Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 46 references

Cosmic Colliders: High Energy Physics with First-Order Phase Transitions

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

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

Pith's one-line read Runaway bubble-wall collisions in first-order phase transitions act as cosmic-scale colliders that can produce particles with masses approaching the Planck scale, making particle production up to that scale an inevitable feature of any…

desk verdict A useful proceedings summary whose central efficiency formula as written goes imaginary over the advertised integration range, so the Planck-scale reach claim is not backed by the paper's own equations. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18752 v1 pith:IDG54GOF submitted 2024-12-25 hep-ph

Bibhushan Shakya This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords first-orderphasetransitionsrunawaybubblescosmiccolliderbubblecollisionsultraheavydarkmatterleptogenesisgravitationalwaveshigh-energyparticleproduction
topics 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

This review argues that when vacuum bubbles in a first-order cosmological phase transition reach runaway ultra-relativistic speeds, their collisions act as cosmic-scale high-energy colliders. The paper assembles recent analytic and numerical evidence that particle production from these collisions follows a universal power law, so producing particles with masses or energies far above the phase-transition scale is not a special configuration but an inevitable outcome. It then shows that the maximum producible mass is set by the boosted bubble-wall thickness, which in the runaway regime approaches the Planck scale. These cosmic colliders offer new non-thermal routes to ultraheavy dark matter, to leptogenesis through heavy right-handed neutrinos, and to a new gravitational-wave signal that dominates at low frequencies. The paper thus positions bubble collisions as the most energetic phenomena in cosmic history, transcending any temperature or energy scale otherwise present in the Universe.

What carries the argument

The effective-action formalism for particle production from bubble collisions: the probability is P = 2 Im Gamma[phi], where the imaginary part of the 2-point 1PI Green function, combined with the Fourier modes of the background field at collision, gives the number of produced particles per unit area. The key input is the universal efficiency factor f($p^{2}$) = (16 $v_phi^{2}$ / $p^{4}$) log[2(1/l_w)^2 - $p^{2}$ + 2(1/l_w) $\sqrt$((1/l_w)^2 - $p^{2}$)) / $p^{2}$] for p >> v_phi, which makes the high-energy tail independent of collision details. The upper cutoff pmax = 2 gamma_w / l_w0 = 2 R*/R0 v_phi, combined with the runaway relation gamma ~ R/R0 and the Hubble bound R* H < 1, yields pmax approaching the Planck mass.

What would settle it

A numerical (lattice or Boltzmann) calculation of bubble wall propagation in a supercooled first-order phase transition with light gauge bosons that shows the wall boost factor saturating at a constant terminal value rather than growing linearly with radius, or a lattice simulation of bubble collisions showing that the production of particles with masses much larger than v_phi is exponentially suppressed, would directly falsify the universality claim and the Planck-scale reach.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the production of particles with very high masses or energies — the realization of a cosmic collider — is an inevitable phenomenon in any first-order phase transition with runaway bubbles. The maximum momentum reachable is pmax = 2 gamma_w / l_w0, the inverse boosted thickness of the bubble wall at collision. Since runaway walls have gamma ~ R/R0 and l_w0 ~ $v_phi^{{-1}}$, requiring at least one bubble per Hubble volume gives pmax < 2 $v_phi^{2}$ / H ~ M_P, up to O(1) factors, independently of the phase-transition scale v_phi. Efficiency is governed by a universal form f($p^{2}$) ~ 16 $v_phi^{2}$ / $p^{4}$ times a logarithmic factor for p >> v_phi, established by heuristic, analytic, and numerical studies, so the high-energy tail is not suppressed even for inelastic collisions. The paper then applies this mechanism to ultraheavy dark matter, nonthermal leptogenesis, and a new gravitational-wave source, with parameter space spanning many orders of magnitude.

