Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

Dynamical friction in ultralight dark matter: Plummer sphere perspective

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For a Plummer sphere in ultralight dark matter, the dynamical friction force is the point-probe force with each momentum mode weighted by $[k\ell_p K_1(k\ell_p)]^2$: identical to a point mass for compact clusters, measurably different for…

desk verdict Useful analytic extension of point-probe dynamical friction to Plummer spheres in ULDM, but the headline comparison to the point-probe limit is muddied by an undefined cutoff and needs rework. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15428 v2 pith:XNHOGW2X submitted 2024-12-19 astro-ph.GA hep-ph

V.M. Gorkavenko , A.I. Yakimenko , A.O. Zaporozhchenko , E.V.Gorbar This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAhep-ph
keywords ultralightdarkmatterBose-EinsteincondensatedynamicalfrictionPlummersphereglobularclusterssuperfluidlinearresponseorbitaldecay
open problems Dark Matter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper derives analytic formulas for the radial and tangential components of the dynamical friction force on a globular cluster modelled as a Plummer sphere moving on a circular orbit through a homogeneous superfluid of ultralight bosonic dark matter. The central result is that the drag equals the known point-probe force with the squared momentum-space density profile of the sphere inserted into the momentum integrals, Eqs. (14) with (15) and (17). When the Plummer radius is below about one hundredth of the orbital radius, the extended body feels essentially the same force as a point mass of the same mass; at larger radii, or at large Mach numbers, the two components deviate visibly. The paper also finds that a spherically symmetric cluster receives no internal torque from the drag, so dynamical friction does not spin it up. The formulas matter because globular clusters are usually treated as point particles in dark-matter halo studies, and these equations state when that treatment is safe.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the momentum-space form factor of the Plummer sphere, $\rho_{\mathrm{Pl}}(k\ell_p)=M\,k\ell_p\,K_1(k\ell_p)$. In the linear response equation the moving sphere enters only through this factor, so the entire finite-size effect on the force is packaged into the squared ratio $[k\ell_p K_1(k\ell_p)]^2$ multiplying the point-probe integrand. The spherical-harmonic decomposition with the cutoff $\ell_{\max}=\pi r_0/\ell_p$ and the real positive zero $k_3$ of the dispersion relation turn the force into the two-component formulas of Eqs. (15)-(21).

