Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 37 references

Production of Primordial Black Holes in the Double D3-Brane - anti-D3-Brane Inflation Model

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two pairs of colliding D3-branes can seed primordial black holes across a wide range of masses.

desk verdict A novel PBH-from-dielectric-branes idea that is honestly labeled a conjecture, but the mass/radius estimates for the collapsing Diel-3-branes lie outside the regime where the Myers potential is valid, so the central chain does not hold as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08870 v1 pith:LNXOIQAN submitted 2026-08-09 hep-th astro-ph.CO

S.-H. Henry Tye This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thastro-ph.CO PACS 98.80.Cq11.25.-w04.70.-s
keywords primordialblackholesbraneinflationD3-branesanti-D3-branesdielectricbranesD1-strings5-formfieldstrengthscalarspectralindex
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 tries to establish that primordial black holes arise naturally in a two-pair version of D3-anti-D3 brane inflation, a leading string-theory inflation setup. The key step is that the first brane pair's annihilation releases D1-strings in the presence of the second pair's 5-form field strength, which binds them into neutral "dielectric 3-branes" with a wide spread of masses. These objects behave like pressureless matter and can seed black holes without large primordial density fluctuations. If correct, the model would connect string-theory inflation to the unexplained population of supermassive black holes, while remaining consistent with measured cosmic-microwave-background anisotropies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the dielectric 3-brane, a neutral finite-size bound state of $N$ D1-strings wrapped on a fuzzy two-sphere of radius $R_d \simeq N f/(2 M_A^2)$, held together by the non-commutative geometry of the string-theory matrix action. The mechanism is that, in the background 5-form field strength $G_5$ of the surviving D3-$\bar{D}$3 pair, a cloud of D1-strings lowers its energy by expanding into an $\mathbb{R}\times S^2$, 3-ball, dumbbell, or network configuration; the binding energy scales as $f^4 N^2$, so the magnitude $f$ of the 5-form field at the annihilation site controls whether bound states exist at all.

What would settle it

Find $F(M)$ numerically from the two-pair collision: if at the annihilation site $N f^2/M_A^2 \ge 1$ cannot be satisfied (that is, the field strength sits at or below the dipole benchmark without enormous $N$), the dielectric minimum $R_-$ in $V(R)$ disappears, Diel-3-branes do not form, and the PBH mechanism fails. Equivalently, a precise measurement of the PBH mass function in the predicted supermassive range that found none at the expected abundance would falsify the model's central route.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a minimal extension of brane-antibrane inflation to two D3-$\bar{D}$3 pairs produces a natural, string-theoretic source of primordial black holes. When the inner pair annihilates, D1-strings are released into the 5-form field strength of the outer pair; this field strength binds clouds of $N$ D1-strings into neutral, finite-size dielectric 3-branes whose topology is $\mathbb{R}\times S^2$ and whose mass grows with $N$. Because $N$ is effectively unbounded, the Diel-3-brane masses span a wide range; because they are neutral and pressureless, they can collapse to black holes. The paper shows the idealized aligned geometry yields a scalar spectral index consistent with CMB data, and estimates that only a small fraction of the annihilation energy needs to go into these objects.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 5-form field strength $f$ at the annihilation site of the first pair is large enough for dielectric binding to occur; the binding energy scales as $f^4N^2$, and the paper's own estimates range from $f/M_A\sim 10^{-3}$ in an idealized geometry down to $f/M_A\sim 10^{-10}$ for a displaced pair, so a small $f$ suppresses Diel-3-brane formation entirely.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • PBH production becomes a generic by-product of brane-antibrane annihilation when a second pair survives, rather than a mechanism requiring tuned parameters.
  • The model predicts supermassive PBHs alongside lower-mass ones, offering a non-stellar route to early high-redshift black holes.
  • Because the spectral-index constraint forces the annihilation to occur in the surviving pair's field, the model is testable through precise measurements of the scalar spectral index.
  • Dumbbell and network Diel-3-branes provide a merging channel that can grow black holes during the radiation era and source gravitational waves.
  • The small energy fraction into Diel-3-branes keeps the PBH dark-matter fraction small, so the model evades current PBH abundance constraints even while producing seeds.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own admission that the mass distribution $F(M)$ is unknown is the main gap; computing it from the model's parameters would turn the proposal into a quantitative prediction for the PBH mass function.
  • If the typical field strength is near the paper's dipole benchmark, the $f^4N^2$ scaling implies that only very large $N$ clouds bind, pushing the mass spectrum toward a high-mass tail; this is an inference, not a claim the paper makes.
  • The same dielectric mechanism should operate whenever any D3-$\bar{D}$3 pair annihilates in the presence of a second pair, so the PBH route may generalize to other brane-inflation geometries or to networks of more than two pairs.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a two-pair extension of the D3-anti-D3 brane inflation model. When the first pair annihilates, D1- and F1-strings are produced in the background 5-form field strength of the remaining pair; via the Myers dielectric effect, these strings are claimed to form neutral, finite-size bound states ('Diel-3-branes') of variable mass. The paper computes the scalar spectral index n_s in an idealized aligned configuration, compares it with PLANCK data, and gives order-of-magnitude estimates for the abundance of primordial black holes that could form from Diel-3-branes. The Introduction explicitly states that the Diel-3-brane mass distribution function cannot be computed and that the PBH proposal should be treated as a conjecture.

