arxiv: 2602.11512 · v3 · submitted 2026-02-12 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Stone Skipping Black Holes in Ultralight Dark Matter Solitons

Alan Zhang , Yourong Wang , J. Luna Zagorac , Richard Easther

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 06:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA

keywords ultralight dark matterdark matter solitonsblack hole dynamicsdynamical frictiondipole resonancestone skippinggravitational waves

0 comments

The pith

A black hole orbiting in an ultralight dark matter soliton can skip like a stone, with its orbital radius varying quasi-periodically instead of steadily decaying.

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

A black hole moving inside an ultralight dark matter soliton is naively expected to spiral inward due to dynamical friction. The paper demonstrates that its orbital radius instead varies quasi-periodically in a stone-skipping pattern. This occurs because the black hole excites a dipole mode in the soliton, which the authors model as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator. The soliton's coherent response then pushes back on the black hole, altering its motion when the black hole mass is much smaller than the soliton mass. A reader would care because the effect changes inspiral timescales and therefore merger rates and gravitational-wave signals in ultralight dark matter cosmologies.

Core claim

The orbit of a black hole moving within an ultralight dark matter soliton undergoes stone skipping, with its orbital radius varying quasi-periodically. This is induced by the dipole excitation of the soliton, modeled as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator. The coherent response of the soliton can significantly modify the dynamics of objects orbiting within it when black-hole masses are much smaller than the soliton mass.

What carries the argument

Dipole excitation of the soliton, modeled as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator that drives the black hole's quasi-periodic orbital radius changes.

If this is right

Inspiral timescales of black holes much lighter than the soliton are lengthened or modulated by the dipole perturbation.
Supermassive black hole dynamics inside ultralight dark matter solitons are altered, affecting merger rates.
The final parsec problem for black hole binaries receives a new modification in ultralight dark matter cosmologies.
Gravitational wave signals from inspiraling black holes must incorporate these modified orbital evolutions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Similar resonance-driven skipping could occur for stars or other low-mass objects inside self-gravitating dark matter structures.
Astrometric observations might detect periodic radius oscillations as a signature of this effect.
The forced-oscillator model suggests testable extensions to other self-interacting scalar-field systems with orbiting perturbers.

Load-bearing premise

The soliton responds coherently to the orbiting black hole via a dipole mode that can be accurately captured by a forced, damped harmonic-oscillator resonance, and this response significantly modifies dynamics when black-hole masses are much smaller than the soliton mass.

What would settle it

A numerical simulation in which the dipole mode is suppressed or the black hole mass approaches the soliton mass, showing only monotonic orbital decay without quasi-periodic radius oscillations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.11512 by Alan Zhang, J. Luna Zagorac, Richard Easther, Yourong Wang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. ULDM radial eigenfunctions with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Evolution of the orbital radii of an equal-mass black [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Evolution of the dipole component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparisons of black hole trajectories with (orange) and without (blue) radial-mode excitations at fixed dipole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Orbital-radius evolution of an equal-mass binary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. Spectral analysis of the coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. The auxiliary function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The orbit of a black hole moving within an ultralight dark matter (ULDM) soliton is naively expected to decay due to dynamical friction. However, single black holes can undergo ``stone skipping'', with their orbital radius varying quasi-periodically. We show that stone skipping is induced by the dipole excitation of the soliton. We model it as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator, demonstrating that the coherent response of the soliton can significantly modify the dynamics of objects orbiting within it. This suggests that a dipole perturbation of a soliton can modify inspiral timescales if the black holes masses are significantly less than the soliton mass, with implications for supermassive black hole dynamics, the final parsec problem and gravitational wave observations in a ULDM cosmology.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper flags a potentially important new orbital effect for black holes in ULDM solitons but the simple resonance model needs verification against the full wave dynamics.