What would settle it

Run a fully nonlinear numerical simulation of the ultralight scalar field with self-gravity for a Plummer-sphere source with radius one-tenth of the orbital radius on a circular orbit at Mach number 2, and compare the measured radial and tangential drag forces with Eqs. (14)-(17); agreement would support the form-factor claim, while a mismatch at these parameters would falsify it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a structural extension of the point-probe result: for a circularly moving Plummer sphere the total dynamical friction force is obtained from the point-probe expression by the replacement $\rho_p(k)\to\rho_{\mathrm{Pl}}(k\ell_p)$, where $\rho_{\mathrm{Pl}}(k\ell_p)=M\,k\ell_p\,K_1(k\ell_p)$ and $K_1$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind. The only modification is the factor $[\rho_{\mathrm{Pl}}(k\ell_p)/M]^2=[k\ell_p K_1(k\ell_p)]^2$ inside the momentum integral. Evaluating the integral with a distribution identity for the imaginary part gives a closed formula for the tangential component, Eq. (20), and a principal-value integral for the radial component, Eq. (21), with the harmonic sum cut off at $\ell_{\max}=\pi r_0/\ell_p$. The quantitative content is that the point-probe approximation holds for $\ell_p/r_0\lesssim 10^{-2}$ and fails at larger radii or large Mach numbers, precisely where the extended density suppresses modes with $k\sim 1/\ell_p$.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes the dark-matter response stays linear and spatially uniform, with the gravitational back-reaction of the disturbed dark matter (the term $-4\pi G\rho_0\alpha$) neglected, so the cluster's size enters only as a momentum-space filter; if nonlinear wakes, halo granularity, or that back-reaction matter for real globular clusters, the given force formulas do not apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For globular clusters with $\ell_p/r_0\lesssim 10^{-2}$, the point-mass idealization reproduces both components of the drag, so existing decay-time estimates built on point-probe formulas remain valid in that regime.
  • For clusters with radius a tenth of the orbital radius or larger, and at Mach numbers near the force maximum, the finite size changes both components, so orbital-decay modelling must use the extended-body expressions.
  • The total dynamical-friction torque on a spherical cluster is simply $\mathbf{r}_{\mathrm{CM}}\times\mathbf{F}_{\mathrm{fr}}$; a spherical Plummer sphere does not spin up from dynamical friction.
  • The radial and tangential components depend on orbital radius in qualitatively different ways in the sampled cases, so fitting both components separately carries more information about the dark-matter parameters than the total drag alone.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same squared-form-factor replacement should extend the point-probe formulas to other spherically symmetric mass models, so the momentum-space density ratio is a general handle for finite-size corrections to dynamical friction.
  • Because the suppression sets in at $k\sim 1/\ell_p$, large globular clusters and dwarf galaxies in ultralight-dark-matter halos could sink more slowly than point-probe estimates suggest; the paper illustrates this but does not develop the orbital-decay consequence.
  • The vanishing inner torque is a symmetry test: a tidally deformed, aspherical cluster would acquire spin through dynamical friction, so measuring cluster rotation could simultaneously probe shape and dark-matter response.
  • A direct numerical simulation of the fully nonlinear ultralight scalar field with self-gravity, for $\ell_p/r_0=0.1$ at $M=2$, would test whether the linear homogeneous form-factor formula survives nonlinear wake effects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper derives analytic formulas for the dynamical friction force acting on a Plummer sphere moving on a circular orbit in a homogeneous ultralight dark matter (ULDM) superfluid. Working in linear response and neglecting the self-gravity term in the density-perturbation equation, the authors show that the force is the point-probe expression with an additional momentum-space form factor [ρ_Pl(k lp)/M]^2 inserted in the k-integral, leading to analytic expressions for the imaginary part and numerically evaluated real parts of the relevant mode sums (Eqs. (14)-(21)). The paper then computes radial and tangential force components for several Plummer radii and Mach numbers, concluding that the force is essentially unchanged from the point-probe result when lp/r0 is below about 10^-2, and that visible deviations appear for lp/r0 = 5×10^-2 and 10^-1 and at large Mach numbers.

