Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 3 cited by

Gravitational Wave Scattering on Magnetic Fields

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The inverse Gertsenshtein effect is a classical scattering problem with a full angular and polarization structure, and a magnetic dipole converts an unpolarized gravitational-wave background into equator-peaked, up-to-13-percent polarized…

desk verdict Genuinely useful 3D reformulation of the inverse Gertsenshtein effect with new polarization results, but the central intensity formulas in Sec. 4.2 use a transpose where a Hermitian conjugate is needed; likely fixable, but must be corrected. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16609 v1 pith:QKSSPNIO submitted 2025-07-22 gr-qc astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-phhep-th

Valerie Domcke , Camilo Garcia-Cely , Sung Mook Lee This is my paper
classification gr-qcastro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-phhep-th PACS 04.30.-w
keywords inverseGertsenshteineffectgravitationalwavetophotonconversionStokesparametersmagneticdipolestochasticbackgroundGreen'sfunctionmethodneutronstarmagnetospherepolarization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper's central claim is that the inverse Gertsenshtein effect—gravitational waves converting into electromagnetic radiation in a static magnetic field—is exactly a classical scattering problem, not merely a one-dimensional conversion probability. In the far field, the emitted wave is the retarded Green's function acting on an effective current set by the gravitational-wave polarization and the magnetic field's Fourier transform at the momentum transfer. The authors derive the full angular distribution of intensity and Stokes polarization parameters. A headline result is that a magnetic dipole immersed in an isotropic, unpolarized stochastic gravitational-wave background emits radiation that peaks at the equator and is linearly polarized up to 7/54 ≈ 0.13, with the polarization direction set by the observer–dipole geometry. This gives a new, geometry-sensitive observational handle on high-frequency gravitational waves scattering off magnetized astrophysical objects.

What carries the argument

The effective current $\mathbf{j}_{\rm eff}$ (Eq. 2.8) is the central object: it encodes the coupling of gravitational-wave polarization tensors to a background magnetic field, and the Coulomb-gauge wave equation $\Box A_h = -\mathbf{j}_{\rm eff}$ turns conversion into radiation from a known source. The far-field Green's function acts on the Fourier transform of the field, yielding a $2\times 2$ transfer matrix $T$ (Eq. 4.22) that maps gravitational-wave Stokes parameters to electromagnetic Stokes parameters. In a uniform domain, surface and bulk currents combine to produce transmitted and reflected waves; the reflected wave is suppressed by destructive interference but can dominate for antisymmetric field profiles. Extensions to media add a WKB phase from the effective photon mass $\mu^2(x)$, with stationary-phase resonant conversion at the surface where $\mu^2 = 0$.

