Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 63 references

A two-step strategy to identify episodic sources of gravitational waves and high energy neutrinos in starburst galaxies

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Starburst galaxies may dominate the highest-energy cosmic rays

desk verdict A testable two-step selection strategy for neutrino/GW host candidates, built on a speculative single-source rate anchor; the strategy itself is worth engaging, but the quantitative claims need revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13639 v1 pith:5XP5Y2BJ submitted 2025-04-18 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.CO

M. L. Allen , P. L. Biermann , L. I. Caramete , A. Chieffi , R. Chini , D. Frekers , L. Á. Gergely , B. Harms
show 7 more authors
I. Jaroschewski P. S. Joshi P. P. Kronberg E. Kun A. Meli E.-S. Seo T. Stanev
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.CO
keywords neutrinosstarburstgalaxiesblackholemergersgravitationalwavesparticleaccelerationultra-high-energycosmicraysmulti-messengerastronomy
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 proposes that mergers of stellar-mass black holes in starburst and normal galaxies, whose precessing jets sweep through gas, are episodic factories for ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, high-energy neutrinos, and gravitational waves. It argues that these galaxies may outshine active galactic nuclei in the flux of ultra-high-energy particles reaching Earth, and that they feed both the cosmic neutrino background and the gravitational-wave background. The practical centerpiece is a two-step identification strategy: for any detected neutrino or gravitational-wave event, rank the candidate host galaxies by far-infrared flux density, then within that sample rank by far-infrared luminosity, because at a given flux density the most luminous galaxy has the highest probability of being active right now. If the claim holds, multi-messenger searches gain a concrete way to assign otherwise orphaned events to a specific galaxy.

What carries the argument

The central object is a precessing relativistic jet pair produced by two coalescing stellar-mass black holes with misaligned spins: as the spins align before merger, the jet direction sweeps through a cone and continuously encounters fresh interstellar gas to accelerate. The load-bearing identity is the rate budget that connects the M82 anchor to the cosmic population: the inter-event time scales inversely with far-infrared luminosity, so the probability that a galaxy is active in the observer frame is proportional to its far-infrared luminosity, while the probability of detecting it is proportional to its flux density. This ratio, expressed as the repetition time of 2,500 years divided by the episode duration of 5 years, sets the sample size required to have near-certainty that at least one galaxy in the flux-density interval is currently active. That machinery turns the concept of episodic acceleration into a concrete two-step ranking procedure.

What would settle it

Repeated high-resolution radio imaging of 41.9+58 should show its double-cone structure changing or rotating on timescales of years if it is an active precessing jet; a static structure, or a second such source in M82 appearing at a rate incompatible with one per 2,500 years, would break the rate anchor. On the population side, if a sample of identified neutrino or gravitational-wave hosts shows no preference for the highest far-infrared luminosity galaxy within each flux-density interval, the probability ranking is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery claim is that stellar-mass black hole mergers with spin-flips, where two black holes with misaligned spins spiral together and their jets precess, accelerate particles to ultra-high energies, and that such events recur throughout cosmic star formation. A single compact radio source, 41.9+58 in M82, is interpreted as one such merger, yielding an estimated rate of one per 2,500 years in that galaxy; scaling this rate with far-infrared luminosity gives one active episode roughly every 100 years in the most luminous starbursts, with each acceleration episode lasting about 5 years. Because the probability that a galaxy hosts an active episode right now scales with its luminosity while detection probability scales with flux density, the highest-luminosity galaxies at any given flux density are the most likely sources. The paper concludes that starburst and normal galaxies may dominate over active galactic nuclei in the ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray flux observed at Earth, and that ranking candidates first by far-infrared flux density and then by far-infrared luminosity is the correct search strategy for identifying the hosts of neutrino and gravitational-wave events.

