Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 36 references

Constraining Asymmetric DM Properties by Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars and Population III Stars

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Observing a single intact Population III star can exclude bosonic asymmetric dark matter down to $10^{-8}$ GeV, or below $10^{-15}$ GeV if the captured dark matter forms a Bose-Einstein condensate.

desk verdict A credible extension of the scalar-ADM collapse program with a genuinely new Pop III application, but the headline low-mass reach rests on an unadapted thermalization formula and an abstract/body inconsistency. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.07953 v2 pith:YBWOMAP6 submitted 2024-12-10 astro-ph.CO hep-ph

Jared Diks , Cosmin Ilie This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COhep-ph
keywords asymmetricdarkmatterbosonicblackholeformationneutronstarsPopulationIIIcaptureevaporationBose-Einsteincondensate
topics Dark Matter
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

The paper argues that simply observing an intact star can rule out large regions of the allowed mass and interaction strength for bosonic asymmetric dark matter. The reason is that captured dark matter cannot annihilate, so it accumulates; if enough of it collects in the star's core it collapses into a black hole that swallows the star. The paper's new case for Population III stars is that a single high-mass first-generation star, the type easiest for JWST to see, should be destroyed if the dark matter has mass down to about $10^{-8}$ GeV at a scattering cross section of $10^{-40}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$, and down to $10^{-15}$ GeV if the captured dark matter forms a Bose-Einstein condensate. For neutron stars in very dense dark matter environments near the Galactic center, the paper shows that multiscatter capture and evaporation shift and reshape the previously derived exclusion boundary. If correct, these bounds extend dark matter searches into mass ranges far below what terrestrial direct detection can reach, using telescopes that already exist or are coming online.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the population equation $dN_\chi/dt = C - E N_\chi$ together with two thresholds for black hole formation: $N_\chi > N_{\rm self}$ without a condensate, and $N_\chi^0 > N_{\rm Cha}^{\rm boson}$ if a Bose-Einstein condensate forms. Capture is computed as a multiscatter sum over $N$ collisions, suppressed by a degenerate-neutron factor $\xi_s$ at low mass and a nucleon form factor $F(\delta p^2)$ at high mass; in four regions of parameter space the full sum reduces to closed-form rates used to locate analytic bounds. Evaporation is computed from the upscattering integral with a suppression factor $s_{\rm evap}$, with isothermal and local-thermal-equilibrium dark matter distributions stitched by Knudsen number, plus a separate closed-form evaporation rate for particles in the BEC ground state. Polytropic Lane-Emden profiles provide the stellar density and temperature structure for both object classes.

What would settle it

Calculate the thermalization time from Eq. (3.5) for a $1000\,M_\odot$ Population III star of age $10^6$ years at the paper's deepest claimed exclusion points, for example $m_\chi = 10^{-8}$ GeV with $\sigma = 10^{-40}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ and the BEC case below $10^{-15}$ GeV; if $t_{\rm th}$ exceeds the stellar age anywhere in the excluded region, that part of the bound is not valid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that non-destruction of a neutron star or a Population III star excludes bosonic asymmetric dark matter whose parameters lie above the black-hole-formation boundary in the $\sigma$--$m_\chi$ plane. For a reference neutron star of $1.44\,M_\odot$, age $10^{10}$ years, in ambient dark matter density $\rho_\chi = 10^{13}\,\mathrm{GeV}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, the paper obtains the boundary including multiscatter capture, evaporation, and a finite-nucleon-size form factor; the main new qualitative feature is that the boundary enters multiscatter region I, so capture does not saturate until much higher $\sigma$, allowing deeper $m_\chi$ reach than previous single-scatter treatments. For a $1000\,M_\odot$ Population III star observed $10^6$ years after entering the main sequence, the paper claims bounds reaching $m_\chi \sim 10^{-8}$ GeV for $\sigma = 10^{-40}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$, and below $10^{-15}$ GeV if a Bose-Einstein condensate forms, because the geometric capture limit is pushed to far higher $\sigma$ than in neutron stars. Throughout, the paper treats dark matter evaporation self-consistently, including from the condensed ground state, and derives closed-form evaporation approximations for arbitrary polytropic objects and for a BEC. All of these bounds are explicitly lifted where the dark matter has not thermalized within the object's lifetime.

