Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 83 references

The Earth can act as a giant detector that turns ultralight dark matter into a magnetic field.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 23:34 UTC pith:QFGBLLVD

load-bearing objection A solid review that consolidates the Earth-transducer field; no new results, but the central R-scaling argument survives scrutiny.

arxiv 2607.16342 v1 pith:QFGBLLVD submitted 2026-07-16 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Earth as a transducer for ultralight bosonic dark-matter detection

Saarik Kalia , Ibrahim A. Sulai This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.CO
keywords ultralight bosonic dark matterdark photonaxionmillicharged dark matterEarth transducer effectmagnetometer arrayvector spherical harmonicsSchumann resonances
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This review argues that the Earth itself is a dark-matter detector: ultralight bosonic dark matter that couples to electromagnetism sources an oscillating effective current, and the conducting Earth-ionosphere cavity converts that current into a global magnetic field on the surface. The field's amplitude scales with Earth's radius R rather than with a lab's size, so for masses below about 3×10⁻¹⁴ eV the effect becomes one of the most powerful direct probes. The signal has a fixed spatial pattern expressible in vector spherical harmonics, oscillates coherently at the dark-matter Compton frequency, and can be extracted from unshielded magnetometer arrays by projecting onto the toroidal Φℓm component. The paper derives explicit signal formulas for dark-photon, axion, and millicharged dark matter, and reviews searches that already constrain these models and methods to push to higher masses.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that when the dark-matter Compton wavelength is much larger than Earth, the Maxwell response reduces to ∇×B_DM = J_eff with the displacement current negligible; solving this in a spherical Earth-ionosphere cavity gives B_DM ∝ R for dark photons (Eq. 26), axions with the geomagnetic field as background (Eq. 32), and millicharged dark matter, whose induced field oscillates at 2mφ and depends on Earth's interior currents (Eq. 34). Because B_env from the irregular outer environment is curl-free, it contains only radial and tangential-gradient VSH parts, so the robust toroidal Φℓm part of the signal can be projected out.

What carries the argument

The effective current J_eff, defined so gauge invariance makes it conserved, unifies all three UBDM models: for dark photons J_eff = -ε m²A′, for axions it is the axion-photon interaction current requiring a background B field, and for millicharged matter it is the charged-scalar current. The central geometric tool is the vector-spherical-harmonic (VSH) decomposition: Φℓm (the toroidal tangential part) is the only component sourced by the robust part of the signal, since any environmental correction B_env has zero curl and hence no Φℓm part. The spherical conducting boundary sets the length scale R that enters the Ampère-law scaling B ~ J_eff L.

Load-bearing premise

The whole R-scaling and robustness story rests on the premise that, at the relevant frequencies, the Earth-ionosphere system is an effectively concentric, perfectly conducting spherical cavity with negligible displacement current; if the ionosphere is not a good conductor at the lowest masses, the outer boundary is the aspherical magnetopause and the robust Φℓm projection is not guaranteed.

