Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 50 references

A single phase-space function still generates finite-time evolution once dissipation and nonlocal forces are included via doubled variables.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 17:48 UTC pith:OFMHZ43W

load-bearing objection Clean, incremental extension of the Magnusian to Galley-doubled dissipative dynamics, with an explicit 2.5PN cycle map that checks out against known Peters fluxes. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.24335 v1 pith:OFMHZ43W submitted 2026-07-27 gr-qc astro-ph.SRphysics.class-ph

The Magnusian generator for dissipative systems and application to leading 2.5PN radiation-reaction dynamics

Francisco M. Blanco This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.SRphysics.class-ph
keywords Magnusianin-in formalismradiation reaction2.5PNbinary dynamicsfinite-time mapsdissipative systemsDelaunay variables
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 paper extends the Magnusian—the phase-space function that turns infinitesimal Hamiltonian flow into a finite-time map through nested Poisson brackets—to systems that radiate and interact nonlocally in time. Using the classical in-in (doubled-path) formalism, dissipative forces become part of a Hamiltonian flow on an enlarged phase space, so the same generator construction still works. To first order the Magnusian is the force evaluated on the unperturbed trajectory and pulled back by the Jacobi map. Applied to Newtonian binaries with the leading 2.5PN radiation-reaction force, the one-period Magnusian yields a discrete cycle-to-cycle map whose energy and frequency evolution match direct numerical integration. The result matters because binary observables are naturally relational and cycle-averaged; a compact generator of those maps organizes radiation reaction without reintegrating the equations every orbit.

Core claim

To first order in a perturbing force, the Magnusian on the doubled phase space is χ⁽¹⁾ = −Q⁻_B ∫ ds F^A[X⁽⁰(s)] M^A_B, and this function continues to generate the finite-time evolution of physical observables by nested Poisson brackets. For Newtonian bound motion plus the leading 2.5PN radiation-reaction force, the explicit one-period Magnusian defines a discrete map from one radial cycle to the next that reproduces the secular evolution seen in numerical solutions of the same equations.

What carries the argument

The first-order doubled-phase-space Magnusian χ⁽¹⁾(Q₊, Q₋, s_f, s_i) = −Q⁻_B ∫_{s_i}^{s_f} F^A[X⁽⁰_{s,s_i}(Q₊)] M^A_B(s, s_i; Q₊) ds. It packages the force along the unperturbed flow into a single generator whose Poisson-bracket exponential advances any physical observable over a finite interval.

Load-bearing premise

That keeping only the first-order Magnusian and a few nested brackets of it, while dropping independent higher-order Magnus terms, still captures the cumulative dissipative map over many orbits for the cases shown.

What would settle it

Iterate the reported one-period Magnusian map for the same initial data (e.g. ν=1/4, e=0.3, h=20) over thousands of orbits and compare energy and angular frequency against a high-accuracy numerical integration of the 2.5PN ODEs; systematic drift that grows faster than the truncated nested-bracket residual would falsify the claim that χ⁽¹⁾ alone suffices on that timescale.

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

If this is right

  • One-period Magnusians supply discrete inspiral maps that advance observables cycle by cycle without reintegrating the ODEs every orbit.
  • The same construction applies to nonlocal hereditary forces after perturbative order reduction, so 4PN tail terms can be folded into a Magnusian.
  • A scattering Magnusian from past to future asymptotics is defined by the same integral, opening a direct link between bound-cycle and unbound generators.
  • Near resonances the finite-time Magnusian integrals remain nonsingular, unlike angle-averaging near-identity transformations that divide by vanishing frequency combinations.
  • After regularization of worldline n-point functions, a self-force Magnusian can encode both conservative and dissipative mass-ratio corrections in one generator.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the bound and scattering Magnusians are analytic continuations of one function, existing scattering-amplitude data could seed cycle maps for eccentric inspirals without a separate bound-state calculation.
  • Comparing wall-clock cost of iterated Magnusian maps against existing averaging schemes on resonant EMRI trajectories would quantify whether the Poisson-bracket organization is cheaper near resonances.
  • Because the Magnusian is linear in the difference variables, gauge-invariant relational observables (redshift, periastron advance) may be read off by single derivatives once the generator is known, even when the motion is non-integrable.