Load-bearing premise

The bounds rest on captured dark matter actually thermalizing inside the star within its lifetime; if a dark matter particle is captured but does not sink to the core, the paper cannot guarantee a black hole forms, and the exclusion region must be lifted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If a single Population III star of about $1000\,M_\odot$ is observed at age $\sim 10^6$ years, the absence of collapse excludes bosonic ADM with $\sigma = 10^{-40}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ down to $m_\chi \sim 10^{-8}$ GeV, and below $10^{-15}$ GeV if a Bose-Einstein condensate forms.
  • With many Population III stars observed, non-destruction in high-density early-universe minihalos would strengthen the exclusion beyond the single-object limit, subject to the thermalization condition.
  • Neutron star bounds in dense environments ($\rho_\chi \gtrsim 10^9$ GeV cm$^{-3}$) must include multiscatter capture and evaporation; single-scatter-only treatments can misplace or overstate parts of the excluded region.
  • The closed-form evaporation rates for arbitrary polytropes and for BEC states let these bounds be recast quickly for other celestial objects without expensive numerical integration.
  • In the mass range probed, these stellar bounds are complementary to terrestrial direct searches, covering sub-keV masses below the neutrino-floor-limited reach of current detectors.

Reading between the lines

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

  • We infer that the same capture-and-evaporation machinery could be applied to white dwarfs and brown dwarfs, where the lower escape velocity makes evaporation stronger; that analysis would sharpen or relax the sub-GeV bounds those objects already provide, depending on how well the dark matter thermalizes.
  • We infer that if BEC-forming bosonic ADM exists near the lower end of the Population III reach, the first deep searches for Population III stars in dark-matter-rich minihalos should see an absence of such stars; a surviving star there would disfavor that candidate.
  • We infer that the thermalization requirement is the quiet bottleneck: future work should map the excluded region after imposing $t_{\rm th} < t_\ast$ exactly, since the closed-form estimate of Eq. (3.5) may be the main source of systematic uncertainty in the low-mass, high-$\sigma$ corner.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies constraints on asymmetric dark matter (ADM) via black hole formation in neutron stars (NSs) and Population III (Pop III) stars. For NSs, the authors extend the earlier analysis of McDermott, Yu, and Zurek by including multiscatter capture, a nucleon form-factor suppression, and a complete treatment of evaporation, including evaporation from a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC). For Pop III stars, they apply the same formalism to a 1000 solar-mass, 10^6-year-old star in a high-density DM environment, claiming that observation of such a star can probe bosonic ADM down to m_chi ~ 10^-8 GeV at sigma ~ 10^-40 cm^2, and the abstract states a reach below 10^-15 GeV if a BEC forms. They also present single-integral approximations for the evaporation rate from arbitrary polytropic objects (Appendix A) and from a BEC state (Appendix B), and check the uniform-density radius approximation to within 1%.