Significance. If valid, the mechanism would provide a string-theoretic production channel for PBHs and would connect the double-pair inflation model to observable cosmology through n_s and PBH abundances. The paper builds on established Myers dielectric-brane physics, presents the relevant formulas in a self-contained way, and is admirably explicit about its main unresolved ingredients: the mass distribution is not computed, and the G5 field strength f is uncertain by many orders of magnitude. These strengths do not, however, compensate for the fact that the quantitative chain from D1-strings to massive Diel-3-branes to PBHs is not established, and at least one step of that chain appears to operate outside the regime of validity of the potential used.

major comments (4)
  1. [Secs. 4.3, 5.1, 3.3] The stability bound R_d < 1/(2f) from eq. (4.5) and the collapse condition r_3 > 10^4/M_A from Sec. 5.1 require f/M_A to be of order 10^-4 or smaller for PBH-forming Diel-3-branes. Using the benchmark values below eq. (3.11) (N_e=50, N_2=30, tau3/M_P^4=1.09e-16, Q=0.17) gives phi_1t ~ 40/M_A, so the Diel-3-brane radius is hundreds of times larger than the distance to the G5 source. The Myers potential (4.1)-(4.4) is derived for a constant background G5; a field falling as 1/phi^5 varies on a scale of order phi_1t/5 ~ 8/M_A. The paper acknowledges time variation of f in Sec. 3.3 and states in Sec. 7 that other terms in the model may not be ignored, but it does not quantify the spatial variation. The bound-state radius and mass used in Secs. 5 and 6 are therefore computed from a potential whose regime of validity is far exceeded, breaking the chain from D1-strings to Diel-3-branes and hence to PBHs.
  2. [Secs. 1, 6] The central quantity F(M), the Diel-3-brane mass distribution, is not computed. Sec. 1 states 'we are unable to find the Diel-3-brane mass distribution function', and Sec. 6 introduces F(M) only through a log-normal ansatz without deriving it from the brane-annihilation dynamics. Equation (6.1) converts F(M) into the PBH mass function psi(M), so the claim that Diel-3-branes seed PBHs over a wide mass range is not quantitatively supported. The abstract's assertion that they seed primordial black holes goes well beyond what the paper actually demonstrates.
  3. [Secs. 3.3, 6] The value of f is uncertain by roughly seven orders of magnitude: f/M_A ~ 10^-3 in the idealized case, ~ 10^-10 for the dipole benchmark (3.17), and 'much smaller' for generic orientations. The Diel-3-brane binding energy scales as f^4 N^2 (eq. (4.2)) and the stability condition (4.5) involves f^2, so the formation rate and mass scale depend extremely sensitively on f. Section 6 gives order-of-magnitude estimates without error bars or a scan over f, so the resulting PBH abundance cannot be regarded as a robust prediction.
  4. [Sec. 5.1] The condition r_S > r_3 is necessary but not sufficient for collapse. The Diel-3-brane is not described as a pressureless dust ball; it is a bound state supported by the dielectric potential (4.4) and by D1-string tension, and Secs. 5.2-5.3 consider configurations with strings under tension between spheres. No equation of state or dynamical collapse criterion beyond the Schwarzschild-radius comparison is provided, so the assertion that a Diel-3-brane behaves as matter with little or no pressure is an assumption rather than a derived property.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Table 1] The comparison with PLANCK is presented as a consistency check, but table 1 fixes tau3 by the COBE normalization and then chooses N2 to match n_s. This is a legitimate parameter fit, but the text should describe it as such rather than implying a parameter-free prediction of n_s for the double-pair model.