Load-bearing premise

The claim stands or falls on the existence of the runaway regime: bubble walls must experience negligible plasma friction so that their boost factor grows linearly with bubble radius; if friction is significant, walls reach terminal velocity and the Planck-scale reach, the universal power law, and all three applications lose their basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Ultraheavy dark matter with mass many orders above the phase-transition scale can be produced with the correct relic abundance over a wide parameter space, requiring only modest couplings.
  • Heavy right-handed neutrinos in a type-I seesaw with O(1) couplings, normally washout-limited, can be produced from bubble collisions in a hidden sector to realize nonthermal leptogenesis.
  • The population of relativistic particles produced by the collisions radiates gravitational waves that survive after the bubbles disappear, changing the low-frequency GW spectral slope from a cubic to a linear falloff around k/beta ~ 0.1.
  • The production of particles up to pmax approaching the Planck scale is universal for runaway-bubble FOPTs, making these collisions a guaranteed source of the most energetic particles in our cosmic history.
  • The maximum energy reach is independent of the scale of the phase transition, so colliders associated with low-scale transitions can still probe extremely high energy scales.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the universal power law holds, cosmic colliders may be the only known mechanism that can produce particles at trans-GUT or near-Planck energies in the observable Universe, potentially relevant for probes of Planck-suppressed operators or quantum gravity effects.
  • The distinct k/beta ~ 0.1 feature in the GW spectrum offers a concrete observational test: a future GW detector seeing a linear rather than cubic low-frequency slope from a phase transition would independently corroborate efficient particle production from runaway wall collisions.
  • Because the universality is argued for scalar and gauge boson production but gauge boson production is noted to have gauge-boson-related subtleties, an extension to production of fermions (other than through scalar channels) might require a separate derivation and could break the universality.
  • The same runaway-wall mechanism could also produce superheavy cosmic rays or high-energy neutrinos in the present epoch if any late-time phase transition occurs, connecting early-universe cosmology with extreme-energy astroparticle observables.
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 / 3 minor

Summary. This proceedings paper argues that in first-order phase transitions with runaway bubble walls, collisions of ultrarelativistic bubbles act as 'cosmic colliders' that can produce particles with masses or energies far above the transition scale, possibly approaching the Planck scale. The paper outlines the effective-action formalism for particle production, derives an upper bound p_max ~ M_P/(beta/H), presents a universal efficiency power law in Eq. (8), and discusses applications to ultraheavy dark matter, nonthermal leptogenesis, and gravitational waves. It concludes that high-mass production is inevitable in any FOPT with runaway bubbles.

Significance. If the underlying formalism survives correction, the paper identifies an intriguing mechanism with observable consequences: a non-thermal production channel for ultraheavy dark matter, a new leptogenesis route via right-handed neutrino production, and a characteristic infrared distortion of the gravitational wave spectrum. The manuscript is clearly written and usefully collects recent analytic and numerical results, including the author's own companion papers and the independent older work of Watkins-Widrow and Falkowski-No. However, the central quantitative formula in Eq. (8) is defective as written, and the Planck-scale wording in the abstract is not supported by the manuscript's own beta/H suppression. The potential significance is high, but the present version does not establish the advertised claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2, Eq. (8)] In Section 2, Eq. (8), the claimed universal efficiency factor f(p^2) is not a real function on the advertised integration interval p in (1/l_w, 2/l_w). With A = 1/l_w, for p > A the logarithm's argument becomes (2A^2 - p^2 + 2A i sqrt(p^2 - A^2))/p^2, whose magnitude is 1; hence Re[ln(...)] = 0 and f(p^2) = i (16 v_phi^2/p^4) arg(...), which is purely imaginary. At p = A the log vanishes, giving f = 0. Thus Eq. (6) does not yield a real production rate for the high-momentum tail that the text claims extends to p_max = 2A, and the kinematic reach asserted after Eq. (7) is not supported by the paper's own equations. Please correct Eq. (8) (or specify the intended real branch/domain) and re-evaluate the maximum production energy and the applications in Section 3.
  2. [Sec. 2, Eq. (7) and Abstract] Section 2, Eq. (7) and the Abstract: the phrase 'energy reach close to the Planck scale' is an upper-bound statement that the paper itself immediately relaxes, writing p_max <= M_P/(beta/H) with beta/H ~ 10-10^4 in practice. For typical transitions this gives p_max around 10^-2 to 10^-4 M_P, which is not 'close to the Planck scale' in the colloquial sense; the Abstract and Section 1 should either quote the beta/H-suppressed bound or specify the exceptional (beta/H ~ 1) regime for which the Planck-scale wording is accurate. As written, the headline claim overstates the quantitative result.
  3. [Sec. 1, final paragraph] Section 1, final paragraph: the claim that high-mass particle production is 'an inevitable phenomenon in any FOPT with runaway bubbles' is too strong given the content of the paper. Runaway walls are an assumption restricted to supercooled transitions or sectors without gauge bosons, as the Introduction itself states, and the efficiency formula that underlies the conclusion has the domain problem described above. Please qualify the sentence to state the conditions under which the conclusion holds and cite the corrected efficiency result.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3] 'Dicussions' should be 'discussions' (two occurrences), and 'ultrarelatvistic' appears instead of 'ultrarelativistic' in the leptogenesis and gravitational wave subsections; the text needs a proofreading pass.
  2. [Sec. 1] The sentence attributing to reference [21] the 'simplest quantum treatment of bubble collisions' appears to cite a gravitational wave paper (Jinno and Takimoto, JCAP 01 (2019) 060) rather than a particle-production calculation; please verify and correct the citation.
  3. [Sec. 2] The symbol l_w is used in Eq. (8) but is not defined explicitly before that point; since p_max = 2/l_w = 2 gamma_w/l_w0 implies l_w = l_w0/gamma_w, please define l_w explicitly.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Central 'cosmic collider' conclusion rests on self-citations and an efficiency formula that does not support the advertised upper cutoff.