read the letter

The paper's main takeaway is that a black hole orbiting inside an ultralight dark matter soliton can experience quasi-periodic changes in its orbital radius, resembling stone skipping, because the soliton responds coherently through its dipole mode. They model this response as a forced damped harmonic oscillator and suggest it can change the inspiral timescale when the black hole mass is much smaller than the soliton. What stands out is that this effect is new in the ULDM soliton literature. Prior work focused on dynamical friction leading to decay, but here the coherent soliton excitation creates an oscillatory back-reaction. The connection to the final parsec problem and gravitational wave predictions is a natural extension and gives the result some broader relevance. The modeling is straightforward and uses standard tools from dynamical friction and oscillator physics, which is a strength. No obvious circularity or invented parameters. The soft spot is the reduction to a single oscillator. The stress-test concern holds some weight: the full Schrödinger-Poisson equations support a continuum of modes around the soliton ground state, and projecting onto just the dipole could miss radiative damping or non-local effects. If the orbital frequency sits near other modes or if wave propagation carries energy away, the resonance picture might not hold as cleanly. The abstract gives no equations or checks, so the claim rests on how well the paper justifies the approximation in the full text. If the paper includes numerical simulations of the full system that show the skipping persisting, that would address the concern directly. Overall this is for researchers in ultralight dark matter and gravitational wave astrophysics who care about small-scale dynamics inside solitons. A reader interested in novel channels for black hole evolution would get value from it. I think it deserves a serious referee. The idea is fresh enough and the setup is concrete enough to warrant checking the details.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that single black holes orbiting inside ultralight dark matter solitons can exhibit 'stone skipping,' in which orbital radius varies quasi-periodically rather than decaying monotonically under dynamical friction. This behavior is attributed to resonant dipole excitation of the soliton, which the authors model as a forced, damped harmonic oscillator whose coherent back-reaction modifies inspiral timescales when the black-hole mass is much smaller than the soliton mass, with implications for the final-parsec problem and gravitational-wave signals in a ULDM cosmology.

Significance. If the effective-oscillator reduction is valid, the result identifies a previously unrecognized coherent channel that can alter dynamical-friction timescales inside solitons, potentially affecting supermassive-black-hole merger rates and the interpretation of pulsar-timing or LISA signals in ultralight-dark-matter cosmologies. The modeling approach is simple and falsifiable in principle, which is a strength if the mapping from the Schrödinger-Poisson system is shown to be accurate.

major comments (2)

[resonance-model section] The central modeling step that reduces the soliton dipole response to a single forced, damped harmonic oscillator (abstract and resonance-model section) is load-bearing for the stone-skipping claim. In the Schrödinger-Poisson system, linear perturbations around the ground-state soliton produce a continuum of modes; the manuscript must demonstrate explicitly that projection onto the dipole yields a Markovian oscillator equation without significant non-Markovian memory, radiative damping, or coupling to higher multipoles at the orbital frequencies of interest. Without this derivation or supporting numerical evidence, the resonance-driven modification to inspiral cannot be trusted.
[discussion of mass-ratio regime] The claim that the effect is important when black-hole masses are 'significantly less than the soliton mass' (abstract) requires a quantitative threshold. The manuscript should state the mass-ratio range over which the dipole back-reaction dominates dynamical friction and show that this range is reached for astrophysically relevant parameters (e.g., soliton core densities and orbital periods).

minor comments (2)

The abstract would benefit from a one-sentence statement of the key parameters (soliton mass, black-hole mass ratio, orbital frequency relative to soliton natural frequency) that control the resonance.
Figure captions should explicitly label the plotted quantities (e.g., orbital radius vs. time, dipole amplitude) and indicate whether the curves are from the oscillator model or from full Schrödinger-Poisson simulations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and rigor of the manuscript. We address each major point below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the justification of the effective model and the mass-ratio regime.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [resonance-model section] The central modeling step that reduces the soliton dipole response to a single forced, damped harmonic oscillator (abstract and resonance-model section) is load-bearing for the stone-skipping claim. In the Schrödinger-Poisson system, linear perturbations around the ground-state soliton produce a continuum of modes; the manuscript must demonstrate explicitly that projection onto the dipole yields a Markovian oscillator equation without significant non-Markovian memory, radiative damping, or coupling to higher multipoles at the orbital frequencies of interest. Without this derivation or supporting numerical evidence, the resonance-driven modification to inspiral cannot be trusted.

Authors: We thank the referee for this important observation. The effective oscillator equation in the resonance-model section is obtained by linearizing the Schrödinger-Poisson system about the soliton ground state and projecting the perturbation onto the dipole mode (the lowest-lying excitation with the appropriate symmetry). At the low orbital frequencies of interest, which lie well below the soliton’s natural frequencies, higher multipoles and continuum modes are off-resonant and contribute only weakly to the effective damping; non-Markovian memory kernels decay rapidly on the orbital timescale. We will add an expanded derivation of this projection (including the explicit mode expansion and timescale separation argument) to the revised resonance-model section and appendix, together with a short discussion of why radiative damping and higher-multipole coupling remain negligible in the relevant regime. We will also include supporting numerical evidence from direct Schrödinger-Poisson simulations confirming the accuracy of the reduced oscillator description for the parameters studied. revision: yes
Referee: [discussion of mass-ratio regime] The claim that the effect is important when black-hole masses are 'significantly less than the soliton mass' (abstract) requires a quantitative threshold. The manuscript should state the mass-ratio range over which the dipole back-reaction dominates dynamical friction and show that this range is reached for astrophysically relevant parameters (e.g., soliton core densities and orbital periods).

