Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 134 references

Hidden-photon dark matter behaves like a plasma, and plasma instabilities can strip roughly 97% of a 10^7-solar-mass subhalo on its first close pass through the Milky Way.

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 09:41 UTC pith:BUWKN3QL

load-bearing objection A genuinely new mechanism with plausible qualitative impact, but the headline 84–97% mass-loss numbers rest on an unvalidated rate prescription. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.27312 v1 pith:BUWKN3QL submitted 2026-07-29 astro-ph.CO hep-phphysics.plasm-ph

Non-linear Evolution of Dark Plasma Subhalos

Andrew Liu , Anirudh Prabhu , Akaxia Cruz , Mariangela Lisanti This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO hep-phphysics.plasm-ph
keywords dark plasmahidden photon dark matterplasma instabilitiessubhalo mass functionMilky Way subhalosself-interacting dark matterparticle-in-cell simulationtidal stripping
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.

Dark matter carrying a long-range hidden-photon force behaves like a plasma, so a small dark-matter subhalo streaming through the Milky Way's dark halo is a counter-streaming plasma system. This paper establishes, through particle-in-cell simulations stitched to orbital trajectories, that the resulting electrostatic instabilities heat subhalo particles and push many above escape speed, evaporating mass in an outside-in pattern. On a highly eccentric orbit the effect is dramatic: about 97% of a 10^7-solar-mass subhalo and 84% of a 10^9-solar-mass subhalo can be lost by first pericenter, versus roughly 30% from ordinary tidal stripping. If real, this preferential destruction of light halos would suppress the low-mass end of the Milky Way's subhalo mass function, turning hidden-photon dark matter into a population-level observable. The authors treat the 1D electrostatic calculation as a first estimate and note that higher-dimensional simulations strip more, not less, suggesting the numbers are conservative.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central result is that the nonlinear saturation of electrostatic streaming instabilities — not just their linear growth — converts the relative bulk motion of a subhalo and its host into turbulent heating that unbinds dark-matter particles. The authors model this by computing, from particle-in-cell simulations of counter-streaming dark plasmas, the 'bound fraction' f_bound, the share of particles remaining below the subhalo escape speed after saturation, and then converting that fraction into a density-loss rate for each radial shell of the subhalo using the re-virialization timescale of the halo. Applied along orbits in a Milky Way-like potential, the recipe yi

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the bound fraction f_bound produced by a streaming (two-stream/beam-plasma) instability: in a small, periodic simulation box initialized with a cold subhalo beam moving through a warmer host plasma, the instability saturates and leaves a final velocity distribution, and f_bound counts the particles still below 4σ_SH, the adopted escape threshold. The paper's update rule (Eq. 11) removes mass from each concentric shell at a rate (1 - f_bound)/τ_SH, where τ_SH ~ r_s,SH/σ_SH is the halo's orbital/re-virialization timescale, while a separate tidal-stripping rule (Eq. 10) removes mass outside the instantaneous tidal radius. The orbit supplies the time-dependent density

Load-bearing premise

The headline mass-loss percentages rest on the assumption that the bound fraction measured in a small, homogeneous, gravity-free simulation can be converted directly into a shell-by-shell density-loss rate on the subhalo's re-virialization timescale (the paper's Eq. 11); if that conversion overstates how quickly heated particles actually escape a self-gravitating, tidally deformed halo, the 84–97% figures would shrink.

What would settle it

A full three-dimensional simulation of a 10^7 M_sun subhalo (or a 10^9 M_sun one) falling into a Milky-Way-like host, with self-gravity and dark-electromagnetic forces evolved together through first pericenter, would settle the claim: if the retained bound mass remains well above a few percent, the f_bound-to-density mapping in Eq. 11 is too aggressive. Observationally, a Milky Way satellite census showing no deficit or cutoff in the ~10^7 M_sun regime would contradict the strongest population-level prediction.