Significance. If the derived bounds are correct, this work would extend ADM constraints to masses many orders of magnitude below direct-detection limits, using a class of objects (Pop III stars) that may be observed by JWST. The paper contains analytic derivations that are mostly self-consistent, and it explicitly checks the uniform-density approximation used for the DM radius. The evaporation approximations in the appendices, especially the BEC evaporation rate, are a useful technical contribution. However, the two load-bearing points—the thermalization of captured DM in Pop III stars and the consistency of the abstract's headline mass reach with the body's calculation—currently prevent the central claim from being fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3, Eq. (3.5); Section 5] The thermalization timescale used to justify the Pop III exclusion regions is the degenerate-neutron-star expression from [19], with p_F ≈ 0.575 GeV in the numerator. The Pop III star is modeled as a non-degenerate n=3 polytrope with T_c = 2×10^7 K, for which the relevant target momentum is ∼(3 m_N T_c)^{1/2} ≈ 2×10^{-3} GeV. No justification is given for applying the degenerate formula to this environment, and the paper's own caveat in Section 3—'we assume that the DM particles have thermalized. If this is not the case, we can no longer guarantee that a BH would form, so we must lift our bounds'—means that if the thermalization time is underestimated, the headline exclusion at m_chi ≈ 10^{-8} GeV, sigma ≈ 10^{-40} cm^2 (Section 5) would be invalid. This is exactly the low-m_chi, high-sigma regime where the thermalization requirement is most restrictive. Please provide a non-degenerate thermalization calculation for Pop III stars or demonstrate that the excluded region is robust to the correct timescale.
  2. [Abstract vs. Section 5] The abstract states that Pop III stars maintain 'efficacy below m_chi = 10^{-15} GeV' when a BEC forms, but Section 5 states explicitly that 'there must be a value of m_chi at which N_chi < N_Cha, which turns out to be sigma-independent and equal to approximately 10^{-8} GeV,' and the vertical line in the right panels of Figs. 4 and 5 is at m_chi ≈ 10^{-8} GeV. No curve in the body extends to 10^{-15} GeV. This is a direct contradiction between the headline claim and the body's own calculation; the abstract must be revised or the underlying calculation must be changed to support the claimed reach.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.1, after Eq. (2.5)] The statement that the form factor 'suppresses the boundary of BH formation by approximately two orders of magnitude when m_chi > m_n' is ambiguous: the form factor suppresses the capture rate, which weakens (raises) the boundary; please rephrase to state that it weakens the bound.
  2. [Section 2.2, Eq. (2.13)] The notation '0F1(;1+2/3 \hat{\phi}(r); \tau(r))' should be typeset as _0F_1(; b; z) with the semicolon inside the argument; as written it appears to have an empty first argument, which is confusing.
  3. [Section 5] The MESA-derived stellar parameters (T_c = 2×10^7 K, R = 1.11 R_sun, M = 1000 M_sun) are stated without a reference or simulation details; please cite the MESA model or provide the relevant input file.
  4. [Appendix A, Eqs. (A.14) and (A.18)] The resulting 'closed-form approximations' still contain an unevaluated integral over xi (Xi(xi) in A.14 and the integral in A.18). Calling these 'closed-form' overstates the reduction; they are more accurately described as single-integral reductions of the original triple integral.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the NS and Pop III bounds are solved from external capture, evaporation, and BH-formation formulas; the authors' self-citations provide in-paper-validated closed forms, and the thermalization limitation is explicitly flagged as lifting the bounds.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The exclusion boundaries are solutions of dNchi/dt = C - E Nchi (Eq. 2.1) using the capture rate from Bramante et al. [13] (external; Eq. 2.3), the evaporation formalism of Gould [22] and Garani & Palomares-Ruiz [24, 25] (external; Eqs. 2.10-2.13), and the black-hole formation thresholds Nself and N_Cha^boson from McDermott, Yu & Zurek [19] (external; Eqs. 3.1-3.4). No parameter is fitted to the target result, and the claimed reach (mchi about 10^-8 GeV for sigma = 10^-40 cm^2, or lower with a BEC) is obtained by solving those equations, not by imposing the answer. The self-citations ([7], [9], [14], [23]) supply (i) closed-form four-region capture approximations, which the paper validates in-paper against the full Eq. 2.3 (Fig. 1: 'plotting the relative error between the full capture rate and the regional approximations'), and (ii) the Pop III isothermal DM temperature T_DM about 0.6 Tc for mchi below about 10^-2 GeV (following Eq. B12 of [9]), whose governing equation A.10 is reproduced in Appendix A. Neither item is an unverified premise that uniquely forces the headline result, so the self-citations are not load-bearing in a circular sense. The manuscript explicitly flags its genuine limitations: Sec. 3 states 'we assume that the DM particles have thermalized. If this is not the case, we can no longer guarantee that a BH would form, so we must lift our bounds', and Sec. 5 notes 'the sheer amount of otherwise constrainable parameter space that is excluded by the thermalization requirement' for the short-lived Pop III stars; the affected regions are hatched and lifted in Figs. 2 and 4. Whether the degenerate-neutron-star formula Eq. 3.5 (from [19]) can be applied to a non-degenerate hydrogen polytrope is a physical-validity question, not a circular reduction; likewise the abstract's 10^-15 GeV BEC claim extending beyond the plotted range is a support and correctness concern. The rX uniform-density caveat (Sec. 3) and the BH-evaporation and Hawking-radiation caveats (Sec. 4) are also stated and plotted, not hidden. Weighing all of the above, the analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks with only minor, non-load-bearing self-citations; score 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard ADM capture-collapse framework from [19] and the multiscatter and evaporation machinery from [13], [24], and [25]. The free parameters and axioms listed here are the input choices that set the numerical exclusion lines. None of these is fitted to the target result, but several are imported from prior papers, including by the same group, and the BEC and thermalization assumptions are load-bearing.