Load-bearing premise

The entire rate normalization rests on reading one compact radio source in M82 as a precessing-jet merger of two black holes and assuming that such events become more frequent in proportion to a galaxy's far-infrared luminosity; if that reading is wrong or atypical, the claimed dominance and the search strategy lose their anchor.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a detected high-energy neutrino or gravitational-wave event, ranking candidate galaxies first by far-infrared flux density and then by far-infrared luminosity gives a concrete, ordered list of host candidates, with the top-ranked galaxy the most probable source.
  • Starburst and normal galaxies would join active galactic nuclei, and may dominate them, as contributors to the ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray flux observed at Earth, which would reshape models of cosmic-ray origin and composition.
  • The cosmic neutrino background and the gravitational-wave background would receive a previously unquantified contribution from stellar-mass black hole mergers, with episodes lasting about 5 years and repeating on timescales of roughly 100 years in the most luminous starbursts.
  • Because neutrino emission is relativistically boosted along the jet while gravitational waves are emitted in all directions, a single merger episode will rarely be detectable in both messengers at once; searches should treat neutrino and gravitational-wave samples as complementary rather than requiring coincidence.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test of the strategy's rate anchor is to survey a volume-limited sample of starburst galaxies for double-cone radio structures; the fraction with one active source should track far-infrared luminosity if the model is right.
  • The same flux-density-then-luminosity ranking could be applied to other episodic transients whose rate scales with a galaxy luminosity proxy, such as core-collapse supernovae, a case the paper notes would give the same conclusion.
  • If stellar-mass mergers dominate ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, the arrival directions and composition of these particles should correlate with the cosmic star-formation history rather than with the distribution of active galactic nuclei; next-generation observatories could test this.
  • The sample-size formula could be inverted: recording how often the highest-luminosity galaxy is confirmed as the host would measure the true inter-event time, turning the search strategy into a population-rate measurement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that stellar-mass black-hole mergers in starburst and normal galaxies, when preceded by spin-flip jet precession, act as episodic accelerators of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays and neutrinos, and that the same mergers eventually produce gravitational waves. The authors generalize an earlier proposal based on the compact radio source 41.9+58 in M82 to the cosmic population of starburst galaxies, and argue that these sources may dominate over AGN in the observed UHECR flux. They then outline a two-step observational strategy: within a FIR flux-density interval, rank candidate host galaxies by FIR luminosity, under the assumption that the probability of being currently active is proportional to FIR luminosity. The paper presents analytic estimates for binary orbital angular-momentum loss via magnetic winds, a rate normalization of one merger per 2,500 years in M82, an episode duration of about 5 years, and a sample-size threshold in Section 3.8 based on the ratio of these timescales.

Significance. If the central assumptions hold, the paper offers a simple, falsifiable prioritization rule for multi-messenger follow-up: at fixed FIR flux density, select the highest-FIR-luminosity galaxies because they have the largest duty-cycle probability of harboring an active episodic accelerator. This is a testable prediction that could be confronted with future neutrino and gravitational-wave events, and the authors are transparent about some of the order-of-magnitude uncertainties. The manuscript does not supply machine-checked proofs or code, but it does make its quantitative skeleton explicit enough to be challenged. The significance is currently limited by the fact that the rate normalization, the FIR-luminosity scaling, and the near-maximal-spin fraction are all anchored to one morphological candidate and a series of undocumented assumptions, so the claimed UHECR dominance over AGN is best read as a conditional scenario rather than an established result.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.8] The entire quantitative framework, including the 2,500-year repetition time used in the Section 3.8 sample-size inequality, is normalized to a single compact radio source, 41.9+58 in M82, interpreted as a second-generation stellar-mass black-hole merger with precessing jets. The paper itself states that the resulting rate is 'a very uncertain estimate' and has 'an error range of probably at least an order of magnitude.' The only discriminator offered is a qualitative morphological argument against a stratified-atmosphere explosion, which does not exclude other jet-producing configurations such as an accreting black hole in a binary or an unusual supernova remnant. Because this one source carries the rate normalization for the claimed UHECR dominance and for the strategy's sample-size rule, the issue is load-bearing. The authors should either provide a quantitative precessing-jet model that reproduces the radio morphology and spectrum of 41.9+58 and rules out alternatives, or demonstrate that analogous double-cone sources appear in a FIR-luminosity-selected sample of nearby starbursts with the expected rate, or cross-check the implied merger rate per unit stellar mass against the LIGO/Virgo merger-rate density.
  2. [Section 3.8] The inequality Σ LFIR,j,i > L_FIR,M82 τ3.4/τep is accompanied by the statement that 'there is a ≃ 100 percent expectation, that some galaxy is in an active phase of an episode.' This conflates an expected number with a probability. If each galaxy's active probability is p_i = (τep/τ3.4) (LFIR,i/L_FIR,M82) and the sum of p_i equals unity, the Poisson probability of at least one active galaxy is only 1 - e^{-1} ≈ 63 percent, not approximately 100 percent. The sample-size rule therefore does not provide the claimed confidence unless the duty-cycle interpretation is revised or additional assumptions are stated explicitly.
  3. [Sections 2.1 and 3.4] The conclusion that stellar-mass black-hole mergers in starburst and normal galaxies 'may dominate over AGN' in the UHECR flux assumes that a large fraction of massive-star black holes are born near maximally spinning, that magnetic winds efficiently shrink the orbit, and that relativistic jets form with an efficiency of about one-third. The manuscript itself states that the fraction of massive stars that produce such black holes 'is unknown at present' (Section 2.1), and the 1/3 efficiency is an adopted value with no propagated uncertainty. Because this unknown fraction multiplies the entire energy-budget comparison with AGN, the dominance claim is an upper-limit scenario rather than a demonstrated inference. The authors should either derive a plausible range for the fraction from stellar-evolution and binary-population calculations, or explicitly rewrite the claim as a conditional statement and propagate the fraction through the comparison with the AGN contribution.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The statement 'The Gravitational Wave (GW) data support such a scenario' is not backed by any quantitative comparison in the text; either add the specific GW observables being referenced or rephrase as 'are not inconsistent with such a scenario.'
  2. [Section 2.1] The displayed formula for Jorb, Jorb = π^{-1/3} M^{5/3} G^{2/3} P^{1/3}, differs from the standard equal-mass circular orbital angular momentum by a numerical factor of 4^{1/3} when r is half the binary separation; the subsequent conclusion for rdot/r is insensitive to this constant, but the formula should be corrected for internal consistency.
  3. [Section 3.3] The example '10^12/10^10.6 × 1/2,500 per year, so about 1 in about 100 years' should explicitly state that this is a present-day, local-universe estimate that excludes efficiency factors and redshift evolution, so that readers do not mistake it for a cosmic rate.
  4. [Section 3.6] The sentence 'at any given flux density the sources with the highest luminosity, so highest redshift, have the highest probability to contribute' assumes that FIR luminosity is the correct proxy for the currently-active probability and that no strong redshift-dependent evolution of the near-maximal-spin fraction is present; these are assumptions that should be listed as caveats.
  5. [Section 3.4] The sentence 'This is fully consistent with new Auger results [Auger-Coll. (2024)]' is unsupported as written; no quantitative confrontation of the model with the Auger spectrum or composition constraints appears in the paper, so this claim should be substantiated or removed.
  6. [References and front matter] Several references and headings contain typographical artifacts, such as 'GA-NIFS: JWST disc overs an offset AGN' and the version-history line at the top of the manuscript, which should be cleaned before publication.