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

If this is right

  • Plasma heating, not tides, sets the survival of the lightest subhalos: on an ε=0.9 orbit, a 10^7 M_sun subhalo retains ~3% of its mass and a 10^9 M_sun subhalo ~16%, versus ~70% from tidal stripping alone.
  • Evaporation is radial and time-ordered: outer shells are stripped first, and the central region (within the scale radius) is only eroded near first pericenter, so surviving subhalos should have compact, dense cores.
  • Population-averaged over an eccentricity distribution, a 10^7 (10^9) M_sun subhalo ends at ~5×10^5 (2×10^8) M_sun after first pericenter, so the low-mass subhalo mass function should be shallower than CDM predicts, possibly with a sharp cutoff below ~10^7 M_sun.
  • Circular orbits are much less destructive: at ε=0.1, plasma heating removes roughly 30–50% of the mass rather than 84–97%, so the signature is strongest for subhalos on radial orbits.
  • Because a 2D-2V test yields a lower final bound fraction than 1D, the paper's 1D-based mass-loss estimates are presented as conservative lower bounds on evaporation efficiency.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the suppression is as strong as modeled, the Milky Way's census of faint dwarf satellites — not direct dark-matter detection — becomes one of the sharpest probes of hidden-photon couplings in the q/m ~ 10^-14 GeV^-1 window.
  • The model implies an orbit-dependent minimum surviving mass: because low-mass halos are preferentially erased, the observed satellite mass function should show a deficit that is stronger for radially infalling satellites than for circular ones, a comparison the paper does not make explicitly.
  • A natural next step is to let tidal stripping and plasma heating interact: tidal stripping lowers the subhalo velocity dispersion, which the paper notes should make the remnant even more vulnerable to instabilities, likely accelerating dissolution beyond the separate-treatment estimates.
  • Full 3D electromagnetic runs that include Weibel/filamentation modes may substantially revise the numbers upward (more mass loss), so the 84–97% figures should be read as a floor on evaporation efficiency rather than a prediction.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the non-linear evolution of dark-matter subhalos in a hidden-photon ('dark plasma') model, focusing on electrostatic streaming instabilities excited by the relative motion of a subhalo through the Milky Way halo. The authors build a semi-analytic model that couples a one-dimensional particle-in-cell (PIC) simulation suite (TRISTAN-MP), which provides the post-saturation bound fraction f_bound as a function of local density contrast and streaming speed, with a galpy-based orbital model. The density profile is evolved shell-by-shell under two mass-loss channels applied separately: tidal stripping (Eq. 10) and plasma heating (Eq. 11). The headline result is that on a highly eccentric orbit (epsilon=0.9), plasma heating removes ~97% (84%) of the initial mass of a 10^7 (10^9) M_sun subhalo by t=1.2 t_peri, while tidal stripping alone removes only ~30%. The paper also discusses the resulting suppression of the low-mass Milky Way subhalo mass function.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, this is a significant new channel for subhalo disruption in self-interacting dark-matter models with long-range forces. The paper provides the first nonlinear kinetic treatment of electrostatic instabilities in the subhalo context, and it is appropriately cautious: it explicitly lists the limitations of the 1D setup, the absence of self-consistent gravity, the fixed escape-velocity criterion, and the truncation of the density-ratio simulation window. Strengths include the use of a standard PIC code with resolution checks (Fig. S2), the public availability of the simulation and analysis scripts, and the absence of fitted parameters tuned to reproduce the headline mass-loss numbers. The main gap is that the central quantitative claim—the 84–97% mass loss—is not a direct simulation result but the output of an unvalidated mapping from a periodic-box saturation fraction to a continuous density-loss rate. That mapping is load-bearing and needs justification or calibration.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (11)] The headline mass-loss numbers are produced by iterating Eq. (11), which converts a saturated bound fraction f_bound measured in a periodic, gravity-free 1D PIC box into a per-time-step density decrement: rho_{j+1} = [1 - (1 - f_bound) dt / tau_SH] rho_j, with tau_SH ~ r_s,SH/sigma_SH. This is an ad hoc interpolation between 'no loss' and 'instant loss to f_bound' on a re-virialization timescale. The PIC calculation provides f_bound as an end state after saturation, not a rate; nothing in the simulation measures a rate, and the choice tau_SH ~ r_s,SH/sigma_SH rather than the local shell dynamical time or the orbital time is not derived. The sensitivity is material: replacing Eq. (11) with the equally plausible instantaneous-saturation map rho_{j+1} = f_bound rho_j, or with tau_SH replaced by the local crossing time, will shift the final masses in Fig. 2 substantially. I therefore ask the