What would settle it

At frequencies below ~0.02 Hz, check whether the ionosphere satisfies the skin-depth condition for all conductivity directions; if it does not, the predictions of Eqs. (26), (32), and (34) lose their spherical boundary, and a low-frequency search would find a signal pattern that rotates or scales with magnetopause geometry. Alternatively, measure the first Schumann resonances: the spherical model mispredicts them by more than their widths, so any claim of robust predictions above ~3×10⁻¹⁴ eV would already be falsified by those observations.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • For m_DM ≲ 1/R ≈ 3×10⁻¹⁴ eV, unshielded magnetometer arrays become among the most sensitive direct probes of EM-coupled UBDM, and existing global geomagnetic dataset searches already set leading constraints.
  • The fixed spatial pattern of the signal lets many imperfectly sampled stations be combined into a few VSH-weighted timeseries, increasing sensitivity without requiring uniform coverage.
  • Temporal coherence means long-duration datasets can integrate; dark-photon signals acquire sidereal-day sidebands, while axion and millicharged signals do not, providing a discrimination handle.
  • Above ~3×10⁻¹⁴ eV the spherical model fails near Schumann resonances; either local measurements of ∇×B or atmospheric-conductivity modeling is needed to extend the reach.
  • Millicharged dark matter yields a field at twice the Compton frequency whose amplitude depends on unmeasured interior currents of Earth, so those searches carry an O(1) modeling uncertainty.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This is an editorial extension: the same R-scaling argument should apply to any conducting body with a large radius, so planetary missions carrying magnetometers could in principle double as dark-matter detectors; the paper does not explore this.
  • This is an editorial extension: if the ionosphere is not an effective conductor at the lowest masses, the outer boundary becomes the aspherical magnetopause; one test of the projection robustness is to check whether low-frequency residuals align with magnetopause orientation rather than with the spherical Φℓm pattern.
  • This is an editorial extension: the mDM signal's dependence on Earth's interior current parameters suggests a cross-check, where independent geophysical inversions of core conductivity could be compared with the inferred κ values needed to explain any candidate signal.
  • This is an editorial extension: the VSH projection idea could be applied to noise rejection in future arrays, because environmental magnetic noise is curl-free, a network that measures enough spatial derivatives can suppress it without shielding.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a review of the "Earth transducer" mechanism for detecting ultralight bosonic dark matter (UBDM) through oscillating magnetic fields at the Earth's surface. It treats dark photons, axion-like particles, and millicharged dark matter in a common effective-current framework, solves the quasi-static Ampère law in an idealized spherical Earth–ionosphere cavity (Eqs. (24), (26), (32), (34)), and argues that the Φ_ℓm component of the signal scales with Earth's radius R, is spatially and temporally coherent, and is robust to environmental detail via VSH projection. It further reviews existing SuperMAG, Eskdalemuir, SNIPE Hunt, and GPEX searches and summarizes current constraints in Figs. 3–4. The higher-mass extension via local curl measurements and atmospheric-conductivity modeling is also summarized.

Significance. If correct, the central claim makes unshielded global magnetometer arrays a leading direct probe of sub-10^-14 eV DPDM and axion DM, and gives nontrivial mDM sensitivity. The theoretical development is transparent and parameter-free for DPDM and axion DM: the key field solutions are written out explicitly, and the robustness argument based on curl-free corrections is elegant and uses only the VSH identities in Appendix A. The review is also valuable for compiling the experimental landscape and is unusually candid about the main caveats: the O(1) non-exactness of the VSH projection in real analyses (footnote 10), the breakdown of the spherical model near Schumann resonances, and the κ_ℓm dependence of the mDM signal. The paper should be of interest to the ultralight DM direct-detection community.

minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Table I] The unqualified claim that the Earth transducer signal scales with R for "multiple UBDM models" is too broad for mDM. The R-scaling Φ_ℓm term in Eq. (34) is proportional to the unmeasured interior coefficients κ_ℓm; if these were accidentally small, the dominant R-scaled part would vanish and the signal would reduce to h-scaled Y_ℓm/Ψ_ℓm terms. The text gives the estimated range 0.5 ≲ κ_10 ≲ 2.3, but this contingency should be stated in the abstract or Table I so the statement is not read as model-independent.
  2. [Sec. III.A, footnote 10] The O(1) systematic from the non-exact VSH projection—caused by nonuniform station distribution and noise weighting—is confined to a footnote. Because Figs. 3 and 4 present smoothed constraints, the main text should at least note that the SuperMAG limits carry this O(1) coverage/modeling uncertainty when they are quoted as leading constraints.
  3. [Sec. II.B, Eq. (24)] The step from Eq. (10) to Eq. (24) drops the displacement current. This is standard in the m_DM R ≪ 1 regime, but a one-sentence statement that the correction is O((m_DM R)^2) relative to the retained term would help readers and would make the domain of validity of the robustness argument explicit.
  4. [Eq. (43) and Fig. 4] The recast mDM constraints depend on the mapping in Eq. (43) and on the fiducial κ_10 = 0.5. The text correctly labels these as approximate, but it would be more informative to show the resulting band as κ_10 varies over the quoted range 0.5–2.3, making the O(1) uncertainty visible rather than implicit.
  5. [Typos] Please proofread for typographical errors, e.g., "indepedent" in the introduction to Sec. II, "dilineates" in Sec. II.B, "satisy" in Sec. II.C, "atmophseric" in Sec. IV, "conituted" in Sec. III.A, and "interpetted" in the Fig. 4 caption.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: signal formulas are explicit boundary-value solutions; robustness and constraints rest on direct Maxwell/VSH arguments and external data.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. J_eff is defined from each model Lagrangian (Eqs. 14, 18, 23); Eq. (24) is the magnetoquasistatic Ampere law with the stated condition m_DM R << 1; Eqs. (26), (32), and (34) are constructed solutions in the idealized spherical cavity, not restatements of J_eff. Equation (26), for example, carries the VSH structure and the prefactor m_A' R / (2 - (m_A' R)^2) that come from solving ∇×B = J_eff with conducting boundary conditions. The R-scaling follows from an Ampere-law area/circumference argument (Eq. 25), which is independent of h and of details of the outer boundary. The robustness argument (Eq. 35 and surrounding text) uses Maxwell's equation ∇×B_env = 0 and the VSH curl identities (A12)-(A14) to show B_env cannot contain Φ_lm; this is an analytic argument, not a citation. The only model inputs are the IGRF geomagnetic field, the conductivity assumptions, and the Earth-interior κ10 range, none of which is fitted to the signal being predicted; Fig. 4 explicitly labels the recast as non-rigorous and dependent on interior modeling. Limitation disclosures — footnote 10, the Schumann resonance mismatch in Sec. II.C, and the aspherical magnetopause discussion — weaken robustness or coverage but do not reduce the central claim to its inputs. Self-citations to Refs. [52,54,66] provide prior context, but the review re-derives the formulas and the searches use public and independently analyzed data, so the self-citation is not load-bearing.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on treating UBDM as a classical AC effective current, on perfect-conductor boundary conditions for the Earth and ionosphere, on neglecting the displacement current at low masses, and on the VSH projection to isolate a robust signal component. For mDM there is one hand-set numerical input, κ10=0.5, which carries an O(1) modeling uncertainty. No new particle, force, or conserved quantity is introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • κ_ellm (especially κ10) = κ10 = 0.5 (fiducial; estimated range 0.5–2.3)
    Unobservable part of the geomagnetic vector potential in Eq. (33); not fixed by magnetic-field observations. It sets the dominant mDM signal in Eq. (34) and the recast constraints in Fig. 4, which are stated to be accurate only to O(1).
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption UBDM can be described as a classical oscillating effective current J_eff with negligible backreaction on the DM background.
    Sec. II A: weak coupling and ρ_DM ~ 0.3 GeV/cm^3, v_DM ~ 10^-3 are used to write the fields as classical plane waves and to neglect backreaction in Maxwell's equations.
  • domain assumption The Earth's interior and the ionosphere act as good conductors, with the lower ~100 km atmosphere as vacuum, in a concentric spherical geometry.
    Sec. II B: the model takes the Earth as a perfectly conducting sphere and the ionosphere as a concentric perfectly conducting shell. The paper notes this is idealized and may fail for m_DM <~ 1e-16 eV.
  • domain assumption For m_DM R << 1, the electric-field term in the Ampère-Maxwell law can be neglected, reducing it to ∇×B_DM = J_eff.
    Sec. II A and Eq. (24): this approximation underlies all three signal formulas and the R-scaling argument. The paper explicitly abandons it at higher masses.
  • domain assumption The geomagnetic field is described by the IGRF-13 multipole expansion, and the mDM vector potential contains unobservable κ_ellm terms.
    Sec. II B, Eqs. (30) and (33): the axion and mDM signals depend on the Earth's DC magnetic field and on a gauge-dependent part of its vector potential that is fixed by interior-current modeling, not by B0 measurements.
  • standard math Vector spherical harmonics form an orthonormal basis, with the divergence and curl identities in Eqs. (A9)-(A14).
    Appendix A: used to solve Eq. (24), to separate the robust Φ_ellm component from B_env, and to write the signal formulas.
  • domain assumption The mDM background distribution is not significantly deflected by the geomagnetic field.
    Footnote 7: the treatment remains valid only if π e_m^2 |B0|^2 R^4 << 1; above the dashed red line in Fig. 4 the signal calculation breaks down.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 20619 in / 13954 out tokens · 141421 ms · 2026-08-01T23:34:54.123325+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Ultralight bosonic dark matter (UBDM) that couples to electromagnetism can generate an oscillating magnetic-field signal at the Earth's surface. This is referred to as the "Earth transducer" effect, as the Earth converts UBDM into a detectable magnetic field. Similar DM-induced fields in laboratory experiments typically scale with the size $L$ of the experiment. Because the Earth transducer signal instead scales with the large radius of the Earth, $R$, it is one of the most powerful direct probes of UBDM with masses $m_\mathrm{DM}\lesssim1/R\sim3\times10^{-14}\,\mathrm{eV}$. It has many other favorable properties, such as high spatial and temporal coherence and robustness to atmospheric modeling. In this review, we derive the Earth transducer effect and its properties for multiple UBDM models, and discuss current and future prospects to detect it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16342 by Ibrahim A. Sulai, Saarik Kalia.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Sketches of idealized spherical Earth-ionosphere cavity and Amp`ere’s law arguments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Summary of constraints on DPDM ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Sensitivity of Earth transducer effect to mDM. We recast the SuperMAG low-fidelity [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 27 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv

