless, just because it's about youtube, makeup, and primarily female interests.
Colleges would be boring if all they did was admit the top test-takers. If we all got 1600s on the SATs and didn't do anything in high school but study to get the best grades... what can I learn from you that I don't already know? But if you started a successful youtube channel, have created partnerships and sponsorships with major beauty brands, etc. etc. etc., you're someone who knows a TON of stuff I don't. That's valuable.
If Olivia Jade is a criminal, obviously don't look up to her. But understand that girls like her have knowledge that is powerful and worth sharing, and we shouldn't discount it, just because it's nontraditional, or traditionally undervalued because it's feminine.
Same is true for anyone who's put in the time to become world-class at something, whether that's tennis or makeup or Overwatch.
Olivia profiting off USC: https://www.businessinsider.com/olivia-jade-lori-loughlin-daughter-partnered-amazon-sephora-2019-3
From reading the affidavit it becomes clear that Olivia Jade very likely knew of this alleged fraudulent scheme. From allegedly posing on the ergometer for a photo, presenting herself at the USC subcommittee as a crew coxswain, entering the college on the basis of being part of the row team, her high school counsellor disputing the fact that she may not be a coxswain.
Excerpts from the affidavit: CW-1 (Cooperating Witness-1, Rick Singer, the mastermind of the scheme) replied, "With [your younger daughter] (Olivia Jade) please let me know if there is a similar need anywhere so we do not lose a spot." GIANNULLI (Mossimo) responded, "Yes [our younger daughter] as well," and LOUGHLIN (Lori) added, "Yes USC for [our younger daughter]!" CW-1 replied, "So work to acquire [U]SC? As soon as the semester is over I will need a transcript and test scores." On or about July 16, 2017, CW-1 e-mailed the GIANNULLIS requesting information for the crew profile. CW-1 indicated that the profile would present their younger daughter, falsely, as a crew coxswain for the L.A. Marina Club team, and requested that the GIANNULLIS send an "Action Picture." Four days later, CW-1 sent the GIANNULLIS a second request, noting, "If we want USC I will need a transcript, test scores and picture on the ERG (ergometer/rowing machine)." LOUGHLIN, copying GIANNULLI, replied later that day, "Moss will get this done. We are back in town on Monday." On or about July 28, 2017, GIANNULLI, copying LOUGHLIN, e-mailed CW-1 a photograph of their younger daughter (Olivia Jade) on an ergometer (rowing machine). Heinel presented the GIANNULLIS' (Olivia Jade) younger daughter to the USC subcommittee for athletic admissions on or about November 2, 2017. At the meeting, the subcommittee approved her conditional admission to the university. Less than two weeks later, on or about November 16, 2017, CW-1 sent the GIANNULLIS an e-mail bearing the subject line, "CONGRATULATIONS!!!" with their younger daughter's conditional acceptance letter attached. LOUGHLIN responded, "This is wonderful news! [High-Five Emoji]." CW-1 replied: "Please continue to keep hush hush till March." LOUGHLIN responded: "Yes of course."
I hardly think this qualifies as exploiting the university... Was she supposed to pretend she was not a college student or a student at USC? I mostly think it's cool she worked with such big brands before even starting college.
The burden is on the prosecution to prove Olivia was "in on it." Maybe she was. Maybe she didn't know why her parents wanted her to post for photos on an erg. Maybe she did know, but felt powerless to stop it. (You might be surprised how many students feel powerless in their own college admissions process. They have ideas and objections of their own, but know it's not really a choice, because their parents will squash it.)
Again, the post says multiple times, if she WAS in on it, that's bad and she doesn't deserve her spot. But she was definitely a good addition to the USC community, and an asset to her classmates (maybe even her professors).
She is not a genius by any standard. Otherwise her parents wouldn't have had to pay her way in with half a million dollars. She couldn't even use correct grammar in her patents https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a26961109/olivia-jade-trademark-applications-rejected-college-bribery-scandal/
As I wrote in the post, I think it's sad that her parents didn't think she could do it on her own, when she was clearly such a talented young woman. I think she could have gotten in on her own, and I think she would have deserved it.
"And it's a shame her parents didn't have enough faith and respect in her to see that. While they were busy bribing people and breaking the law... they somehow missed that their daughter actually has a certain kind of genius.
(And, again, I take it all back if it turns out she was in on the scheme.)"


Renowned for producing unique rugs, the Bereber is designed in Spain by Gandia Blasco and hand knotted by specialist craftsmen in India using the latest techniques.
Superbly soft, this rug is hand knotted from fine quality New Zealand wool to create its cavernous textured pattern.
Available in a range of sizes, the contemporary design makes an elegant addition to both modern and ethnic styled spaces.


This is a placeholder page for Cody Mercedes, which means this person is not currently on this site. We do suggest using the tools below to find Cody Mercedes.
You are visiting the placeholder page for Cody Mercedes. This page is here because someone used our placeholder utility to look for Cody Mercedes. We created this page automatically in hopes Cody Mercedes would find it. If you are not Cody Mercedes, but are an alumni of Model High School Rome, GA, register on this site for free now.


text:
\section{Introduction}
Accretion-powered millisecond X-ray Pulsars (AMXPs) are transient low-mass X-ray binaries (LMXBs) showing X-ray pulsations during the outburst phases at frequencies larger than $\sim$100 Hz \citep{Alpar82}. Matter transferred from
the companion star via Roche-lobe overflow is captured by the neutron star (NS) magnetosphere and forced to follow
the magnetic lines down to the NS's magnetic polar caps. Among the 18 known AMXPs \citep{Burderi13, Patruno12b, Papitto2015a}, fifteen show
persistent X-ray pulsations throughout the outbursts \citep[with PSR J1023+0038
 and XSS J12270 showing persistent pulsations at a much lower luminosity than those of the canonical AMXPs;][]{Archibald2015a, Papitto2015a}. The three remaining sources only occasionally show X-ray
pulsations: Aql X-1 \citep{Casella08} showed pulsations only during a 150 s segment of data over more than
1.3 Ms available, HETE J1900.1$-$2455 \citep{Kaaret06} switched off the X-ray pulsations after 2 month from the
beginning of a long outburst, and SAX J1748.9$-$2021 \citep{Gavriil07, Altamirano08a,Patruno09a} for which the X-ray
pulsations turned on and off intermittently during the outbursts. What makes these 3 sources different from the rest
of the known AMXPs is still unclear. However, solving this issue could help to understand the lack of pulsations in a large number
of LMXBs (around 100 at the moment).

SAX J1748.9$-$2021 is a NS X-ray transient hosted in the globular cluster NGC 6440 located at 8.5$\pm$0.4 kpc \citep{Ortolani94}. The source was discovered by BeppoSax in 1998 during monitoring of the X-ray activity around the Galactic center \citep{in-t-Zand99}. Since then, SAX J1748.9$-$2021 has been observed in outburst 4 more times: 2001 \citep{in-t-Zand01}, 2005 \citep{Markwardt05}, 2010 \citep{Patruno10a} and recently at the beginning of 2015 \citep{Bozzo15}. X-ray pulsations at the frequency of $\sim$442.3 Hz were discovered for the first time in a single observation of the 2005 outburst \citep{Gavriil07}. More observations with pulsations have been found later on by re-analysing archival data. A first estimation of the spin frequency and the orbital parameters of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 have been reported by \cite{Altamirano08a} analysing the 2001 outburst. Using the same set of data, but applying a phase-coherent timing technique, \cite{Patruno09a} managed to determine a refined timing solution (see Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}). According to \cite{Altamirano08a}, the companion star might be a main-sequence (or a slightly evolved) star with mass ranging between 0.85 M$_\odot$ and 1.1 M$_\odot$.

Here we present the analysis of the timing properties of the coherent signal emitted by the intermittent source SAX J1748.9$-$2021, using the \textit{XMM-Newton} observation performed during the latest outburst. Moreover, we investigate the orbital evolution of the source by means of the modelling of the times of the ascending nodes determined during different outbursts.
\section[]{Observations and Data analysis}

\subsection{XMM-Newton}
\label{sec:XMM}
We reduced the pointed \textit{XMM-Newton} observation of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 performed on March the 4th, 2015 (Obs ID 0748391301). The observation was
taken in timing mode for $\sim100$ ks and in burst mode for $\sim10$ ks, for a total exposure time of $\sim110$ ks. The combination of short exposure time and the low number of detected photons made the observation taken in burst mode not suitable for this work. We therefore decided to exclude it from the analysis. From here on with EPIC-pn (PN) data we will refer to the observation segment performed in timing mode. Fig.~\ref{fig:lc} shows the light curve of the 2015 outburst of the source monitored by \textit{Swift}-XRT (black points). The green star represents the \textit{XMM-Newton} data taken roughly a weak before the outburst peak. For this analysis we focused on the PN data, which have both the statistics and time resolution (30 $\mu$s) required to investigate the millisecond variability of the source. We performed the reduction of the PN data using the Science Analysis Software (SAS) v. 14.0.0 with the up-to-date calibration files, and adopting the standard reduction pipeline RDPHA \citep[see][for more details on the method]{Pintore14}. We verified that no significant high background flaring activity was present during the observation. We filtered the PN data in the energy range 0.3$-$15.0 keV, selecting events with \textsc{pattern$\leq$4} allowing for single and double pixel events only. \begin{comment}We detected evidence of background caused by solar proton flares in the last 5 ks of the observation, that we decided to remove from the analysis. Even though the PN data showed moderately pile-up effects in the energy spectrum \citep[see][for more details on the issue]{Pintore2016a}, we verified that excising the central column RAWX=37 the fractional amplitude of the X-ray pulsation does not change significantly, we only registered a decrease of the signal-to-noise ratio. Therefore we selected all photons collected in the range RAWX=[28:46] corresponding to $\sim80$ arcsec (including more than 90\% of the source photons).\end{comment} \\
The PN average count rate during the observation was $\sim700$ cts/s. We estimated the background mean count rate in the RAWX range [3:5] to be $\sim1.5$ cts/s in the energy range 0.3$-$15.0 keV. During the observation numerous type-I burst episodes have been recorded, the episodes occurred almost regularly every hour, with an average duration of $\sim100$ seconds \citep[see][for a detailed analysis]{Pintore2016a}. We did not exclude the X-ray type-I burst for the timing analysis (see Sec.~\ref{sec:ta2015} for more details).