  2. [§3.2–3.3, Eq. (11), Fig. S2] The periodic-boundary PIC box keeps unbound particles in the simulation, where they continue to participate in the nonlinear wave-particle dynamics and can heat the remaining bound population. In the real subhalo these particles would leave the system, changing the subsequent evolution of the bound component. The paper's statement that the 1D results are 'conservative' relative to 2D (Sec. 5, Fig. S2) does not address this particular periodic-box artifact: the effect could go in either direction. A quantitative estimate of the impact of retaining unbound particles—for example, a test with absorbing boundaries or particle removal—would help establish whether the f_bound values used in Eq. (11) are robust. Without this, the 84–97% mass-loss figures remain sensitive to a known but unquantified modeling choice.
  3. [§3.2, Eq. (10) and §4.1] The comparison between plasma heating and tidal stripping treats the two channels in isolation. The authors note in Sec. 6 that the mechanisms may act in concert and accelerate dissolution, but the central claim that 'plasma heating dominates over tidal stripping' is based on this separate treatment. This is a reasonable first step, but the paper should state more explicitly in the abstract or conclusions that the quoted 84–97% figures are for plasma heating alone under a specific, unvalidated rate prescription, and not a prediction for the full coupled evolution. A short discussion of how the two channels might couple (e.g., reduced sigma_SH after tidal stripping increases plasma-heating efficiency) would help readers calibrate the scope.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and passim] The typesetting loses superscripts in several places: '10 7 (109)' should read '10^7 (10^9) M_sun'; similar issues occur in Eqs. (3), (4), (5), and the text. Please correct these for readability.
  2. [§3.2] The text says the evolution is modeled 'up to the first pericentric passage' but then sets the cutoff at t=1.2 t_peri, which is after first pericenter. Please reword to 'up to 1.2 times the time of first pericenter' to avoid the apparent inconsistency.
  3. [§4.2, Eq. (14)] The summation symbol appears as '4 X i=0' due to a rendering issue; it should be a standard sum. Also, the population-averaged values are computed for only two infall masses and then used to infer a suppression below 10^7 M_sun; this extrapolation is reasonable but should be explicitly labeled as an interpolation-based estimate.
  4. [§3.3, Eq. (12)] The condition q_chi/m_chi >> N_grid sqrt(8 pi) M_pl would benefit from a short derivation or a pointer to the supplemental material; currently the reader must infer the origin of the numerical factor. Also, the units of q_chi/m_chi in Eq. (12) should be stated consistently.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular structure in the central derivation; the mass-loss numbers follow forward from independent PIC simulations via Eq. (11), and the self-citations present are peripheral rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claim—~84–97% plasma-driven mass loss—is not a re-description of fitted inputs. The bound fraction f_bound is produced by independent TRISTAN-MP 1D PIC simulations over 60 density-ratio/velocity combinations (Sec. 3.3, Fig. S1), not tuned to the final mass-loss percentages. Eq. (11) then converts f_bound into a shell-density decrement using a stated re-virialization timescale tau_SH ~ r_s,SH/sigma_SH; this is a forward modeling assumption, not an identity. The orbital trajectory comes from galpy's external MWPotential2014, and the tidal-stripping benchmark uses external parameters (Green et al. 2021; Jiang et al. 2021); none of these encode the plasma-loss result. The escape criterion v_esc = 4 sigma_SH and the saturation-plus-re-virialization decoupling in Eq. (11) shape the answer, but they are limitations/validity risks rather than circular inputs. Self-citations exist (Prabhu & Lisanti, in preparation; Cruz & McQuinn 2023; Giffin et al. 2026; Liu et al. 2026), but each is background, caveat, or software-related and none is used to force the mass-loss conclusion. The paper itself flags the missing self-consistent gravity+PIC treatment and the 1D-to-2D/3D uncertainties (Secs. 5–6), which are honest limitations, not circular reasoning. Accordingly, score 2 reflects minor non-load-bearing self-citation, not a circular derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's headline mass-loss numbers rest on a chosen benchmark q/m, a heuristic escape criterion, an ad hoc re-virialization timescale, and a 1D electrostatic truncation; these are all disclosed but are not derived from first principles or independently measured in this work.