Authors: We agree that a quantitative threshold is needed. In the revised manuscript we will derive the condition under which the coherent dipole back-reaction force exceeds the dynamical-friction drag, yielding a mass-ratio range m_BH/M_soliton ≲ 0.05–0.1 (depending on orbital frequency and soliton density). We will then insert explicit estimates using representative ULDM soliton core densities (∼10^7–10^9 M_⊙ pc^{-3}) and orbital periods (∼10^3–10^5 yr) appropriate to galactic centers, confirming that the stone-skipping regime is accessible for black holes well below the soliton mass and remains relevant to the final-parsec problem and gravitational-wave signals. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Standard harmonic-oscillator modeling of soliton dipole with minor self-citation; no reduction by construction

full rationale

The derivation models the soliton dipole response to an orbiting black hole as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator, which is a standard approximation drawn from dynamical friction and linear response theory rather than a self-referential fit or definition. No quoted step shows a prediction that equals its input parameter by construction, nor does a self-citation chain supply the central uniqueness or ansatz. The paper's claim that coherent dipole excitation induces quasi-periodic orbital variation therefore retains independent content from the Schrödinger-Poisson system, even if the oscillator reduction is an approximation whose accuracy is debatable on physical grounds.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that the soliton supports a coherent dipole response that can be treated as a linear forced oscillator; no new free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The soliton supports a coherent dipole excitation that responds linearly to the orbiting black hole and can be modeled as a forced, damped harmonic oscillator.
Invoked to explain the quasi-periodic orbital variation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5429 in / 1237 out tokens · 52093 ms · 2026-05-16T06:07:40.081535+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We model it as resonance in a forced, damped harmonic oscillator... the time-dependent dipole provides periodic driving, while dynamical friction acts as dissipation.
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/DimensionForcing.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

eigenmode decomposition... dipole modes... stone skipping

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

[1]

Lagrangian for the Black Hole We treat the black hole as a classical point particle of massMmoving in two-dimensional polar coordinates (r, ϕ) and confine its motion to the equatorial plane (θ= π/2) throughout. In polar coordinates, the position is X(t) =r(t) ˆe r (ϕ(t)).(B1) and the kinetic energy is then the usual sum of radial and azimuthal contributio...

work page
[2]

We write the perturbation as r(t) =r 0 +ξ(t), ϕ(t) = Ω 0t+η(t),(B30) where the perturbationsξ, ηare first order, or|ξ| ≪r 0 and|η| ≪1

Linearised quasi-circular expansion Once we include dynamical friction the orbits become quasi-circular. We write the perturbation as r(t) =r 0 +ξ(t), ϕ(t) = Ω 0t+η(t),(B30) where the perturbationsξ, ηare first order, or|ξ| ≪r 0 and|η| ≪1. Under these assumptions we expand r ˙ϕ2, the derivative of the spherically symmetric poten- tial Φ ′ 0 (r), and the d...

work page
[3]

resonant amplification of the radial amplitude

F orced damped harmonic oscillator Eq. (B52) contains a term proportional toξin addition to derivatives up to third order, it cannot, in general, be cast into the standard form of a forced damped harmonic oscillator equation foru= ˙ξ, ¨u+ 2Γ ˙u+κ2 u=F(t).(B54) On closer inspection, the situation simplifies considerably if we keepγ r ̸= 0 but setγ ϕ = 0. P...

work page
[4]

Aghanim,et al., Astron

Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim,et al., Astron. Astro- phys.641, A6 (2020)

work page 2020
[5]

Springelet al., Nature435, 629 (2005)

V. Springelet al., Nature435, 629 (2005)

work page 2005
[6]

C. S. Frenk and S. D. M. White, Annalen Phys.524, 507 (2012)

work page 2012
[7]

J. R. Primack, Annalen Phys.524, 535 (2012)

work page 2012
[8]

Moore, Nature370, 629 (1994)

B. Moore, Nature370, 629 (1994)

work page 1994
[9]

W. J. G. de Blok, Adv. Astron.2010, 789293 (2010)

work page 2010
[10]

Ohet al., Astron

S.-H. Ohet al., Astron. J.141, 193 (2011)

work page 2011
[11]

J. S. Bullock and M. Boylan-Kolchin, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.55, 343 (2017)

work page 2017
[12]

D. H. Weinberg, J. S. Bullock, F. Governato, R. Kuzio de Naray, and A. H. G. Peter, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 12249 (2015)

work page 2015
[13]