\subsection{Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer}
With the aim of improving the orbital solution for SAX J1748.9$-$2021 we also re-analysed the previous four outbursts observed by \textit{Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer} (RXTE), see Tab.~\ref{tab:obs}. In particular, we extracted data from the proportional counter array \citep[PCA; see][]{Jahoda06} instrument on board on the \textit{RXTE} satellite. We used data taken by the PCA in Event (122 $\mu$s temporal resolution) and Good Xenon (1$\mu$s temporal resolution) packing modes. Following \citet{Patruno09a}, to improve the chances to detect the X-ray pulsations, we selected the event files in the energy range between 5 and 25 keV. This energy selection allows to avoid strong background contamination at high energies and to exclude energy intervals where the pulsed fraction is below $\sim1$\% rms, helping to maximise the signal-to-noise ratio. \begin{comment}We corrected the \textit{RXTE} photon arrival times for the motion of the Earth-spacecraft system with respect to the Solar System barycentre by using the \textsc{faxbary} tool (DE-405 Solar System ephemeris), using the source position mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:XMM}.\end{comment}
\begin{table}
    \caption{Observations analysed for each outburst.}
    \label{tab:obs}
    \resizebox{0.47\textwidth}{!}{
    \begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c}
    	\hline
	\hline
      Outburst & Begin & End & Instr&Exp & Obs ID \\
      (year) & (MJD) & (MJD) & & (ks)&\\

      1998 & 51051.28 & 51051.45 & RXTE & 15 & P30425 \\

      2001 & 52138.40 & 52198.31 & RXTE & 115 & P60035/84\\

      2005 & 53514.30 & 53564.85 & RXTE & 19 & P91050\\

      2010 & 55214.79 & 55254.56& RXTE &  216 & P94315 \\

      2015 &57085.74 & 57086.89& XMM & 100 & 0748391301\\
      \hline
      \hline
    \end{tabular}
    }
\end{table}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figure1}
\caption{Light-curve of the 2015 outburst of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 as observed by \textit{Swift}-XRT (black points). The green star represents the epoch of the \textit{XMM-Newton} observation}.
\label{fig:lc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Solar-system barycentric corrections}
We corrected the PN and \textit{RXTE} photon arrival times for the motion of the Earth-spacecraft system with respect to the Solar System barycentre (DE-405 Solar System ephemeris) by using the \textsc{barycen} and the \textsc{faxbary} tools, respectively. We used the best available source position obtained with \textit{Chandra} reported by \citet[][]{Pooley02}, and reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}. Using the expression of the residuals induced by the motion of the Earth for small variations of the source position $\delta_{\lambda}$ and $\delta_{\beta}$ expressed in ecliptic coordinates $\lambda$ and $\beta$ \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Lyne90}, we estimated the systematic uncertainties induced by the source position uncertainties on the linear and quadratic terms of the pulse phase delays, which correspond to an additional error in the spin frequency correction and in the spin frequency derivative, respectively. The former and the latter terms can be expressed as $\sigma_{\nu_{pos}}\leq \nu_0\,y\,\sigma_{\gamma}(1+\sin^2\beta)^{1/2}2\pi/P_{\oplus}$ and $\sigma_{\dot{\nu}_{pos}}\leq \nu_0y\sigma_{\gamma}(1+\sin^2\beta)^{1/2}(2\pi/P_{\oplus})^2$, respectively, where $y=r_E/c$ is the semi-major axis of the orbit of the Earth in light-seconds, $P_{\oplus}$ is the Earth orbital period, and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ is the positional error circle. Considering the positional uncertainty of $0.6 ''$ reported by \citet{Pooley02}, we estimated $\sigma_{\nu_{pos}} \leq 6\times 10^{-10}$ Hz and $\sigma_{\dot{\nu}_{pos}}\leq 1.4\times 10^{-16}$ Hz s$-1$. The level of accuracy of the source position guarantees us sufficient precision to proceed with a phase-coherent timing analysis of the data. These systematic uncertainties will be added in quadrature to the statistical errors estimated from the timing analysis.

\subsection{Timing analysis of the 2015 outburst}
\label{sec:ta2015}
Starting from the timing solution inferred by \citet[][see Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}; hereafter P09]{Patruno09a} during the 2001 outburst, we corrected all the photon time of arrivals of the PN dataset for the delays caused by the binary motion applying the orbital parameters through the recursive formula
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:barygen}
t + \frac{z(t)}{c} = t_{arr},
\end{eqnarray}
where $t$ is photon emission time, $t_{arr}$ is the photon arrival time to the Solar System barycentre, $z(t)$ is the projection along the line of sight of the distance between the NS and the barycenter of the binary system, and $c$ is the speed of light. As reported by \citet{Burderi07}, for almost circular orbits (eccentricity $e \ll 1$) we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:bary}
\frac{z(t)}{c}= \frac{a \sin i}{c}\,\sin\Big(\frac{2\pi}{P_{orb}} \,(t-T^\star)\Big),
\end{eqnarray}
where $a \sin{\textit{i}/c}$ is the projected semimajor axis of the NS orbit in light seconds, $P_{orb}$ is the orbital period, and $T^\star$ is the time of passage from the ascending node.
The correct emission times (up to an overall constant $D/c$ , where $D$ is the distance between the Solar System barycenter and the barycenter of the binary system) are calculated by solving iteratively the aforementioned equation~(\ref{eq:barygen}), $t_{n+1} = t_{arr} - z(t_{n})/c$,
with $z(t)/c$ defined as in equation~(\ref{eq:bary}),
with the conditions $D/c = 0$, and $z(t_{n=0}) = 0$. We iterated until the difference between two consecutive steps (${\Delta t}_{n+1} = t_{n+1} - t_{n}$) is of the order of the absolute timing accuracy of the instrument used for the observations. In our case we set ${\Delta t}_{n+1}=1 \mu$s.

To look for pulsations we performed an epoch-folding search of the whole observation using 16 phase bins and starting with the spin frequency value $\nu_0$ = 442.36108118 Hz, corresponding to the spin frequency measured from the 2001 outburst (the most accurate spin estimate reported in literature). Given the poor knowledge of the NS spin evolution between the outbursts under consideration, we explored the frequency space around $\nu_0$ with steps of $10^{-8}$ Hz for a total of 1001 steps. We found no evidence for X-ray pulsation in the observation.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{figure2}
\caption{Maximum value of $\chi^2$ from the epoch-folding search on the PN data as a function of the $T^{\star}$ values used to correct for the orbital modulation in the range $T_{2015}^{\star}\pm\sigma_{ T^{\star}_{2015}}$. $\Delta T^{\star}$ represents the delay in seconds from the predicted $T^{\star}_{2015} = 57085.43844$ MJD extrapolated from the timing solution obtained analysing the 2001 outburst. The inset shows a more detailed investigation of the region around the $\chi^2$ peak (shaded region) using a $\Delta T^{\star}$ step of 0.5s.  }
\label{fig:tstar_2015}
\end{figure}
For this reason we investigated the possibility that the lack of pulsation reflects a wrong set of orbital parameters for the source. The ephemerides of the source are expected to vary with time following the system evolution. However, the accuracy of the X-ray timing solutions for AMXPs is such that we cannot usually track variations of parameters such as the orbital period and the projected semimajor axis of the NS orbit in between outbursts. On the other hand we are often sensitive to variations of the time of passage from the ascending node \citep[e.g.,][]{Riggio11b}. From the timing solution reported by P09 we noted that $T^{\star}$ is the parameter with the largest uncertainty, and propagating the error to the 2015 outburst we found:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:sigmaTstar}
\sigma_{ T^{\star}_{2015}} = (\sigma^2_{ T^{\star}_{2001}} + N^2 \times \sigma^2_{P_{orb_{2001}}})^{1/2}\simeq1340\, s,
\end{eqnarray}
where, $\sigma_{ T^{\star}_{2015}}$ is the error on $T^{\star}$ extrapolated from the 2001 timing solution, $\sigma_{ T^{\star}_{2001}}$ and $\sigma_{P_{orb_{2001}}}$ are the 1$\sigma$ errors on $T^{\star}$ and $P_{orb}$ from the 2001 outburst reported by P09 (see Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}), respectively, and N is the number of integer orbital cycles completed in the time interval between the outbursts. We note that this estimation has been made assuming a zero orbital-period derivative $\dot{P}_{orb}$.