Circularity Check

4 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The M82 41.9+58 interpretation and its 1/2,500 yr rate are inherited from the authors' own earlier papers; the L_FIR-proportional probability and the ≃100% sample expectation are restatements of that assumed scaling rather than independent predictions.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3.1, "Source 41.9+58, a second generation stellar mass black hole merger?"]
    "This can be interpreted as the action of a pair of two-sided precessing jets emanating from two coalescing active rotating black holes of stellar mass [Kronberg et al. (1985), Biermann et al. (2018)]. ... So the detection of one such source out of 43 yields a very uncertain estimate of their rate of one per 2,500 years in the starburst galaxy M82 [Biermann et al. (2018)]."

    The rate of one merger per 2,500 years in M82 is the numerical anchor for the cosmic event rate, the power-input integral, and the Section 3.8 sample-size formula. That rate is not measured or independently derived in this paper; it is taken from Biermann et al. (2018), a prior paper by overlapping authors, which itself rests on the interpretation of one radio source, 41.9+58, as a second-generation stellar-mass black-hole merger. The current paper explicitly bases the identification on its own earlier works (Kronberg et al. 1985; Biermann et al. 2018), and the 'one such source out of 43' is an estimate under that interpretation. Thus the central population prediction is normalized by a self-citation chain rather than by an external measurement.

  2. uniqueness imported from authors [Section 3.1, immediately after the interpretation of 41.9+58]
    "This topology is inconsistent with an explosion in a stratified atmosphere, since that always leads to a stem-like outflow (extensive literature is given in [Biermann et al. (2018)])."

    The paper needs 41.9+58 to be a precessing black-hole-merger jet rather than an expanding supernova remnant. The exclusion of the supernova-remnant alternative is not demonstrated here; it is asserted by referring to Biermann et al. (2018), which shares authors with this paper and is the same self-referential chain that supplies the merger identification. No external, machine-checked, or independently reproduced uniqueness argument is provided. This author-imported uniqueness claim is what makes the 'second generation stellar mass black hole merger' interpretation appear forced, and the rate derived from that forced identification is load-bearing for the rest of the paper.

2 more flagged steps
  1. self definitional [Section 3.6, "Probability"]
    "The probability that a given starburst galaxy is ejecting for instance high energy neutrinos right now (in the observer frame) runs with the FIR luminosity in our proposed model. Therefore comparing all sources at some given flux density those at the highest luminosity, therefore highest redshift, have the highest probability to contribute."