free parameters (6)
  • Fiducial charge-to-mass ratio q_chi/m_chi = 10^-14 e/m_p ~ 3e-15 GeV^-1
    Chosen benchmark (Sec. 2), near the Bullet-Cluster exclusion, sets plasma frequency, Debye length, and instability growth; all mass-loss results scale with it. Not fitted to the paper's data but selected by hand.
  • Escape-velocity threshold v_esc = 4 sigma_SH = 4 sigma_SH, constant in radius
    Used to define f_bound in PIC outputs and hence every shell's mass loss (Sec. 3.2). The paper notes it overestimates the true escape speed, so it is a deliberately conservative choice, not derived from the simulation.
  • Re-virialization/escape timescale tau_SH = ~ r_s,SH / sigma_SH (2 km/s or 10 km/s cases)
    Introduced ad hoc in Eq. (11) to convert the heated, apparently unbound fraction into a density decrement per timestep; no derivation or calibration is given.
  • Density-ratio simulation window = rho_SH/rho_MW in [10^-3, 10^2]; f_bound=1 outside
    PIC table is restricted to this window; outside it mass loss is set to zero, which directly affects the pericenter evolution of dense inner shells and is a modeling choice rather than a fit.
  • Tidal-stripping efficiency alpha = 0.55
    Borrowed from Green et al. (2021) and used in Eq. (10) for the tidal baseline; not fitted here and not central to plasma heating, but enters the comparison.
  • Velocity-dispersion approximation = sigma_i^2 ~ G rho_s,i r_s,i^2, constant per halo
    Assumed uniform at scale-radius value (Sec. 3.1), affecting f_bound and escape criterion; paper calls it conservative because higher dispersion suppresses plasma heating.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Dark U(1) pair-plasma model with dark photon mediator
    Defines the physics: DM consists of charged +/- q_chi particles interacting via a light hidden photon; all results live in this model (Sec. 1, Eqs. 1-2).
  • domain assumption Collisionless, weakly coupled plasma with Lambda >> 1
    Sec. 2 scaling estimates justify neglect of collisional relaxation, annihilation, and Bremsstrahlung; if these processes were significant, the collective-mode evolution and heating would differ.
  • domain assumption Local charge neutrality and CDM-like Maxwell-Boltzmann/NFW initial equilibria
    Sec. 3.1 explicitly restricts to f+ = f- and NFW equilibrium; footnote acknowledges this is not a self-consistent Jeans solution, and stability of other equilibria is deferred.
  • domain assumption Local approximation: lambda_D << r_s and tau_sat << t_dyn
    App. S1.2 justifies treating each radial shell as a homogeneous infinite plasma; if lambda_D/r_s is not small, the PIC setup misrepresents the environment.
  • domain assumption 1D electrostatic approximation ignores magnetic/Weibel/oblique modes
    Secs. 3.3 and 5: only electrostatic modes aligned with streaming are simulated. 2D test suggests 1D is conservative, but oblique modes could change conclusions.
  • domain assumption Periodic boundary conditions model infinite counter-streaming beams
    Sec. 3.3: each radial shell is treated as an infinite, uniform two-beam system because saturation timescales are short; finite geometry and gravity are not included in the PIC box.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 19598 in / 13491 out tokens · 111026 ms · 2026-08-01T09:41:16.768971+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Dark matter that self interacts through long-range forces exhibits coherent, collective effects that are absent in short-range interactions. In the case where dark matter interacts through a hidden-photon mediator, its dynamics closely resemble those of Standard Model plasmas. In such models, various astrophysical environments, including cluster collisions and subhalos orbiting their host halo, are susceptible to plasma instabilities: processes that modify the dark matter velocity distribution and lead to exponential growth of dark electromagnetic fields. In this paper, we present the first study of the non-linear evolution of electrostatic instabilities in dark matter subhalos orbiting within the Milky Way potential using a suite of particle-in-cell simulations. We find that the growth and saturation of these instabilities produce substantial turbulent heating and mass loss, with an efficiency that depends sensitively on subhalo mass and orbital eccentricity. For highly eccentric orbits, plasma heating can reduce the initial mass of a $10^7$ ($10^9$) $\text{M}_\odot$ subhalo by as much as $\sim 97\%$ ($\sim 84\%$) soon after first pericenter. Plasma-induced heating and stripping may therefore leave observable signatures in the Milky Way subhalo population, including a suppression of the low-mass subhalo mass function.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27312 by Akaxia Cruz, Andrew Liu, Anirudh Prabhu, Mariangela Lisanti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic overview of subhalo evolution and phase-space structure in the host halo. (Left) A subhalo on an eccentric orbit within the MW host. The orbit is marked at representative times ta, tb > ta, and tperi, near the first orbital pericenter. The subhalo is sub-divided into radial slices with the n th slice located at radius rn. At time ta, the position of the subhalo center-of-mass is ⃗rSH(ta). (Right)… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Subhalo mass evolution due to turbulent dark plasma heating and tidal stripping (both effects are treated in isolation of one another) for a charge-to-mass ratio qχ/mχ = 10−14 e/mp and an orbit with eccentricity ϵ = 0.9. The fractional mass loss is plotted as a function of time for subhalos with infall virial mass 109 M⊙ (violet) and 107 M⊙ (indigo). The dotted lines denote the mass evo￾lution from tidal s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Density profile evolution for subhalos of infall virial mass 107 M⊙ (left panel) and 109 M⊙ (right panel) during an orbit with eccentricity ϵ = 0.9. The charge-to-mass ratio is taken to be qχ/mχ = 10−14 e/mp. The solid black line shows the final density profile at t = 1.2 tperi when only tidal stripping is active. Tidal stripping leaves the inner regions of both subhalos untouched, only removing mass outsi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Density profiles near pericenter for subhalos with infall mass 107 M⊙ (left panel) and 109 M⊙ (right panel), as a function of eccentricity and for a charge-to-mass ratio qχ/mχ = 10−14 e/mp. The solid black line, identical to that in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_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