Following \citet[][see also \citealt{Riggio11b}]{Papitto05}, we investigated the orbital solution, under the assumption that the best set of orbital parameters is the one for which the folded pulse profile obtained by epoch-folding the data has the highest signal-to-noise ratio, hence the largest $\chi^2$ value in an epoch-folding search \citep[see e.g.][]{Kirsch04}. Here we focused on the $T^{\star}$ because is the parameter with largest uncertainty among the orbital parameters. We explored possible values of the parameter in the interval $T_{2015}^{\star}\pm\sigma_{ T^{\star}_{2015}}$. We corrected each time series with Eq.~\ref{eq:bary} adopting the same orbital parameters, except for $T^{\star}$, which varied in steps of 60 seconds. We then applied the epoch-folding techniques to search for X-ray pulsation around the spin frequency $\nu_0$ using 16 phase bin to sample the signal. In  Fig.~\ref{fig:tstar_2015} we report the largest value of $\chi^2$ from the epoch-folding search of each time series as a function of the $T^{\star}$ value used to correct the photon times of arrival. A clear peak is present at $\Delta T^{\star}\simeq 540$ seconds. As shown in the inset of Fig.~\ref{fig:tstar_2015}, adopting a finer stepping in $T^{\star}$ (0.5 seconds) around the value which gave the highest $\chi^2$, we were able to refine the measurement of the parameter. By fitting the top of the $\chi^2$ curve with a Gaussian plus a constant we obtained a value of $\Delta T^{\star}=543.7$ seconds. As described by \citet{Riggio11b}, the folding search technique used for this analysis does not provide a straightforward method to estimate the uncertainty on the derived $T^{\star}$ parameter. Following \citet{Riggio11b}, we then performed Monte Carlo simulations generating 100 datasets (allowing $1\sigma$ error estimations) with the same properties of the real data such as, length, count rate, pulsation fractional amplitude and orbital modulation. Applying the method previously described we derived a value of $T^{\star}$ for each simulated dataset. We defined the $1\sigma$ error interval of the time of passage from the ascending node as the standard deviation of the $T^{\star}$ distribution from the simulation. Therefore, we derived $T^{\star}$ during the 2015 outburst as $T_{2015}^{\star} = T_{2001}^{\star} + \Delta T^{\star} = 57085.444732(2)$ MJD(TDB).

Using the updated set of orbital parameters we barycentered the PN data and performed an epoch-folding search to estimate an average local spin frequency, finding the value $\bar{\nu}=442.3610955(5)$ Hz. The error on the spin frequency has been estimated by means of Monte Carlo simulations following the method mentioned above. In Fig.~\ref{fig:pp} we show the folded pulse profile obtained epoch-folding the PN observation at $\bar{\nu}$ and sampling the signal in 32 phase bins. The pulse shape is well fitted with a combination of two sinusoids, where the fundamental and its first overtone have fractional amplitude of 0.9\% and 0.1\%, respectively.

The same analysis has been also done excluding the X-ray bursts from the data. We did not find any significant variation in terms of detectability of the pulse profile or in terms of pulse fractional amplitude. Furthermore, we investigated the presence of coherent pulsation during each of the X-ray bursts, but we found no significant evidence. We decided to continue the timing analysis including the X-ray bursts.

In order to compute statically significant pulse profiles in time intervals shorter then the whole PN observation, we split the data in time intervals of approximately 4000 seconds that we epoch-folded in 16 phase bins at the mean spin frequency $\bar{\nu}$ with respect to the epoch $T_0=57085.7$ MJD. We modelled each epoch-folded pulse profile with a sinusoid of unitary period in order to determine the corresponding sinusoidal amplitude and the fractional part of phase residual. Only folded profiles with ratio between sinusoidal amplitude and $1\sigma$ error larger than 3 were taken into consideration. We detected pulsation in $\sim81$ks of data out of the total $\sim95$ks analysed, corresponding to $\sim85\%$ of the PN observation. The fractional amplitude of the signal varies between $\sim0.6\%$ and $\sim1.6\%$, with a mean value of $\sim1\%$.

We modelled the temporal evolution of the pulse phase delays with the relation:

\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:ph}
\Delta \phi(t)=\phi_0+\Delta \nu_0\,(t-T_0)+R_{orb}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where $T_0$ represents the reference epoch for the timing solution, $\Delta \nu_0=(\nu_0-\bar{\nu})$ is the difference between the frequency at the reference epoch and the spin frequency used to epoch-fold the data, and $R_{orb}$ is the phase residual caused by differences between the \emph{correct} set of orbital parameters and those used to correct the photon time of arrivals \citep[see e.g.][]{Deeter81}. If a new set of orbital parameters is found, photon time of arrivals are corrected using Eq.~\ref{eq:bary} and pulse phase delays are created and modelled with Eq.~\ref{eq:ph}. This process is repeated until no significant differential corrections are found for the parameters of the model. Obtained best-fit parameters are shown in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}, while in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase_fit} we report the pulse phase delays with the best-fitting model (top panel), and the residuals with respect to the model. The value of $\tilde{\chi}^2\sim1$ (with 11 degrees of freedom) combined with the distribution of the residuals around zero, clearly show a good agreement between the model and the pulse phase delays.
\begin{comment}
Finally, uncertainties on the source coordinates affect the pulse phase delays \citep[e.g.,][]{Burderi07}. Using the expression of the residuals induced by the motion of the Earth for small variations of the source position $\delta_{\lambda}$ and $\delta_{\beta}$ expressed in ecliptic coordinates $\lambda$ and $\beta$ \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Lyne90} we estimated the systematic uncertainties induced on the linear term of the pulse phase delays, which corresponds to an error in the spin frequency correction $\delta \nu_0$. The former correction can be expressed as $\sigma_{\nu_{pos}}\leq \nu_0\,y\,\sigma_{\gamma}(1+\sin^2\beta)^{1/2}2\pi/P_{\oplus}$, where $y=r_E/c$ is the semi-major axis of the orbit of the Earth in light-seconds, $P_{\oplus}$ is the Earth orbital period, and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ is the positional error circle. Considering the positional uncertainty of $0.6 ''$ reported by \citet{Pooley02}, we estimated $\sigma_{\nu_{pos}} \leq 6\times 10^{-10}$ Hz. We added in quadrature these systematic uncertainties to the statistical errors of $\nu_0$ estimated from the timing analysis.
\end{comment}
We investigated the dependence of the pulse profile as a function of energy, dividing the energy range between 0.5 keV to 15 keV into 17 intervals and measuring the fractional amplitude and the time lags of the pulse profile. We adjusted the width of the energy bins considered for the analysis in order to be able to significantly detect the pulsation. Fig.~\ref{fig:amp_vs_energy} shows the dependence of the fractional amplitude of the pulse profile (top panel), and the time lags with respect to the first energy band (bottom panel), both as a function of energy. The fractional amplitude increases from $\sim0.1\%$ at around 2 keV up to $\sim3\%$ at 13 keV. A linear correlation between pulse amplitude and energy is quite clear from the plot; we emphasised that by plotting the best-fitting linear function on top of the data (see dashed line on Fig.~\ref{fig:amp_vs_energy}), corresponding to a slope of $(0.24\pm0.1)\%$ keV$^{-1}$. On the other hand, no significant time lags are measured, with all the measurements being consistent with a zero lag with respect to the chosen reference profile.

\subsection{Timing analysis of the previous outbursts}

Using the previously described $T^\star$ searching technique we investigated the whole available \textit{RXTE} dataset of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 to search for more pulsation episodes (see Tab.~\ref{tab:obs}), with the exception of the 2001 outburst (Obs ID P960035 and P960084) for which has been already reported an accurate timing solution (P09). Starting from the set of orbital parameters reported by P09 and using Eq.~\ref{eq:barygen}, we corrected photon times of arrival varying $T^\star$ in order to explore all possible values for the parameter. For each set of orbital parameters we epoch-folded the data sampling the signal with 16 phase bins. Given the correlation between $T^\star$ and spin frequency on time scales shorter than the orbital period and given the low achievable accuracy for the spin frequency in the single \textit{RXTE} observations due to their relative short lengths, we decided to epoch-fold the data fixing the spin frequency value to the one reported by P09. We found evidence for pulsations in five observations, one corresponding to the 2005 outburst \citep[already reported by][]{Gavriil07,Altamirano08a, Patruno09a}, and four corresponding to the 2010 outburst \citep[some of them already reported by][]{Patruno10a}. Fig.~\ref{fig:tstars} shows, for each observation, the $\chi^2$ curve as a function of the $T^\star$ adopted to correct the photon times of arrival. The detected pulsations correspond to $T^\star$ consistent, within the error estimated by applying Eq.~\ref{eq:sigmaTstar}, with respect to the predicted values extrapolated from the solution reported by P09. \\
From Fig.~\ref{fig:tstars} we note that the $\chi^2$ distribution as a function of $\Delta T^\star$ showed a broad range of the full width at half-maximum values, going from $\sim40$ seconds up to $\sim300$ seconds. This can be explained taking into account that the Doppler shift effect (caused by the binary orbital motion), varies in intensity as a function of the orbital phase of the source. Hence, if investigated on time scales shorter than the orbital period, the signal-to-noise ratio of the pulsation can be more or less sensitive to variations of the orbital parameters depending on the orbital position. If, for instance, the source is at an orbital phase where the Doppler effects are relatively intense, small changes of the orbital parameters will strongly degrade the signal (i.e., Fig.~\ref{fig:tstars} Obs ID 94315-01-06-07). On the other hand, if the Doppler effects are relatively weak, large variations of the orbital parameters are required to degrade the signal (i.e., Fig.~\ref{fig:tstars} Obs ID 94315-01-07-02).
In Tab.~\ref{tab:solution} we reported the value of $T^\star$ and the source spin frequency derived from the pulse detection of the 2005 outburst. The $1\sigma$ uncertainties associated to the parameters have been derived by means of Monte Carlo simulations.\\
In spite of the four pulsation episodes observed during the 2010 outburst, the time gap between the detections as well as their statistics did not allow us to perform a phase-coherent timing analysis. However, we managed to study the pulse frequency drift using epoch-folding search techniques with the aim of investigating the orbital parameters of the source. We proceeded as follows:  1) using the four observations reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:tstars} we estimated an averaged value for $T^\star=55214.4259$ MJD, 2) we corrected photon times of arrival using the solution reported by P09, except for the $T^\star$ parameter for which we used the aforementioned value, 3) we performed an epoch-folding search around the spin frequency of the source for each of the available \textit{RXTE} observations of the 2010 outburst. As a result we detected the pulsation in two additional observations, corresponding to Obs ID 94315-01-05-01 (MJD 55214.815) and Obs ID 94315-01-06-01 (MJD 55218.869), both with an exposure of $\sim1.6$ ks. To model the behaviour of the the spin frequency with time we used the expression $\nu = \nu_0(1-\dot{z}(t)/c)$. In order to investigate the differential corrections on the orbital parameters we differentiated the former relation finding the expression:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
\nu(t) =& (\nu_0 + \delta\nu_0) \big\{1 - \frac{2\pi}{P_{orb}} \big[\cos(l(t)) \delta x + \frac{x}{P_{orb}} \big(\cos(l(t)) \\
 - & l(t)  \sin(l(t))\big) \delta P_{orb} - \frac{2\pi}{P_{orb}} x  \sin(l(t))  \delta T^\star \big] \big\},
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\nu_0$ is the average spin frequency, $\delta\nu_0$ is the differential correction to the spin frequency, $l(t)=2\pi/P_{orb}(t-T^\star)$ is the mean longitude, $\delta x$, $\delta P_{orb}$ and $\delta T^\star$ represent the differential corrections to the orbital parameters. Given the limited number of points we restricted our search to $\delta T^\star$ and  $\delta\nu_0$. Fig.~\ref{fig:doppler} shows the pulse frequency as a function of time for the 2010 outburst as well as the best-fit orbital model. Best-fit parameters are reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}.