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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper extends the Magnusian — a phase-space function whose exponentiated Poisson-bracket action generates finite-time evolution — to dissipative and nonlocal-in-time dynamics using the classical in-in (Galley/Schwinger-Keldysh) formalism. After reviewing the doubled phase space, the ± basis, and the closure of linear-in-Q₋ generators under the doubled bracket (§2), the author constructs a classical interaction picture and derives the Magnusian–Hamiltonian relation via the Magnus series (§3). The main result is Eq. (3.40): the first-order dissipative Magnusian is the force evaluated along the unperturbed flow, transported back to the initial point by the Jacobi propagator, and contracted with Q₋. As an application (§4), the one-period Magnusian for Newtonian motion perturbed by the 2.5PN radiation-reaction force is computed in Delaunay variables, with explicit closed-form coefficients (4.21), defining a discrete cycle-to-cycle map that is compared with numerical integrations of the same ODEs (Figs. 1–2). Section 5 identifies the one-period Magnusian with the effective Hamiltonian of a canonical near-identity transformation and contrasts it with NITs used in self-force theory, notably the absence of resonant denominators. Appendices A–B treat integrating out a scalar field and perturbative order reduction of nonlocal forces.

Significance. If the construction holds, it gives the first canonical phase-space generator for finite-time dissipative two-body evolution, with direct relevance to inspiral self-force and PN radiation-reaction problems where relational/cycle-to-cycle observables are the gauge-invariant currency. Notable strengths: the derivation is parameter-free (the 2.5PN force is an external input from the literature, not fitted); the one-period generator is obtained in closed form (Eqs. 4.21) and its content is independently verified against known physics — chi_g and chi_l reproduce the Peters-averaged dJ/dt and dE/dt including the (1+7e^2/8) and (1+73e^2/24+37e^4/96) eccentricity enhancements, and chi_G=0 correctly encodes the absence of periastron advance at 2.5PN; the closure result (§2.4) guarantees the physical limit needs no extra prescription; and Appendices A-B give a concrete, reusable treatment of nonlocal self-force-type interactions. These are real assets for the record.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.3, Figs. 1-2] The comparison validating the cycle map (Figs. 1-2) is shown only as a qualitative overlay of two curves. The evolution uses exp of chi^(1) truncated at three nested brackets, while chi^(2) (Eq. 3.41) is written down but never evaluated or bounded. I agree the omission is parametrically controlled at the plotted parameters (F_2.5/F_Newt ~ nu/q^3 ~ 3e-5 at h=20, so chi^(2) contributes ~1e-4 or less over the ~20 cycles shown, and it is formally the same order as the already-omitted 5PN EOM terms, so the truncation is internally consistent with the stated 'leading dissipative order' scope). Nonetheless, the claim in the abstract that the map 'describes the evolution ... in agreement with numerical solutions' deserves quantitative support: please add a residual/error curve (numerical minus Magnusian) for E and phi-dot, state the truncation error of the three-bracket exponential, and either估算
  2. [§5.3, after Eq. (5.23)] The text states that 'the finite-time integrals defining the Magnusian do not face this problem and therefore remain finite at resonances.' The one-cycle integrals in Eqs. (4.20) are indeed finite where the NIT Fourier denominators (k.Y) vanish, and this is a genuine formal advantage. However, near a resonance the accuracy of an iterated single-cycle map can still degrade through slow resonant-phase accumulation, which the present construction does not address. Since the outlook (§6, final paragraph) already calls for a comparison with NIT-based inspiral schemes near resonances, I recommend softening or qualifying this sentence to claim finiteness of the generator, not robustness of the long-time evolution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [App. A, App. B, §4.3] Typos: 'achives' (App. A.1, below Eq. A.3), 'swith' (App. A.1, first line), 'time independent If the order-reduced flow' (capital I mid-sentence, after Eq. B.9), 'apoastron' (§4.3) — 'apoapsis' is the standard term for a generic central mass.
  2. [Figs. 1-2 and captions] State the integrator, tolerance, and number of cycles used for the numerical solution; the phi-dot axis label renders as a missing glyph in both figures. A brief note on how the one-cycle map is iterated (whether the orbital period and endpoint times are recomputed at each step as L evolves, and how the f=pi/2 strobing of Fig. 2 is implemented) would make the construction reproducible.
  3. [Eqs. (4.21a) vs (4.21c)] chi_l and chi_L differ in the e^4 coefficient (37 vs 36) and overall normalization; a one-sentence remark tracing this to the Jacobi-propagator term -3(t-t_i)F_l/L^4 in Eq. (4.17) would save the reader a check.
  4. [Eq. (5.16)] The identification H' = -chi/T picks a logarithm of the finite map; the phrase 'perturbative branch continuously connected to the identity' is doing real work here, and one sentence spelling out that the branch is fixed order by order in epsilon would help, particularly since the map is not symplectic on the physical (Q+) subspace.
  5. [References, Eq. (3.40)] Ref. [41] contains duplicated journal-field text ('Lynch, Philip. "Efficient Trajectory..."'). Also check index-placement conventions for M^A_B between Eqs. (2.24) and (3.22)/(3.40) — consistent as written, but a defining sentence would prevent misreading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: Magnusian is derived from doubled Hamiltonian + Magnus series; 2.5PN force and Peters fluxes are external inputs; numerics are a consistency check of the same ODEs.