Significance. If the central comparison is robust, the paper provides a useful semi-analytic tool for estimating finite-size corrections to dynamical friction for globular clusters in ULDM models, complementing the point-probe analyses of Refs. [10,23,24]. Strengths include the clean Fourier transform of the Plummer profile in Eq. (2), the explicit reduction of the integrand to the point-probe expression in the limit lp→0, and the absence of fitted parameters; the derivation from Eq. (3) to Eq. (20) is coherent and reproducible. However, the numerical comparison against the point-probe reference is compromised by an undefined cutoff procedure, as detailed in the major comments, so the headline finite-size threshold and the deviations reported in Figs. 3-5 are not yet established. The paper also transparently lists several idealizations (spherical symmetry, homogeneity, linear response) in its conclusions, though it omits the neglect of the self-gravity term from that list.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (15) and the paragraph before Fig. 2] The point-probe limit is not well-defined in the manuscript's own formalism. The sum in Eq. (15) extends to ℓmax = π r0 / lp, which diverges as lp → 0. However, the text states that Fig. 2 and the point-probe curves in Figs. 3-5 are obtained by 'setting lp = 0 in Eqs. (20) and (21) and using Eq. (15)'. Since ℓmax would be infinite in that limit, the point-probe reference curves must have been computed with some other, undisclosed cutoff, most plausibly the healing-length cutoff of Ref. [24] where lp has a different meaning. As written, the comparison between the Plummer sphere and the point probe does not use the same cutoff prescription, so the deviations in Figs. 3-5 may be an artifact of the mismatch rather than a genuine finite-size effect. Please specify exactly which cutoff is used for the point-probe reference and demonstrate that the comparison is made consistently.
  2. [Sec. 3, Eq. (17) and the definition of ℓmax after it] The angular cutoff ℓmax = π r0 / lp is inherited from the point-probe analysis of Ref. [24], where the analogous length scale is the healing length of the superfluid, not the radius of the moving body. For the Plummer sphere, the form factor ρ_Pl(k lp) in Eq. (17) already suppresses large-k contributions exponentially for k lp ≳ 1, so it is not self-evident that an additional angular truncation at ℓmax = π r0 / lp is needed or physically justified. No convergence test is provided: for a given lp/r0, one does not know whether the sums in Eq. (15) have converged before ℓmax is reached. Without such a test, the reported threshold lp/r0 ≃ 10^-2 and the deviations in Figs. 3-5 could be consequences of the arbitrary truncation rather than of the extended mass profile. I ask the authors to (i) show the convergence of Eqs. (15)-(17) as ℓmax is increased beyond π r0 / lp for several lp/r0 values, or (ii) justify the cutoff from the physics of the Plummer source, or (iii) remove the cutoff dependence from the central comparison by using a converged ℓmax for the Plummer case and an appropriate independent prescription for the point-probe case.
  3. [Sec. 2, Eq. (3) and the Introduction (discussion of Ref. [38])] The self-gravity term −4πGρ0α is neglected in the linearized equation (3), and the introduction correctly notes that this term is responsible for a non-zero dynamical friction at subsonic speeds in the linear-motion case (Ref. [38]). In the present circular-orbit results, both the radial and tangential components vanish as M → 0 (e.g., Fig. 3), which is consistent with the neglect of this term. The conclusions acknowledge homogeneity and linear-response idealizations but do not explicitly list the neglect of self-gravity. Since the abstract and conclusions make general statements about 'dynamical friction acting on circularly moving globular clusters', the omission of this physical effect and its expected impact on the subsonic regime should be stated explicitly, and the claims restricted accordingly or extended to include the self-gravity term.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 2, after Eq. (3)] The phrase 'light-hand side' should be 'left-hand side'.
  2. [Eq. (19)] The expressions for k1,2 appear garbled in the typeset text ('±mcsif + ml' should presumably be '±i m c_s f^+_ml' with the plus as a superscript). Also the footnote about restoring ℏ is confusing because ℏ is omitted from the main equations except in Eq. (21); please make the units explicit throughout.
  3. [Sec. 3, Eq. (14)] The dimensionless force is denoted \(\vec{F}\) in Eq. (14) while the total dimensional force is \(F_{fr}\); this reuse of notation is confusing. Please use distinct symbols, e.g., \(\vec{\mathcal{F}}\) for the dimensionless force.
  4. [Caption of Fig. 2] The caption does not state the angular cutoff used for the point-probe reference curves. This is directly related to the first major comment; the figure caption should specify the value or prescription of ℓmax.
  5. [Abstract and Sec. 3] The paper calls the results 'analytic expressions' but the real part of S^ml_ℓ,ℓ−1 in Eq. (21) is evaluated numerically. Suggest using 'semi-analytic' or 'analytic up to a one-dimensional integral' to describe the force components.
  6. [Sec. 3, after Eq. (17)] The notation lp is used for the Plummer radius, while the same symbol denotes the healing length in Ref. [24]. This difference should be stated explicitly to avoid confusion when adopting the cutoff ℓmax from that reference.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Plummer-sphere force is a parameter-free generalization of the external point-probe result, with no fitted quantity relabeled as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and not circular. The starting point, Eq. (3), is the standard linear-response equation for the ULDM density perturbation, with the moving Plummer sphere as the gravitational source. The Fourier transform of the Plummer density, Eq. (2), is computed directly from Eq. (1) and reduces to M for lp -> 0, matching the point-probe source. The total force, Eq. (10), follows by integrating the local force density over the sphere and involves the product rho_Pl(-k) rho_Pl(k); no unknown parameter is introduced. The angular-momentum decomposition then follows the algebraic steps of the external Refs. [10,24], and in the limit rho_Pl(k lp) -> M, Eqs. (20) and (21) reproduce exactly the point-probe expressions of Ref. [24]. This is an external benchmark, not an assumed result. The comparison between Plummer sphere and point probe is therefore a numerical evaluation of the same formula with and without the form factor, so the claimed threshold lp/r0 ~ 10^-2 is an emergent numerical observation rather than an input. The only self-citation, Ref. [39], is invoked alongside external Ref. [10] for the standard point-probe equation and is not load-bearing. The angular cutoff lmax = pi r0/lp is inherited from external Ref. [24]; whether reusing it for a finite body radius is physically justified is a correctness or modeling concern, not a circularity, because no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction and no target result is assumed. Overall, the analysis does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard math plus domain assumptions about ULDM linear response and Plummer modeling. The only hand-set element is the angular cutoff; no new particles, forces, or fitted constants are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Angular mode cutoff lmax = pi r0 / lp
    The sum over angular modes is truncated at lmax = pi r0 / lp, a choice inherited from the point-probe analysis in Ref. [24]. It is not fitted to data but is a hand-set approximation whose validity for finite lp is not derived in this paper.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption ULDM is a homogeneous superfluid described by Eq. (3) with sound speed cs and quantum pressure k^4 / (4 m^2)
    Adopted in Sec. 2; the paper explicitly neglects granular structure of halos and nonzero temperature later in the ULDM halo.
  • domain assumption Linear response with self-gravity term -4 pi G rho0 alpha neglected
    Equation (3) omits this term; Sec. 2 notes its role via Ref. [38] but proceeds without it.
  • domain assumption Globular clusters are Plummer spheres with spherical symmetry and no tidal deformation
    Eq. (1) and Sec. 4; the paper acknowledges tidal deformation is ignored.
  • domain assumption Steady circular orbit with constant angular velocity Omega
    Sec. 2 setup; force formulas apply to circular orbits only.
  • standard math Standard integral and distributional identities (Sokhotski-Plemelj, spherical Bessel expansions, Plummer Fourier transform)
    Used in Eqs. (2), (18)-(20); these are unproved background results.
  • ad hoc to paper Angular cutoff lmax = pi r0 / lp inherited from point-probe analysis
    Introduced in Sec. 3 as pointed out in Ref. [24]; not derived for the Plummer source in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical friction in ultralight dark matter: Plummer sphere perspective." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XNHOGW2X

