Gravitational phase transitions and instabilities of self-gravitating fermions in general relativity

Giuseppe Alberti; Pierre-Henri Chavanis

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Gravitational phase transitions and instabilities of self-gravitating fermions in general relativity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 Self-gravitating fermions in general relativity collapse in two stages: first to a condensed fermion ball, then, above the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit, into a black hole.

desk verdict Useful unified phase-diagram summary for self-gravitating fermions in GR, but the black-hole collapse branch rests on a box-regulated equilibrium sequence that the authors themselves concede may not survive without the box. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.10303 v1 pith:OLMOBD2R submitted 2019-08-27 gr-qc

Pierre-Henri Chavanis , Giuseppe Alberti This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qc PACS 04.40.Dg05.70.-a05.70.Fh95.30.Sf95.35.+d

keywords self-gravitatingfermionsgeneralrelativitycaloriccurvegravitationalphasetransitionOppenheimer-Volkofflimitgravothermalcatastropheblackholeformationcore-halostructure

open problems Dark Matter

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that a self-gravitating gas of fermions in general relativity, held in a spherical box at finite temperature, has a caloric curve with either an N-shape or a Z-shape depending on particle number and box size. Below the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit $N_{\rm OV}$, Pauli exclusion stops the classical gravitational collapse, so lowering energy or temperature drives a phase transition from a dilute gaseous phase to a condensed fermion ball (a white-dwarf-like or neutron-star-like object). Above $N_{\rm OV}$, the condensed phase itself becomes unstable at a lower critical energy or temperature, and the system collapses, presumably into a black hole. The authors connect the microcanonical core-halo instability to red-giant and supernova behavior and the canonical whole-object implosion to hypernovae.

What carries the argument

The caloric curve $\eta(\Lambda)$, i.e., the dimensionless inverse Tolman temperature versus the binding energy, is computed by extremizing the Fermi-Dirac entropy at fixed mass-energy and particle number in a spherical reflecting box. The extremization yields the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations and the Tolman-Klein relations, so each point on the curve is a hydrostatic equilibrium. The argument turns on the curve's turning points and spirals: each turning point of temperature or energy changes stability by the Poincaré criterion, and the N/Z shapes encode which ensemble has a phase transition. The Oppenheimer-Volkoff mass $N_{\rm OV}=0.39853\,(\hbar c/G)^{3/2}m^{-3}$ sets the threshold above which a second instability to a black hole appears.

What would settle it

A general-relativistic kinetic or hydrodynamic simulation of a fermionic gas with $N>N_{\rm OV}$, initialized on the supposedly stable branch between $E_*$ and $E''_c$ and cooled without any confining walls, would either form a black hole (supporting the claim) or relax to a long-lived core-halo state (contradicting it). Alternatively, direct entropy sampling of the boxed gas at fixed energy should reproduce the predicted $S(E)$ curve with its spike at $E''_c$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that the equilibrium sequence of general-relativistic self-gravitating fermions is organized by the topology of the caloric curve $T_\infty(E)$ (or $\eta(\Lambda)$). For $N<N_{\rm OV}$ and suitable box radii, the curve has an N-shape (canonical phase transition) or a Z-shape (microcanonical phase transition), with a stable gaseous branch, a negative-specific-heat region replaced by a phase transition to a condensed phase, and an explosion branch. For $N_{\rm OV}<N\ll N_{\rm max}$, a second turning point appears: below $E''_c$ (MCE) or $T'_c$ (CE), the condensed fermion ball has no equilibrium and collapses to a black hole. The stable branches are metastable with lifetimes scaling as $e^N$, so physical transitions occur at the spinodal points $E_c/T_c$ rather than at the thermodynamic transition points.