    F. Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv. Phys. Acta6(1933) 110–127

    1933

  2. [2]

    V. C. Rubin and W. K. Ford, Jr.,Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions, Astrophys. J.159(1970) 379–403

    1970

  3. [3]

    Clowe, M

    D. Clowe, M. Bradaˇ c, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones et al.,A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter,The Astrophysical Journal648(Aug. 2006) L109–L113. [4]Planck, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6 [arXiv:1807.06209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  4. [5]

    Catena and P

    R. Catena and P. Ullio,A novel determination of the local dark matter density,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2010(Aug. 2010) 004–004

    2010

  5. [6]

    N. W. Evans, C. A. J. O’Hare and C. McCabe,Refinement of the standard halo model for dark matter searches in light of the Gaia Sausage,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 023012 [arXiv:1810.11468]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  6. [7]

    S¨ oding, R

    L. S¨ oding, R. L. Bartel and P. Mertsch,Local dark matter density from Gaia DR3 K-dwarfs using Gaussian processes, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society542(Aug. 2025) 2987–2997. 16

    2025

  7. [8]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,WISPy Cold Dark Matter,JCAP06(2012) 013 [arXiv:1201.5902]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  8. [9]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball and K. van Bibber,The Search for Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter. Springer, 2022, 10.1007/978- 3-030-95852-7

    doi:10.1007/978- 2022

  9. [10]

    Antypas et al.,New Horizons: Scalar and Vector Ultralight Dark Matter,arXiv:2203.14915

    D. Antypas et al.,New Horizons: Scalar and Vector Ultralight Dark Matter,arXiv:2203.14915

    arXiv

  10. [11]

    Lin, H.-Y

    S.-C. Lin, H.-Y. Schive, S.-K. Wong and T. Chiueh,Self-consistent construction of virialized wave dark matter halos,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 103523

    2018

  11. [12]

    G. P. Centers, J. W. Blanchard, J. Conrad, N. L. Figueroa, A. Garcon, A. V. Gramolin et al.,Stochastic fluctuations of bosonic dark matter,Nat. Comm.12(2021) 7321

    2021

  12. [13]

    D. Y. Cheong, N. L. Rodd and L.-T. Wang,A quantum description of wave dark matter,arXiv:2408.04696

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [14]

    Holdom,TwoU(1)’s andϵCharge Shifts,Phys

    B. Holdom,TwoU(1)’s andϵCharge Shifts,Phys. Lett. B166(1986) 196–198

    1986

  14. [15]