@misc{pith2026241215428,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical friction in ultralight dark matter: Plummer sphere perspective},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XNHOGW2X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15428}
}
read the original abstract

In models of dark matter composed of feebly interacting ultralight bosons in the state of Bose-Einstein condensate, the dynamical friction force acting on circularly moving globular clusters modelled as Plummer spheres is determined. Analytic expressions for both radial and tangential components of the dynamical friction force are given. We reveal that the dynamical friction force for the Plummer sphere deviates from that for a point probe of the same mass for a significantly large ratio of the Plummer sphere radius to its orbital radius, as well as for large values of the Mach number.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15428 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Plummer sphere mass density in momentum space normalized by its value [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Radial (left panel) and tangential (right panel) components of the dimensionless [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Radial (left panel) and tangential (right panel) components of the dimensionless [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The tangential component of the dimensionless dynamical friction force for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The radial component of the dimensionless dynamical friction force for the Mach [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Damping of dynamical friction force in self-interacting ultralight dark matter and Fornax timing problem

    astro-ph.GA 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Including a damping term in the ultralight-dark-matter Gross-Pitaevskii equations reduces dynamical friction enough to allow the Fornax globular cluster GC3 to survive to 12 Gyr for certain boson masses and initial orbits.

  2. Vortex State of Ultralight Dark Matter and the Fornax Timing Problem

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A vortex state of ultralight dark matter suppresses dynamical friction for co-rotating globular clusters, potentially resolving the Fornax timing problem.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [24]

    Berezhiani, G

    L. Berezhiani, G. Cintia, V. De Luca and J. Khoury, Dynamical friction in dark matter superfluids: The evolution of black hole binaries , JCAP 06 (2024) 024 [2311.07672]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [39]

    Gorkavenko, O.V

    V.M. Gorkavenko, O.V. Barabash, T.V. Gorkavenko, O.M. Teslyk, A.O. Zaporozhchenko, J. Jia et al., Dynamical friction in rotating ultralight dark matter galactic cores , Class. Quant. Grav. 41 (2024) 235013 [ 2408.00104]. 13

    arXiv 2024

  3. [38]

    Berezhiani, B

    L. Berezhiani, B. Elder and J. Khoury, Dynamical Friction in Superfluids , JCAP 10 (2019) 074 [ 1905.09297]

    arXiv 2019

  4. [1]