Load-bearing premise

The entire phase-transition picture assumes that a star or dark-matter halo can be treated as a Fermi gas in quasi-static thermal equilibrium inside a spherical reflecting box while its energy or temperature changes slowly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For $N<N_{\rm OV}$, a cooling fermionic system ends as a compact degenerate object, not a singularity, so Pauli pressure provides a definite endpoint for gravothermal collapse.
For $N>N_{\rm OV}$, the two-step path gas → fermion ball → black hole gives a concrete formation channel for stellar-mass and intermediate-mass black holes from fermionic dark matter or exotic stars.
In the microcanonical ensemble, the unstable perturbation has a core-halo structure with an imploding core and exploding envelope, which the paper maps to red giants and type II supernovae; in the canonical ensemble the whole object implodes, mapped to hypernovae.
Because metastable branches live for times scaling as $e^N$, observed collapses are expected at the spinodal temperatures and energies $T_c$, $E_c$, not at the first-order transition points $T_t$, $E_t$, and the gas-ball-gas cycle is hysteretic.
For fermionic dark matter halos, the model predicts a dense quantum core containing roughly a quarter of the mass plus a hot isothermal envelope, a structure that could be compared with bulge and halo observations.

Reading between the lines

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

Removing the box would let the hot halo escape instead of being confined, so the true remnant in the microcanonical case may be just the condensed core; the predicted core/halo mass split should then be read as an ejection fraction rather than a static halo.
The same caloric-curve topology should appear for any long-range attractive system with a short-distance cutoff, e.g., self-gravitating bosons with a repulsive core, with the OV limit replaced by the corresponding maximum mass.
A sharp testable consequence is the core mass fraction: if this picture is right, the compact remnant after microcanonical collapse should contain about $1/4$ of the initial mass, which can be checked against neutron-star progenitor statistics or dark-matter core-bulge observations.
The paper's 'presumably to a black hole' language flags that the black-hole endpoint is assumed from the absence of equilibrium, not demonstrated dynamically; a full collapse simulation is the natural next step.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper is a Letter-length account of a larger program on the statistical mechanics of self-gravitating fermions in general relativity. What is new is the systematic caloric-curve phase diagram for N>N_OV, including N- and Z-shaped structures and a secondary collapse branch that the authors associate with black hole formation. The comparison of microcanonical and canonical evolution, and the analogy with supernovae/hypernovae, is thought-provoking.

It does what it can within Letter length: the equations are standard, the narrative is internally consistent, and it is honest about the box regularization, conceding in Section V that without the box the atmosphere is expelled.

The main soft spot is exactly where the stress-test note lands. The central claim that for N>N_OV the system collapses to a black hole below a critical energy/temperature is read off from caloric curves computed inside a reflecting spherical box. The authors themselves point out that the box holds the atmosphere; without it, in the microcanonical ensemble the system expels the halo, and for N up to ~4N_OV the remnant is a fermion ball, not a black hole. So the black-hole branch is not established by the equilibrium calculation alone. The quasi-static assumption that a real radiating star tracks the boxed equilibrium sequence down to the critical point is asserted, not shown. The e^N lifetime argument concerns metastability of equilibria, not the post-instability dynamical phase.

The paper also relies heavily on companion papers [30-33], several listed as bare 'arXiv' with no identifier, so the numerical results cannot be independently checked from the Letter itself. That is a real reproducibility problem, though normal for a Letter; the companion papers presumably supply the details.

All that said, the paper is not careless. It flags where the claims are analogies, and the underlying entropy maximization is the standard one. The qualitative phase diagram is likely correct in broad strokes for the boxed system; the question is whether the unconfined extrapolation holds. A serious referee would want the companion papers and a dynamical calculation or at least a clear discussion of the box removal.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. The claims are important enough and the framework is standard enough that referee time is justified, but the decision should rest on whether the companion papers actually support the caloric curves and whether the authors address the box issue. My own verdict would be conditional: accept as a Letter only if the black-hole claim is softened to 'may collapse' or supported by unconfined calculations.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This Letter studies the statistical mechanics of a self-gravitating Fermi gas in general relativity, enclosed in a spherical box, by maximizing the Fermi-Dirac entropy at fixed mass-energy and particle number. The resulting equations are the Fermi-Dirac distribution, the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations, and the Tolman temperature relation. The authors report three regimes of caloric curves: a classical double-spiral curve with low- and high-energy collapse; an N-shape curve for N<N_OV with a gaseous-to-condensed phase transition; and a Z-shape curve for N>N_OV in which, below a lower critical energy E''_c or temperature T'_c, the condensed fermion ball is expected to collapse to a black hole. They use these curves to propose qualitative scenarios for stellar evolution, contrasting microcanonical core-halo collapse (red giant and supernova analogies) with canonical whole-star collapse (hypernova analogy), and they suggest applications to dark matter halos.