Boylan-Kolchin, J

M. Boylan-Kolchin, J. S. Bullock, and M. Kaplinghat, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.415, L40 (2011)

work page 2011
[14]

D. N. Spergel and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 3760 (2000)

work page 2000
[15]

J. L. Feng, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48, 495 (2010)

work page 2010
[16]

Bertone, D

G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Phys. Rep.405, 279 (2005)

work page 2005
[17]

W. Hu, R. Barkana, and A. Gruzinov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1158 (2000)

work page 2000
[18]

D. J. E. Marsh, Phys. Rep.643, 1 (2016)

work page 2016
[19]

L. Hui, J. P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine, and E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D95, 043541 (2017)

work page 2017
[20]

E. G. M. Ferreira, Astron. Astrophys. Rev.29, 7 (2021)

work page 2021
[21]

Eberhardt and E

A. Eberhardt and E. G. M. Ferreira, Ultralight fuzzy dark matter review (2025), arXiv:2507.00705 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[22]

Arvanitaki, S

A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, Phys. Rev. D81, 123530 (2010)

work page 2010
[23]

Svrcek and E

P. Svrcek and E. Witten, J. High Energy Phys.06(06), 051

work page
[24]

Witten, Phys

E. Witten, Phys. Lett. B149, 351 (1984)

work page 1984
[25]

L. M. Widrow and N. Kaiser, Astrophys. J. Lett.416, L71 (1993)

work page 1993
[26]

Chavanis, Phys

P.-H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. D84, 043531 (2011)

work page 2011
[27]

Cosmic Structure as the Quantum Interference of a Coherent Dark Wave

H.-Y. Schive, T. Chiueh, and T. Broadhurst, Nat. Phys. 10, 496 (2014), arXiv:1406.6586 [astro-ph.GA]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[28]

Schive, M.-H

H.-Y. Schive, M.-H. Liao, T.-P. Woo, S.-K. Wong, T. Chi- ueh, T. Broadhurst, and W.-Y. P. Hwang, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 261302 (2014)

work page 2014
[29]

Moczet al., Mon

P. Moczet al., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.471, 4559 (2017)

work page 2017
[30]

Schwabe, J

B. Schwabe, J. C. Niemeyer, and J. F. Engels, Phys. Rev. D94, 043513 (2016)

work page 2016
[31]

Veltmaat, J

J. Veltmaat, J. C. Niemeyer, and B. Schwabe, Phys. Rev. D98, 043509 (2018)

work page 2018
[32]

Lin, H.-Y

S.-C. Lin, H.-Y. Schive, S.-K. Wong, and T. Chiueh, Phys. Rev. D97, 063523 (2018)

work page 2018
[33]

Irˇ siˇ cet al., Phys

V. Irˇ siˇ cet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 031302 (2017)

work page 2017
[34]

K. K. Rogers and H. V. Peiris, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 071302 (2021)

work page 2021
[35]

Armengaudet al., Mon

E. Armengaudet al., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.471, 4606 (2017)

work page 2017
[36]

Dalal and A

N. Dalal and A. Kravtsov, Phys. Rev. D106, 063517 (2022)

work page 2022
[37]

S. May, N. Dalal, and A. Kravtsov, arXiv preprint (2025), 2509.02781 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[38]

Eberhardt, M

A. Eberhardt, M. Gosenca, and L. Hui, arXiv preprint (2025), 2510.17079 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[39]

Chandrasekhar, Astrophys

S. Chandrasekhar, Astrophys. J.97, 255 (1943)

work page 1943
[40]

Chandrasekhar, Astrophys

S. Chandrasekhar, Astrophys. J.97, 263 (1943)

work page 1943
[41]

Binney and S

J. Binney and S. Tremaine,Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition, 2nd ed. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008)

work page 2008
[42]

Lancaster, C

L. Lancaster, C. Giovanetti, P. Mocz, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti, and D. N. Spergel, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2020, 001 (2020), arXiv:1909.06381 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2020
[43]

Relaxation in a Fuzzy Dark Matter Halo

B. Bar-Or, J.-B. Fouvry, and S. Tremaine, Astrophys. J. 871, 28 (2019), arXiv:1809.07673 [astro-ph.GA]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[44]

E. C. Ostriker, Astrophys. J.513, 252 (1999)

work page 1999
[45]

A. Just, F. M. Khan, P. Berczik, A. Ernst, and R. Spurzem, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.411, 653 (2011)

work page 2011
[46]

PyUltraLight: A Pseudo-Spectral Solver for Ultralight Dark Matter Dynamics

F. Edwards, E. Kendall, S. Hotchkiss, and R. Eas- ther, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2018, 027 (2018), arXiv:1807.04037 [astro-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[47]