    The 'therefore' conclusion is a direct restatement of the model input. Earlier the paper set the merger rate proportional to FIR luminosity: 'Using a scaling with FIR luminosity yields a maximal rate...' and 'the rate can be estimated to be correspondingly higher for a higher FIR luminosity.' The statement that, at fixed flux density, the highest-FIR-luminosity source has the highest probability is exactly the assumed proportionality P ∝ L_FIR rephrased. The two-step observational strategy of Section 3.8 is therefore the ansatz itself, not an independent prediction of the model.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.8, "An observational strategy"]
    "where τ3.4 the repetition time scale is, in our BH merger approach 2,500 yrs, and τep the length of the UHECR injection, in our approach the length of the time, during which the jets precess, 5 yrs. Thus, in this sample, there is a ≃ 100 percent expectation, that some galaxy is in an active phase of an episode."

    The '≃100 percent expectation' is built into the sample-selection inequality by construction. The formula Σ L_FIR,j,i > L_FIR,M82 τ3.4/τep is chosen so that, under the assumed P ∝ L_FIR scaling, the expected number of active galaxies in the sample is ≥ 1. The quoted expectation is therefore a property of the defining inequality and of the adopted τ3.4 and τep values, not an empirical outcome. Moreover, those two values come from the self-citation chain identified above: τ3.4 = 2,500 yr is the M82 estimate from Biermann et al. (2018), and τep = 5 yr is scaled from Gergely & Biermann (2009), with the authors themselves admitting 'an error range of probably at least an order of magnitude.'

full rationale

This paper is not a completely closed formal loop: the energy-per-event estimate uses standard black-hole spin energetics, the 5-yr episode time is scaled from the Gergely–Biermann inspiral formula, and the jet-power comparison draws on genuinely external benchmarks such as Punsly & Zhang, EHT-M87, LIGO/Virgo catalogs, and Waxman's UHECR input. However, the quantitative population claim is anchored in a single identification, 41.9+58 in M82, that is inherited from overlapping-author prior papers (Kronberg et al. 1985; Allen & Kronberg 1998; Biermann et al. 2018). The rate of one per 2,500 years is an estimate from 'one such source out of 43' under that interpretation, and the paper itself calls it uncertain by at least an order of magnitude. That rate and the L_FIR scaling are then used to build the two-step selection rule and the sample-size formula, so the 'prediction' that the highest-FIR-luminosity galaxies at a given flux density are the most probable hosts is a restatement of the assumed proportionality. The '≃100 percent expectation' in Section 3.8 is a consequence of the selection inequality, not an empirical outcome. Because the headline conclusion (starburst galaxies may dominate over AGN) inherits its normalization from this self-citation chain and because the central selection strategy reduces to the assumed L_FIR scaling, the paper warrants a partial-circularity score of 6 rather than a clean bill or a fully forced 8+.

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

All rate and energy outputs are products of the five free parameters above; no external calibration is applied. The model depends on the assumption that the M82 41.9+58 interpretation and the FIR-luminosity scaling hold throughout cosmic history.

free parameters (5)
  • magnetic wind torque parameter epsilon_W,B = approximately 1
    Estimated from assumed wind numbers (vr = 2000 km/s, B about 100 G, Mdot = 1e-5 Msun/yr) in Section 2.1; the binary-tightening scenario requires epsilon_W,B > 1/2.
  • M82 second-generation merger rate = 1 per 2,500 years
    From one candidate (41.9+58) out of 43 compact sources in M82 (Section 3.1); normalizes all cosmic rate estimates and the strategy formula.
  • episode duration tau_ep = 5 years
    Scaled from Gergely and Biermann (2009) Table 2 for a 10 Msun equal-mass binary (Section 3.3); sets active fraction.
  • particle energy efficiency = 1/3
    Chosen in Section 3.4 ('Allowing 1/3 this gives') to convert BH rotational energy into energetic particles.
  • maximum starburst FIR luminosity = 1e12 Lsun
    Adopted as the maximum for rate scaling in Section 3.3; used to claim a maximal recurrence rate of once per 100 years.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Massive stars mostly form in binaries, triples, and quadruples, and close binaries can tidally lock to produce near-maximally spinning black holes.
    Section 2.1 relies on Chini et al. (2012, 2013a,b) multiplicity data and on Limongi and Chieffi (2018, 2020) rotating stellar models; the paper explicitly notes the fraction of such systems is unknown.
  • ad hoc to paper Magnetic winds remove orbital angular momentum efficiently (epsilon_W,B at least 1/2) so binary separation shrinks rather than grows.
    Section 2.1: the condition epsilon_W,B > 1/2 is required for the whole spin-up channel; epsilon_W,B approximately 1 is an estimate, and the paper admits weaker fields would break the channel.
  • domain assumption Spin-flip BH mergers produce precessing relativistic jets that accelerate particles to ultra-high energies and produce neutrinos and gravitational waves.
    Central scenario from Biermann et al. (2018) and Gergely and Biermann (2009); adopted without independent verification in Sections 2 and 3.
  • ad hoc to paper The rate of such episodes in a galaxy scales linearly with its FIR luminosity.
    Section 3.3: 'Using a scaling with FIR luminosity...' extrapolates from M82 to all starbursts; this assumption drives the two-step strategy.
  • domain assumption Episodes are independent and Poisson-distributed in time.
    Implicit in the probability argument of Section 3.6 and the sample-size formula of Section 3.8; the paper then misreads the expectation value as a probability.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A two-step strategy to identify episodic sources of gravitational waves and high energy neutrinos in starburst galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5XP5Y2BJ