  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. 1, paragraph beginning 'However, more recent studies have demonstrated...'; Sec.]
    "However, more recent studies have demonstrated, through heuristic and analytic arguments [33] as well as numerical studies [34], that the efficiency for producing high-energy phenomena from bubble collisions follows a universal power law ... Therefore, the production of particles with very high masses or energies – the realization of a cosmic collider – in an inevitable phenomenon in any FOPT with runaway bubbles."

    The universal power law is the load-bearing premise for the inevitability claim, and the only references given for it are [33,34], both co-authored by the present author. The review does not reproduce or derive this law, so the core conclusion reduces to a self-citation chain. The three applications are likewise introduced as 'based on [12]', 'based on [36]', and 'based on [45]', again all co-authored by the author. No independent verification, benchmark, or derivation is supplied within this manuscript for these central results.

  2. other [Sec. 2, Eqs. (6)-(8) and the sentence defining pmax.]
    "The upper cutoff is provided by pmax = 2/lw = 2γw/lw0 ... f (p2) = 16v2 ϕ p4 Log h 2(1/lw)2 − p2 + 2(1/lw) p (1/lw)2 − p2 p2 i ."

    With A = 1/lw, the logarithm's argument equals (A + sqrt(A^2 - p^2))^2 / p^2. For p > A, the square root is imaginary, so f(p^2) is not real on the advertised tail A < p < 2A. At p = A the log vanishes, giving f = 0. Hence Eq. (8) does not support production up to the claimed pmax = 2A; the Planck-scale reach is asserted in the text but is not an output of the quoted integral. The central prediction therefore relies on an efficiency factor whose kinematic range is incompatible with the stated upper cutoff.

full rationale

This is a proceedings that largely summarizes the author's own body of work, so self-citations are expected in that genre. However, the paper's central claim that ultrarelativistic runaway bubble collisions inevitably produce particles up to Planck-scale energies is supported only by references [33,34] (Shakya and Mansour-Shakya) for the universal power law, and the phenomenological applications are all presented as summaries of [12], [36], and [45], all involving the same author. The review does not derive the universal efficiency law, so the load-bearing step is a citation to the author's own prior results. In addition, the quoted efficiency factor Eq. (8) becomes imaginary or zero for p > 1/lw, while the stated kinematic upper limit is pmax = 2/lw, so the paper's own equations do not even cover the advertised high-momentum tail. There is some independent grounding in the external formalism of [30,32] and in the energy-conservation estimate leading to Eq. (7), but the core 'cosmic collider' inevitability and the three applications rely on self-citations and on an internally inconsistent integrand. Overall score 6: the central prediction is partially supported by independent earlier work, but it is substantially carried by the author's own citations and is not supported by the quoted formula in the claimed range.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central estimate uses the dimensionless vacuum energy coefficient c_V and the phase transition duration beta/H as inputs; neither is derived. The runaway-wall and percolation conditions are physical assumptions. The coupling lambda_s is adjusted to match the observed dark matter density. No new entities are introduced; the review only repackages states from the cited models.