full rationale

The load-bearing formula (Eq. 3.40) follows from the classical in-in doubled action (Sec. 2), the interaction-picture Hamiltonian linear in Q− (Eq. 3.22), and the standard Magnus inversion (Eqs. 3.35–3.39). None of these steps define the generator in terms of the claimed finite-time map; the map is obtained by exponentiating the derived χ. The 2.5PN force (Eq. 4.2) is taken from the PN literature, not fitted. The explicit one-period coefficients (Eqs. 4.21) independently reproduce the known Peters-averaged dE/dt and dJ/dt (including eccentricity factors), which is external corroboration rather than a renamed fit. Comparison to numerical integration of Eqs. (4.1) is a truncation/implementation consistency check of the same input force, not a statistically forced “prediction.” Prior Magnusian citations (Kim et al.) supply the conservative foundation and are extended, not used as a uniqueness theorem that forces the dissipative result. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain appears.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard classical mechanics plus the Galley/in-in embedding of nonconservative forces, the Magnus expansion for time-dependent generators, and perturbative order reduction of nonlocal forces. No empirical free parameters enter the formal generator; example initial data in figures are illustrative only. The Magnusian name and conservative theory are inherited from cited work; the dissipative extension is constructed here rather than postulated as a new particle or force.

axioms (6)
  • standard math Classical Hamiltonian evolution and Poisson brackets on ordinary and doubled phase space, including the ± symplectic structure {q₊,p₋}={q₋,p₊}=1.
    Used throughout §§2–3 as the ambient calculus; not re-proved.
  • domain assumption Galley/in-in (Schwinger–Keldysh) doubling with physical limit Q₋→0 correctly embeds dissipative and retarded nonlocal forces as Hamiltonian flow on the doubled space.
    Foundation of §2 and App. A; taken from Galley et al. and assumed valid for PN radiation reaction and self-force-type kernels.
  • standard math Magnus expansion relates a time-dependent interaction Hamiltonian to a finite-time generator χ via Bernoulli numbers / nested brackets (Eqs. 3.35–3.41).
    Classical Magnus theorem applied as in Ref. [30]; load-bearing for identifying χ⁽¹⁾ with −∫H_I.
  • standard math Functions linear in Q₋ are closed under the doubled Poisson bracket and act as vector fields on physical observables independent of Q₋ after bracketing (§2.4).
    Proved in-text for the doubled structure; needed so the physical map never requires an extra physical-limit step after evolution.
  • domain assumption Nonlocal-in-time forces may be perturbatively order-reduced to local forces along the iterative background flow X, yielding an equivalent local doubled Hamiltonian for the physical vector field (App. B).
    Stated as the justification that Eq. (3.40) still holds for hereditary interactions; essential for claimed PN/self-force applicability beyond instantaneous 2.5PN.
  • domain assumption Leading dissipative dynamics may be treated as Newtonian conservative motion plus the harmonic-gauge 2.5PN radiation-reaction force in the adiabatic regime (Eqs. 4.1–4.2).
    Standard PN truncation; application claim depends on this model matching the intended physical regime.
invented entities (1)
  • Dissipative (doubled) Magnusian χ(Q₊,Q₋,s_f,s_i) independent evidence
    purpose: Single phase-space generator of finite-time maps for systems with radiation reaction and nonlocal forces after fields are integrated out.
    Name and conservative theory come from prior work; this paper defines the in-in extension and proves first-order form. Not a new physical field—an organizational generator.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-grok45-kimik3 · 29717 in / 3655 out tokens · 90300 ms · 2026-07-31T17:48:32.849906+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The Magnusian is a phase-space function that generates finite-time evolution through nested Poisson brackets. It is related to several familiar generators of classical dynamics, including the radial action, the eikonal phase and related quantities. In this work, we extend the Magnusian framework to systems with dissipation and nonlocal-in-time interactions using the in-in formalism, also known as the Schwinger-Keldysh or Galley formalism. This framework is particularly natural for binary dynamics, where integrating out the mediating gravitational field can produce both dissipative radiation-reaction effects and hereditary, nonlocal-in-time interactions. We derive the generalized Magnusian and show that it continues to generate finite-time evolution. As an application, we construct the Magnusian for Newtonian bound motion subject to the leading 2.5PN radiation-reaction force. The resulting generator defines a discrete evolution map from one cycle to the next and describes the evolution of the system in agreement with numerical solutions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.24335 by Francisco M. Blanco.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison between the numerical and Magnusian evolutions of the energy and angular frequency with initial true anomaly f0 = 0. evolution of the energy E and angular frequency ˙φ, shown in red, is compared with a numerical solution of the 2.5PN equations, shown in blue. The finite-time evolution is calculated using Eq. (3.10), where we exponentiate the first-order Magnusian and retain the first three neste… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of E( ˙φ) computed from a numerical solution and from the Magnusian evolution with initial true anomaly f0 = π/2. A NIT is a perturbative redefinition of the dynamical variables designed to ab￾sorb the oscillatory part of the motion, leaving transformed variables that evolve secularly. For a Hamiltonian system with a periodic perturbation, this redefinition may be implemented as a time-dependent… 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