@misc{pith2026250413639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A two-step strategy to identify episodic sources of gravitational waves and high energy neutrinos in starburst galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5XP5Y2BJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13639}
}
read the original abstract

Supermassive black hole mergers with spin-flips accelerate energetic particles through their precessing relativistic jets, producing high energy neutrinos and finally gravitational waves. In star formation massive stars come in pairs, triplets and quadruplets, allowing second generation mergers of the remnants with discrepant spin directions. The Gravitational Wave (GW) data support such a scenario. Earlier we suggested that stellar mass black hole mergers (visible in M82) with an associated spin-flip analogously allow the acceleration of energetic particles, with ensuing high energy neutrinos and high energy photons, and finally producing gravitational waves. At cosmic distances only the gravitational waves and the neutrinos remain detectable. Here we generalize the argument to starburst and normal galaxies throughout their cosmic evolution, and show that these galaxies may dominate over Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) in the flux of ultra-high energy particles observed at Earth. All these sources contribute to the cosmic neutrino background, as well as the gravitational wave background (they detected the lower frequencies). We outline a search strategy to find such episodic sources, which requires to include both luminosity and flux density.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Aleksi \'c , J., Ansoldi, S., Antonelli, L.A., Antoranz, P., Babic, A., Bangale, P., et al., 346 , 1080 - 1084 (2014); Title: Black hole lightning due to particle acceleration at subhorizon scales

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Allen, M.L., & Kronberg, P.P., 502 , 218 - 228 (1998); Title: Radio Spectra of Selected Compact Sources in the Nucleus of M82

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    Radio continuum studies of the evolved starburst in M82

    Allen, M.L., (1999). Radio continuum studies of the evolved starburst in M82. PhD thesis U. of Toronto. Bibcode 1999PhDT....10A

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    \'A ., Harms, B., et al., 161 , id.102976 (2024): Title: Loaded layer-cake model for cosmic ray interaction around exploding super-giant stars making black holes

    Allen, M.L., Biermann, P.L., Chieffi, A., Frekers, D., Gergely, L. \'A ., Harms, B., et al., 161 , id.102976 (2024): Title: Loaded layer-cake model for cosmic ray interaction around exploding super-giant stars making black holes. DOI: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2024.102976

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Appenzeller, I., & Fricke, K., 21 , 285 - 290 (1972); Title: Hydrodynamic Model Calculations for Supermassive Stars. II. The Collapse and Explosion of a Nonrotating 5.2 \, 10^ 5 \, M_ Star

    work page 1972

  6. [6]

    The Auger-Coll. (incl. P.L. Biermann), Abdul Halim, A., Abreu, P., Aglietta, M., Allekotte, I., Almeida Cheminant, K., Almela, A., et al., 2024, 1 , id.022 (2024); Title: Constraining models for the origin of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays with a novel combined analysis of arrival directions, spectrum, and composition data measured at the Pierre Auger Observatory

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Becker Tjus, J., Jaroschewski, I., Ghorbanietemad, A., Bartos, I., Kun, E., & Biermann, P.L., 941 , L25 (2022); Title: Neutrino Cadence of TXS 0506+056 Consistent with Supermassive Binary Origin

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Interactions and transport of cosmic rays in the Galaxy