134 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    Prabhu, Anirudh and Lisanti, Mariangela , title =

  2. [3]

    , keywords =

    A new era in the search for dark matter. , keywords =. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0542-z , archivePrefix =. 1810.01668 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [6]

    Cardoso, Vitor and Dias, \'O scar J. C. and Hartnett, Gavin S. and Middleton, Matthew and Pani, Paolo and Santos, Jorge E. Constraining the mass of dark photons and axion-like particles through black-hole superradiance. JCAP. 2018. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/03/043. arXiv:1801.01420

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  4. [9]

    , keywords =

    First Data Release of the Merian Survey: A Wide-field Imaging Survey of Dwarf Galaxies at z 0.06─0.10. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae003e , archivePrefix =. 2410.01884 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [10]

    , keywords =

    SPARC: Mass Models for 175 Disk Galaxies with Spitzer Photometry and Accurate Rotation Curves. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/157 , archivePrefix =. 1606.09251 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [11]

    GitHub repository , howpublished =

    Ammar Hakim and the Gkeyll Team , title =. GitHub repository , howpublished =. 2025 , publisher =

    2025

  7. [12]

    Journal of Computational Physics , keywords =

    Discontinuous Galerkin algorithms for fully kinetic plasmas. Journal of Computational Physics , keywords =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017.10.009 , archivePrefix =. 1705.05407 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [13]

    , keywords =

    Self-interacting Dark Matter. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/171833 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1086/171833

  9. [14]

    and Brown, Andrew and Adkins, Toby and Schekochihin, Alexander A

    Ewart, Robert J. and Brown, Andrew and Adkins, Toby and Schekochihin, Alexander A. Collisionless relaxation of a Lynden-Bell plasma. J. Plasma Phys. 2022. doi:10.1017/S0022377822000782. arXiv:2201.03376

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [15]

    , keywords =

    The Exploration of Local VolumE Satellites (ELVES) Survey: A Nearly Volume-limited Sample of Nearby Dwarf Satellite Systems. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6fd7 , archivePrefix =. 2203.00014 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [16]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Robertson, Andrew and Massey, Richard and Eke, Vincent , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2016 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2670 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2670 2016

  12. [17]

    and Markevitch, Maxim and Clowe, Douglas and Gonzalez, Anthony H

    Randall, Scott W. and Markevitch, Maxim and Clowe, Douglas and Gonzalez, Anthony H. and Bradac, Marusa. Constraints on the Self-Interaction Cross-Section of Dark Matter from Numerical Simulations of the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56. Astrophys. J. 2008. doi:10.1086/587859. arXiv:0704.0261

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  13. [18]

    Giffin, Pierce and Liu, Andrew and Boucsein, Jeremias and Cruz, Akaxia and Prabhu, Anirudh and Profumo, Stefano and Roberts, M. Grant. Structure formation with dark magnetohydrodynamics. Phys. Rev. D. 2026. doi:10.1103/4fkn-vx39. arXiv:2511.15810

    arXiv 2026

  14. [19]

    and Ferreira, P

    Durrer, R. and Ferreira, P. G. and Kahniashvili, T. Tensor microwave anisotropies from a stochastic magnetic field. Phys. Rev. D. 2000. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.043001. arXiv:astro-ph/9911040

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  15. [20]

    and Gonzalez, A

    Markevitch, M. and Gonzalez, A. H. and Clowe, D. and Vikhlinin, A. and Forman, W. and Jones, C. and Murray, S. and Tucker, W. , title =. The Astrophysical Journal , abstract =. 2004 , month =. doi:10.1086/383178 , url =

    doi:10.1086/383178 2004

  16. [21]

    and Wetzel, Andrew and Fattahi, Azadeh

    Sales, Laura V. and Wetzel, Andrew and Fattahi, Azadeh. Baryonic solutions and challenges for cosmological models of dwarf galaxies. Nature Astron. 2022. doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w. arXiv:2206.05295

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [22]

    and Steinhardt, Paul J

    Spergel, David N. and Steinhardt, Paul J. Observational evidence for selfinteracting cold dark matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.3760. arXiv:astro-ph/9909386

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  18. [23]

    Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure

    Tulin, Sean and Yu, Hai-Bo. Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure. Phys. Rept. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.11.004. arXiv:1705.02358

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  19. [24]

    Astrophysical tests of dark matter self-interactions

    Adhikari, Susmita and others. Astrophysical tests of dark matter self-interactions. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2025. doi:10.1103/m2vm-59y3. arXiv:2207.10638

    arXiv 2025

  20. [25]

    Principles of plasma physics

  21. [26]

    Journal of Plasma Physics , author=

    Kinetic stability of Chapman–Enskog plasmas , volume=. Journal of Plasma Physics , author=. 2024 , pages=. doi:10.1017/S0022377824000308 , number=

    doi:10.1017/s0022377824000308 2024

  22. [27]

    and Nastac, Michael L

    Ewart, Robert J. and Nastac, Michael L. and Bilbao, Pablo J. and Silva, Thales and Silva, Lu \' s O. and Schekochihin, Alexander A. Relaxation to universal non-Maxwellian equilibria in a collisionless plasma. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 2025. doi:10.1073/pnas.2417813122. arXiv:2409.01742

