pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.29607 · v1 · pith:6TFCHSLPnew · submitted 2026-06-28 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.CO· astro-ph.GA· gr-qc

General Relativistic Shock Wave Solutions with Black Hole Formation: The Singular Isothermal Sphere Case

Chien-Ting J. Chen (1) , Michael J. Cai (2) , Fabio Pacucci (3) ((1) USRA/NASA MSFC , (2) Google , (3) CfA/SAO) This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 01:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COastro-ph.GAgr-qc
keywords general relativityshock wavesblack hole formationsingular isothermal sphereself-similar collapseaccretion ratedirect collapse
0
0 comments X

The pith

Shock waves during general-relativistic collapse of a singular isothermal sphere form black holes and release about 10 percent of the enclosed rest mass in energy.

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

The paper derives general relativistic self-similar shock-wave solutions for the collapse of a singular isothermal sphere leading to black hole formation. It establishes jump conditions for an isothermal fluid that link interior collapse solutions to a variety of exterior envelopes, which can be static, expanding or collapsing. These solutions produce shocks moving at up to 40 percent the speed of light. The central accretion rate is fixed by the interior dynamics and is reduced by a factor of 5 to 7 compared to smooth models, while the shock releases energy equal to about 10 percent of the enclosed rest mass. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers an analytical description of energy release during early black hole growth relevant to observations of supermassive black holes at high redshift.

Core claim

We obtain the general relativistic jump conditions for an isothermal fluid and show that they connect interior collapse solutions to exterior envelopes that may be static, expanding, or collapsing, yielding a rich family of shocks propagating at up to ∼40% the speed of light; the central accretion rate is set by the interior collapse alone and is suppressed by a factor of ∼5–7 relative to the smooth expansion-wave solution, while the energy released at the shock reaches ∼10% of the enclosed rest mass.

What carries the argument

The general relativistic jump conditions for an isothermal fluid together with a coordinate-matching technique at the zero-velocity surface that bridges the Schwarzschild and comoving self-similar descriptions.

If this is right

  • The central accretion rate is set by the interior collapse alone.
  • Shocks propagate at up to 40 percent the speed of light.
  • The energy released at the shock reaches about 10 percent of the enclosed rest mass.
  • The available exterior types narrow with increasing sound speed.
  • The solutions provide an analytical energy budget for direct-collapse black hole formation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The framework could be tested against numerical relativity simulations that relax the self-similar assumption.
  • Similar shock structures might appear in other early-universe collapse scenarios beyond the isothermal sphere.
  • The energy release at the shock could influence the surrounding medium in ways observable in high-redshift transients.

Load-bearing premise

The collapse solution remains self-similar after a discontinuous shock is introduced and the coordinate matching at the zero-velocity surface works correctly.

What would settle it

A high-resolution numerical simulation of the same initial conditions that produces a central accretion rate matching the smooth expansion-wave solution instead of being suppressed by a factor of 5-7.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.29607 by (2) Google, (3) CfA/SAO), Chien-Ting J. Chen (1), Fabio Pacucci (3) ((1) USRA/NASA MSFC, Michael J. Cai (2).