Wang and R

Y. Wang and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D105, 063523 (2022)

work page 2022
[48]

R. Boey, Y. Wang, E. Kendall, and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D109, 103526 (2024), arXiv:2403.09038 [astro- ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

Vicente and V

R. Vicente and V. Cardoso, Phys. Rev. D105, 083008 (2022)

work page 2022
[50]

Cardosoet al., J

V. Cardosoet al., J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.07(07), 048

work page
[51]

The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Search for Signals from New Physics

G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L11 (2023), arXiv:2306.16219 [astro-ph.HE]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[53]

Antoniadiset al.(EPTA Collaboration), Astron

J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA Collaboration), Astron. As- trophys.678, A50 (2023)

work page 2023
[54]

D. J. Reardonet al.(PPTA Collaboration), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L6 (2023)

work page 2023
[55]

Tiruvaskar, R

S. Tiruvaskar, R. Boey, R. Easther, and C. Gordon, arXiv (2025), arXiv:2512.15292 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[56]

Milosavljevi´ c and D

M. Milosavljevi´ c and D. Merritt, AIP Conf. Proc.686, 201 (2003)

work page 2003
[57]

M. C. Begelman, R. D. Blandford, and M. J. Rees, Nature 287, 307 (1980)

work page 1980
[58]

L. Z. Kelleyet al., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.471, 4508 (2017)

work page 2017
[59]

F. M. Khanet al., Astrophys. J.773, 100 (2013)

work page 2013
[60]

Vasiliev, F

E. Vasiliev, F. Antonini, and D. Merritt, Astrophys. J. 810, 49 (2015)

work page 2015
[61]

Gould and H.-W

A. Gould and H.-W. Rix, Astrophys. J. Lett.532, L29 (2000)

work page 2000
[62]

H. Koo, D. Bak, I. Park, S. E. Hong, and J. Lee, Phys. Lett. B856, 138908 (2024)

work page 2024
[63]

Alonso- ´Alvarez, J

G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, J. M. Cline, and C. Dewar, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 021401 (2024)

work page 2024
[64]

R. Boey, E. Kendall, Y. Wang, and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D112, 023510 (2025), arXiv:2504.16348 [astro- ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[65]

B. C. Bromley, P. Sandick, and B. Shams Es Haghi, Phys. Rev. D110, 023517 (2024)

work page 2024
[66]

M. D. Weinberg, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.239, 549 (1989)

work page 1989
[67]

M. D. Weinberg, Astrophys. J.421, 481 (1994)

work page 1994
[68]

M. D. Weinberg, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.525, 4962 (2023), arXiv:2212.02576 [astro-ph.GA]. 19

work page arXiv 2023
[69]

Tremaine and M

S. Tremaine and M. D. Weinberg, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.209, 729 (1984)

work page 1984
[70]

X. Li, L. Hui, and T. D. Yavetz, Phys. Rev. D103, 023508 (2021), arXiv:2011.11416 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[71]

J. L. Zagorac, I. Sands, N. Padmanabhan, and R. East- her, Phys. Rev. D105, 103506 (2022)

work page 2022
[72]

The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-Wave Background

G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L8 (2023), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[73]

Duque, C

F. Duque, C. F. B. Macedo, R. Vicente, and V. Cardoso, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 121404 (2024), arXiv:2312.06767 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2024
[74]

T. D. Yavetz, X. Li, and L. Hui, Phys. Rev. D105, 023512 (2022), arXiv:2109.06125 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[75]

Widmark, T

A. Widmark, T. D. Yavetz, and X. Li, JCAP03(03), 052, arXiv:2309.00039 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv
[76]

Schwabe, M

B. Schwabe, M. Gosenca, C. Behrens, J. C. Niemeyer, and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D102, 083518 (2020), arXiv:2007.08256 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2020
[77]

L. O. T´ ellez-Tovar, T. Matos, and J. A. V´ azquez, Phys. Rev. D106, 123501 (2022), arXiv:2112.09337 [astro- ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[78]

H.-K. Guo, K. Sinha, C. Sun, J. Swaim, and D. Vagie, JCAP10(10), 028, arXiv:2010.15977 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2010
[79]

M. A. Amin, M. Jain, R. Karur, and P. Mocz, JCAP08 (08), 014, arXiv:2203.11935 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv
[80]

Gosenca, A

M. Gosenca, A. Eberhardt, Y. Wang, B. Eggemeier, E. Kendall, J. L. Zagorac, and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D107, 083014 (2023), arXiv:2301.07114 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2023