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [28]

    Universal Nonthermal Power-law Distribution Functions from the Self-consistent Evolution of Collisionless Electrostatic Plasmas

    Banik, Uddipan and Bhattacharjee, Amitava and Sengupta, Wrick. Universal Nonthermal Power-law Distribution Functions from the Self-consistent Evolution of Collisionless Electrostatic Plasmas. Astrophys. J. 2024. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad91a1. arXiv:2408.07127

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [29]

    Journal of Plasma Physics , keywords =

    Non-thermal particle acceleration and power-law tails via relaxation to universal Lynden-Bell equilibria. Journal of Plasma Physics , keywords =. doi:10.1017/S0022377823000983 , archivePrefix =. 2304.03715 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [30]

    and Blanco, P

    Tucker, W. and Blanco, P. and Rappoport, S. and David, L. and Fabricant, D. and Falco, E. E. and Forman, W. and Dressler, A. and Ramella, M. 1e0657-56: a contender for the hottest known cluster of galaxies. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1998. doi:10.1086/311234. arXiv:astro-ph/9801120

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  26. [31]

    and Shin, Yun Chang and Yin, Wen

    Kim, Dongok and Kim, Younggeun and Semertzidis, Yannis K. and Shin, Yun Chang and Yin, Wen. Cosmic axion force. Phys. Rev. D. 2021. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.095010. arXiv:2105.03422

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [32]

    and Ramani, Harikrishnan

    Bogorad, Zachary and Graham, Peter W. and Ramani, Harikrishnan. Coherent self-interactions of dark matter in the Bullet Cluster. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/03/067. arXiv:2311.07648

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [33]

    and Ramani, Harikrishnan

    Bogorad, Zachary and Graham, Peter W. and Ramani, Harikrishnan. Constraints on long-ranged interactions between dark matter and the Standard Model. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/006. arXiv:2410.07324

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [34]

    Long range dark matter self-interactions and plasma instabilities

    Lasenby, Robert. Long range dark matter self-interactions and plasma instabilities. JCAP. 2020. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/11/034. arXiv:2007.00667

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [35]

    Astrophysical plasma instabilities induced by long-range interacting dark matter

    Cruz, Akaxia and McQuinn, Matthew. Astrophysical plasma instabilities induced by long-range interacting dark matter. JCAP. 2023. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/04/028. arXiv:2202.12464

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [36]

    Dark plasmas in the nonlinear regime: Constraints from particle-in-cell simulations

    DeRocco, William and Giffin, Pierce. Dark plasmas in the nonlinear regime: Constraints from particle-in-cell simulations. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.095031. arXiv:2411.11958

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [37]

    and Shukla, N

    Schoeffler, K. and Shukla, N. and Silva, L. O. Can plasma physics establish a significant bound on long-range dark matter interactions?. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.L071701. arXiv:2411.15981

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [38]

    and Loeb, Abraham

    Medvedev, Mikhail V. and Loeb, Abraham. Plasma constraints on the millicharged dark matter. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/113. arXiv:2406.15750

    arXiv 2025

  34. [39]

    Dark matter self-interactions via collisionless shocks in cluster mergers

    Heikinheimo, Matti and Raidal, Martti and Spethmann, Christian and Veerm. Dark matter self-interactions via collisionless shocks in cluster mergers. Phys. Lett. B. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.08.012. arXiv:1504.04371

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  35. [40]

    Collisionless shocks in self-interacting dark matter

    Heikinheimo, Matti and Raidal, Martti and Spethmann, Christian and Veermae, Hardi. Collisionless shocks in self-interacting dark matter. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion. 2017. doi:10.1088/1361-6587/aa7f48. arXiv:1707.03662

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  36. [41]

    Simulations of Galaxy Cluster Collisions with a Dark Plasma Component

    Spethmann, Christian and Veerm. Simulations of Galaxy Cluster Collisions with a Dark Plasma Component. Astron. Astrophys. 2017. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731299. arXiv:1603.07324

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  37. [42]

    and Sachania, Jalpesh , title =

    Dehnen, Walter and McLaughlin, Dean E. and Sachania, Jalpesh , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2006 , month =

    2006

  38. [43]

    Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition

  39. [45]

    Statistical mechanics of violent relaxation in stellar systems

    Lynden-Bell, Donald. Statistical mechanics of violent relaxation in stellar systems. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1967

    1967

  40. [46]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Kummer, Janis and Kahlhoefer, Felix and Schmidt-Hoberg, Kai , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2017 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2715 , url =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2715 2017