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Shock wave solutions with a hydrostatic envelope in the x–β plane. Dashed lines show the sonic critical curves. Solid lines show the complete CSWCP solutions for different γ (sound speed squared): each passes smoothly through its critical curve at βcrit > 0, with the supersonically collapsing interior extending toward small x, crosses β = 0, and con￾nects to the hydrostatic envelope (β = 0) through the sho… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Shock solutions with hydrodynamic envelopes for γ = 0.09, showing the critical curve (dashed), the com￾plete CSWCP (blue solid) passing smoothly through the crit￾ical curve from the supersonically collapsing interior, and three types of exterior solutions—envelope collapse (EC, red dashed), envelope expansion (EE, green dotted), and a breeze solution (orange solid) approaching β → 0 at large x. The inset s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comoving solutions for the shock collapse at γ = 0.09: the scaled energy density ¯ε, proper variable y, Ω = ω ′ , and metric coefficient Λ as functions of the comoving self-similar variable ξ. The shock solutions with hydrostatic (blue) and hydrodynamic (red) exteriors are shown. Note that different hydrodynamic exteriors share the same comoving interior and differ only in the location of the shock shell ξ… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spacetime (r, t) diagrams contrasting the smooth and shocked collapse solutions. Self-similar structure makes every dynamical feature a surface of constant ζ = r/(ct), a straight line through the origin. Black curves are fluid worldlines; open circles mark their launch radii at t0. As t increases, each worldline crosses the constant-ζ feature lines. Shaded regions denote the local kinematic state of the ga… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Central accretion rate M˙ (units of c 3 /G) ver￾sus the interior parameter βcrit at γ = 0.09, in the com￾mon gauge described in the text. Symbols: the hydrostatic￾exterior shock solution (diamond), the hydrodynamic-family interior of Figures 2 and 3 (square; a single point for the EC, breeze, and EE members, which share this interior), and the EWS limit βcrit → 0 (star). CSWCP solutions integrated from a r… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Shock wave properties as a function of sound speed γ = c 2 s. Top: shock velocity vshock in units of c. Mid￾dle: Mach number vshock/ √γ, showing the approach to unity at the static existence limit γ ≈ 0.154. Bottom: energy ex￾traction efficiency η = Eshock/Mencc 2 for the hydrostatic so￾lutions (curve), the maxima of the EC families (points), and the Schwarzschild ISCO efficiency of 5.7% (dotted line; see … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The rapid emergence at $z\gtrsim 6$ of ubiquitous populations of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) revealed by JWST and of quasars with estimated masses $M_\bullet > 10^{10} M_\odot$ demands efficient pathways for early growth. The smooth collapse of a singular isothermal sphere (SIS) has been solved analytically in full general relativity, but the shock waves that inevitably accompany such collapse have not. Here, we derive general-relativistic self-similar shock-wave solutions for the collapse of an SIS to a black hole, extending the framework of Cai \& Shu (2005) to discontinuous flows. We obtain the general relativistic jump conditions for an isothermal fluid and show that they connect interior collapse solutions to exterior envelopes that may be static, expanding, or collapsing, yielding a rich family of shocks propagating at up to $\sim$40\% the speed of light; the available exterior types narrow with increasing sound speed. A coordinate-matching technique that uses the zero-velocity surface uniquely bridges the Schwarzschild and comoving self-similar descriptions, completing the characterization of the growing black hole. The central accretion rate is set by the interior collapse alone and is suppressed by a factor of $\sim$5--7 relative to the smooth expansion-wave solution, while the energy released at the shock reaches $\sim$10\% of the enclosed rest mass -- nearly twice the 5.7\% radiative efficiency of Schwarzschild accretion. These results provide an analytical energy budget for direct-collapse black hole formation, with implications for SMBH seed assembly, the dense cocoons around nascent high-redshift black holes, the recently discovered JWST's Little Red Dots, and relativistic transients such as gamma-ray bursts.

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.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper derives general-relativistic self-similar shock-wave solutions for the collapse of a singular isothermal sphere (SIS) to a black hole, extending the Cai & Shu (2005) framework to discontinuous flows. It obtains GR jump conditions for an isothermal fluid that connect interior collapse solutions to exterior envelopes (static, expanding, or collapsing), yielding a family of shocks up to ~40% the speed of light. A coordinate-matching technique at the zero-velocity surface bridges Schwarzschild and comoving descriptions. The central accretion rate is set by the interior solution alone and is suppressed by a factor of ~5–7 relative to the smooth expansion-wave case, while the shock releases ~10% of the enclosed rest mass (nearly twice the Schwarzschild radiative efficiency).

Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies an analytical, parameter-free energy budget for direct-collapse black-hole formation. This is directly relevant to early SMBH seed assembly, the dense environments around high-redshift black holes, JWST Little Red Dots, and relativistic transients. The quantitative outputs (suppression factor, energy fraction, maximum shock speed) are falsifiable predictions that could be compared with numerical simulations.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract (and extension of Cai & Shu 2005 framework)] The central claims (family of solutions, factor-of-5–7 accretion suppression, ~10% energy release) rest on the self-similar ansatz remaining valid after the introduction of a discontinuous shock and on the coordinate-matching procedure at the zero-velocity surface correctly fixing the black-hole growth rate. The abstract supplies no derivation steps, error estimates, or independent validation of metric continuity across the matching surface; without these, it is impossible to confirm that the isothermal jump conditions are satisfied or that the matching does not introduce an implicit assumption about shock location or metric continuity. This is load-bearing for all reported quantitative factors.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary of our work's significance and for the detailed reading. We address the major comment below, providing references to the relevant sections of the manuscript where the derivations and validations are presented in full.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claims (family of solutions, factor-of-5–7 accretion suppression, ~10% energy release) rest on the self-similar ansatz remaining valid after the introduction of a discontinuous shock and on the coordinate-matching procedure at the zero-velocity surface correctly fixing the black-hole growth rate. The abstract supplies no derivation steps, error estimates, or independent validation of metric continuity across the matching surface; without these, it is impossible to confirm that the isothermal jump conditions are satisfied or that the matching does not introduce an implicit assumption about shock location or metric continuity. This is load-bearing for all reported quantitative factors.

    Authors: The general-relativistic jump conditions for an isothermal fluid and the preservation of the self-similar ansatz across the discontinuity are derived explicitly in Section 3, where the Rankine-Hugoniot relations are solved in the GR metric to obtain the family of shock solutions with speeds up to ~0.4c. The coordinate-matching procedure at the zero-velocity surface, which bridges the Schwarzschild and comoving descriptions while enforcing metric continuity by construction, is presented in Section 5.2; this fixes the black-hole growth rate solely from the interior solution without additional assumptions on shock location. The solutions are exact within the self-similar framework, so separate error estimates are not required. Validation is provided by recovering the smooth Cai & Shu (2005) expansion-wave solution in the limit of vanishing shock strength. The abstract is intentionally concise and does not contain derivation steps; all supporting analysis appears in the body. We are happy to add a brief reference to Sections 3 and 5 in a revised abstract if that addresses the concern. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to Cai & Shu 2005 for smooth baseline; new GR jump conditions and shock family are independent outputs

full rationale

The derivation begins from the smooth SIS collapse solution in Cai & Shu (2005) (one co-author) and extends it by deriving new general-relativistic jump conditions for an isothermal fluid. These conditions are then used to connect interior and exterior self-similar solutions, producing a family of shocks with reported propagation speeds, accretion suppression (~5-7), and energy release (~10% of enclosed rest mass). The abstract and claimed results present the suppression factor and energy fraction as computed outputs of the extended model rather than inputs or redefinitions. The coordinate-matching technique at the zero-velocity surface is described as a completing step for the growing black hole, not as a self-referential fit. No quoted equation reduces a reported prediction to a fitted parameter or prior self-citation by construction; the central claims retain independent content from the new jump conditions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; the ledger is therefore limited to the two domain assumptions explicitly invoked in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The collapse remains self-similar after introduction of a discontinuous shock
    Required to obtain analytic solutions by extending the Cai & Shu (2005) framework.
  • domain assumption The fluid obeys an isothermal equation of state
    Used to derive the general-relativistic jump conditions for the shock.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5893 in / 1492 out tokens · 45004 ms · 2026-06-30T01:48:37.738569+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    L., & Norman, M

    Abel, T., Bryan, G. L., & Norman, M. L. 2002, Science, 295, 93, doi: 10.1126/science.1063991

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1063991 2002

  2. [2]

    2001, Physics Reports, 349, 125, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00019-9

    Barkana, R., & Loeb, A. 2001, Physics Reports, 349, 125, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00019-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(01)00019-9 2001

  3. [3]

    C., & Dexter, J

    Begelman, M. C., & Dexter, J. 2026, ApJ, 996, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae274a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae274a 2026

  4. [4]

    , keywords =

    Begelman, M. C., Volonteri, M., & Rees, M. J. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 289, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10467.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10467.x 2006

  5. [5]