What would settle it

Observations of a magnetized neutron star with known dipole orientation: if the electromagnetic emission from an isotropic stochastic gravitational-wave background does not peak at the equator and reach linear polarization up to 7/54 at α = π/2, the central scattering formula fails. In a laboratory test, a polarized gravitational wave sent through a uniform magnetic domain should show a vanishing reflected amplitude at the Brewster-like angles satisfying $\sin^2\theta_\gamma\sin^2\phi_\gamma + \cos^2\theta_\gamma = 1/2$; a null result there would rule out the predicted polarization structure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that Maxwell's equations at linear order in the gravitational-wave amplitude reduce to a sourced wave equation $\Box A_h^\mu = -j^\mu_{\rm eff}$ with the effective current $\mathbf{j}_{\rm eff} = \sum_{\lambda=+,\times} h_\lambda \,[(ik+\nabla)\times(e_\lambda \mathbf{B}_0)]\,e^{-i(\omega t-k\cdot r)}$. For a localized magnetized volume, the far-field solution is $A_h(t,r) = e^{-i\omega(t-r)}/(4\pi r)\,\tilde{J}_{\rm eff}(q)$ with momentum transfer $q = k_\gamma - k$, so the emission pattern is controlled by the Fourier transform of the magnetic field at $q$. From this the paper obtains the intensity (Eq. 4.23) and Stokes parameters (Eq. 4.24). In a uniform magnetic domain, the transmitted wave inherits the gravitational-wave Stokes vector, while the reflected wave carries a geometry-dependent polarization that can be nonzero even for unpolarized gravitational waves, including a Brewster-angle-like direction where one gravitational-wave polarization is not reflected. For a magnetic dipole exposed to an isotropic, unpolarized stochastic gravitational-wave background, the integrated cross section is $d\sigma/d\Omega = Gm^2\omega^2(11-7\cos 2\alpha)/10$ and the Stokes vector is $\xi = -[7\sin^2\alpha/(33-21\cos 2\alpha)](\sin 2\beta,0,\cos 2\beta)$, giving a maximum degree of polarization $p = 7/54 \simeq 0.13$ when the dipole is perpendicular to the line of sight, with peak intensity at the equator.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes the background magnetic field stays frozen while the gravitational wave passes and that the produced light never feeds back into the gravitational wave; for neutron stars it also assumes a Goldreich–Julian dipole plasma, which the authors note is unreliable near the stellar surface.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A magnetic dipole bathed in an isotropic stochastic gravitational-wave background emits a radio signal whose linear polarization degree reads the angle between the line of sight and the dipole axis, independent of the magnetic-field orientation.
  • Searches for high-frequency gravitational waves around neutron stars should target the full angular pattern: the strongest conversion is at the equator (θγ = π/2), not along the gravitational-wave propagation direction.
  • Reflected (back-scattered) electromagnetic waves, often neglected, can dominate when the magnetic field profile has zero mean along the line of sight, as in an antisymmetric slab.
  • A magnetic domain can act as a polarizer at a gravitational-wave analogue of the Brewster angle, reflecting only one gravitational-wave polarization; laboratory setups could exploit this to distinguish h+ from h×.
  • Including a plasma photon mass yields a WKB phase and a resonant conversion surface; the conversion probability scales as f² at low frequencies and f^{−4/5} at high frequencies, with a quasi-resonant plateau for weakly magnetized neutron stars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the polarization pattern for unpolarized fixed-direction gravitational waves is independent of the magnetic field's orientation, a future polarization measurement could in principle separate the gravitational-wave direction from the field geometry without modeling the field in detail.
  • The same Green's-function treatment should carry over to time-dependent or turbulent magnetic fields, where the momentum-transfer language would predict spectral line broadening and field-structure-dependent polarimetric signatures.
  • The ≈13% polarization prediction is a clean observational target: detecting higher polarization, circular polarization, or a different angular peak would point to a non-Goldreich–Julian magnetosphere or a non-stochastic background rather than to the paper's vacuum scattering formula.
  • The paper's axion analogue (Appendix D) implies that the same angular-polarization maps could distinguish spin-2 from spin-0 conversion, which might help identify the particle nature of an observed electromagnetic signal.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reformulates the inverse Gertsenshtein effect—GW-to-photon conversion in a static magnetic field—as a classical scattering problem. Starting from Maxwell's equations in curved spacetime, the authors define an effective current (Eqs. 2.3–2.8), solve for the induced vector potential with a Green's function in the far-field regime (Eq. 4.18), and derive angular distributions of intensity and Stokes parameters for the emitted radiation. They recover the standard forward-conversion probability, analyze reflected waves from a magnetic domain, and study localized sources, in particular a magnetic dipole. For an isotropic, unpolarized stochastic gravitational wave background scattering off a dipole, they predict net linear polarization with degree up to 7/54 and peak intensity at the equator (Eq. 4.32, Fig. 7). The final section extends the formalism to medium effects via a WKB/stationary-phase approximation and applies it to neutron star magnetospheres. The main deliverable is a unified three-dimensional framework that connects the effective-current, Green's function, and S-matrix approaches.