    Cvetiˇ c and P

    M. Cvetiˇ c and P. Langacker,Implications of Abelian extended gauge structures from string models,Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 3570 [arXiv:hep-ph/9511378]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  15. [16]

    A. E. Nelson and J. Scholtz,Dark Light, Dark Matter and the Misalignment Mechanism,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 103501 [arXiv:1105.2812]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  16. [17]

    P. W. Graham, J. Mardon and S. Rajendran,Vector Dark Matter from Inflationary Fluctuations,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 103520 [arXiv:1504.02102]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  17. [18]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise and F. Wilczek,Cosmology of the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120(1983) 127–132

    1983

  18. [19]

    Abbott and P

    L. Abbott and P. Sikivie,A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120(1983) 133–136

    1983

  19. [20]

    Dine and W

    M. Dine and W. Fischler,The Not So Harmless Axion,Phys. Lett. B120(1983) 137–141

    1983

  20. [21]

    Svrcek and E

    P. Svrcek and E. Witten,Axions In String Theory,JHEP06(2006) 051 [arXiv:hep-th/0605206]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  21. [22]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper and J. March-Russell,String Axiverse,Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 123530 [arXiv:0905.4720]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  22. [23]

    Wen and E

    X.-G. Wen and E. Witten,Electric and magnetic charges in superstring models,Nuclear Physics B261(1985) 651–677

    1985

  23. [24]

    L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell and S. M. West,Freeze-in production of fimp dark matter,Journal of High Energy Physics2010(Mar. 2010)

    2010

  24. [25]

    Alonso- ´Alvarez, J

    G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, J. Gehrlein, J. Jaeckel and S. Schenk,Very light asymmetric dark matter,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2019(Sept. 2019) 003–003

    2019

  25. [26]

    Jaeckel and S

    J. Jaeckel and S. Schenk,Challenging the stability of light millicharged dark matter,Physical Review D103(May 2021)

    2021

  26. [27]

    Sikivie,Experimental Tests of the Invisible Axion,Phys

    P. Sikivie,Experimental Tests of the Invisible Axion,Phys. Rev. Lett.51(1983) 1415–1417

    1983

  27. [28]

    Jaeckel,Probing minicharged particles with tests of coulomb’s law,Physical Review Letters103(Aug

    J. Jaeckel,Probing minicharged particles with tests of coulomb’s law,Physical Review Letters103(Aug. 2009)

    2009

  28. [29]

    Ehret, M

    K. Ehret, M. Frede, S. Ghazaryan, M. Hildebrandt, E.-A. Knabbe, D. Kracht et al.,New ALPS results on hidden-sector lightweights,Phys. Lett. B689(2010) 149–155 [arXiv:1004.1313]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  29. [30]

    Redondo and A

    J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,Light shining through walls,Contemp. Phys.52(2011) 211–236 [arXiv:1011.3741]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  30. [31]

    Horns, J

    D. Horns, J. Jaeckel, A. Lindner, A. Lobanov, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,Searching for WISPy Cold Dark Matter with a Dish Antenna,JCAP04(2013) 016 [arXiv:1212.2970]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  31. [32]

    M. Betz, F. Caspers, M. Gasior, M. Thumm and S. W. Rieger,First results of the CERN resonant weakly interacting sub-eV particle search (CROWS),Phys. Rev. D88(oct 2013)

    2013

  32. [33]

    Chaudhuri, P

    S. Chaudhuri, P. W. Graham, K. Irwin, J. Mardon, S. Rajendran and Y. Zhao,Radio for hidden-photon dark matter detection,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 075012 [arXiv:1411.7382]. [34]MADMAX Working Group, A. Caldwell, G. Dvali, B. Majorovits, A. Millar, G. Raffelt, J. Redondo et al.,Dielectric Haloscopes: A New Way to Detect Axion Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  33. [36]