    Biermann, P.L, Langer, N., Seo, E.-S., & Stanev, T., 369 , 269 - 277 (2001); Title: Cosmic Rays IX. Interactions and transport of cosmic rays in the Galaxy

    work page 2001

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    Biermann, P.L., Becker Tjus, J., de Boer, W., Caramete, L.I., Chieffi, A., Diehl, R., et al., invited review, in Adv. in Sp. Res. 62 , 2773 - 2816 (2018), eprint arXiv:1803.10752; Title: Supernova explosions of massive stars and cosmic rays

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Biermann, P.L., Kronberg, P.P., Allen, M.L., Meli, A., Seo, E.-S., invited review for a special issue on plasmas of the journal Galaxies , 7 , 48 (2019); Title: The origin of the most energetic galactic cosmic rays: Supernova explosions into massive star plasma winds

    2019

  3. [11]

    Bisnovatyi-Kogan, G.S., Astron. Zh. 47 , 813 (1970); transl. Sov. Astron. 14 , 652 (1971); Title: The Explosion of a Rotating Star As a Supernova Mechanism. Bibcode 1971SvA...14..652B

    1970

  4. [12]

    Bisnovatyi-Kogan, G.S., & Moiseenko, S.G., Chin. J. of Astr. & Astroph. Suppl. 8 , 330 - 340 (2008); Title: Magnetorotational Supernovae with Jets. Bibcode 2008ChJAS...8..330B

    2008

  5. [13]

    Caramete, L.I., & Biermann, P.L., 521 , A55 (2010); Title: The mass function of nearby black hole candidates

    2010

  6. [14]

    of Bonn (2016); Title: Ultra high energy cosmic rays (UHECR) - From massive black holes to cosmic rays

    Caramete, L.I., PhD thesis, Univ. of Bonn (2016); Title: Ultra high energy cosmic rays (UHECR) - From massive black holes to cosmic rays

    2016

  7. [15]

    Pre-supernova Evolution of Rotating Solar Metallicity Stars in the Mass Range 13-120 M_ and their Explosive Yields

    Chieffi, A., & Limongi, M., 764 , 21 (2013). Pre-supernova Evolution of Rotating Solar Metallicity Stars in the Mass Range 13-120 M_ and their Explosive Yields

    2013

  8. [16]

    Chini, R., Kreysa, E., Biermann, P.L., 219 , 87 - 97 (1989a); Title: The nature of radio-quiet quasars

    1989

  9. [17]

    Chini, R., Kreysa, E., Biermann, P.L., 221 , L3 - L6 (1989b); Title: 870 and 1300 m observations of radio quasars

    1989

  10. [18]

    Chini, R., Hoffmeister, V.H., Nasseri, A., Stahl, O., Zinnecker, H., 424 , 1925 - 1929 (2012); Title: A spectroscopic survey on the multiplicity of high-mass stars

    2012

  11. [19]

    Chini, R., Barr, A., Buda, L.S., Dembsky, T., Drass, H., Nasseri, A., et al., Centr. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. 37 , 295 - 310 (2013a); Title: The Multiplicity of High-mass Stars. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1306.1811

    2013 doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    Chini, R., Nasseri, A., Dembsky, T., Buda, L.-S., Fuhrmann, K., Lehmann, H., EAS Publ. Ser. 64 , 155 - 162 (2013b); Title: Stellar multiplicity across the mass spectrum. Setting a New Standard in the Analysis of Binary Stars , Eds. K. Pavlovski, A. Tkachenko & G. Torres

    2013

  13. [21]

    Cox, D.P., 178 , 159 - 168 (1972); Title: Cooling evolution of a Supernova remnant

    1972

  14. [22]

    Daly, R.A., 886 , 37 (2019); Title: Black Hole Spin and Accretion Disk Magnetic Field Strength Estimates for More Than 750 Active Galactic Nuclei and Multiple Galactic Black Holes

    2019

  15. [23]

    Diehl, R., Halloin, H., Kretschmer, K., Lichti, G., Sch \"o nfelder, V., Strong, A.W., et al., 439 , 45 - 47 (2006); Title: Radioactive ^ 26 Al from massive stars in the Galaxy

    2006

  16. [24]

    EHT-Coll., Akiyama, K., Alberdi, A., Alef, W., Asada, K., Azulay, R., Baczko, A.-K., al., 875 , L5 (2019); Title: First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Physical Origin of the Asymmetric Ring

    2019

  17. [25]

    EHT-Coll., Akiyama, K., Alberdi, A., Alef, W., Algaba, J.C., Anantua, R., Asada, K., et al., 930 , L16 (2022); Title: First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Testing Astrophysical Models of the Galactic Center Black Hole