free parameters (5)
  • Form factor scale Lambda = 0.25 GeV
    Imported from reference [20] to model finite nucleon size; suppresses capture for mchi above about 1 GeV and shifts bounds by approximately two orders of magnitude (Sec. 2.1).
  • Knudsen transition constant = 0.4
    Chosen in Eq. A.6 to numerically match expected distributions; interpolates between isothermal and LTE evaporation estimates.
  • Polytropic indices = n=1.5 for neutron stars, n=3 for Population III stars
    Chosen stellar structure models for degenerate neutron matter and radiative Pop III stars; they set the density, temperature, and gravitational potential used in all evaporation and capture integrals.
  • Population III DM temperature ratio = T_DM approximately 0.6 T_c for mchi below 1e-2 GeV
    Approximation from [9] for the isothermal Pop III case; it sets the BEC occupation fraction and therefore the collapse threshold.
  • Ambient DM density scenarios = 1e6 to 1e13 GeV/cm3 for neutron stars, up to 1e16 GeV/cm3 for Pop III stars
    Scanned astrophysical inputs rather than fitted values; the extreme 1e13 GeV/cm3 value from adiabatic contraction is central to the claim that evaporation matters in neutron stars.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Asymmetric bosonic DM never annihilates, so captured DM accumulates without bound.
    Introduction and Sec. 2; the entire black-hole-formation mechanism relies on the absence of annihilation.
  • domain assumption The neutron star mass is entirely neutrons distributed as an n=1.5 polytrope, and the Population III star follows an n=3 polytrope.
    Sec. 2.2 and Appendix A; used for all density, temperature, potential, and evaporation integrals.
  • domain assumption DM-nucleon scattering is velocity independent, spin independent, and described by the upscattering rate of Gould (1987) and Garani and Palomares-Ruiz.
    Sec. 2.2 Eq. 2.12; central to both capture and evaporation rates.
  • standard math A BEC forms whenever the DM follows a thermal distribution with T_DM below T_crit, and the ground-state occupation is given by Eq. 3.3.
    Sec. 3; standard Bose-Einstein condensation applied to DM inside stars, following [19].
  • domain assumption The threshold for black hole formation is either self-gravitation N_self or the bosonic Chandrasekhar number N_Cha, approximated as (M_pl/mchi)^2.
    Sec. 3 and Eq. 3.4, following [19]; if the collapse threshold differs, all exclusion bounds shift.
  • ad hoc to paper The BEC can be modeled as a point-like sphere of iso-velocity particles at the stellar center using delta-function distributions.
    Appendix B Eq. B.3; simplifying assumption used to obtain the closed-form E_BEC estimate.
  • ad hoc to paper The Knudsen stitching function f(Kn) = 1/(1+(Kn/0.4)^2) interpolates between isothermal and LTE distributions.
    Eq. A.6; the constant 0.4 is chosen to match numerical expectations rather than derived.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Constraining Asymmetric DM Properties by Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars and Population III Stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YBWOMAP6

@misc{pith2026241207953,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Constraining Asymmetric DM Properties by Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars and Population III Stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YBWOMAP6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.07953}
}
abstract