\begin{table*}

\begin{tabular}{l | c  c  c  c}
Parameters             & 2001 outburst & 2005 outburst & 2010 outburst & 2015 outburst \\
\hline
\hline
R.A. (J2000) &  \multicolumn{4}{c}{$17^h48^m52^s.163$}\\
DEC (J200) & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$-20^\circ21'32''.40$}\\
Orbital period $P_{orb}$ (s) & 31554.9(1) & $-$$^a$ & $-$$^a$ & 31555.3(3)\\
Projected semi-major axis a sin\textit{i/c} (lt-ms) &387.60(4) & $-$$^a$& $-$$^a$ & 387.57(2) \\
Ascending node passage $T^{\star}$ (MJD) & 52191.507190(4) & 53513.9661(1)& 55214.42571(3)& 57085.444718(9)\\
Eccentricity (e) &$ < 2.3 \times 10^{-4} $&  $-$$^a$& $-$$^a$&$< 8\times 10^{-5}$\\
Spin frequency $\nu_0$ (Hz) &442.36108118(5)& 442.36108(4)& 442.36111(2)& 442.3610957(2)\\
Epoch of $\nu_0$ and $\dot{\nu}_0$, $T_0$ (MJD) & 52190.0 & 53535.4& 55214.7& 57085.7 \\
\hline
$\chi^2_\nu$/d.o.f. & $-$ & $-$& 4.6/3& 10.9/11\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Orbital parameters of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 obtained by analysing the 2001 outburst \citep[first column;][]{Patruno09a}, 2005, 2010 and  2015 outbursts investigated in this work (second, third, and fourth column). Errors are at 1$\sigma$ confidence level. The reported X-ray position of the source has a pointing uncertainty of 0.6$''$ \citep[see e.g.][]{in-t-Zand01, Pooley02}. $^a$ This parameter has been fixed to the value obtained from the 2001 outburst timing solution.}
\label{tab:solution}
\end{table*}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{figure3}
\caption{Pulse profile and best-fitting model (combination of two sinusoids) obtained by epoch-folding the PN observation. The profile has been created after subtracting the background and it is normalised to the average flux. For clarity, we show two cycles of the pulse profile.}
\label{fig:pp}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figure4}
\caption{\textit{Top panel -} Pulse phase delays as a function of time computed by epoch-folding the \textit{XMM-Newton} observation at the spin frequency $\nu_0 = 442.3610955$ Hz, together with the best-fit model (red dotted line, see text). \textit{Bottom panel -} Residuals in $\mu s$ with respect to the best-fitting orbital solution.}
\label{fig:phase_fit}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figure5}
\caption{\textit{Top panel -} Evolution of the pulse profile fractional amplitude obtained from the PN observation as a function of energy, and best-fitting model to the data (dashed line). \textit{Bottom panel -} Time lags in $\mu s$ as a function of energy, calculated with respect to the first energy band.}
\label{fig:amp_vs_energy}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figure6}
\caption{Maximum value of $\chi^2$ from the epoch-folding search on the single \textit{RXTE} observations as a function of the $T^{\star}$ values used to correct for the orbital modulation. $\Delta T^{\star}$ represents the delay in seconds from the predicted $T^{\star}$ extrapolated from the timing solution obtained analysing the 2001 outburst. In order to identify the different outbursts in the panels we reported the reference time MJD 53513.964283 and MJD 55214.422783 for the 2005 and 2010 outburst, respectively.}
\label{fig:tstars}
\end{figure*}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figure7_2}
\caption{\textit{Top panel -} Pulse frequency evolution during the 2010 outburst of the source. The solid line represents the best-fitting orbital model. \textit{Bottom panel -} Residuals in units of $10^{-5}$ Hz with respect to the best-fitting model. }
\label{fig:doppler}
\end{figure}

\section{Discussion}

We have presented an updated timing solution for the intermittent accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar SAX J1748.9$-$2021 obtained by phase connecting the pulsations detected during the \textit{XMM-Newton} observation of its 2015 outburst. The new set of orbital parameters is compatible within the errors with the previous timing solution obtained from the analysis of the 2001 outburst (P09).

\subsection{The spin evolution of SAX J1748.9$-$2021}
As already discussed in previous sections, the source has been observed in outburst 5 times since its discovery, and in 4 of them X-ray pulsation has been detected. Tab.~\ref{tab:solution} shows that we have accurate measurements of the spin frequency only for the 2001 and 2015 outbursts. The difference in frequency between these outbursts is $\Delta \nu = \nu_{2015}-\nu_{2001} = (1.45\pm0.02)\times 10^{-5}$ Hz, where the error quoted is the statistical error obtained propagating those reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}. The variation of spin frequency between the outbursts suggests a significant spin-up of the NS. This trend cannot be confirmed by the rest of the outbursts, because the uncertainties on the spin frequency values estimated from the 2005 and 2010 outbursts are large enough to be consistent both with $\nu_{2001}$ and $\nu_{2015}$. We can speculatively discuss the possibility that the $\Delta \nu$ observed is the result of the accretion torque exerted on the NS as a consequence of the mass transfer from the companion. A rough estimation of the spin-up frequency derivative, $\dot{\nu}$, can be obtained by dividing the spin difference $\Delta \nu$ by the time interval where the source appeared in outburst. Combining Fig.~1 of \citet{Altamirano08a}, the light-curve of the 2010 outburst (not shown in this work) and Fig.~\ref{fig:lc} in this paper, we can estimate that between the first detected X-ray pulsations (2001) and the latest one (2015), the source spent almost 170 days in outburst, corresponding to $\dot{\nu}\simeq 1\times 10^{-12}$ Hz/s. It is interesting to note that, although very approximate, the frequency derivative obtained is in line with values measured in other AMXPs such as IGR J00291$+$5934 \citep{Burderi10}, SAX J1808.4$-$3658 \citep{Burderi06}, XTE J1807$-$294 \citep{Riggio08}, and IGR J17480$-$2446 \citep{Papitto11a}. Finally, with some assumptions on the accretion torque modelling \citep[see][for a detailed dissertation of the subject]{Burderi07} we can estimate the NS magnetic field as:

\begin{eqnarray}
B_9\simeq 1.6\,\phi^{-7/4}_{0.5}I^{7/2}_{45}R^{-6}_6m^{3/2}\dot{\nu}^{7/2}_{12}L^{-3}_{37}
\end{eqnarray}
where $B_9$ is the NS magnetic field in units of $10^9$ Gauss, $\phi_{0.5}$ is a model-dependent dimensionless number usually between 0 and 1 \citep{Ghosh79b,Wang96,Burderi98b} in units of 0.5, $I_{45}$ is the moment of inertia of the NS in units of $10^{45}$ g cm$^2$, $R_6$ is the NS radius in units of $10^6$ cm, $m=1.4$ is the NS mass in solar masses, $\dot{\nu}_{12}$ is the spin frequency derivative in units of $10^{-12}$ Hz/s and $L_{37}$ is the luminosity of the source in units of $5\times 10^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$ corresponding to the 1$-$50 keV unabsorbed source luminosity measured combining \textit{XMM-Newton} and \textit{INTEGRAL} observations (assuming a distance of 8.5 kpc) during the latest outburst \citep{Pintore2016a}. This value is in agreement with the estimation $B\gtrsim1.3\times 10^{8}$ G reported by \citet{Altamirano08b} from the 2001 outburst of the source.

\subsection{Pulse energy dependence}

An interesting aspect of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 is the behaviour of its pulse profile as function of energy. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:amp_vs_energy}, the pulse fractional amplitude clearly increases with energy, varying from 0.1\% up to 2.5\% in the energy range 0.5$-$15 keV, confirming the findings of P09 obtained with \textit{RXTE} during the 2001 outburst of the source. A similar behaviour has been observed in several AMXPs such as Aql X-1 \citep{Casella08}, SWIFT J1756.9$-$2508 \citep{Patruno10b}, XTE J1807$-$294 \citep{Kirsch04}. An increase of the fractional amplitude with energy has been detected also in IGR J00291+5934 \citep{Falanga05b}, although here the energy dependence is more complex. The origin of the phenomenon is still unclear, however mechanisms such as strong Comptonisation of the beamed radiation have been proposed to explain the hard spectrum of the pulsation observed in these sources \citep{Falanga07b}. An alternative scenario proposed by \citet{Muno02, Muno03}, and reported by P09 to describe the behaviour of the SAX J1748.9$-$2021, attempts to explain the X-ray pulsations with the presence of a hot spot region emitting as a blackbody with a temperature significantly different with respect to the NS surface. Such a configuration could explain the increasing pulse amplitude with energy in the observer rest frame. However, it is interesting to note that other AMXPs such as SAX J1808.4$-$3658 \citep{Cui98b, Falanga07b}, XTE J1751-305 \citep{Falanga07b} and IGR J17511$-$3057 \citep{Falanga11} show the exact opposite correlation between pulse fractional amplitude and energy.