Significance. If the reported caloric-curve topology and phase diagrams are correct, the paper would unify the Antonov-Lynden-Bell-Wood gravothermal catastrophe, Pauli degeneracy pressure, and the general-relativistic Oppenheimer-Volkoff instability in a single variational framework. The Letter's strength is that it starts from a well-defined variational problem and standard TOV/Tolman equations, and it makes concrete falsifiable predictions: the existence and locations of N-shape and Z-shape caloric curves, the critical radii R_CCP and R_MCP, and the collapse thresholds E'_c, E''_c, T'_c as functions of N and R. The paper is less strong as a standalone research Letter: all quantitative results are deferred to companion papers, several of which lack arXiv identifiers, and no numerical details, convergence checks, or error estimates are given. The astrophysical extrapolations from the box-regulated equilibrium to unconfined stellar collapse are suggestive but not established by the calculation presented here.

major comments (3)

[Section IV, Eqs. (2)-(3), Figs. 2-6] The quantitative content of the Letter is asserted rather than derived. The critical radii R_CCP=12.0 and R_MCP=92.0, the critical particle numbers N_CCP(R)≃2125/R^3 and N_MCP(R)≃2.20×10^6/R^3, and the detailed shapes of the caloric curves in Figs. 2-6 are presented without a derivation or numerical method, and the supporting references [30], [32], and [33] are listed as bare 'arXiv' with no identifiers. Since these quantities determine the phase-transition and black-hole-collapse scenarios, the central claims are not independently checkable from this manuscript.
[Section V, paragraph 2] The black-hole thresholds E''_c and T'_c are computed for a gas enclosed in a reflecting spherical box, and the same section states that without the box 'the atmosphere is expelled at large distances.' The Letter does not show that a slowly evolving unconfined star follows the boxed equilibrium sequence up to the critical point, nor that the expelled atmosphere carries negligible energy and particle number. If mass loss accompanies halo expulsion, a core below the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit may remain and form a fermion ball rather than a black hole; this possibility is not excluded by the equilibrium calculation alone, so the astrophysical black-hole prediction rests on an untested closed-box, quasi-static assumption.
[Section IV, stability assertions] The Letter repeatedly assigns stability ('The series of equilibria is stable until E'_c', 'stable between T* and T'_c') using the Poincaré turning-point criterion, but it does not exhibit the second variation of the entropy or free energy, nor an explicit count of negative modes. The Poincaré criterion is standard, but its valid application requires knowing the stability of the initial branch and the transversality of the bifurcations; none of this is shown. Because the collapse scenario is driven by the loss of stability at these turning points, this is a load-bearing step rather than a purely presentational detail.

minor comments (5)

[Section III] The symbol R is used both for the box radius and for the density contrast R = ϵ(0)/ϵ(R) in the sentence 'The density contrast R is minimum at the center...'; this makes expressions such as ϵ(0)/ϵ(R) ambiguous, and a different symbol (e.g., A or D) should be used for the density contrast.
[Section IV, figure captions] The critical particle numbers N_e and N_f appearing in the captions of Figs. 2 and 5 are not defined in the text; please define them or point explicitly to the companion-paper equation where they are introduced.
[Section V, paragraph 1] There is a typo: 'correponding' should be 'corresponding' in the sentence 'a canonical one correponding to Fig. 2 and a microcanonical one corresponding to Fig. 5.'
[References] Several arXiv references are incomplete: [30], [32], [33], and [46] are listed with only 'arXiv' and no identifier, which prevents readers from locating them; please complete all references with arXiv numbers or journal citations.
[Section IV.B, last sentence] The statement 'For large values of N, the caloric curve approaches the classical caloric curve of Fig. 1' needs clarification, since the preceding discussion characterizes N≪N_OV as the nonrelativistic quantum limit; please specify the range of N and the sense in which the classical Boltzmann curve is recovered.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: caloric curves follow from stated TOV/Fermi-Dirac equations; self-citations and box limitation noted but not load-bearing.