In this work we explore the potential for Neutron Stars (NSs) at the Galactic center and Population~III stars to constrain bosonic Asymmetric Dark Matter (ADM). We demonstrate that for NSs in an environment of sufficiently high DM density ($\rho_\chi\gtrsim10^{9}\text{GeV/cm}^3$), the effects of both multiscatter capture and DM evaporation cannot be neglected. Conversely, for Pop~III stars, we find they are excellent at probing low-mass ADM. For instance, the most easily observable Population III stars could be highly effective at constraining high-$\sigma$ low-$m_\chi$ DM, maintaining efficacy below $m_\chi=10^{-15}\text{GeV}$ (assuming a Bose Einstein Condensate(BEC) forms) thanks to their far lower value of $m_\chi$ at which capture saturates to the geometric limit. Finally, we derive closed-form approximations for the evaporation rate of DM from arbitrary polytropic objects and from DM particles in a BEC state.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [19]

    S. D. McDermott, H.-B. Yu and K. M. Zurek,Constraints on scalar asymmetric dark matter from black hole formation in neutron stars,Physical Review D85(2012)

    work page 2012

  2. [1]

    Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helvetica Physica Acta6(1933) 110

    F. Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helvetica Physica Acta6(1933) 110

    work page 1933

  3. [2]

    Banik, C

    I. Banik, C. Pittordis, W. Sutherland, B. Famaey, R. Ibata, S. Mieske et al.,Strong constraints on the gravitational law from Gaia DR3 wide binaries,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society527(2023) 4573 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/527/3/4573/53896686/stad3393.pdf]

    work page 2023

  4. [3]

    D. E. Kaplan, M. A. Luty and K. M. Zurek,Asymmetric dark matter,Physical Review D79 (2009)

    work page 2009

  5. [4]

    Aprile, J

    E. Aprile, J. Aalbers, F. Agostini, M. Alfonsi, F. D. Amaro, M. Anthony et al.,The xenon1t dark matter experiment,The European Physical Journal C77(2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [5]

    W. C. Pettus,Dm-ice: Current status and future prospects, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [6]

    Kluck, G

    H. Kluck, G. Angloher, P. Bauer, A. Bento, C. Bucci, L. Canonica et al.,Search for low-mass dark matter with the cresst experiment, 2017

    work page 2017

  8. [7]

    C. Ilie, C. Levy and J. Diks,The effectiveness of exoplanets and Brown Dwarfs as sub-GeV Dark Matter detectors,JCAP04(2024) 082 [2312.13979]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 36 references
  1. [8]

    R. K. Leane and J. Smirnov,Exoplanets as sub-gev dark matter detectors,Phys. Rev. Lett.126 (2021) 161101

    2021

  2. [9]

    C. Ilie, C. Levy, J. Pilawa and S. Zhang,Constraining dark matter properties with the first generation of stars,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 123031

    2021

  3. [10]

    Freese, D

    K. Freese, D. Spolyar and A. Aguirre,Dark Matter Capture in the first star: a Power source and a limit on Stellar Mass,JCAP0811(2008) 014 [0802.1724]

    2008 arXiv

  4. [11]

    C. J. Horowitz,Nuclear and dark matter heating in massive white dwarf stars,Phys. Rev. D 102(2020) 083031 [2008.03291]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Dasgupta, A

    B. Dasgupta, A. Gupta and A. Ray,Dark matter capture in celestial objects: light mediators, self-interactions, and complementarity with direct detection,arXiv e-prints(2020) [2006.10773]

    2020

  6. [13]

    Bramante, A

    J. Bramante, A. Delgado and A. Martin,Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 063002 [1703.04043]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [14]

    multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter

    C. Ilie, J. Pilawa and S. Zhang,Comment on “multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter”, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 048301

    2020

  8. [15]

    T. T. Q. Nguyen and T. M. P. Tait,Bounds on long-lived dark matter mediators from neutron stars,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 115016 [2212.12547]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Baryakhtar, J