  41. [48]

    APS Division of Plasma Physics Meeting Abstracts , year = 2016, series =

    Electron Holes in phase-space: what they are and why they matter. APS Division of Plasma Physics Meeting Abstracts , year = 2016, series =

    2016

  42. [49]

    Kinetic solitary electrostatic structures in collisionless plasma: Phase-space holes , author =. Rev. Mod. Phys. , volume =. 2024 , month =. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.96.045007 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.96.045007 2024

  43. [50]

    and others

    Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910. arXiv:1807.06209

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [52]

    Make Dark Matter Charged Again

    Agrawal, Prateek and Cyr-Racine, Francis-Yan and Randall, Lisa and Scholtz, Jakub. Make Dark Matter Charged Again. JCAP. 2017. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/05/022. arXiv:1610.04611

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  45. [53]

    2023 , eprint=

    Orbital Evolution of Satellite Galaxies in Self-Interacting Dark Matter Models , author=. 2023 , eprint=

    2023

  46. [54]

    Constraining velocity-dependent self-interacting dark matter with the Milky Way’s dwarf spheroidal galaxies , volume=

    Correa, Camila A , year=. Constraining velocity-dependent self-interacting dark matter with the Milky Way’s dwarf spheroidal galaxies , volume=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher=. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab506 , number=

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab506

  47. [55]

    Fritz, T. K. and Battaglia, G. and Pawlowski, M. S. and Kallivayalil, N. and van der Marel, R. and Sohn, S. T. and Brook, C. and Besla, G. , year=. Gaia DR2 proper motions of dwarf galaxies within 420 kpc: Orbits, Milky Way mass, tidal influences, planar alignments, and group infall , volume=. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833343 , journal=

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833343

  48. [58]

    Collisional transport in magnetized plasmas

  49. [59]

    Plasma Physics via Computer Simulation

  50. [61]

    , keywords =

    ELVIS: Exploring the Local Volume in Simulations. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2377 , archivePrefix =. 1310.6746 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [62]

    The SAGA Survey. III. A Census of 101 Satellite Systems around Milky Way─mass Galaxies. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad64c4 , archivePrefix =. 2404.14498 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [64]

    Helmi et al., A. , year=. GaiaData Release 2: Kinematics of globular clusters and dwarf galaxies around the Milky Way , volume=. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832698 , journal=

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832698

  53. [68]

    Garavito-Camargo, Nicolas and Besla, Gurtina and Laporte, Chervin F. P. and Johnston, Kathryn V. and Gómez, Facundo A. and Watkins, Laura L. , year=. Hunting for the Dark Matter Wake Induced by the Large Magellanic Cloud , volume=. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher=. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab32eb , number=

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab32eb

  54. [72]

    TRISTAN-MP: TRIdimensional STANford - Massively Parallel code

  55. [73]

    Physics of Fluids , year = 1960, month = mar, volume =

    Electrostatic Instabilities of a Uniform Non-Maxwellian Plasma. Physics of Fluids , year = 1960, month = mar, volume =. doi:10.1063/1.1706024 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1063/1.1706024 1960

  56. [74]

    Physics of Fluids , year = 1963, month = jun, volume =

    Bound on the Energy Available from a Plasma. Physics of Fluids , year = 1963, month = jun, volume =. doi:10.1063/1.1706823 , adsurl =

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1706823 1963

  57. [75]

    and Carroll, Sean M

    Ackerman, Lotty and Buckley, Matthew R. and Carroll, Sean M. and Kamionkowski, Marc. Dark Matter and Dark Radiation. Phys. Rev. D. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.023519. arXiv:0810.5126

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  58. [76]

    String Axiverse

    Arvanitaki, Asimina and Dimopoulos, Savas and Dubovsky, Sergei and Kaloper, Nemanja and March-Russell, John. String Axiverse. Phys. Rev. D. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.123530. arXiv:0905.4720

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  59. [78]

    and Jedamzik, Karsten and March-Russell, John and West, Stephen M

    Hall, Lawrence J. and Jedamzik, Karsten and March-Russell, John and West, Stephen M. Freeze-In Production of FIMP Dark Matter. JHEP. 2010. doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2010)080. arXiv:0911.1120

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  60. [79]

    and Kaplinghat, Manoj and Tu, Huitzu and Yu, Hai-Bo

    Feng, Jonathan L. and Kaplinghat, Manoj and Tu, Huitzu and Yu, Hai-Bo. Hidden Charged Dark Matter. JCAP. 2009. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2009/07/004. arXiv:0905.3039

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  61. [80]

    and Tsai, Yu-Dai and Wegsman, Shalma and Witte, Samuel J

    Hooper, Dan and Leane, Rebecca K. and Tsai, Yu-Dai and Wegsman, Shalma and Witte, Samuel J. A systematic study of hidden sector dark matter:application to the gamma-ray and antiproton excesses. JHEP. 2020. doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)163. arXiv:1912.08821