  2. [Eq. (6.1)] The numerical substitution in eq. (6.1) appears to be off by a factor of order 10: using the stated benchmark values gives psi ~ 0.2 A(M) F(M), not psi ~ A(M) F(M) as in eq. (6.2); the displayed intermediate expression also contains a stray factor of 10^-26 in the denominator. The arithmetic should be checked.
  3. [Sec. 5.1] The mass formula M3 ~ (4 pi r3^3/3) tau3 and the relation r3 ~ 2 f N / (3 M_A^2) are presented without a clear derivation from the spherical-shell potential V(R) in eq. (4.4); a few lines clarifying how the shell radius R relates to the 3-ball radius r3 would improve readability.
  4. [References] Reference [10] cites Wikipedia for the list of most massive black holes; a primary or review reference would be more appropriate for a JHEP submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the Diel-3-brane/PBH mechanism rests on the external Myers dielectric-brane effect; CMB parameter fits are not disguised predictions.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. The Diel-3-brane potential and radius, eqs. (4.1)-(4.5), are imported from Myers [1] and Johnson [2] as independent string-theory results; the paper applies them to its two-pair brane setup rather than defining those results in terms of PBH formation. The PBH estimate in Secs. 5-6 combines the model's field-strength estimate f (Sec. 3.3) with the Schwarzschild criterion r_S > r3; no step equates the conclusion to an input by construction. The ns discussion in Table 1 is a parameter-space scan: tau3 is solved from the COBE/PLANCK power-spectrum normalization via tau3/M_P^4 = 6 pi^2 P(k) epsilon, and N2 is then constrained by PLANCK's ns = 0.968 +/- 0.006. That is standard parameter fitting, not a circular prediction, and the PBH claim does not rest on the ns fit. Self-citations [17,18] supply the underlying brane-antibrane potential, but that potential is not invoked to forbid alternatives and is not the source of the Diel-3-brane mechanism; the load-bearing dielectric physics is externally cited. The paper explicitly flags its own limitations: Sec. 1 says 'we are unable to find the Diel-3-brane mass distribution function' and that the proposal 'should be treated as a conjecture,' and Sec. 7 concedes 'we assume the magnitude f of the 5-form field strength to be constant. In the model, the 5-form field strength f actually varies. So the other terms in the model may not be ignored.' Those are validity/correctness caveats, not circularity. Even the skeptic's complaint that the constant-G5 Myers potential may fail for very large R_d is a physical-regime gap, not a reduction of the output to the input. No equation is equivalent to its own input by definition, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on several unproven inputs: the alignment of the brane pairs, the magnitude of G5, the efficiency of Diel-3-brane formation, and the unknown mass distribution F(M). The paper honestly labels the proposal a conjecture.