    Baryakhtar, J

    M. Baryakhtar, J. Huang and R. Lasenby,Axion and hidden photon dark matter detection with multilayer optical haloscopes, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 035006 [arXiv:1803.11455]. [37]IAXO Collaboration, E. Armengaud, D. Atti´ e, S. Basso, P. Brun, N. Bykovskiy, J. Carmona et al.,Physics potential of the International Axion Observatory (IAXO),JCAP06(2019) 047 [arXiv...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [38]

    Lawson, A

    M. Lawson, A. J. Millar, M. Pancaldi, E. Vitagliano and F. Wilczek,Tunable axion plasma haloscopes,Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(2019) 141802 [arXiv:1904.11872]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [39]

    Berlin, R

    A. Berlin, R. T. D’Agnolo, S. A. R. Ellis, P. Schuster and N. Toro,Directly deflecting particle dark matter,Physical Review Letters124(Jan. 2020)

    2020

  36. [40]

    Berlin and A

    A. Berlin and A. Hook,Searching for millicharged particles with superconducting radio-frequency cavities,Physical Review D102(Aug. 2020)

    2020

  37. [41]

    A. V. Gramolin, D. Aybas, D. Johnson, J. Adam and A. O. Sushkov,Search for axion-like dark matter with ferromagnets, Nat. Phys.17(2021) 79 [arXiv:2003.03348]. [42]FUNK Experiment, A. Andrianavalomahefa, C. M. Sch¨ afer, D. Veberiˇ c, R. Engel, T. Schwetz, H.-J. Mathes et al.,Limits from the Funk Experiment on the Mixing Strength of Hidden-Photon Dark Matt...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  38. [43]

    C. P. Salemi et al.,Search for Low-Mass Axion Dark Matter with ABRACADABRA-10 cm,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 081801 [arXiv:2102.06722]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  39. [44]

    Berlin and K

    A. Berlin and K. Schutz,Helioscope for gravitationally bound millicharged particles,Physical Review D105(May 2022)

    2022

  40. [45]

    Chiles, I

    J. Chiles, I. Charaev, R. Lasenby, M. Baryakhtar, J. Huang, A. Roshko et al.,New constraints on dark photon dark matter 17 with superconducting nanowire detectors in an optical haloscope,Phys. Rev. Letters128(Jun 2022) [arXiv:2110.01582]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  41. [46]

    C. M. Adair, K. Altenm¨ uller, V. Anastassopoulos, S. Arguedas Cuendis, J. Baier, K. Barth et al.,Search for Dark Matter Axions with CAST-CAPP,Nature Communications13(Oct. 2022)

    2022

  42. [47]

    Jiang, T

    M. Jiang, T. Hong, D. Hu, Y. Chen, F. Yang, T. Hu et al.,Long-baseline quantum sensor network as dark matter haloscope, Nature Communications15(Apr. 2024)

    2024

  43. [48]

    Berlin, R

    A. Berlin, R. Harnik, Y.-Y. Li and B. Xu,Millicharged condensates on earth,arXiv:2404.16094

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [49]

    X. Bai, M. J. Jewell, J. Echevers, K. van Bibber, A. Droster, M. H. Esmat et al.,Dark matter axion search with haystac phase ii,Physical Review Letters134(Apr. 2025)

    2025

  45. [50]

    Carosi, C

    G. Carosi, C. Cisneros, N. Du, S. Durham, N. Robertson, C. Goodman et al.,Search for Axion Dark Matter from 1.1 to 1.3 GHz with ADMX,Physical Review Letters135(Nov. 2025)

    2025

  46. [51]

    Kalia et al.,Improved Dark Photon Sensitivity from a Superconducting-Radio-Frequency-Cavity Experiment,Phys

    S. Kalia et al.,Improved Dark Photon Sensitivity from a Superconducting-Radio-Frequency-Cavity Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 111802 [arXiv:2510.02427]

    arXiv 2026

  47. [52]

    M. A. Fedderke, P. W. Graham, D. F. Jackson Kimball and S. Kalia,Earth as a transducer for dark-photon dark-matter detection,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 075023 [arXiv:2106.00022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  48. [53]