free parameters (3)
  • c_V
    Dimensionless coefficient in the vacuum energy difference Delta V = c_V v_phi^4 (Eq. 1). The Planck-scale bound in Eq. 7 treats c_V as O(1) even though the bound scales as 1/sqrt(c_V), so the reach estimate depends on an unspecified model input.
  • beta/H = O(10 to 10,000), quoted in Sec. 2
    The inverse phase transition duration relative to the Hubble rate. The paper states pmax is approximately MP/(beta/H), so the realistic energy reach is below Planck unless beta/H is near 1. This parameter is an input from the phase transition model.
  • lambda_s = chosen to yield Omega_chi h^2 approx 0.1
    Scalar dark matter coupling to the phase transition field in Eq. 9. In Fig. 1 the coupling is adjusted to reproduce the observed relic abundance, so the dark matter application fits a coupling rather than predicting the abundance from a fixed model.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Runaway bubble walls with negligible plasma friction exist, with gamma ~ R/R0.
    Sec. 1 and Sec. 2 use this to derive pmax. It is not guaranteed: in thermal electroweak transitions, walls generally reach terminal velocity due to friction. The paper restricts to supercooled or cold sector transitions.
  • domain assumption At least one bubble per Hubble volume at collision: R* H < 1.
    Used to convert R* into the pmax bound in Eq. 7. This is the standard percolation condition for completing the phase transition.
  • domain assumption The total energy density is dominated by the latent vacuum energy, H^2 = 8 pi Delta V / (3 M_P^2).
    Invoked before Eq. 7; if radiation dominates instead, the Hubble rate and the pmax estimate change.
  • standard math Particle production probability is the imaginary part of the 1PI effective action, P = 2 Im Gamma.
    Eq. 2, a standard QFT optical theorem / cutting rule, used to derive Eqs. 5 and 6.
  • domain assumption The efficiency factor f(p^2) in Eq. 8 is universal for ultra-relativistic walls.
    The paper asserts this from refs 33 and 34 without deriving it. The universality claim is load-bearing for all applications.
  • domain assumption Gauge-dependent results can still yield physical predictions in the high-energy limit.
    Sec. 2 admits the formalism is gauge-dependent, especially for gauge boson production, and asserts that physical results can be extracted; this is not demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cosmic Colliders: High Energy Physics with First-Order Phase Transitions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IDG54GOF

@misc{pith2026241218752,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cosmic Colliders: High Energy Physics with First-Order Phase Transitions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IDG54GOF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18752}
}
read the original abstract

Collisions of vacuum bubbles in the early Universe can act as cosmic-scale high-energy colliders with energy reach close to the Planck scale. Such "cosmic colliders" would represent the most energetic phenomena in our cosmic history, transcending any temperature or energy scale ever reached in our Universe, opening tremendous opportunities for particle physics and cosmology. Such configurations are realized during first-order phase transitions with runaway bubbles -- a topic of significant current research interest as a promising cosmological source of gravitational waves. We discuss recent developments and challenges in the physics of such cosmic colliders, as well as their broad applications for particle physics and cosmology, from dark matter to leptogenesis to gravitational waves.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18752 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Ultraheavy dark matter (left, from [12]) and nonthermal leptogenesis (right, from [36]) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Gravitational wave signals from relativistic particles produced by cosmic colliders (solid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. J. Hogan, NUCLEATION OF COSMOLOGICAL PHASE TRANSITIONS , Phys. Lett. B 133 (1983) 172–176

    work page 1983

  2. [2]

    Witten, Cosmic separation of phases , Phys

    E. Witten, Cosmic separation of phases , Phys. Rev. D 30 (Jul, 1984) 272–285

    work page 1984

  3. [3]