\subsection{Orbital period evolution}
As reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution} we have measurements of the time of passage of the NS at the ascending node for 4 out of the 5 observed outbursts of the source.  We note that the correction to the predicted $T^\star_{predict}=T^\star_{2001}+N P_{orb_{2001}}$, increases with time. Here, the integer $N$ represents the number of orbital cycles elapsed between two different $T^\star$ \citep[see e.g.,][]{diSalvo08, Burderi09}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:fit_tstar2} we report the differential correction on the NS passage from the ascending node (with respect to the timing solution of P09) for each of the outbursts where we detected the pulsation, as a function of the orbital cycles elapsed from the reference time. We fitted the data with the expression:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:fit_tstar}
\Delta T^\star = \delta T^\star_{2001} + N\, \delta P_{orb_{2001}}+0.5\,N^2\, \dot{P}_{orb}P_{orb_{2001}},
\end{eqnarray}
where the correction to the adopted time of passage from the ascending node, $\delta T^\star_{2001}$, the correction to the orbital period, $\delta P_{orb_{2001}}$, and the orbital-period derivative, $\dot{P}_{orb}$, are the fit parameters.
We found the best-fitting values $\delta T^\star_{2001}=(0.05\pm0.35)$ MJD, $\delta P_{orb_{2001}}=(0.0163\pm0.0008)$ s, and $\dot{P}_{orb}=(1.14\pm0.04)\times 10^{-10}$ s/s, with a $\chi^2=78.4$ (for 1 d.o.f.). We note that the large $\chi^2$ value is influenced by the $T^\star$ value estimated from the 2005 outburst, that differs more than $10\sigma$ from the best-fitting model. We remind the reader that the aforementioned parameter has been deduced from a single short observation ($\sim 1$ ks of data) during the whole outburst. The best fit of the $T^\star$ evolution is clearly statistically not acceptable, likely reflecting a complex orbital period evolution that we can not investigate with such data, or an underestimation of the statistical uncertainties. However, under the simple hypothesis that the underlying evolution of $T^\star$ with time is compatible with Eq.~\ref{eq:fit_tstar}, we can re-modulate the uncertainty on the fitting parameters taking into account the root-mean-square of the fit residuals, i.e. multiplying the fit uncertainties by the square root of the $\chi^2$ per degree of freedom, that in this specific case corresponds to a factor $\sim9$. We can re-write the best-fitting parameters as $\delta T^\star_{2001}=(0.05\pm3.1)$ MJD, $\delta P_{orb_{2001}}=(0.0163\pm0.007)$ s, and $\dot{P}_{orb}=(1.1\pm0.3)\times 10^{-10}$ s/s. We find no significant correction for $T^\star_{2001}$ and a marginally significant correction for $P_{orb_{2001}}$. On the other hand we find, for the first time for this source, a marginally significant ($3.5\sigma$) orbital-period derivative, which suggests a very rapid increase of the orbital period. \begin{comment}We note, however, that the significance of the orbital-period derivative is quite sensitive to the uncertainty on the value of $T^\star_{2010}$, e.g., an increment of its error by a factor of 2 with respect to the value reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution} would cause a drop in significance from $3\sigma$ to $1.5\sigma$. \end{comment}

Under the hypothesis that the value of $\dot{P}_{orb}$ is reliable, we can investigate the orbital evolution of the system. As a first step we can estimate the mass-loss rate from the secondary expected from the observed orbital period and the orbital-period derivative. Following \citet{Burderi10}, we can write the averaged secondary mass-loss rate as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:m2_pdot}
\dot{m}_{est,-8}=1.9 \times (3n-1)^{-1}\,m_{2,0.1}\Big(\frac{\dot{P}_{orb,-10}}{P_{orb,9h}}\Big),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\dot{m}_{est,-8}$ is expressed in units of $10^{-8}$ M$_{\odot}/yr$, $n$ is the index of the mass-radius relation of the secondary R$_2\propto$ M$_2^n$, $m_{2,0.1}$ is the mass of the companion star in units of 0.1 M$_{\odot}$, $\dot{P}_{orb,-10}$ is the orbital-period derivative in units of $10^{-10}$ s/s, and $P_{orb,9h}$ is the orbital period in units of 9 hours (appropriate for SAX J1748.9$-$2021 since $P_{orb}=8.76$ h). We remind the reader that the previous relation is valid for small mass ratios, $q=m_2/m_1\leq 0.8$, since it assumes the Paczy\'nski approximation \citep{Paczynski71} to describe the secondary Roche Lobe.

Even though the mass of the companion star is still unknown, we can at least define a mass range by means of the binary mass function
\begin{eqnarray}
f(m_1,m_2)=\frac{4\pi^2(a \sin i)^3}{G P^2_{orb}}=\frac{(m_2 \sin i)^3}{(m_1+m_2)^2},
\end{eqnarray}

where $G$ is the gravitational constant, and $i$ is the inclination angle of the binary. Adopting the orbital parameters reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:solution}, assuming $i\leq60^\circ$ (taking into account that no X-ray eclipses, neither dips have been observed), and a NS mass $m_1=1.4$ M$_{\odot}$ we estimate $m_2 \geq 0.12$ M$_{\odot}$. Moreover, an upper limit for the companion star can be estimated under the assumption that a Roche lobe-filling star is close to the lower main sequence, that translates in the relation $m_2\simeq 0.11 P_{orb,h}$ M$_{\odot}$ \citep{King88}, and corresponds to $\simeq1$ M$_{\odot}$ for this source. We note that the latter value corresponds to the mass value estimated by \citet{Altamirano08a}.

Using Eq.~\ref{eq:m2_pdot} we estimate the expected secondary mass-loss rate for mass values of the secondary ranging between 0.12$-$1 M$_\odot$. Regarding the value of the mass-radius index, we note that the observed $\dot{P}_{orb}>0$ (under the assumption that the measured orbital-period derivative reflects the secular evolution of the system) likely implies a companion star in non-thermal equilibrium, with mass lower than 0.3 M$_{\odot}$, and mass-radius relation inverted \citep{King88, Verbunt93}. Assuming a fully convective companion star, and an orbital evolution driver by GR, we substitute $n=-1/3$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:m2_pdot}. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:orb_ev} (dashed line), the mass-loss rate varies from $\sim 1.3\times 10^{-8}$ M$_\odot$/yr ($m_2=0.12$ M$_\odot$) up to $\sim 11\times 10^{-8}$ M$_\odot$/yr ($m_2=1$ M$_\odot$). Starting from these numbers we can explore two possible evolutionary scenarios invoking \emph{conservative} and \emph{non-conservative} mass transfer between the secondary and the NS.

The first scenario assumes that mass transferred from the companion star during the outburst must be completely accreted by the NS, while during the quiescence states no mass is accreted or lost from the system. Defining $\beta$ as the fraction of the mass transferred from the secondary to the NS, we can identify the conservative scenario with $\beta=1$. To verify whether the inferred mass-loss rate reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:orb_ev} is somehow compatible with the conservative scenario we need to compare it with the averaged mass-transfer rate extrapolated from the averaged observed flux of the source. Assuming the unabsorbed bolometric luminosity observed from the \textit{XMM-Newton} observation \citep[$\sim 5.7\times 10^{-37}$ erg/s, see][]{Pintore2016a} as the averaged luminosity during the outburst, and taking into account that SAX J1748.9$-$2021 spends roughly 60 days in outburst every 5 years, we can infer the averaged mass-loss rate $\dot{m}_{\beta=1}\sim1.4\times 10^{-10}$ M$_\odot$/yr. As clearly shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:orb_ev}, $\dot{m}_{\beta=1}$ (dot-dashed line) and the expected secondary mass-loss rate estimated from the orbital-period derivative are not compatible for any reasonable explored value of the mass of the companion star. This result strongly suggests that the orbital evolution of the systems (characterised by the observed $\dot{P}_{orb}$), cannot be described by a conservative mass-transfer scenario.

The second scenario assumes a non-conservative mass transfer ($\beta < 1$), meaning that also during the quiescence phases the companion star fills its Roche lobe but instead of being accreted onto the NS the matter is ejected from the system. A rough estimate of $\beta$ for SAX J1748.9$-$2021 can be obtained by computing the outburst phase duty cycle, corresponding to roughly 60 days every 5 years, hence $\beta\sim 3\%$. To investigate this scenario we make the assumption that the NS accretes at a rate equal to the one shown during the peak of the most luminous outburst of the source \citep[2005 outburst, see][]{Altamirano08b}, that corresponds to $\dot{m}_{\beta=0.03}\sim 7\times 10^{-9}$ M$_{\odot}$/yr (the value has been extrapolated from the unabsorbed bolometric flux measured from the \textit{RXTE} observation of the source). It is interesting to note from Fig.~\ref{fig:orb_ev}, that $\dot{m}_{\beta=0.03}$ (solid line) and the estimated secondary mass-loss rate are compatible for values of the companion star in the range 0.05$-$0.09 M$_{\odot}$ ($1\sigma$ confidence level) and 0.04$-$0.14 M$_{\odot}$ ($2\sigma$ confidence level). We find that the $2\sigma$ interval is compatible with the lower limit of $m_2$ estimated from the binary mass function. Our finding, taking into account all the assumptions and the caveats explained above, suggests that large value of the orbital-period derivative reported for SAX J1748.9$-$2021 reflects an highly non-conservative mass transfer scenario for which a large amount of mass lost from the companion star is expelled from the system.