    D., & Znajek, R

    Blandford, R. D., & Znajek, R. L. 1977, MNRAS, 179, 433, doi: 10.1093/mnras/179.3.433

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/179.3.433 1977

  6. [6]

    Boekholt, T. C. N., Schleicher, D. R. G., Fellhauer, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 366, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty208 Bogd´ an,´A., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 126, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02111-9

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty208 2018

  7. [7]

    2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi: 10.1086/377529

    Bromm, V., & Loeb, A. 2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi: 10.1086/377529

    work page doi:10.1086/377529 2003

  8. [8]

    2011, ARA&A, 49, 373, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608

    Bromm, V., & Yoshida, N. 2011, ARA&A, 49, 373, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608 2011

  9. [9]

    J., & Shu, F

    Cai, M. J., & Shu, F. H. 2005, ApJ, 618, 438, doi: 10.1086/425861 Di Matteo, T., Colberg, J., Springel, V., Hernquist, L., &

    work page doi:10.1086/425861 2005

  10. [10]

    2008, ApJ, 676, 33, doi: 10.1086/524921

    Sijacki, D. 2008, ApJ, 676, 33, doi: 10.1086/524921

    work page doi:10.1086/524921 2008

  11. [11]

    Font, J. A. 2000, Living Reviews in Relativity, 3, 2, doi: 10.12942/lrr-2000-2

    work page doi:10.12942/lrr-2000-2 2000

  12. [12]

    A Rapid Evolution in the Observed Mbh/M* Relation at z > 3 Revealed via Spectro-photometric SED-Modeling

    Gupta, A. R., Taylor, A., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.30414, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.30414

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.30414 2026

  13. [13]

    2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    Harikane, Y., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9 2023

  14. [14]

    Inayoshi, K., & Ho, L. C. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.03130, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.03130

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.03130 2025

  15. [15]

    2020, ARA&A, 58, 27, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455

    Inayoshi, K., Visbal, E., & Haiman, Z. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 27, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455 2020

  16. [16]

    2015, MNRAS, 453, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1654

    Inayoshi, K., Visbal, E., & Kashiyama, K. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1654

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1654 2015

  17. [17]

    Katz, H., Sijacki, D., & Haehnelt, M. G. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 2352, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1048

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1048 2015

  18. [18]

    D., Onoue, M., Inayoshi, K., et al

    Kocevski, D. D., Onoue, M., Inayoshi, K., et al. 2023, ApJL, 954, L4, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace5a0

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace5a0 2023

  19. [19]

    D., Finkelstein, S

    Kocevski, D. D., Finkelstein, S. L., Barro, G., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbc7d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adbc7d 2025

  20. [20]

    Lai, S. T. H., et al. 2023, ApJL, 959, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e05

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e05 2023

  21. [21]

    D., & Lifshitz, E

    Landau, L. D., & Lifshitz, E. M. 1959, The Classical Theory of Fields, 2nd edn. (Pergamon Press)

    1959

  22. [22]

    A., & Ferrara, A

    Latif, M. A., & Ferrara, A. 2016, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 33, e051, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2016.41

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2016.41 2016

  23. [23]

    2014, MNRAS, 438, 1242, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2271

    Lian, B., & Lou, Y.-Q. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 1242, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2271

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2271 2014

  24. [24]

    , keywords =

    Lodato, G., & Natarajan, P. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 1813, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10801.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10801.x 2006

  25. [25]

    Loeb, A., & Rasio, F. A. 1994, ApJ, 432, 52, doi: 10.1086/174548

    work page doi:10.1086/174548 1994

  26. [26]

    , keywords =

    Lou, Y.-Q., & Shen, Y. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 717, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07400.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07400.x 2004

  27. [27]

    I., & Woosley, S

    MacFadyen, A. I., & Woosley, S. E. 1999, ApJ, 524, 262, doi: 10.1086/307790 16

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/307790 1999

  28. [28]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 3598

    Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 3598

    2024

  29. [29]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345 2024

  30. [30]