    Chandrasekhar, Dynamical Friction

    S. Chandrasekhar, Dynamical Friction. I. General Considerations: the Coefficient of Dynamical Friction, Astrophys. J. 97 (1943) 255

    work page 1943

  5. [2]

    Bondi and F

    H. Bondi and F. Hoyle, On the Mechanism of Accretion by Stars , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 104 (1944) 273

    work page 1944

  6. [3]

    Dokuchaev, Emission of Magnetoacoustic Waves in the Motion of Stars in Cosmic Space, Soviet Astronomy 8 (1964) 23

    V. Dokuchaev, Emission of Magnetoacoustic Waves in the Motion of Stars in Cosmic Space, Soviet Astronomy 8 (1964) 23

    work page 1964

  7. [4]

    Ruderman and E

    M. Ruderman and E. Spiegel, Galactic Wakes , Astrophys. J. 165 (1971) 1

    work page 1971

  8. [5]

    Rephaeli and E

    Y. Rephaeli and E. Salpeter, Flow past a massive object and the gravitational drag , Astrophys. J. 240 (1980) 20

    work page 1980

Show all 39 references
  1. [6]

    Ostriker, Dynamical friction in a gaseous medium , Astrophys

    E.C. Ostriker, Dynamical friction in a gaseous medium , Astrophys. J. 513 (1999) 252 [astro-ph/9810324]

    1999 arXiv

  2. [7]

    Sanchez-Salcedo and A

    F.J. Sanchez-Salcedo and A. Brandenburg, Dynamical friction of bodies orbiting in a gaseous sphere , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 322 (2001) 67 [ astro-ph/0010003]

    2001 arXiv

  3. [8]

    Kim and W.-T

    H. Kim and W.-T. Kim, Dynamical Friction of a Circular-Orbit Perturber in a Gaseous Medium, Astrophys. J. 665 (2007) 432 [ 0705.0084]

    2007 arXiv

  4. [9]

    Kim, W.-T

    H. Kim, W.-T. Kim and F.J. Sanchez-Salcedo, Dynamical Friction of Double Perturbers in a Gaseous Medium , Astrophys. J. Lett. 679 (2008) L33 [ 0804.2010]

    2008 arXiv

  5. [10]

    Desjacques, A

    V. Desjacques, A. Nusser and R. Buehler, Analytic solution to the dynamical friction acting on circularly moving perturbers , The Astrophysical Journal 928 (2022) 64

    2022

  6. [11]

    Chavanis, Self-gravitating Bose-Einstein Condensates , Fundam

    P.-H. Chavanis, Self-gravitating Bose-Einstein Condensates , Fundam. Theor. Phys. 178 (2015) 151

    2015

  7. [12]

    Niemeyer, Small-scale structure of fuzzy and axion-like dark matter , Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 113 (2020) 103787 [ 1912.07064]

    J.C. Niemeyer, Small-scale structure of fuzzy and axion-like dark matter , Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 113 (2020) 103787 [ 1912.07064]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [13]

    Hui, Wave Dark Matter , Ann

    L. Hui, Wave Dark Matter , Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 59 (2021) 247 [2101.11735]. 11

    2021 arXiv

  9. [14]

    Ferreira, Ultra-light dark matter , Astron

    E.G.M. Ferreira, Ultra-light dark matter , Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 29 (2021) 7 [2005.03254]

    2021 arXiv

  10. [15]

    Salucci, The distribution of dark matter in galaxies , Astron

    P. Salucci, The distribution of dark matter in galaxies , Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 27 (2019) 2 [ 1811.08843]

    2019 arXiv

  11. [16]

    Hui, J.P

    L. Hui, J.P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine and E. Witten, Ultralight scalars as cosmological dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 043541 [ 1610.08297]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [17]

    Lancaster, C

    L. Lancaster, C. Giovanetti, P. Mocz, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti and D.N. Spergel, Dynamical Friction in a Fuzzy Dark Matter Universe , JCAP 01 (2020) 001 [1909.06381]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [18]

    Wang and R

    Y. Wang and R. Easther, Dynamical friction from ultralight dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 063523

    2022

  14. [19]

    R. Boey, Y. Wang, E. Kendall and R. Easther, Dynamical friction and black holes in ultralight dark matter solitons , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 103526 [ 2403.09038]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [20]