    2022

  18. [26]

    Falcke, H., & Biermann, P.L., 293 , 665 - 682 (1995); Title: The jet-disk symbiosis. I. Radio to X-ray emission models for quasars

    1995

  19. [27]

    Gaisser, T.K., Stanev, T., & Tilav, S., Front. Phys. 8 , 748 - 758 (2013); Title: Cosmic ray energy spectrum from measurements of air showers. Invited review

    2013

  20. [28]

    \'A ., & Biermann, P.L., 697 , 1621 - 1633 (2009); arXiv:0704.1968; Title: Supermassive black hole mergers

    Gergely L. \'A ., & Biermann, P.L., 697 , 1621 - 1633 (2009); arXiv:0704.1968; Title: Supermassive black hole mergers

    2009 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Gopal-Krishna, & Biermann, P.L., Lett. 529 , L135 - L139 (2024); Title: Collimated Synchrotron Threads in Wide-Angle-Tail radio galaxies: Collimated Synchrotron Threads in Wide-Angle-Tail radio galaxies: Cosmic thunderbolts?

    2024

  22. [30]

    Gregorini, L., Mantovani, F., Eckart, A., Biermann, P.L., Witzel, A., & K \"u hr, H., 89 , 323 - 331 (1984); Title: The low-frequency spectra of a complete sample of extragalactic radio sources

    1984

  23. [31]

    Multi-Messenger Modeling of precessing Blazar Jets

    Jaroschewski, I., PhD thesis, "Multi-Messenger Modeling of precessing Blazar Jets", Univ. of Bochum, Bochum, Germany

  24. [32]

    Jaroschewski, I., Becker Tjus, J., & Biermann, P.L., 518 , 6158 (2023b), Title: Extragalactic neutrino-emission induced by supermassive and stellar mass black hole mergers

    2023

  25. [33]

    Joshi, A.B., Dey, D., Joshi, P.S., & Bambhaniya, P., 102 , id.024022 (2020); Title: Shadow of a naked singularity without photon sphere

    2020

  26. [34]

    King, A.R., & Kolb, U., 305 , 654 - 660 (1999); Title: The evolution of black hole mass and angular momentum

    1999

  27. [35]

    Kronberg, P.P., Biermann, P.L., & Schwab, F.R., 291, 693 - 707 (1985); Title: The nucleus of M82 at radio and X-ray bands: Discovery of a new radio population of Supernova candidates

    1985

  28. [36]

    \'A ., 466, L3 - L38 (2017), Title: A flat-spectrum candidate for a track-type high-energy neutrino emission event, the case of blazar PKS 0723-008

    Kun, E., Biermann, P.L., & Gergely, L. \'A ., 466, L3 - L38 (2017), Title: A flat-spectrum candidate for a track-type high-energy neutrino emission event, the case of blazar PKS 0723-008

    2017

  29. [37]

    \'A ., 483, L42 - L46 (2019); Title: Very long baseline interferometry radio structure and radio brightening of the high-energy neutrino emitting blazar TXS 0506+056

    Kun, E., Biermann, P.L., & Gergely, L. \'A ., 483, L42 - L46 (2019); Title: Very long baseline interferometry radio structure and radio brightening of the high-energy neutrino emitting blazar TXS 0506+056

    2019

  30. [38]

    Kun, E., Bartos, I., Becker Tjus, J., Biermann, P.L., Halzen, F., & Mez \"o , G., 911 , L18 (2021); Title: Cosmic Neutrinos from Temporarily Gamma-suppressed Blazars

    2021

  31. [39]

    Lagache, G., Dole, H., & Puget, J.-L., 338 , 555 - 571 (2003); Title: Modelling infrared galaxy evolution using a phenomenological approach

    2003

  32. [40]

    LIGO/VIRGO-Coll., Abbott, B.P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Abraham, S., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., et al., 9 , 031040 (2019); Title: GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs

    2019

  33. [41]

    LIGO/VIRGO-Coll., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Abraham, S., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, A., et al., 11 , id.021053 (2021); Title: GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    2021

  34. [42]

    LIGO/VIRGO/KAGRA-Coll., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adhikari, N., et al., 13 , id.041039 (2023); Title: GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run

    2023

  35. [43]

    LIGO/VIRGO-Coll., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adhikari, N., et al., 109 , id.022001 (2024); Title: GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run

    2024

  36. [44]

    Limongi, M., & Chieffi, A., 237 , 13 (2018); Title: Presupernova Evolution and Explosive Nucleosynthesis of Rotating Massive Stars in the Metallicity Range -3 [Fe/H] 0