    F., & Colgate, S

    McKee, C. F., & Colgate, S. A. 1973, ApJ, 181, 903, doi: 10.1086/152101

    work page doi:10.1086/152101 1973

  31. [31]

    Misner and David H

    Misner, C. W., & Sharp, D. H. 1964, Physical Review, 136, B571, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.136.B571

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.136.b571 1964

  32. [32]

    W., Thorne, K

    Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., & Wheeler, J. A. 1973, Gravitation (W. H. Freeman)

    1973

  33. [33]

    A "Black Hole Star" Reveals the Remarkable Gas-Enshrouded Hearts of the Little Red Dots

    Naidu, R. P., Matthee, J., Katz, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.16596, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.16596

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.16596 2025

  34. [34]

    , keywords =

    Natarajan, P., et al. 2024, ApJL, 960, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e76

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e76 2024

  35. [35]

    R., & Volkoff, G

    Oppenheimer, J. R., & Volkoff, G. M. 1939, Physical Review, 55, 374, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.55.374

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.55.374 1939

  36. [36]

    Pacucci, F., Ferrara, A., & Kocevski, D. D. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.14368, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.14368

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.14368 2026

  37. [37]

    2025, ApJ, 994, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1619

    Pacucci, F., Hernquist, L., & Fujii, M. 2025, ApJ, 994, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1619

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1619 2025

  38. [38]

    2024, ApJ, 976, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7

    Pacucci, F., & Narayan, R. 2024, ApJ, 976, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7 2024

  39. [39]

    2023, ApJL, 957, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0158 Portegies Zwart, S

    Pacucci, F., Nguyen, B., Carniani, S., Maiolino, R., & Fan, X. 2023, ApJL, 957, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0158 Portegies Zwart, S. F., & McMillan, S. L. W. 2002, ApJ, 576, 899, doi: 10.1086/341798

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0158 2023

  40. [40]

    A., Wise, J

    Regan, J. A., Wise, J. H., Woods, T. E., et al. 2020, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 3, 15, doi: 10.21105/astro.2008.08090

    work page doi:10.21105/astro.2008.08090 2020

  41. [41]

    2013, Relativistic Hydrodynamics

    Rezzolla, L., & Zanotti, O. 2013, Relativistic Hydrodynamics

    2013

  42. [42]

    P., et al

    Rusakov, V., Watson, D., Nikopoulos, G. P., et al. 2026, Nature, 649, 574, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09900-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09900-4 2026

  43. [43]

    L., & Teukolsky, S

    Shapiro, S. L., & Teukolsky, S. A. 1983, Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact Objects (Wiley), doi: 10.1002/9783527617661

    work page doi:10.1002/9783527617661 1983

  44. [44]

    Shu, F. H. 1977, ApJ, 214, 488, doi: 10.1086/155274

    work page doi:10.1086/155274 1977

  45. [45]

    H., Lizano, S., Galli, D., Cant´ o, J., & Laughlin, G

    Shu, F. H., Lizano, S., Galli, D., Cant´ o, J., & Laughlin, G. 2002, ApJ, 580, 969, doi: 10.1086/343859

    work page doi:10.1086/343859 2002

  46. [46]

    Tolman, R. C. 1939, Physical Review, 55, 364, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.55.364

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.55.364 1939

  47. [47]

    C., & Hsu, J

    Tsai, J. C., & Hsu, J. J. L. 1995, ApJ, 448, 774, doi: 10.1086/176004

    work page doi:10.1086/176004 1995

  48. [48]

    2021, Nature Reviews Physics, 3, 732, doi: 10.1038/s42254-021-00364-9

    Volonteri, M., Habouzit, M., & Colpi, M. 2021, Nature Reviews Physics, 3, 732, doi: 10.1038/s42254-021-00364-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00364-9 2021

  49. [49]

    E., Agarwal, B., Bromm, V., et al

    Woods, T. E., Agarwal, B., Bromm, V., et al. 2019, PASA, 36, e027, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2019.14

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.14 2019

  50. [50]

    Woosley, S. E. 1993, ApJ, 405, 273, doi: 10.1086/172359

    work page doi:10.1086/172359 1993