full rationale

Sec. II states the variational problem (maximize Fermi-Dirac entropy at fixed mass-energy and particle number) and the resulting TOV equations; the caloric curves are solved from these equations, not fitted to the phenomena they are used to explain. The classical limits reproduce the known Antonov/Lynden-Bell-Wood turning points (Λc=0.335, ηc=2.52) and the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit (N_OV=0.39853), providing independent anchors. The Letter does lean on the authors' own companion papers [30–33] for numerical details and phase diagrams, but those cited computations are parameter-free and are made under stated assumptions (box regularization, equilibrium sequence) that do not include the target phase-transition conclusions; they are supporting references, not circular inputs. The paper explicitly concedes the box idealization: "In the box model, the atmosphere is held by the walls of the box. Without the box, the atmosphere is expelled at large distances," and the stellar-evolution scenario assumes the system follows the equilibrium sequence; these are physical limitations of the idealization, not definitional circularity. No quoted equation or inferred quantity in the derivation reduces to an input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model uses no fitted parameters; the box radius R and particle number N are control parameters scanned in the study. The central claim rests on the entropy-maximization formalism, the spherical-box regularization, the TOV hydrostatic equilibrium equations, and the Poincare stability criterion, all of which are standard or domain assumptions.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The self-gravitating Fermi gas is enclosed in a spherical box of radius R to prevent evaporation; physical stars are not boxed.
Required to define finite equilibrium states; the paper admits in Section V that without the box the halo would be expelled, so the box materially affects the microcanonical picture.
domain assumption Statistical equilibrium is obtained by maximizing the Fermi-Dirac entropy at fixed mass-energy M and particle number N, yielding the TOV equations and Tolman temperature.
This is the standard long-range-interaction statistical mechanics used in the field, but it is not derived from a microscopic dynamics in the Letter (Section II).
standard math The Poincare turning-point criterion is used to infer stability changes along the series of equilibria.
Standard for Hamiltonian systems and used in prior caloric-curve studies; the Letter invokes it without proof.
domain assumption Slow stellar evolution follows the sequence of equilibrium states (gaseous branch until a spinodal point).
Section V assumes quasi-static evolution and identifies collapse with loss of stability, rather than with dynamical simulations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gravitational phase transitions and instabilities of self-gravitating fermions in general relativity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OLMOBD2R

@misc{pith2026190810303,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gravitational phase transitions and instabilities of self-gravitating fermions in general relativity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OLMOBD2R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.10303}
}

abstract

We discuss the occurrence of gravitational phase transitions and instabilities in a gas of self-gravitating fermions within the framework of general relativity. In the classical (nondegenerate) limit, the system undergoes a gravitational collapse at low energies $E<E_c$ and low temperatures $T<T_c$. This is called "gravothermal catastrophe" in the microcanonical ensemble and "isothermal collapse" in the canonical ensemble. When quantum mechanics is taken into account and when the particle number is below the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit ($N<N_{\rm OV}$), complete gravitational collapse is prevented by the Pauli exclusion principle. In that case, the Fermi gas undergoes a gravitational phase transition from a gaseous phase to a condensed phase. The condensed phase represents a compact object like a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a dark matter fermion ball. When $N>N_{\rm OV}$, there can be a subsequent gravitational collapse below a lower critical energy $E<E''_c$ or a lower critical temperature $T<T'_c$ leading presumably to the formation of a black hole. The evolution of the system is different in the microcanonical and canonical ensembles. In the microcanonical ensemble, the system takes a "core-halo" structure. The core consists in a compact quantum object or a black hole while the hot halo is expelled at large distances. This is reminiscent of the red giant structure of low-mass stars or the implosion-explosion of massive stars (supernova). In the canonical ensemble, the system collapses as a whole towards a compact object or a black hole. This is reminiscent of the implosion of supermassive stars (hypernova).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.10303 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: Caloric curve for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Entropy per fermion as a function of the normalized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Normalized free energy as a function of the normal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Caloric curve for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: Entropy per fermion as a function of the normalized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Statistical mechanics of self-gravitating systems in general relativity: I. The quantum Fermi gas
gr-qc 2019-08 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

Maximizing entropy at fixed mass-energy and particle number in general relativity yields the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations and the Tolman-Klein relations for a Fermi gas, for any convex form of entropy.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[30]