    C. J. Hogan, Gravitational radiation from cosmological phase transitions , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 218 (1986) 629–636

    1986

  4. [4]

    Kosowsky, M

    A. Kosowsky, M. S. Turner and R. Watkins, Gravitational waves from first-order cosmological phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 (Oct, 1992) 2026–2029

    work page 1992

  5. [5]

    Kosowsky, M

    A. Kosowsky, M. S. Turner and R. Watkins, Gravitational radiation from colliding vacuum bubbles, Phys. Rev. D 45 (Jun, 1992) 4514–4535

    work page 1992

  6. [6]

    Kamionkowski, A

    M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky and M. S. Turner, Gravitational radiation from first-order phase transitions, Physical Review D 49 (mar, 1994) 2837–2851

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    Grojean and G

    C. Grojean and G. Servant, Gravitational Waves from Phase Transitions at the Electroweak Scale and Beyond , Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 043507, [ hep-ph/0607107]

    arXiv 2007

  8. [8]

    Caprini et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA

    C. Caprini et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions, JCAP 1604 (2016) 001, [ 1512.06239]

    arXiv 2016

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Caprini and D

    C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves , Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) 163001, [ 1801.04268]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Caprini et al., Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update , JCAP 2003 (2020) 024, [ 1910.13125]

    C. Caprini et al., Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update , JCAP 2003 (2020) 024, [ 1910.13125]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Athron, C

    P. Athron, C. Bal´ azs, A. Fowlie, L. Morris and L. Wu,Cosmological phase transitions: from perturbative particle physics to gravitational waves , 2305.02357

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    G. F. Giudice, H. M. Lee, A. Pomarol and B. Shakya, Nonthermal Heavy Dark Matter from a First-Order Phase Transition , 2403.03252

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Kosowsky, M

    A. Kosowsky, M. S. Turner and R. Watkins, Gravitational radiation from colliding vacuum bubbles, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 4514–4535

    1992

  6. [14]

    Kosowsky, M

    A. Kosowsky, M. S. Turner and R. Watkins, Gravitational waves from first order cosmological phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 (1992) 2026–2029

    1992

  7. [15]

    Kosowsky and M

    A. Kosowsky and M. S. Turner, Gravitational radiation from colliding vacuum bubbles: envelope approximation to many bubble collisions , Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993) 4372–4391, [astro-ph/9211004]

    1993 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Kamionkowski, A

    M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky and M. S. Turner, Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 2837–2851, [ astro-ph/9310044]

    1994 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Caprini, R

    C. Caprini, R. Durrer and G. Servant, Gravitational wave generation from bubble collisions in first-order phase transitions: An analytic approach , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 124015, [0711.2593]

    2008 arXiv

  10. [18]

    S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin, Gravitational Wave Production by Collisions: More Bubbles, JCAP 09 (2008) 022, [ 0806.1828]

    2008 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Bodeker and G

    D. Bodeker and G. D. Moore, Can electroweak bubble walls run away? , JCAP 05 (2009) 009, [0903.4099]

    2009 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Jinno and M

    R. Jinno and M. Takimoto, Gravitational waves from bubble collisions: An analytic derivation, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 024009, [ 1605.01403]

    2017 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Jinno and M

    R. Jinno and M. Takimoto, Gravitational waves from bubble dynamics: Beyond the Envelope, JCAP 01 (2019) 060, [ 1707.03111]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Konstandin, Gravitational radiation from a bulk flow model , JCAP 03 (2018) 047, [1712.06869]

    T. Konstandin, Gravitational radiation from a bulk flow model , JCAP 03 (2018) 047, [1712.06869]

    2018 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Cutting, M

    D. Cutting, M. Hindmarsh and D. J. Weir, Gravitational waves from vacuum first-order phase transitions: from the envelope to the lattice , Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 123513, [1802.05712]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Cutting, E

    D. Cutting, E. G. Escartin, M. Hindmarsh and D. J. Weir, Gravitational waves from vacuum first order phase transitions II: from thin to thick walls , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 023531, [2005.13537]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Lewicki and V