free parameters (5)
  • N2 = 7-49 (best fit ~30)
    Number of e-folds of the second brane pair. Free model parameter; PLANCK ns selects this range (Table 1).
  • tau3 (D3-brane tension) = tau3/M_P^4 ~ 1.09e-16 for N2=30
    Solved self-consistently from the COBE/PLANCK power spectrum amplitude P(k)=4.7e-9 (Sec. 3.1, Table 1).
  • Q (throat geometry) = 0.17
    Taken from KKLMMT; not derived in this paper. Influences the potential and G5 strength.
  • N_e = 50 (benchmark)
    Total e-folds; chosen by hand; shifting by 1 changes ns by 0.0007 according to the paper.
  • f (G5 field strength) = f/MA ~ 1e-3 (idealized) to 1e-10 (dipole benchmark)
    Not determined; the whole Diel-3-brane mechanism depends on it. Paper says f varies and may be much smaller.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Type IIB string theory with D3/anti-D3 pairs in a warped throat, with tensions as in eq. (2.1).
    Background framework; not proven here.
  • ad hoc to paper The two brane pairs are aligned along a line with equal intra-pair separations, giving the potential V(phi1,phi2) in eq. (3.1).
    Idealized geometry that maximizes G5; the paper notes realistic setups weaken G5.
  • domain assumption Slow-roll inflation with two sequential single-field phases and a sharp transition at phi1t.
    Needed for the ns calculation in Sec. 3.1; transition dynamics are not derived.
  • domain assumption Myers dielectric effect (non-abelian DBI) applies to D1-strings in the G5 background, forming stable Diel-3-branes.
    Uses established results [1,2], but the efficiency of Diel-3-brane formation in a brane collision is assumed.
  • domain assumption The axion fuzzy dark matter model with m~1e-22 eV and zeta_i~1e17 GeV.
    Adopted to convert F(M) into PBH abundance in Sec. 6.
invented entities (1)
  • Diel-3-brane (dielectric 3-brane as PBH seed)
    purpose: Neutral, pressureless massive objects that collapse into primordial black holes.
    Known from Myers [1], but their production in this scenario and their mass distribution are not computed; no falsifiable prediction is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Production of Primordial Black Holes in the Double D3-Brane - anti-D3-Brane Inflation Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LNXOIQAN

@misc{pith2026260808870,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Production of Primordial Black Holes in the Double D3-Brane - anti-D3-Brane Inflation Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LNXOIQAN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08870}
}
abstract

A natural extension of the successful $D3$-${\bar D}3$-brane inflation model in string theory is one with two $D3$-${\bar D}3$-brane pairs, giving rise to a novel feature in string-theory. When the first pair annihilates, $D1$-strings and $F1$-strings are produced. Following the non-commutative geometric properties in string theory, it is shown by Myers that the presence of the $D3$-charge field strength of the remaining $D3$-${\bar D}3$-brane pair leads to the formation of dielectric $3$-branes -- neutral, finite-size bound states of $3$-branes with $D1$-strings. They behave as matter with little or no pressure. Spanning a wide range of masses, they seed primordial black holes in the early universe.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dielectric Branes

    R. Myers, “Dielectric Branes”, JHEP 12, 022, (1999) [hep-th/9910053]

    arXiv 1999

  2. [2]

    D-Branes

    C. V. Johnson, “D-Branes”, Cambridge University Press (2003). See also “D-Brane Primer”, hep-th/0007170 (2001)

    arXiv 2003

  3. [3]

    The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems

    A. H. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems”, Phys. Rev. D23, 347 (1981)

    work page 1981

  4. [4]

    A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems

    A. Linde, “A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems”, Phys. Lett. B108, 389 (1982)

    work page 1982

  5. [5]

    Brane inflation

    G. R. Dvali and S.-H. H. Tye, “Brane inflation”, Phys. Lett. B450, 72 (1999) [hep-ph/9812483]

    arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    D-brane inflation

    G. R. Dvali, Q. Shafi and S. Solganik, “D-brane inflation”, arXiv: hep-th/0105203 (2001)

    arXiv 2001

  7. [7]