The last step needed to investigate the orbital evolution of the source is to verify whether the non-conservative mass-transfer unveiled in the previous paragraph is compatible with a secular evolution. Following \citet{diSalvo08}, we solve the binary evolutionary equation under the assumptions that: 1) the angular momentum losses are driven by emission of gravitational waves; 2) the secondary mass-radius relation is $R_2\propto M^{n}_2$; and 3) the NS accretes mass through Roche lobe overflow, meaning that the evolution of the secondary mass radius $\dot{R}_2/R_2$ can be expressed in terms of to the evolution of the of the secondary Roche lobe $\dot{R}_{L2}/R_{L2}$, where for $R_{L2}$ we adopt the approximation $R_{L2}=2/3^{4/3}[q/(1+q)]^{1/3}a$ \citep{Paczynski71}. Consequently, we can write the orbital-period derivative due to general relativity (GR) as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{P}_{orb,-13}=-1.1\times\Big[\frac{n-1/3}{n-1/3+2g}\Big]m_1\,m_2\,m^{-1/3}\,P^{-5/3}_{orb,9h}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\dot{P}_{orb,-13}$ is expressed in units of $10^{-13}$ s/s, $g=1-\beta q-(1-\beta)(\alpha+q/3)/(1+q)$ reflects the angular momentum losses because of mass loss from the system, and $\alpha=l_{ej}P_{orb}\,m^2/(2\pi a^2 m_1^2)$ is the specific angular momentum of the matter leaving the system ($l_{ej}$) in units of the specific angular momentum of the companion star located at a distance $r_2$ from the center of mass of the system and with an orbital separation $a$.
Adopting $n=-1/3$, $m_1=1.4$ M$_\odot$, $m_2=0.12$ M$_\odot$ (compatible within $2\sigma$ with the mass value with our finding described above), we find that, in order to obtain an orbital-period derivative consistent with values determined from the timing analysis ($\dot{P}_{orb}=1.1\times 10^{-10}$s/s), the specific angular momentum of the matter leaving the system must be $\alpha\simeq0.7$. We note that this value is close to the specific angular momentum of the matter at the inner Lagrangian point $\alpha=[1-0.462(1+q)^{2/3}q^{1/3}]^2\sim0.63$. Therefore, we can conclude suggesting that the large orbital-period derivative observed in SAX J1748.9$-$2021 is compatible with an highly non-conservative GR driven mass transfer, with matter leaving the system in the proximity of the inner Lagrangian point. \cite{diSalvo08} and \cite{Burderi09} reported the same phenomenon for the AMXP SAX J1808.4$-$3658, proposing the \emph{radio-ejection} mechanism as possible explanation.

We note that for the case of SAX J1808.4$-$3658 alternative models have been proposed to explain the orbital period phenomenology. \citet{Hartman08, Hartman09b} and \citet{Patruno12a} suggested that the observed orbital period derivative might instead reflect short-term interchange of angular momentum between the companion star and the orbit. In this scenario the variable gravitational quadrupole moment (GQC) of the companion star (which generates by cyclic spin-up and spin-down on its outer layers) should be responsible for the orbital period changes \citep{Applegate1992a, Applegate1994a}. This mechanism has been applied to describe the time evolution of the orbital period observed in the black widow systems PSR B1957$+$20 \citep{Arzoumanian1994a, Applegate1994a}, PSR J2051$-$0827 \citep{Doroshenko2001a, Lazaridis2011a}, in the redback system PSR J2339$-$0533 \citep{Pletsch2015a}, and in the transitional redback system PSR J1023$+$0038 \citep{Archibald2013a}.
\\
In the case of SAX J1748.9$-$2021, the present data do not allow us to constrain a second time derivative or a sinusoidal trend of the orbital period, and therefore it is not clear if the orbital period derivative will cyclicly change with time. We cannot exclude, however, that the orbital period of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 might exhibit more complex behaviour on longer time scales. Nonetheless, in all the above mentioned systems where GQC has been invoked, the orbital period derivatives vary on timescales $\lesssim 10$ yr, almost a factor of 2 shorter than time interval studied in this work. Furthermore, we note that this mechanism increases in efficiency for Roche-lobe filling factors of the companion star lower than unity \citep[as a consequence of the strong dependence on the ratio $R_{L2}/R_2$;][]{Applegate1994a}.
\\
In conclusion, we propose that the large orbital period derivative observed for SAX J1748.9$-$2021 reflects a highly non-conservative mass transfer where almost 97\% of the matter is ejected from the system with the specific angular momentum of the inner Lagrangian point. However, given the level of significance for the reported orbital-period derivative, more X-ray outbursts are required to further investigate the secular orbit evolution of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 in order to confirm or disprove the proposed scenario.

\begin{comment}
We then investigated the scenario in which the mass transfer from the companion star to the NS is non-conservative, meaning that only a certain fraction $\beta$ of the matter leaving the companion star is accreted onto the NS, while the remaining $1-\beta$ is lost from the system. Assuming $\dot{m}_{-8}$ from Eq.~\ref{eq:m2_pdot} as the expected secondary mass loss rate and $\dot{m}_{obs}$ as the averaged mass accretion rate onto the NS during the outburst phases, we can estimate $\beta= - \dot{m}_{obs}/\dot{m}_{-8} \simeq 0.02$. Interesting this values is quite close to the ratio between days the source spent in outburst (almost 170 days) and quiescence (in total almost 13 years) in the interval in which we estimated the orbital-period derivative. Considering Eq.~3 of \citet{diSalvo08}, and Eq.~3-8 of \citet{Burderi10} we can expressed the conservation of angular momentum of the system as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:anglmom}
\frac{\dot{P}_{orb}}{P_{orb}} = 3\Big[\frac{\dot{J}}{J_{orb}}-\frac{\dot{M}_2}{M_2}g(\beta,q,\alpha)\Big]
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\dot{J}}{J_{orb}} = -1.1\times 10^{-18}[1+T_{MB}]m_1\,m_{2,1}\,m^{-1/3}P^{-5/3}_{9h}
\end{eqnarray}
describes the losses of angular momentum from the systems caused by GR and magnetic braking, with this last term expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{MB}=1.3\times 10^{2}\,(f/k_{0.277})^{-2}\,m^{1/3}_{2,1}\,m^{-4/3}_1\,P^2_{9h},
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_1$ is the mass of the compact object in solar masses, $m=m_1+m_2$ is the total mass of the system, $f$ is a dimensionless parameter of order of unity (with preferred values: $f=0.73$ \cite{Skumanich72}, and $f=1.78$ \cite{Smith79}), and $k_{0.277}$ is the radius of gyration of the companion star in units of 0.277 \citep[][value extrapolated for a zero age main sequence star of mass 1M$_{\odot}$]{Claret89}. Finally $g(\beta,q,\alpha)$ describes the effects of angular momentum losses caused by the mass ejected from the system and can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
g(\beta,q,\alpha)=1-\beta q - \frac{(1-\beta)(\alpha+q/3)}{(1+q)}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha=l_{ej}P_{orb}\,m^2/(2\pi a^2 m_1^2)$ is the specific angular momentum of the matter leaving the system ($l_{ej}$) in units of the specific angular momentum of the companion star located at a distance $r_2$ from the center of mass of the system and with an orbital separation $a$.

Substituting $\dot{M}_2=2.2\times 10^{-7}$M$_\odot /yr$ (obtained from Eq.~\ref{eq:m2_pdot}), $f=0.73$, $m_1=1.4$, $\beta=0.02$, and the observed orbital-period derivative $\dot{P}_{orb}=1.1\times 10^{10}$ s/s, in Eq.~\ref{eq:anglmom} we derived the value of the parameter $\alpha$ required to verify the equation. We estimated $\alpha \simeq 1.8$, that is larger than the maximum available value corresponding to the specific angular momentum of the companion star ($\alpha_2$=1).

\end{comment}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figure8_2}
\caption{Differential correction on the NS time of passage from the ascending node for each of the outbursts showing X-ray pulsations. The cyan dashed line represents the best-fitting parabola used to model the data. }
\label{fig:fit_tstar2}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figure9_2}
\caption{Mass-loss rate of the companion of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 (dashed line) estimated from the measured orbital period derivative as a function of its mass value. The light-green and light orange regions represent the mass-loss rate estimate taking into account the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ uncertainty of $\dot{P}_{orb}$, respectively. The solid line shows the maximum mass-accretion rate observed during all outbursts of SAX J1748.9$-$2021 (measured during the peak of the 2005 outburst), while the dot-dashed line shows the averaged mass-accretion rate estimated for the conservative mass transfer scenario ($\beta=1$). Finally the dark shaded area represents the constraints on the companion mass imposed by the binary mass function of the system.}
\label{fig:orb_ev}
\end{figure}

\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank N. Schartel for the possibility to perform the ToO observation in the Director Discretionary Time, and the XMM-Newton team for the support for the observation. We gratefully acknowledge the Sardinia Regional Government for the financial support (P. O. R. Sardegna F.S.E. Operational Programme of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, European Social Fund 2007-2013 - Axis IV Human Resources, Objective l.3, Line of Activity l.3.1). This work was partially supported by the Regione Autonoma della Sardegna through POR-FSE Sardegna 2007- 2013, L.R. 7/2007, Progetti di Ricerca di Base e Orientata, Project N. CRP-60529. We also acknowledge financial contribution from the agreement ASI-INAF I/037/12/0.The High-Energy Astrophysics Group of Palermo acknowledges support from the Fondo Finalizzato alla Ricerca (FFR) 2012/13, project N. 2012- ATE-0390, founded by the University of Palermo.