50 extracted references · 24 linked inside Pith

  1. [4]

    Amaro-Seoane et al.,Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,1702.00786

    P. Amaro-Seoane et al.,Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,1702.00786

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [5]

    Blanchet,Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries,Living Rev

    L. Blanchet,Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries,Living Rev. Rel.17(2014) 2 [1310.1528]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  3. [6]

    Poisson and C.M

    E. Poisson and C.M. Will,Gravity: Newtonian, Post-Newtonian, Relativistic, Cambridge University Press (2014), 10.1017/CBO9781139507486

    doi:10.1017/cbo9781139507486 2014

  4. [7]

    Goldberger and I.Z

    W.D. Goldberger and I.Z. Rothstein,Effective field theory of gravity for extended objects,Physical Review D73(2006)

    2006

  5. [8]

    Porto,The effective field theorist’s approach to gravitational dynamics,Phys

    R.A. Porto,The effective field theorist’s approach to gravitational dynamics,Phys. Rept.633(2016) 1 [1601.04914]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  6. [9]

    Levi,Effective Field Theories of Post-Newtonian Gravity: A comprehensive review,Rept

    M. Levi,Effective Field Theories of Post-Newtonian Gravity: A comprehensive review,Rept. Prog. Phys.83(2020) 075901 [1807.01699]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  7. [10]

    Damour,Gravitational scattering, post-Minkowskian approximation and Effective One-Body theory,Phys

    T. Damour,Gravitational scattering, post-Minkowskian approximation and Effective One-Body theory,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 104015 [1609.00354]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [11]

    Cheung, I.Z

    C. Cheung, I.Z. Rothstein and M.P. Solon,From scattering amplitudes to classical potentials in the post-minkowskian expansion,Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018) 251101. – 28 –

    2018

  9. [12]

    Kosower, B

    D.A. Kosower, B. Maybee and D. O’Connell,Amplitudes, observables, and classical scattering,Journal of High Energy Physics2019(2019)

    2019

  10. [13]

    Z. Bern, C. Cheung, R. Roiban, C.-H. Shen, M.P. Solon and M. Zeng,Scattering amplitudes and the conservative hamiltonian for binary systems at third post-minkowskian order,Physical Review Letters122(2019)

    2019

  11. [14]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M.S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M.P. Solon et al., Scattering Amplitudes and Conservative Binary Dynamics atO(G 4),Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021) 171601 [2101.07254]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  12. [15]