Alberti, P.H

G. Alberti, P.H. Chavanis, arXiv

work page
[33]

Chavanis, arXiv

P.H. Chavanis, arXiv
[1]

Padmanabhan, Phys

T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rep. 188, 285 (1990)

1990
[2]

Katz, Found

J. Katz, Found. Phys. 33, 223 (2003)

2003
[3]

Chavanis, Int

P.H. Chavanis, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 20, 3113 (2006)

2006
[4]

Dauxois, S

Dynamics and thermodynamics of systems with long range interactions, edited by T. Dauxois, S. Ruﬀo, E. Arimondo, M. Wilkens, Lecture Notes in Physics 602, (Springer, 2002)

2002
[5]

Campa, T

A. Campa, T. Dauxois, S. Ruﬀo, Physics Reports 480, 57 (2009)

2009
[6]

Campa, T

A. Campa, T. Dauxois, D. Fanelli, S. Ruﬀo, Physics of 8 long-range interacting systems (Oxford University Press, 2014)

work page 2014

Show all 56 references

[7]

Antonov, Vest

V.A. Antonov, Vest. Leningr. Gos. Univ. 7, 135 (1962)

1962
[8]

Lynden-Bell and R

D. Lynden-Bell and R. Wood, MNRAS 138, 495 (1968)

1968
[9]

Emden, Gaskugeln (Leipzig, 1907)

R. Emden, Gaskugeln (Leipzig, 1907)

1907
[10]

Inagaki, D

S. Inagaki, D. Lynden-Bell, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 205, 913 (1983)

1983
[11]

Sire, P.H

C. Sire, P.H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. E 66, 046133 (2002)

2002
[12]

Chavanis, Astron

P.H. Chavanis, Astron. Astrophys. 381, 340 (2002)

2002
[13]

Sire, P.H

C. Sire, P.H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. E 69, 066109 (2004)

2004
[14]

Fowler, MNRAS, 87, 114 (1926)

R.H. Fowler, MNRAS, 87, 114 (1926)

1926
[15]

Stoner, Phil

E.C. Stoner, Phil. Mag. 7, 63 (1929)

1929
[16]

Chandrasekhar, Phil

S. Chandrasekhar, Phil. Mag. 11, 592 (1931)

1931
[17]

Hertel and W

P. Hertel and W. Thirring, Thermodynamic Instability of a System of Gravitating Fermions. In: H.P. D¨ urr (Ed.): Quanten und Felder (Brauschweig: Vieweg 1971)

1971
[18]

Bilic, R.D

N. Bilic, R.D. Viollier, Phys. Lett. B 408, 75 (1997)

1997
[19]

Chavanis, Phys

P.H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. E 65, 056123 (2002)

2002
[20]

Oppenheimer, G.M

J.R. Oppenheimer, G.M. Volkoﬀ, Phys. Rev. 55, 374 (1939)

1939
[21]

Anderson, Zeit

W. Anderson, Zeit. f. Phys. 56, 851 (1929)

1929
[22]

Stoner, Phil

E.C. Stoner, Phil. Mag. 9, 944 (1930)

1930
[23]

Chandrasekhar, Astrophys

S. Chandrasekhar, Astrophys. J. 74, 81 (1931)

1931
[24]

Landau, Phys

L.D. Landau, Phys. Zeit. Sow. 1, 285 (1932)

1932
[25]

Bilic, R.D

N. Bilic, R.D. Viollier, Gen. Relat. Grav. 31, 1105 (1999)

1999
[26]

Bilic, R.D

N. Bilic, R.D. Viollier, Eur. Phys. J. C 11, 173 (1999)

1999
[27]

Roupas, Class

Z. Roupas, Class. Quantum Grav. 30, 115018 (2013)

2013
[28]

Roupas, Class

Z. Roupas, Class. Quantum Grav. 32, 135023 (2015)

2015
[29]

Roupas, Phys

Z. Roupas, Phys. Rev. D 91, 023001 (2015)

2015
[31]

Alberti, P.H

G. Alberti, P.H. Chavanis, arXiv:1808.01007

arXiv
[34]

Tolman, Phys

R.C. Tolman, Phys. Rev. 35, 904 (1930)

1930
[35]