    The Inflationary brane anti-brane universe

    C. P. Burgess, M. Majumdar, D. Nolte, F. Quevedo, G. Rajesh and R. J. Zhang, “The Inflationary brane anti-brane universe”, JHEP 0107, 047 (2001) [hep-th/0105204]

    arXiv 2001

  8. [8]

    Towards inflation in string theory

    S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, J. Maldacena, L. McAllister and S. P. Trivedi, “Towards inflation in string theory”, JCAP 0310, 013 (2003) [hep-th/0308055]

    arXiv 2003

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    PLANCK Collaboration: P. A. R. Ade et al., Astron. Astrophys. 594, A20 (2016) [astro-ph.CO/1502.02114]

    2016 arXiv

  2. [10]

    List of Most Massive Black Holes

    “List of Most Massive Black Holes”, Wikipedia – 21 –

  3. [11]

    Primordial Black Holes

    A. Escriv` a, F. Kuhnel and Y. Tada, “Primordial Black Holes”, arXiv: 2211.05767 [astro-ph.CO] (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Observational evidence for primordial black holes: A positivist perspective

    B. Carr, S. Clesse, J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Hawkins and F. Kuhnel, “Observational evidence for primordial black holes: A positivist perspective”, Phys. Rept. 1054, 1 (2024) [astro-ph.CO/2306.03903]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Primordial black holes: constraints, potential evidence and prospects

    B. Carr, A. J. Iovino, G. Perna, V. Vaskonen and H. Veerm¨ ae, “Primordial black holes: constraints, potential evidence and prospects”, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 49, 5, 225 (2026) [astro-ph.CO/2601.06024]

    2026

  6. [14]

    Brane interaction as the origin of inflation

    N. T. Jones, H. Stoica and S.-H. H. Tye, “Brane interaction as the origin of inflation”, JHEP 0207, 051 (2002) [hep-th/0203163]

    2002 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Cosmic string production towards the end of brane inflation

    S. Sarangi and S.-H. H. Tye, “Cosmic string production towards the end of brane inflation”, Phys. Lett. B536, 185 (2002) [hep-th/0204074]

    2002 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Cosmic F- and D-strings

    E. J. Copeland, R. C. Myers and J. Polchinski, “Cosmic F- and D-strings”, JHEP 0406, 013 (2004) [hep-th/0312067]

    2004 arXiv

  9. [17]

    An Improved brane anti-brane action from boundary superstring field theory and multivortex solutions

    N. T. Jones and S.-H. H. Tye, “An Improved brane anti-brane action from boundary superstring field theory and multivortex solutions”, JHEP 0301, 012 (2003) [hep-th/0211180]

    2003 arXiv

  10. [18]

    The D3- D3-brane inflation model revisited

    S.-H H. Tye, “The D3- D3-brane inflation model revisited”, JHEP 01, 171 (2024) [hep-th/2311.07810]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Hybrid inflation

    A. D. Linde, “Hybrid inflation”, Phys. Rev. D49, 748 (1994) [astro-ph/9307002]

    1994 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Density perturbations and black hole formation in hybrid inflation

    J. Garcia-Bellido, A. D. Linde and D. Wands, “Density perturbations and black hole formation in hybrid inflation”, Phys. Rev. D54, 6040 (1996) [astro-ph/9605094]

    1996 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Interbrane potential and the decay of a nonBPS D-brane to closed strings

    S. Sarangi and S.-H. H. Tye, “Interbrane potential and the decay of a nonBPS D-brane to closed strings”, Phys. Lett. B573, 181 (2003) [hep-th/0307078]

    2003 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Structure in the COBE differential microwave radiometer first year maps

    G. F. Smoot and others, “Structure in the COBE differential microwave radiometer first year maps”, Astrophys. J. Lett. 396, L1 (1992)

