The paper goes on to describe asteroids "formed from supernova fallback material" falling into the pulsar. Why would the asteroids be formed after the supernova? More importantly, how could an asteroid form from supernova remnants? If a star with less than ~9 solar masses had planets and asteroids, then those planets and asteroids would still be there after the supernova. Supernova ejecta are charged particles traveling in excess of 10,000 km/s for Type I & II SNe (less than 8,000 km/s for Type Iax SNe). That may be sufficient to strip off layers of atmosphere from planets, but hardly capable of destroying rocky asteroids or planets. Naturally, a star that goes from 9 solar masses to less than 3 solar masses in just a second or two is going to dramatically change the orbits of any object in that solar system, but the supernova would not destroy those objects. I do not doubt that the pulsar in question is being pelted by asteroids, as they claim. However, I do dispute that these asteroids were formed after the supernova. I think all planets and asteroids around neutron stars already existed before the star went supernova. Planets and asteroids do not form directly from supernova remnants, there must be another trigger involved first. Such as another supernova blast from another star that compresses the extremely disbursed supernova remnant gases. Without that trigger the supernova remnants are too disbursed, and getting further disbursed as it continues to travel, to form anything solid. Does anyone think it is possible for a supernova, without any outside influences to trigger a collapse of the supernova remnants, could form asteroids or planets after the supernova? If so, I would be interested in knowing how it would be possible.