\bibliographystyle{mnras}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


Marvelous Ideas Of Blue Coconut Margarita Recipe – From the thousands of Pics on the web concerning blue coconut margarita recipe, we selects the top choices with best possible quality indeed for our visitor, and of course,this photographs is usually believed as one of photographs collections inside our greatest images gallery regarding Marvelous Ideas Of Blue Coconut Margarita Recipe. I feel you may like it.
submitted by Gerald Hopkins at 2019-02-08 17:38:18. To come up with just about all images with Marvelous Ideas Of Blue Coconut Margarita Recipe models gallery make sure you follow this kind of our web URL.


text:
Bloom Avenue Declares That Valentine's Day Is Not for Lovers
Instead, Celebrate Parents, Kids, Best Friends and Others Who Make Life Wonderful
February 09, 2011 13:49 ET | Source: Bloom Avenue
NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwire - February 9, 2011) - Bloom Avenue, the social flower company, wants everyone to know that Valentine's gifts are not just for significant others. While millions of lovers will inevitably exchange presents, the Bloom Avenue community wants to repurpose Valentine's Day, making it a day of celebration for everyone who adores someone.
While the nightly news indicates that there is currently a shortage of love in the world, Bloom Avenue wants to erase that misconception and illustrate that love still makes the world go 'round. Bloom Avenue is focused on making people feel appreciated every day of the year, specializing in unique and alternative flower bouquets and gifts. See their Top 5 Unique Valentine's Day Bouquets here: http://bloomavenueblog.com/, which includes a Zen Planter, Iris Fantasy and Opulent Orchids.
"Our vision is that Valentine's Day this year and for years to come evolves into a creative celebration of love in the broadest sense of the word," said Kevin Hall, president of Bloom Avenue. "Whether you give a vibrant bouquet, silly stuffed monkey or savory gift basket, every woman, man or child should be celebrated for the love they bring into your life."
Bloom Avenue has already been spreading the love through Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/bloomavenue) and Twitter (@bloomavenue), offering the opportunity to win bouquets for loved ones. People across the U.S. have won decadent flowers for their moms, best friends and others who impact their lives. Sign up today -- more bouquets are available and there are special deals and discounts for fans and followers. For more information on Bloom Avenue, visit www.bloomavenue.com.
About Bloom Avenue
Based in New York City, Bloom Avenue is a leading online florist with distribution across the United States. A small company with a big heart, Bloom Avenue is known as "The Social Flower Company" with deep roots in the florist community. Recognized for its quality offerings and commitment to customer service, Bloom Avenue makes people happier every single day. Visit www.bloomavenue.com and become part of their community on Twitter (@bloomavenue) and Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/bloomavenue).
Alicia Hassinger
CSG|PR
www.csg-pr.com
Bloom Avenue
Bloom Avenue Valentine's Day flower send flowers online florist love kids loved ones rose
http://www.bloomavenue.com

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Tributes for Carrie Fisher ought to have pouring in since her fatality aged 60 in Los Angeles on Tuesday. Our readers have been among those transmitting contents and sharing storeys about what the Star Wars actor means to them.
Fisher was known for many things: unflinching integrity, playing flair, writing skill and knockout. Shes also been a mental health issues counsel. Here are a selection of readers tributes, floors and observations.
My husband and I had a speedy photo with Carrie Fisher at New York Comic Con this past October. She was delighted to see us garmented as personas from The Force Awakens. "Finally person my own age! " she said. That's me, Susan Moskop, as General Organa, my husband, RJ Moskop as Luke Skywalker, and Carrie Fisher with her pup Gary.
Beautiful actress and fetched sass and ability to her Star Wars role. Then a endorse of her own flaws and helping others with mental health issues though enjoyable and inspiration.
As a long time fan of the original Star Wars cinemas, I can say that Carrie Fisher came across as a lighthouse of dawn In the 1970 's to movie love like myself. In the past institution of Bette Davis, Barbara Stanwick, Lauren Bacall and Ingrid Bergman she was a strong female extend in the role of Princess Leia attributed with guts and finding. She fired a grease-gun, told men they were moronics and dominated a whole whiz fleet. To me as I was living then in the male dominated, un-enlightened period of early feminism- her cinema show stood out as a lighthouse. She wasn't tall and beautiful- she was pretty to look at but "shes been" cunning and vivaciou with a girl next door kind of persona. The reality that as person or persons she came across as so down to ground despite the Hollywood upbringing, was a jubilation for her. She kept herself "real" despite all the hype. She will be missed – I believe – by all that knew her. I am sorry that we have lost her too soon.
I loved her journals, I could read her messages all day and night. She was a bright wordsmith.
I had the privilege of convene Carrie Fisher for the second time in 2015. I told her how amazing she appeared and thanked her for her epoch. We took our picture together( which I do not have a digital transcript of, it's on my wall) and as I started to walk away she grabbed me and gathered me back to her. She whispered in my ear "I know I lost all the weight but I'm gradually gaining it back." If you were able to observe her with followers you know that she plowed everyone so warmly like you were her friend for years. I feel like a member of their own families has passed. I am abysmally heartbroken, I cannot guess the sorenes their own families gone through. She will always be remembered and I hope I'll get to say hello to her again someday among the stars.
She was always there to induce. As an elderly woman her memoirs and indicates encouraged me to do my own "older" Princess proves in Japan. Life will be very empty without our Princess.
Thank you Carrie Fisher .
Carrie Fisher was the only princess I ever cared about. Princess Leia didn't wait to be saved by someone else. She saved them. She was smart, quick, drle, and didn't suffer suckers. She could be a commander of the universe but never fantasized she was above the people( or creatures ). Much like Carrie Fisher. Leia was a princess who looked like me, in the age of the 70 s blue-eyed blondes, and in my family. Fisher shaped Leia. She thoughts many of the lines were so over the top, that she inserted fun and humor into their give. And while Princess Leia was my first idol/ hero, Carrie Fisher become one that followed. She unapologetically and compassionately wrote and spoke about her own strivings with hollow and mental health. Her writing was/ is sharp as a tack, and she appeared out for the status of women, and men, who followed in her strides. My five-year-old just asked why I was crying. I told him that my first hero died. He said, "that means it's time to be your own hero". Just like Leia and Fisher, themselves.
Return of the Jedi opened eight daytimes after my birth in the U.S. My mother and father refused to miss it. So, they created me, an babe, with them to the theatre. That was my first movie-going experience.
I was ravaged to learn my first ever childhood hero passed away. Flourishing up I've learned the cultural implication of Leia's character and I've got to know the astounding being playing her much more. Carrie exited from depicting one of my all meter favorites to being my role model by being herself unapologetically and being so open about her struggles and raising mental health awareness. She is so much more than Princess Leia and despite never meeting her I feel like we had a lot in common. She had wit, a one of a kind sense of humour and so much flair, this macrocosm will be so much worse without her in it.
Her legacy will continue to live on and she'll be used in my heart.


At Bedford we are aware that keeping our children hydrated helps them to perform at their very best throughout the school day. As a result, some years ago we decided to invest in watercoolers from AquAid.
This decision means that we have donated £20 per year per cooler to The Africa Trust and through our donations an 'Elephant Pump' has been installed in Africa on our behalf.
The pump brings much-needed clean, fresh drinking water and improve the quality of life of those who will have access to the well. Bedford's name is displayed on the well. We are very proud of our connection with AquAid and the opportunity it has given us to help those less fortunate than ourselves.