    Poisson, A

    E. Poisson, A. Pound and I. Vega,The Motion of point particles in curved spacetime,Living Rev. Rel.14(2011) 7 [1102.0529]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  13. [16]

    Barack et al.,Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physics: a roadmap,Class

    L. Barack et al.,Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physics: a roadmap,Class. Quant. Grav.36(2019) 143001 [1806.05195]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  14. [17]

    Barack and A

    L. Barack and A. Pound,Self-force and radiation reaction in general relativity,Rept. Prog. Phys.82(2019) 016904 [1805.10385]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  15. [18]

    Pound and J

    A. Pound and J. Miller,Practical, covariant puncture for second-order self-force calculations,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 104020 [1403.1843]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  16. [19]

    Buonanno and T

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour,Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics,Phys. Rev. D59(1999) 084006

    1999

  17. [20]

    Damour,The General Relativistic Two Body Problem and the Effective One Body Formalism,Fundam

    T. Damour,The General Relativistic Two Body Problem and the Effective One Body Formalism,Fundam. Theor. Phys.177(2014) 111 [1212.3169]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  18. [21]

    Taracchini et al.,Effective-one-body model for black-hole binaries with generic mass ratios and spins,Phys

    A. Taracchini et al.,Effective-one-body model for black-hole binaries with generic mass ratios and spins,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 061502 [1311.2544]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [22]

    Gonzo, J

    R. Gonzo, J. Lewis and A. Pound,First law of binary black hole scattering,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 131401

    2025

  20. [23]

    Detweiler,Consequence of the gravitational self-force for circular orbits of the schwarzschild geometry,Physical Review D77(2008)

    S. Detweiler,Consequence of the gravitational self-force for circular orbits of the schwarzschild geometry,Physical Review D77(2008)

    2008

  21. [24]

    Le Tiec, L

    A. Le Tiec, L. Blanchet and B.F. Whiting,The First Law of Binary Black Hole Mechanics in General Relativity and Post-Newtonian Theory,Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 064039 [1111.5378]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  22. [25]

    Le Tiec,First law of mechanics for compact binaries on eccentric orbits,Physical Review D92(2015)

    A. Le Tiec,First law of mechanics for compact binaries on eccentric orbits,Physical Review D92(2015)

    2015

  23. [26]

    Blanchet and A

    L. Blanchet and A. Le Tiec,First law of compact binary mechanics with gravitational-wave tails,Classical and Quantum Gravity34(2017) 164001

    2017

  24. [27]

    Kim, J.-W

    J.-H. Kim, J.-W. Kim and S. Lee,Massive twistor worldline in electromagnetic fields,Journal of High Energy Physics2024(2024)

    2024

  25. [28]

    Kim, J.-W

    J.-H. Kim, J.-W. Kim, S. Kim and S. Lee,Classical eikonal from Magnus expansion, JHEP01(2025) 111 [2410.22988]. – 29 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [29]

    Kim,Radiation eikonal for post-Minkowskian observables,Phys

    J.-W. Kim,Radiation eikonal for post-Minkowskian observables,Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) L121702 [2501.07372]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [30]

    J.-W. Kim, R. Patil, T. Scheopner and J. Steinhoff,Magnusian: relating the eikonal phase, the on-shell action, and the scattering generator,JHEP03(2026) 241 [2511.05649]

    arXiv 2026

  28. [31]

    Galley,Classical mechanics of nonconservative systems,Phys

    C.R. Galley,Classical mechanics of nonconservative systems,Phys. Rev. Lett.110 (2013) 174301

    2013

  29. [32]

    Galley, D

    C.R. Galley, D. Tsang and L.C. Stein,The principle of stationary nonconservative action for classical mechanics and field theories,1412.3082

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [33]

    Schwinger,Brownian motion of a quantum oscillator,J

    J.S. Schwinger,Brownian motion of a quantum oscillator,J. Math. Phys.2(1961) 407

    1961

  31. [34]

    Keldysh,Diagram Technique for Nonequilibrium Processes,Sov

    L.V. Keldysh,Diagram Technique for Nonequilibrium Processes,Sov. Phys. JETP 20(1965) 1018

    1965

  32. [35]

    Jordan,Effective field equations for expectation values,Phys

    R.D. Jordan,Effective field equations for expectation values,Phys. Rev. D33(1986) 444