    De Laurentis and P

    M. De Laurentis and P. Salucci, The Accurate Mass Distribution of M87, the Giant Galaxy with Imaged Shadow of Its Supermassive Black Hole, as a Portal to New Physics, Astrophys. J. 929 (2022) 17 [ 2206.01997]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [21]

    Boudon, P

    A. Boudon, P. Brax and P. Valageas, Subsonic accretion and dynamical friction for a black hole moving through a self-interacting scalar dark matter cloud , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 043507 [ 2204.09401]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [22]

    Hartman, H.A

    S.T.H. Hartman, H.A. Winther and D.F. Mota, Dynamical friction in Bose-Einstein condensed self-interacting dark matter at finite temperatures, and the Fornax dwarf spheroidal, Astron. Astrophys. 647 (2021) A70 [ 2011.00116]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [23]

    Buehler and V

    R. Buehler and V. Desjacques, Dynamical friction in fuzzy dark matter: Circular orbits, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 023516 [ 2207.13740]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Glennon, N

    N. Glennon, N. Musoke, E.O. Nadler, C. Prescod-Weinstein and R.H. Wechsler, Dynamical friction in self-interacting ultralight dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 063501

    2024

  20. [26]

    Flayac, H

    H. Flayac, H. Ter¸ cas, D.D. Solnyshkov and G. Malpuech,Superfluidity of spinor Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. B 88 (2013) 184503

    2013

  21. [27]

    Solnyshkov, H

    D.D. Solnyshkov, H. Ter¸ cas, K. Dini and G. Malpuech,Hybrid Boltzmann–Gross-Pitaevskii theory of Bose-Einstein condensation and superfluidity in open driven-dissipative systems , Phys. Rev. A 89 (2014) 033626

    2014

  22. [28]

    Gratton, A

    R. Gratton, A. Bragaglia, E. Carretta, V. D ′Orazi, S. Lucatello and A. Sollima, What is a globular cluster? an observational perspective , The Astronony and Astrophysics Review 27 (2019) 8 [ 1911.02835]. 12

    2019 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Chavanis, Predictive model of BEC dark matter halos with a solitonic core and an isothermal atmosphere , Phys

    P.-H. Chavanis, Predictive model of BEC dark matter halos with a solitonic core and an isothermal atmosphere , Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 083022 [ 1810.08948]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [30]

    Tremaine, J

    S. Tremaine, J. Ostriker and S. Spitzer, The formation of the nuclei of galaxies. I. M31., The Astrophysical Journal 196 (1975) 407

    1975

  25. [31]

    Pace, M.G

    A.B. Pace, M.G. Walker, S.E. Koposov, N. Caldwell, M. Mateo, E.W. Olszewski et al., Spectroscopis confirmation of the sixth globular cluster in the Fornax dwarf spheroidal galaxy, The Astrophysical Journal 923 (2021) 77

    2021

  26. [32]

    Tremaine, The formation of the nuclei of galaxies

    S. Tremaine, The formation of the nuclei of galaxies. II - the local group , The Astrophysical Journal 203 (1976) 345

    1976

  27. [33]

    Blas, Dark matter properties from the Fornax globular cluster timing: Dynamical friction and cored profiles , 2205.00289

    D. Blas, Dark matter properties from the Fornax globular cluster timing: Dynamical friction and cored profiles , 2205.00289

    arXiv

  28. [34]

    Marsh and J.C

    D.J.E. Marsh and J.C. Niemeyer, Strong Constraints on Fuzzy Dark Matter from Ultrafaint Dwarf Galaxy Eridanus II , Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 051103 [1810.08543]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Plummer, On the problem of distribution in globular star clusters , Mon

    H. Plummer, On the problem of distribution in globular star clusters , Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 71 (1911) 460

    1911

  30. [36]

    Gradsteyn and I

    I. Gradsteyn and I. Ryzhik, Table of integrals, series, and products , Academic Press (2014)

    2014

  31. [37]

    Alvarez-R ´ ıos, F.S

    I. Alvarez-R ´ ıos, F.S. Guzm´ an and P.R. Shapiro,Effect of boundary conditions on structure formation in fuzzy dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 123524 [2304.03419]

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.