    M. Lewicki and V. Vaskonen, Gravitational waves from colliding vacuum bubbles in gauge theories, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 437, [ 2012.07826]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Arkani-Hamed and J

    N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena, Cosmological Collider Physics , 1503.08043

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    S. W. Hawking, I. G. Moss and J. M. Stewart, Bubble Collisions in the Very Early Universe , Phys. Rev. D 26 (1982) 2681

    1982

  20. [28]

    Kleban, Cosmic Bubble Collisions , Class

    M. Kleban, Cosmic Bubble Collisions , Class. Quant. Grav. 28 (2011) 204008, [ 1107.2593]

    2011 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Chang, M

    S. Chang, M. Kleban and T. S. Levi, Watching Worlds Collide: Effects on the CMB from Cosmological Bubble Collisions , JCAP 04 (2009) 025, [ 0810.5128]

    2009 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Watkins and L

    R. Watkins and L. M. Widrow, Aspects of reheating in first order inflation , Nucl. Phys. B374 (1992) 446–468

    1992

  23. [31]

    Konstandin and G

    T. Konstandin and G. Servant, Natural Cold Baryogenesis from Strongly Interacting Electroweak Symmetry Breaking, JCAP 07 (2011) 024, [ 1104.4793]

    2011 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Falkowski and J

    A. Falkowski and J. M. No, Non-thermal Dark Matter Production from the Electroweak Phase Transition: Multi-TeV WIMPs and ’Baby-Zillas’ , JHEP 02 (2013) 034, [ 1211.5615]

    2013 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Shakya, Aspects of Particle Production from Bubble Dynamics at a First Order Phase Transition, 2308.16224

    B. Shakya, Aspects of Particle Production from Bubble Dynamics at a First Order Phase Transition, 2308.16224

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Mansour and B

    H. Mansour and B. Shakya, On Particle Production from Phase Transition Bubbles , 2308.13070

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    Freese and M

    K. Freese and M. W. Winkler, Dark matter and gravitational waves from a dark big bang , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 083522, [ 2302.11579]

    2023 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Cataldi and B

    M. Cataldi and B. Shakya, Leptogenesis via bubble collisions , JCAP 11 (2024) 047, [2407.16747]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Katz and A

    A. Katz and A. Riotto, Baryogenesis and gravitational waves from runaway bubble collisions, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2016 (nov, 2016) 011–011

    2016

  30. [38]

    S. B. Roland, B. Shakya and J. D. Wells, Neutrino Masses and Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter from the PeV Scale , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 113009, [ 1412.4791]

    2015 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Shakya and J

    B. Shakya and J. D. Wells, Exotic Sterile Neutrinos and Pseudo-Goldstone Phenomenology , JHEP 02 (2019) 174, [ 1801.02640]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    S. B. Roland and B. Shakya, Cosmological Imprints of Frozen-In Light Sterile Neutrinos , JCAP 05 (2017) 027, [ 1609.06739]

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Shakya and J

    B. Shakya and J. D. Wells, Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter with Supersymmetry , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 031702, [ 1611.01517]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    S. B. Roland, B. Shakya and J. D. Wells, PeV neutrinos and a 3.5 keV x-ray line from a PeV-scale supersymmetric neutrino sector , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 095018, [ 1506.08195]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Shakya, Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter from Freeze-In , Mod

    B. Shakya, Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter from Freeze-In , Mod. Phys. Lett. A 31 (2016) 1630005, [1512.02751]

    2016 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Morrison, S

    L. Morrison, S. Profumo and B. Shakya, Sterile neutrinos from dark matter: a ν nightmare?, JHEP 09 (2023) 163, [ 2211.05996]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Inomata, M

    K. Inomata, M. Kamionkowski, K. Kasai and B. Shakya, Gravitational Waves from Particles Produced from Bubble Collisions in First-Order Phase Transitions , 2412.17912

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Jinno, B

    R. Jinno, B. Shakya and J. van de Vis, Gravitational Waves from Feebly Interacting Particles in a First Order Phase Transition , 2211.06405

Pith tools

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