Klein, Rev

O. Klein, Rev. Mod. Phys. 21, 531 (1949)

1949
[36]

Katz, Mon

J. Katz, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 183, 765 (1978)

1978
[37]

Chavanis, Astron

P.H. Chavanis, Astron. Astrophys. 483, 673 (2008)

2008
[38]

Poincar´ e, Acta Math.7, 259 (1885)

H. Poincar´ e, Acta Math.7, 259 (1885)
[39]

Chavanis, Astron

P.H. Chavanis, Astron. Astrophys. 432, 117 (2005)

2005
[40]

Sorkin, R.M

R.D. Sorkin, R.M. Wald, Z.Z. Jiu, Gen. Relat. Grav. 13, 1127 (1981)

1981
[41]

Doremus, M.R

J.P. Doremus, M.R. Feix, G. Baumann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26, 725 (1971)

1971
[42]

Ipser, Astrophys

J.R. Ipser, Astrophys. J. 238, 1101 (1980)

1980
[43]

Chavanis, arXiv:1810.08948

P.H. Chavanis, arXiv:1810.08948

arXiv
[44]

Chavanis, arXiv:1905.08137

P.H. Chavanis, arXiv:1905.08137

1905 arXiv
[45]

Pomeau, M

Y. Pomeau, M. Le Berre, P.H. Chavanis and B. Denet, Eur. Phys. J. E 37, 26 (2014)

2014
[46]

Chavanis, Y

P.H. Chavanis, Y. Pomeau, M. Le Berre and B. Denet, arXiv
[47]

Thirring, Z

W. Thirring, Z. Physik 235, 339 (1970)

1970
[48]

Chavanis, M

P.H. Chavanis, M. Lemou, F. M´ ehats, Phys. Rev. D92, 123527 (2015)

2015
[49]

Zel’dovich, M.A

Y.B. Zel’dovich, M.A. Podurets, Soviet Astron. – AJ 9, 742 (1966)

1966
[50]

Fackerell, J

D. Fackerell, J. Ipser, K. Thorne, Comments Ap. and Space Phys. 1, 134 (1969)

1969
[51]

Shapiro, S.A

S.L. Shapiro, S.A. Teukolsky, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 340, 365 (1992)

1992
[52]

Balberg, S.L

S. Balberg, S.L. Shapiro, S. Inagaki, Astrophys. J. 568, 475 (2002)

2002
[53]

Roupas, P.H

Z. Roupas, P.H. Chavanis, Class. Quant. Grav. 36, 065001 (2019)

2019
[54]

Sch¨ onberg, S

M. Sch¨ onberg, S. Chandrasekhar, Astrophys. J. 96, 161 (1942)

1942
[55]

Bilic, G.B

N. Bilic, G.B. Tupper, R.D. Viollier, Lect. Notes Phys. 616, 24 (2003)

2003
[56]

de Vega, P

H.J. de Vega, P. Salucci, N.G. Sanchez, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 442, 2717 (2014)

2014
[57]

Ruﬃni, C.R

R. Ruﬃni, C.R. Arg¨ uelles, J.A. Rueda, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 451, 622 (2015)

2015

Pith tools

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

[1] [30]

Alberti, P.H

G. Alberti, P.H. Chavanis, arXiv

work page

[2] [33]

Chavanis, arXiv

P.H. Chavanis, arXiv

[3] [1]

Padmanabhan, Phys

T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rep. 188, 285 (1990)

1990

[4] [2]

Katz, Found

J. Katz, Found. Phys. 33, 223 (2003)

2003

[5] [3]

Chavanis, Int

P.H. Chavanis, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 20, 3113 (2006)

2006

[6] [4]

Dauxois, S

Dynamics and thermodynamics of systems with long range interactions, edited by T. Dauxois, S. Ruﬀo, E. Arimondo, M. Wilkens, Lecture Notes in Physics 602, (Springer, 2002)

2002

[7] [5]

Campa, T

A. Campa, T. Dauxois, S. Ruﬀo, Physics Reports 480, 57 (2009)

2009

[8] [6]

Campa, T

A. Campa, T. Dauxois, D. Fanelli, S. Ruﬀo, Physics of 8 long-range interacting systems (Oxford University Press, 2014)

work page 2014