text:
The Sahara: Earth's largest hot desert
By Rachel Ross
Contributions from
Mindy Weisberger
One of the harshest environments on Earth, the Sahara is most famous for its sprawling sand dune fields.
The Sahara is the world's largest hot desert. (Image credit: Ignacio Palacios/Getty Images)
What's the geography of the Sahara?
What kinds of plants and animals live here?
What's the climate like in the Sahara?
Is climate change affecting the Sahara?
The Sahara is the largest hot desert in the world and the third-largest desert overall, behind the cold deserts of Antarctica and the Arctic. The Sahara is one of the harshest environments on Earth, covering 3.6 million square miles (9.4 million square kilometers), an area about the size of the United States (including Alaska and Hawaii) and spanning nearly a third of the African continent. The name of the desert comes from the Arabic word ṣaḥrāʾ, which means "desert," according to the Encyclopedia Britannica (opens in new tab).
The Sahara is bordered by the Atlantic Ocean to the west, the Red Sea to the east, the Mediterranean Sea to the north and the Sahel savanna to the south. The enormous desert spans 10 countries (Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Sudan and Tunisia) as well as the territory of Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony that was annexed by Morocco in 1975, though control of the region is disputed by the Indigenous Saharawi people, the BBC reported (opens in new tab) in 2021.
The Sahara desert has a variety of land features, but it is most famous for the sand dune fields that are often depicted in movies. The dunes can reach almost 600 feet (183 meters) high, and they cover about 25% of the entire desert, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica. Other topographical features include mountains, plateaus, sand- and gravel-covered plains, salt flats, basins and depressions. Emi Koussi, an extinct volcano in Chad, is the highest point in the Sahara, reaching 11,204 feet (3,415 m) above sea level, and the Qattara Depression in northwestern Egypt is the Sahara's deepest point, at 436 feet (133 m) below sea level.
Although water is scarce across the entire region, the Sahara contains two permanent rivers (the Nile and the Niger), as well as at least 20 seasonal lakes and huge aquifers, which are the primary sources of water for more than 90 major oases in the desert. Water management authorities once thought that the aquifers in the Sahara were "fossil aquifers" — water reserves that accumulated under different climate and geological conditions in the distant past — and feared that these resources would soon dry up due to overuse. However, a study published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters (opens in new tab) in 2013 discovered that the aquifers were still being fed via rain and runoff.
The Sahara desert spans the entire northern half of Africa. (Image credit: Shutterstock)
Despite the harsh, arid conditions of the Sahara, many plant and animal species call the region home. Approximately 500 plant species, 70 mammalian species, 90 avian species, 100 reptilian species and numerous species of spiders, scorpions and other small arthropods live in the Sahara, according to the World Wildlife Fund (opens in new tab).
The camel is one of the most iconic animals of the Sahara, though its ancestors originated in North America. The ancestors of modern camels first appeared about 45 million years ago, and the large mammals eventually made their way to the African continent by traveling across the Bering isthmus between 3 million and 5 million years ago, according to a study published in 2015 in the Research Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Management (opens in new tab). Camels were domesticated about 3,000 years ago on the southeast Arabian Peninsula, to be used for transportation in the desert, according to the University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna (opens in new tab).
Camels, also known as the "ships of the desert," are well adapted to the Sahara's hot, arid environment, according to the San Diego Zoo (opens in new tab). The humps on a camel's back store fat, which can be used for energy and hydration in between meals. Camels store energy so efficiently that they can go more than a week without water and several months without food.
Other mammal residents of the Sahara include gazelles, addaxes (a type of antelope), cheetahs, caracals, desert foxes and wild dogs. Many reptiles also thrive in the desert environment, including several species of snakes, lizards and even crocodiles in places where there is enough water. Several arthropod species also call the Sahara home, such as dung beetles, scarab beetles, "deathstalker" scorpions and many types of ants, according to the Sahara Conservation Fund (opens in new tab).
Plant species in the Sahara have adapted to the arid conditions, with roots that reach deep underground to find buried water sources and leaves that are shaped into spines that minimize moisture loss, according to the BBC (opens in new tab). The most arid parts of the desert are completely devoid of plant life, but oasis areas, such as the Nile Valley, support a large variety of plants, including olive trees, date palms and various shrubs and grasses.
Camels are well-suited for life in the arid Sahara. (Image credit: Mint Images, Art Wolfe/Getty Images)
Today, the Sahara has a dry, inhospitable desert climate. However, it alternates between harsh desert and another extreme — a lush, green oasis — every 20,000 years, according to a study published in 2019 in the journal Science Advances (opens in new tab). The study's authors examined marine sediments containing dust deposits from the Sahara from the past 240,000 years. They found that the cycle between a dry and a green Sahara corresponded to the slight changes in the tilt of Earth's axis, which also drives monsoon activity. When Earth's axis tilted the Northern Hemisphere just a single degree closer to the sun (about 24.5 degrees instead of today's 23.5 degrees), it received more sunlight, which increased the monsoon rains and, therefore, supported a lush, green landscape in the Sahara.
Archaeologists have discovered prehistoric cave and rock paintings and other archaeological remains that shed light on what life was like in the once-green Sahara. Bits of pottery suggest that about 7,000 years ago, herders raised livestock and harvested plants in what now is an arid desert.
—Could the Sahara ever be green again?
—Photos: Colorful blooms sprout across the world's driest desert
—Atacama Desert blooms pink after historic rainfall (photos)
But for the past 2,000 years or so, the climate of the Sahara has been fairly stable — and dry. The northeastern winds strip moisture from the air over the desert and drive hot winds toward the equator. These winds can reach exceptional speeds and cause severe dust storms that can drop local visibility to zero. Dust from the Sahara travels on trade winds all the way to the opposite side of the globe.
Precipitation in the Sahara ranges from zero to about 3 inches (7.6 centimeters) of rain per year, researchers reported in 2014 in the journal American Meteorological Society (opens in new tab). Occasionally, snow falls at higher elevations. Year-round, temperatures in dry, arid deserts such as the Sahara are about 60 to 77 degrees Fahrenheit (20 to 25 degrees Celsius) on average, soaring as high as 120 F (49 C) in the summer during the daytime and plummeting to 0 F (minus 18 C) during the winter at night, according to the University of California Museum of Paleontology Berkeley (opens in new tab) (UCMP).
An oasis lake in the Sahara desert. (Image credit: Shutterstock)
The area of the Sahara desert has grown nearly 10% since 1920, according to a 2018 study published in the Journal of Climate (opens in new tab), and the desert will likely continue to expand at a comparable rate until 2050, according to another study, published in 2020 in the journal Scientific Reports (opens in new tab). Although all deserts, including the Sahara, increase in area during the dry season and decrease during the wet season, human-caused climate change, in conjunction with natural climate cycles, is causing the Sahara desert to grow more and shrink less over time. The 2018 study's authors estimated that approximately a third of the desert's expansion was due to human-driven climate change.
One proposal for mitigating the effects of climate change is to install large-scale wind and solar farms in the Sahara. The farms would provide clean energy and reduce the amount of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere, and may also promote increased precipitation in the vicinity, according to a 2018 study published in the journal Science (opens in new tab). Simulations showed that precipitation over wind farms would double, on average, thereby increasing vegetation by an estimated 20%. The solar farm simulations produced similar results.
Discover what the Sahara was like millions of years ago, during the Cretaceous period, in this 2019 study in the journal Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History (opens in new tab). Find out more about one of the desert's most striking landscape features today, the Aïr Mountains in central Niger, in a case study from the U.S. Geological Survey (opens in new tab). Visit the Sahara with Sir David Attenborough, to learn about the extreme adaptations that enable animals to survive the desert's harsh conditions, in an episode of the BBC One documentary, "Africa (opens in new tab)."
Gonçalvès, J., et al. "Quantifying the Modern Recharge of the 'Fossil' Sahara Aquifers." Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 40, no. 11, 2013, pp. 2673–2678., https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50478 (opens in new tab).
"Northern Africa." WWF, World Wildlife Fund, https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/pa1327 (opens in new tab).
Introduction to Camel Origin, History, Raising ... (PDF) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284898592_Introduction_to_Camel_origin_history_raising_characteristics_and_wool_hair_and_skin_A_Review (opens in new tab).
"Origin of Dromedary Domestication Discovered." Vetmeduni, https://www.vetmeduni.ac.at/en/infoservice/presseinformation/presseinformationen-2016/origin-of-dromedary-domestication-discovered (opens in new tab).
"Camel." San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance Animals and Plants, https://animals.sandiegozoo.org/animals/camel (opens in new tab).
"Wildlife Conservation Network (WCN)." Sahara Conservation Fund, 18 Sept. 2019, https://www.saharaconservation.org/Wildlife (opens in new tab).
Skonieczny, C., et al. "Monsoon-Driven Saharan Dust Variability over the Past 240,000 Years." Science Advances, vol. 5, no. 1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav1887 (opens in new tab).
Twentieth-Century Climate Change over Africa ... - UMD. https://www2.atmos.umd.edu/~nigam/JCLIM.African.Sahara.Desert.Expansion.published.29March2018.pdf (opens in new tab).
Liu, Y., Xue, Y. Expansion of the Sahara Desert and shrinking of frozen land of the Arctic. Sci Rep 10, 4109 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61085-0 (opens in new tab).
Li, Yan, et al. "Climate Model Shows Large-Scale Wind and Solar Farms in the Sahara Increase Rain and Vegetation." Science, vol. 361, no. 6406, 2018, pp. 1019–1022., https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar5629 (opens in new tab).
O'leary, Maureen A., et al. "Stratigraphy and Paleobiology of the Upper Cretaceous-Lower Paleogene Sediments from the Trans-Saharan Seaway in Mali." BioOne Complete, American Museum of Natural History, https://bioone.org/journals/bulletin-of-the-american-museum-of-natural-history/volume-2019/issue-436/0003-0090.436.1.1/Stratigraphy-and-Paleobiology-of-the-Upper-Cretaceous-Lower-Paleogene-Sediments/10.1206/0003-0090.436.1.1.short (opens in new tab).
"West Africa: Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics." Landscapes of the Sahara Desert | West Africa, https://eros.usgs.gov/westafrica/case-study/landscapes-sahara-desert (opens in new tab).
"Africa, Sahara." BBC One, BBC, 31 Aug. 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01qh31v (opens in new tab).
This article was updated on Feb. 24, 2022, by Live Science Senior Writer Mindy Weisberger.
Rachel Ross
Rachel Ross is a science writer and editor focusing on astronomy, Earth science, physical science and math. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy from the University of California Davis and a Master's degree in astronomy from James Cook University. She also has a certificate in science writing from Stanford University. Prior to becoming a science writer, Rachel worked at the Las Cumbres Observatory in California, where she specialized in education and outreach, supplemented with science research and telescope operations. While studying for her undergraduate degree, Rachel also taught an introduction to astronomy lab and worked with a research astronomer.
With contributions from
Mindy WeisbergerEditor
Flying saucers to mind control: 24 declassified military & CIA secrets


Television News and its Detriments to Conflict as explored in the short film "White Ants"
As all projects, whether it be art or research, begin with a concept, idea, or opinion that triggers both the curiosity and expression, so just has this endeavor began, it has ended on a completely new, transformed concept, idea and opinion. Only I can trace the beginning to the end through my notes, figures and drawings, connecting one stream of thought to the next. Art is a malleable process, whose shape is determined over time, till completion and even after. From the finished product, one loses the origin from which it began, while also losing the unrelated tangents that my have subconsciously informed the following but remain un-cited and unreported. Of course this close reading covers the intentions behind my decisions, but whether or not it is communicated to the viewer, I can only hope. It is my true belief that art should need no explanation, and although I have explained myself in these brief pages, I hope they are unnecessary to my viewers. I hope it can stand as is, and still spark yet another concept, idea, or opinion.
Enomoto-Hurst, Ayana, "Television News and its Detriments to Conflict as explored in the short film "White Ants"" (2012). Senior Projects Fall 2012. 19.