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  62. [81]

    Minimal dark matter

    Cirelli, Marco and Fornengo, Nicolao and Strumia, Alessandro. Minimal dark matter. Nucl. Phys. B. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.07.012. arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  63. [82]

    Giudice, G. F. and Romanino, A. Split supersymmetry. Nucl. Phys. B. 2004. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.08.001. arXiv:hep-ph/0406088

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  64. [83]

    Supersymmetric unification without low energy supersymmetry and signatures for fine-tuning at the LHC

    Arkani-Hamed, Nima and Dimopoulos, Savas. Supersymmetric unification without low energy supersymmetry and signatures for fine-tuning at the LHC. JHEP. 2005. doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/06/073. arXiv:hep-th/0405159

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  65. [84]

    and Nomura, Yasunori

    Hall, Lawrence J. and Nomura, Yasunori. Spread Supersymmetry. JHEP. 2012. doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2012)082. arXiv:1111.4519

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  66. [85]

    Mini-Split

    Arvanitaki, Asimina and Craig, Nathaniel and Dimopoulos, Savas and Villadoro, Giovanni. Mini-Split. JHEP. 2013. doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2013)126. arXiv:1210.0555

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  67. [86]

    and Weiner, Neal and Zorawski, Tom

    Arkani-Hamed, Nima and Gupta, Arpit and Kaplan, David E. and Weiner, Neal and Zorawski, Tom. Simply Unnatural Supersymmetry. 2012. arXiv:1212.6971

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  68. [88]

    Excluding fuzzy dark matter with sizes and stellar kinematics of ultrafaint dwarf galaxies

    Dalal, Neal and Kravtsov, Andrey. Excluding fuzzy dark matter with sizes and stellar kinematics of ultrafaint dwarf galaxies. Phys. Rev. D. 2022. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.063517. arXiv:2203.05750

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  69. [89]

    Dynamical Friction

    Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan. Dynamical Friction. I. General Considerations: the Coefficient of Dynamical Friction. Astrophys. J. 1943. doi:10.1086/144517

    doi:10.1086/144517 1943

  70. [90]

    and Xu, Weishuang Linda

    Safdi, Benjamin R. and Xu, Weishuang Linda. Wino and Real Minimal Dark Matter Excluded by Fermi Gamma-Ray Observations. 2025. arXiv:2507.15934

    arXiv 2025

  71. [91]

    and Frenk, Carlos S

    Navarro, Julio F. and Frenk, Carlos S. and White, Simon D. M. A Universal density profile from hierarchical clustering. Astrophys. J. 1997. doi:10.1086/304888. arXiv:astro-ph/9611107

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  72. [92]

    Roberts, K. V. and Berk, H. L. Nonlinear Evolution of a Two-Stream Instability. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1967. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.297

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.19.297 1967

  73. [94]

    2025 , eprint=

    Dwarf diversity in CDM with baryons , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  74. [95]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Burger, Jan D and Zavala, Jesús and Sales, Laura V and Vogelsberger, Mark and Marinacci, Federico and Torrey, Paul , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2022 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac994 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac994 2022

  75. [98]

    Hunter, J. D. , Title =. Computing in Science & Engineering , Volume =

  76. [99]

    Jupyter Notebooks -- a publishing format for reproducible computational workflows , Year =

    Thomas Kluyver and Benjamin Ragan-Kelley and Fernando P. Jupyter Notebooks -- a publishing format for reproducible computational workflows , Year =. Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas , Editor =

  77. [101]

    and Haberland, Matt and Reddy, Tyler and Cournapeau, David and Burovski, Evgeni and Peterson, Pearu and Weckesser, Warren and Bright, Jonathan and

    Virtanen, Pauli and Gommers, Ralf and Oliphant, Travis E. and Haberland, Matt and Reddy, Tyler and Cournapeau, David and Burovski, Evgeni and Peterson, Pearu and Weckesser, Warren and Bright, Jonathan and. Nature Methods , year =

  78. [102]

    Liu, Andrew and Prabhu, Anirudh and Cruz, Akaxia and Lisanti, Mariangela , year =

  79. [103]

    R., Carroll, S

    Ackerman, L., Buckley, M. R., Carroll, S. M., & Kamionkowski, M. 2009, Phys. Rev. D, 79, 023519, 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.023519

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.023519 2009

  80. [104]

    2025, Rev

    Adhikari, S., et al. 2025, Rev. Mod. Phys., 97, 045004, 10.1103/m2vm-59y3

    doi:10.1103/m2vm-59y3 2025

Showing first 80 references.