    1992

  15. [23]

    The Fuzzy sphere

    J. Madore, “The Fuzzy sphere”, Class. Quant. Grav. 9, 69 (1992)

    1992

  16. [24]

    Scaling limits of the fuzzy sphere at one loop

    C.-S. Chu, J. Madore and H. Steinacker, “Scaling limits of the fuzzy sphere at one loop”, JHEP 08, 038 (2001) [hep-th/0106205]

    2001 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Spherical membranes in matrix theory

    D. Kabat and W. Taylor, “Spherical membranes in matrix theory”, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 181 (1998) [hep-th/9711078]

    1998 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Gravitating M(atrix) Q balls

    S. Rey, “Gravitating M(atrix) Q balls”, arXiv: 971108 [hep-th] (1997)

    1997

  19. [27]

    Born-Infeld strings tunneling to D-branes

    R. Emparan, “Born-Infeld strings tunneling to D-branes”, Phys. Lett. B423, 71 (1998) [hep-th/9711106]

    1998 arXiv

  20. [28]

    An SL(2,Z) multiplet of type IIB superstrings

    J. H. Schwarz, “An SL(2,Z) multiplet of type IIB superstrings”, Phys. Lett. B360, 13 (1995) [Erratum-ibid. B364, 252 (1995)] [hep-th/9508143]

    1995 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Dirichlet-branes and Ramond-Ramond charges

    J. Polchinski, “Dirichlet-branes and Ramond-Ramond charges”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4724 (1995) [hep-th/9510017]

    1995 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Bound states of strings and p-branes

    E. Witten, “Bound states of strings and p-branes”, Nucl. Phys. B460, 335 (1996) [hep-th/9510135] – 22 –

    1996 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Cold and fuzzy dark matter

    W. Hu, R. Barkana and A. Gruzinov, “Cold and fuzzy dark matter”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1158 (2000) [astro-ph/0003365]

    2000 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Cosmic Structure as the Quantum Interference of a Coherent Dark Wave

    H.-Y. Schive, T. Chiueh and T. Broadhurst, “Cosmic Structure as the Quantum Interference of a Coherent Dark Wave”, Nature Phys. 10, 496 (2014) [astro-ph.GA/1406.6586]

    2014 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Ultralight scalars as cosmological dark matter

    L. Hui, J. P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine and E. Witten, “Ultralight scalars as cosmological dark matter”, Phys. Rev. D95, 4, 043541 (2017) [astro-ph.CO/1610.08297]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Axion Cosmology

    D. J. E. Marsh, “Axion Cosmology”, Phys. Rept. 643, 1 (2016) [astro-ph.CO/1510.07633]

    2016 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Primordial Black Holes as Seeds for Extremely Overmassive Active Galactic Nuclei Observed by JWST

    S. Zhang, B. Liu, V. Bromm and F. K¨ uhnel, “Primordial Black Holes as Seeds for Extremely Overmassive Active Galactic Nuclei Observed by JWST”, Astrophys. J. Lett. 1000, 1, L19 (2026) [astro-ph.GA/2512.14066]

    2026

  28. [36]

    Rapidly growing primordial black holes as seeds of the massive high-redshift JWST Galaxies

    G.-W. Yuan, L. Lei, Y.-Z. Wang, B. Wang, Y. Y. Wang, C. Chen, Z.-Q. Shen, Y.-F. Cai and Y.-Z. Fan, “Rapidly growing primordial black holes as seeds of the massive high-redshift JWST Galaxies”, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 67, 10, 109512 (2024) [astro-ph.CO/2303.09391]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Adding a brane to the brane anti-brane action in BSFT

    N. T. Jones, L. Leblond and S.-H. H. Tye, “Adding a brane to the brane anti-brane action in BSFT”, JHEP 10, 002 (2003) [hep-th/0307086]. – 23 –

    2003 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.