    1986

  33. [36]

    Magnus,On the exponential solution of differential equations for a linear operator,Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics7(1954) 649

    W. Magnus,On the exponential solution of differential equations for a linear operator,Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics7(1954) 649

    1954

  34. [37]

    S. Kim, H. Lee and S. Lee,Classical eikonal in relativistic scattering, 2025

    2025

  35. [38]

    Damour, P

    T. Damour, P. Jaranowski and G. Sch¨ afer,Fourth post-Newtonian effective one-body dynamics,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 084024 [1502.07245]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  36. [39]

    van de Meent and N

    M. van de Meent and N. Warburton,Fast self-forced inspirals,Classical and Quantum Gravity35(2018) 144003

    2018

  37. [40]

    Lynch, M

    P. Lynch, M. van de Meent and N. Warburton,Eccentric self-forced inspirals into a rotating black hole,Classical and Quantum Gravity39(2022) 145004

    2022

  38. [41]

    Efficient Trajectory Calculations for Extreme Mass-Ratio Inspirals Using near-Identity (Averaging) Transformations

    P. Lynch,Efficient trajectory calculations for extreme mass-ratio inspirals using near-identity (averaging),Lynch, Philip.“Efficient Trajectory Calculations for Extreme Mass-Ratio Inspirals Using near-Identity (Averaging) Transformations.” University College Dublin. School of Mathematics and Statistics, 2022.(2022)

    2022

  39. [42]

    K¨ alin and R.A

    G. K¨ alin and R.A. Porto,From boundary data to bound states,Journal of High Energy Physics2020(2020)

    2020

  40. [43]

    K¨ alin and R.A

    G. K¨ alin and R.A. Porto,From boundary data to bound states. part ii. scattering angle to dynamical invariants (with twist),Journal of High Energy Physics2020 (2020)

    2020

  41. [44]

    G. Cho, G. K¨ alin and R.A. Porto,From boundary data to bound states. part iii. radiative effects,Journal of High Energy Physics2022(2022)

    2022

  42. [45]

    Harte, F.M

    A.I. Harte, F.M. Blanco and E.E. Flanagan,Nonlinearly Self-Interacting Extended Bodies Move as Test Bodies in Effective External Fields,Phys. Rev. Lett.135 (2025) 151401 [2504.11912]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [46]

    Detweiler and B.F

    S.L. Detweiler and B.F. Whiting,Selfforce via a Green ’s function decomposition, Phys. Rev. D67(2003) 024025 [gr-qc/0202086]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  44. [47]

    Blanco, E.E

    F.M. Blanco, E.E. Flanagan and A.I. Harte,Conservative and dissipative sectors in a nonlinear scalar model for the gravitational self-force problem,2605.14958

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  45. [48]

    Damour, P

    T. Damour, P. Jaranowski and G. Sch¨ afer,Nonlocal-in-time action for the fourth post-Newtonian conservative dynamics of two-body systems,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 064058 [1401.4548]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  46. [49]

    Dlapa, G

    C. Dlapa, G. K¨ alin, Z. Liu and R.A. Porto,Dynamics of binary systems to fourth post-minkowskian order from the effective field theory approach,Phys. Lett. B831 (2022) 137203 [2106.08276]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  47. [50]

    Dlapa, G

    C. Dlapa, G. K¨ alin, Z. Liu and R.A. Porto,Conservative dynamics of binary systems at fourth post-minkowskian order in the large-eccentricity expansion,Phys. Rev. Lett. 128(2022) 161104 [2112.11296]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  48. [51]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M.S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M.P. Solon et al., Scattering amplitudes, the tail effect, and conservative binary dynamics atO(G 4), Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 161103 [2112.10750]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  49. [52]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M.S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M.P. Solon et al., Scattering amplitudes and conservative dynamics at the fourth post-Minkowskian order,PoSLL2022(2022) 051

    2022

  50. [53]

    Blanco,Local hamiltonian dynamics from nonlocal action principles and applications to binary systems in general relativity,Phys

    F.M. Blanco,Local hamiltonian dynamics from nonlocal action principles and applications to binary systems in general relativity,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 024061. A Integrating out a scalar field: A Self-Force Example In this appendix, we illustrate the procedure described in Subsection 2.3 by explicitly constructing the effective action obtained after integra...

    2024