    M. A. Fedderke, P. W. Graham, D. F. Jackson Kimball and S. Kalia,Search for dark-photon dark matter in the SuperMAG geomagnetic field dataset,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 095032 [arXiv:2108.08852]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  49. [54]

    A. Arza, M. A. Fedderke, P. W. Graham, D. F. Jackson Kimball and S. Kalia,Earth as a transducer for axion dark-matter detection,Phys. Rev. D105(May 2022) 095007 [arXiv:2112.09620]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  50. [55]

    Friel, J

    M. Friel, J. W. Gjerloev, S. Kalia and A. Zamora,Search for ultralight dark matter in the supermag high-fidelity dataset, Physical Review D110(Dec. 2024) . [56]http://supermag.jhuapl.edu

    2024

  51. [57]

    J. W. Gjerloev,A global ground-based magnetometer initiative,Eos90(2009) 230–231

    2009

  52. [58]

    J. W. Gjerloev,The SuperMAG data processing technique,J. Geophys. Res. Space Phys.117(2012) A09213

    2012

  53. [59]

    Taruya, A

    A. Taruya, A. Nishizawa and Y. Himemoto,Hunting axion dark matter signatures in low-frequency terrestrial magnetic fields,Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2025(11 2025) 111E01

    2025

  54. [60]

    Nishizawa, A

    A. Nishizawa, A. Taruya and Y. Himemoto,Axion dark matter search from terrestrial magnetic fields at extremely low frequencies,arXiv:2504.07559

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  55. [61]

    Nomura, A

    K. Nomura, A. Nishizawa, A. Taruya and Y. Himemoto,Searching for dark photon dark matter from terrestrial magnetic fields,arXiv:2509.15783

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  56. [62]

    C. D. Beggan and M. Musur,Observation of Ionospheric Alfv´ en Resonances at 1–30 Hz and Their Superposition With the Schumann Resonances,Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics123(2018) 4202–4214

    2018

  57. [63]

    I. A. Sulai, S. Kalia, A. Arza, I. M. Bloch, E. C. Mu˜ noz, C. Fabian et al.,Hunt for magnetic signatures of hidden-photon and axion dark matter in the wilderness,Phys. Rev. D108(Nov. 2023) [arXiv:2306.11575]. [64]SNIPE Hunt,SNIPE Hunt Run II Results(in preparation), 2026

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [65]

    A. Arza, Y. Gong, J. Guo, X. Huang, J. Shu, H. Tian et al.,Search for ultralight dark matter with quantum magnetometry in the earth’s cavity,arXiv:2511.16553

    arXiv

  59. [66]

    A. Arza, Y. Gong, J. Shu, L. Wu, Q. Yuan and B. Zhu,Geomagnetic constraints on millicharged dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(Jan 2026) 041001

    2026

  60. [67]

    I. M. Bloch and S. Kalia,Curl up with a goodB: detecting ultralight dark matter with differential magnetometry,JHEP 2024(Jan. 2024) [arXiv:2308.10931]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  61. [68]

    Taruya, A

    A. Taruya, A. Nishizawa and Y. Himemoto,Signature of axion dark matter in low-frequency terrestrial electromagnetic fields: formulation and predictions,arXiv:2509.14673. [69]SNIPE Hunt,Millicharged Dark Matter Searches with SNIPE Hunt Experiment(in preparation), 2026

    arXiv 2026

  62. [70]

    A. T. Price,The Electrical Conductivity of the Earth,Q. J. R. Astron. Soc.11(1970) 23

    1970

  63. [71]

    V. R. S. Hutton,The electrical conductivity of the Earth and planets,Rep. Prog. Phys.39(1976) 487–572

    1976

  64. [72]

    Sagalyn and H

    R. Sagalyn and H. Burke,Atmospheric Electricity, inHandbook of Geophysics and the Space Environment(A. S. Jursa, ed.), ch. 20.1. Air Force Geophysics Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command, United States Air Force, 1985

    1985

  65. [73]