    2018

  37. [45]

    Limongi, M., & Chieffi, A., 902 , 95 (2020); Title: Hydrodynamical Modeling of the Light Curves of Core-collapse Supernovae with HYPERION. I. The Mass Range 13 - 25 M_ , the Metallicities -3 [Fe/H] 0 , and the Case of SN 1999em

    2020

  38. [46]

    u st, R. Zeitschr. f. Nat. 7a , 87 - 98 (1952); Title: Die Entwicklung einer um einen Zentralk \

    L \"u st, R. Zeitschr. f. Nat. 7a , 87 - 98 (1952); Title: Die Entwicklung einer um einen Zentralk \"o rper rotierenden Gasmasse, I. L \"o sungen der hydrodynamischen Gleichungen mit turbulenter Reibung; in translation: The evolution of a gaseous body rotating around a central...

    1952

  39. [47]

    Mirabel, I.F., & Rodr \'i guez, L.F., 37 , 409 - 443 (1999); Title: Sources of Relativistic Jets in the Galaxy

    1999

  40. [48]

    NanoGrav-Coll., Agazie1, G., Anumarlapudi, A., Bonilla, A., Brazier, A., Casey-Clyde, J.A., Charisi, M., et al., 951 , L8 (2023a); Title: The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background

    2023

  41. [49]

    NanoGrav-Coll., Agazie1, G., Anumarlapudi, A., Bonilla, A., Brazier, A., Casey-Clyde, J.A., Charisi, M., et al., in 952 , L37 (2023b); Title: The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational-wave Background

    2023

  42. [50]

    NanoGrav-Coll., Agazie1, G., Anumarlapudi, A., Bonilla, A., Brazier, A., Casey-Clyde, J.A., Charisi, M., et al., 956 , L3 (2023c); Title: The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Search for Anisotropy in the Gravitational-wave Background

    2023

  43. [51]

    128 , 664 - 676 (1958); Title: Dynamics of the interplanetary gas and magnetic fields

    Parker, E. 128 , 664 - 676 (1958); Title: Dynamics of the interplanetary gas and magnetic fields

    1958

  44. [52]

    Penrose, R., & Floyd, R.M., 229 , 177 - 179 (1971), Title: Extraction of rotational energy from a black hole

    1971

  45. [53]

    & Zhang, S

    Punsly, B. & Zhang, S. (2011) ApJL 735 , L3 (2011); Title: The jet power and emission-line correlations of radio-loud optically selected quasars

    2011

  46. [54]

    Sanders, R.H., 162 , 791 - 809 (1970); Title: The Effects of Stellar Collisions in Dense Stellar Systems

    1970

  47. [55]

    DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9706117

    Seemann, H., & Biermann, P.L., 327 , 273 - 280 (1997); Title: Unstable waves in winds of magnetic massive stars. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9706117

    1997 doi arXiv

  48. [56]

    Spitzer, Jr., L., 158 , L139 - L143 (1969); Title: Equipartition and the formation of compact nuclei in spherical stellar systems

    1969

  49. [57]

    The spectrum and chemical composition above 10^ 4 GeV

    Stanev, T., Biermann, P.L., & Gaisser, T.K., 274 , 902 (1993), astro-ph/9303006; Title: Cosmic rays IV. The spectrum and chemical composition above 10^ 4 GeV

    1993 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Toomre, A., & Toomre, J., 178 , 623 - 666 (1972); Title: Galactic Bridges and Tails

    1972

  51. [59]

    \"U bler, H., Maiolino, R., P \'e rez-Gonz \'a lez, P.G., D'Eugenio, F., Perna, M., Curti, M., et al., arXiv:2312.03589 (2023; Title: GA-NIFS: JWST discovers an offset AGN 740 million years after the Big Bang

    2023 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Walder, R., Folii, D., Meynet, G., Space Sci. Rev. 166 , 145 - 185 (2012); Title: Magnetic Fields in Massive Stars, Their Winds, and Their Nebulae

    2012

  53. [61]

    DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0003005

    Wang, Y.P., & Biermann, P.L., 356 , 808 - 814 (2000); Title: Effects of galaxy mergers on the faint IRAS source counts and the background. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0003005

    2000 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    Waxman, E., 452 , L1 (1995); Title: Cosmological Origin for Cosmic Rays above 10^ 19 \, eV

    1995

  55. [63]

    Weber, E.J., & Davis, Jr., L., 148 , 217 - 227 (1967); Title: The angular momentum of the Solar wind

    1967

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.