    M. Baryakhtar, J. Bramante, S. W. Li, T. Linden and N. Raj,Dark Kinetic Heating of Neutron Stars and an Infrared Window on WIMPs, SIMPs, and Pure Higgsinos, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) 131801 [1704.01577]

    2017 arXiv

  10. [17]

    N. F. Bell, G. Busoni, S. Robles and M. Virgato,Improved Treatment of Dark Matter Capture in Neutron Stars,arXiv e-prints(2020) arXiv:2004.14888 [2004.14888]. – 20 –

    2020 arXiv

  11. [18]

    N. F. Bell, G. Busoni and S. Robles,Heating up Neutron Stars with Inelastic Dark Matter, JCAP09(2018) 018 [1807.02840]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    C.-T. Lu, A. K. Mishra and L. Wu,Constraining bosonic dark matter-baryon interactions from neutron star collapse, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Gould,Direct and Indirect Capture of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles by the Earth, ApJ328(1988) 919

    A. Gould,Direct and Indirect Capture of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles by the Earth, ApJ328(1988) 919

    1988

  14. [22]

    Gould,Weakly Interacting Massive Particle Distribution in and Evaporation from the Sun, ApJ321(1987) 560

    A. Gould,Weakly Interacting Massive Particle Distribution in and Evaporation from the Sun, ApJ321(1987) 560

    1987

  15. [23]

    Ilie,Closed-form Expressions for Multiscatter Dark Matter Capture Rates, ApJ970(2024) 159 [2402.07713]

    C. Ilie,Closed-form Expressions for Multiscatter Dark Matter Capture Rates, ApJ970(2024) 159 [2402.07713]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Garani and S

    R. Garani and S. Palomares-Ruiz,Evaporation of dark matter from celestial bodies,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2022(2022) 042

    2022

  17. [25]

    Garani and S

    R. Garani and S. Palomares-Ruiz,Dark matter in the sun: scattering off electrons vs nucleons, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2017(2017) 007

    2017

  18. [26]

    D. N. Spergel and W. H. Press,Effect of hypothetical, weakly interacting, massive particles on energy transport in the solar interior, ApJ294(1985) 663

    1985

  19. [27]

    J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk and S. D. M. White,The structure of cold dark matter halos,The Astrophysical Journal462(1996) 563

    1996

  20. [28]

    I. John, R. K. Leane and T. Linden,Dark branches of immortal stars at the galactic center, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Freese, P

    K. Freese, P. Gondolo, J. Sellwood and D. Spolyar,Dark Matter Densities during the Formation of the First Stars and in Dark Stars,Astrophys. J.693(2009) 1563 [0805.3540]

    2009 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Barkana and A

    R. Barkana and A. Loeb,In the beginning: the first sources of light and the reionization of the universe,Physics Reports349(2001) 125–238

    2001

  23. [31]

    Bromm,Formation of the first stars,Reports on Progress in Physics76(2013) 112901

    V. Bromm,Formation of the first stars,Reports on Progress in Physics76(2013) 112901

    2013

  24. [32]

    Zackrisson, A

    E. Zackrisson, A. Hultquist, A. Kordt, J. M. Diego, A. Nabizadeh, A. Vikaeus et al.,The detection and characterization of highly magnified stars with JWST: prospects of finding Population III, MNRAS533(2024) 2727 [2312.09289]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Spolyar, K

    D. Spolyar, K. Freese and P. Gondolo,Dark matter and the first stars: a new phase of stellar evolution,Phys. Rev. Lett.100(2008) 051101 [0705.0521]

    2008 arXiv

  26. [34]

    R. K. Leane and J. Smirnov,Floating dark matter in celestial bodies,

  27. [35]

    Bramante, J

    J. Bramante, J. Kumar, G. Mohlabeng, N. Raj and N. Song,Light dark matter accumulating in terrestrial planets: Nuclear scattering,

  28. [36]

    Gould and G

    A. Gould and G. Raffelt,Thermal Conduction by Massive Particles, ApJ352(1990) 654. – 21 –

    1990

Pith tools

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