    Takeda and T

    M. Takeda and T. Araki,Electric conductivity of the ionosphere and nocturnal currents,J. Atmos. Terr. Phys.47(1985) 601–609

    1985

  66. [74]

    Richmond and J

    A. Richmond and J. Thayer,Ionospheric Electrodynamics: A Tutorial, inMagnetospheric Current Systems (Geophysical Monograph 118)(S. Ohtani, R. Fujii, M. Hesse and R. L. Lysak, eds.), pp. 131–146. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 2000

    2000

  67. [75]

    Kallenrode,Space Physics: An Introduction to Plasmas and Particles in the Heliosphere and Magnetospheres

    M. Kallenrode,Space Physics: An Introduction to Plasmas and Particles in the Heliosphere and Magnetospheres. Advanced Texts in Physics. Springer, 2004

    2004

  68. [76]

    Shue and P

    J.-H. Shue and P. Song,The location and shape of the magnetopause,Planet. Space Sci.50(2002) 549–558

    2002

  69. [77]

    D. G. Sibeck and R.-Q. Lin,Size and shape of the distant magnetotail,J. Geophys. Res. Space Phys.119(2014) 1028–1043

    2014

  70. [78]

    Alken, E

    P. Alken, E. Th´ ebault, C. D. Beggan, H. Amit, J. Aubert, J. Baerenzung et al.,International Geomagnetic Reference Field: the thirteenth generation,Earth Planets Space73(2021) 49

    2021

  71. [79]

    W. O. Schumann, ¨Uber die strahlungslosen Eigenschwingungen einer leitenden Kugel, die von einer Luftschicht und einer Ionosph¨ arenh¨ ulle umgeben ist,Z. Naturforsch. A7(1952) 149–154

    1952

  72. [80]

    Bliokh, A

    P. Bliokh, A. Nikolaenko, I. Filippov, I. Filippov and D. Llanwyn-Jones,Schumann Resonances in the Earth-ionosphere Cavity, vol. 9 ofIEE Electromagnetic Waves Series. Peter Peregrinus, 1980

    1980

  73. [81]

    Rodr ´ ıguez-Camacho, A

    J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Camacho, A. Salinas, M. C. Carri´ on, J. Port ´ ı, J. Fornieles-Callej´ on and S. Toledo-Redondo,Four Year Study 18 of the Schumann Resonance Regular Variations Using the Sierra Nevada Station Ground-Based Magnetometers,Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres127(2022)

    2022

  74. [82]

    C. G. Constable and S. C. Constable,Satellite Magnetic Field Measurements: Applications in Studying the Deep Earth, pp. 147–159. American Geophysical Union, AGU, 2004. DOI. [83]https://twinleaf.com/vector/VMR/. [84]https://lemisensors.com/?p=245. [85]https://quspin.com/qtfm-gen-2/

    2004

  75. [86]

    Kadota, T

    K. Kadota, T. Sekiguchi and H. Tashiro,A new constraint on millicharged dark matter from galaxy clusters, arXiv:1602.04009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  76. [87]

    Stebbins and G

    A. Stebbins and G. Krnjaic,New limits on charged dark matter from large-scale coherent magnetic fields,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2019(Dec. 2019) 003–003

    2019

  77. [88]

    Wadekar and G

    D. Wadekar and G. R. Farrar,Gas-rich dwarf galaxies as a new probe of dark matter interactions with ordinary matter, Phys. Rev. D103(Jun 2021) 123028

    2021

  78. [89]

    S. D. McDermott and S. J. Witte,Cosmological evolution of light dark photon dark matter,Phys. Rev. D101(Mar 2020) 063030

    2020

  79. [90]

    A. Hook, J. Huang and M. Shalaby,No cosmological constraints on dark photon dark matter from resonant conversion: Impact of nonlinear plasma dynamics,arXiv:2510.13956

    arXiv

  80. [91]

    Hoof and L

    S. Hoof and L. Schulz,Updated constraints on axion-like particles from temporal information in supernova SN1987a gamma- ray data,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2023(mar 2023) 054

    2023

Showing first 80 references.