Significance. If correct, this paper provides a useful and largely parameter-free framework for what has previously been treated mostly in one dimension. Its specific falsifiable prediction—that an isotropic unpolarized SGWB acquires a measurable linear polarization after scattering off a magnetized dipole—is new and could inform searches for high-frequency gravitational waves. Strengths of the manuscript include the explicit algebraic derivations, reproduction of known limits (the Raffelt–Stodolsky conversion probability and the De Logi–Mickelson cross sections), and a cross-check against the S-matrix formulation in Appendix C. The authors are also candid about the limitations of the neutron star plasma model. The main concerns are two load-bearing errors in the printed equations: the Hermitian structure of the T-matrix combination and the plasma effective-mass formula. Both appear fixable without changing the physical conclusions, but they must be corrected before the results can be taken at face value.

major comments (2)
  1. [Eqs. (4.23)–(4.24), (C.6), and text after Eq. (4.26)] The intensity and Stokes formulas are written with T T^T and T(ξ^GW·σ)T^T. For the magnetic dipole example, σ̃B0(q) is purely imaginary (Eq. (4.28) with a real σ̃A0), so the matrix T defined in Eq. (4.22) is complex. The correct Hermitian combination is T T^† (equivalently T* T^T), but as printed T T^T is not Hermitian and its trace is not guaranteed to be real or positive. In fact, for a point dipole T = iM, so tr(T T^T) = −tr(M M^T), which is negative, while the printed results in Eqs. (4.29)–(4.32) are positive. The claimed 7/54 polarization degree therefore cannot be derived from the equations exactly as printed, and the S-matrix cross-check in Eq. (C.6) inherits the same issue. Please correct all occurrences of the Hermitian combination and re-derive the displayed intensity and Stokes formulas; the physical conclusions may survive, but the derivation as printed is not reproducible.
  2. [Eq. (5.12)] The plasma contribution to the effective photon mass is dimensionally inconsistent. With the convention Δ = −μ²/(2ω), the standard plasma mass squared is μ²_pla = 4πα n_c/m_c, giving Δ_pla = −2πα n_c/(ω m_c). The printed expression μ²_pla = −2πα n_c/(ω m_c) contains an extra factor 1/ω and has the wrong sign; as written, Δ_pla scales as 1/ω² rather than 1/ω. This affects the frequency scalings in Eqs. (5.13)–(5.19) and the resonant-radius estimates. Please correct this expression and recheck the numerical results in Sec. 5.2.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Text after Eq. (4.26)] The statement that “T T^T – the only B-dependent combination ... – is independent of the orientation of the magnetic field” is misleading. Equation (4.25) shows that the intensity depends on B through |σ̃B_T0|², so only the direction of the Stokes vector is independent of the magnetic field orientation, not the matrix combination itself. Please rephrase this sentence.
  2. [Eqs. (4.29)–(4.30)] The notation “2sαs²θγ/2cφγ” is ambiguous and should be written with explicit parentheses, e.g. 2 s_α sin²(θγ/2) cos φγ, to avoid misreading.
  3. [Appendix E, Eq. (E.10)] In the stationary-phase formula, the last factor appears to be (2π/|f''(x_res)|)^{1/2}; as printed, the second derivative symbol is missing. Please fix this typo.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the angular and polarization results are derived from Maxwell equations with no fitted inputs; the only self-citations are non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The effective source Eq. (2.8) is obtained in-paper from the linearized Maxwell equations (2.3), not imported as a fitted result; refs [50,51] are only supporting citations for the standard effective-current and surface-current forms. No parameter is fitted to the claimed SGWB polarization or intensity: the far-field solution Eq. (4.18) follows from the Green's function and the Fourier transform of the prescribed static magnetic field, and the observables in Eqs. (4.23)-(4.24) are algebraic consequences of that solution. The dipole example is cross-checked against the independent 1977 S-matrix calculation [48] in Appendix C, and the axion comparison in Appendix D is an independent consistency test. The admitted limitations of the Goldreich-Julian model in Sec. 5.2 affect astrophysical robustness, not circularity. No load-bearing self-citation or fitted-input-as-prediction step was found; the claimed net linear polarization from an unpolarized SGWB is a genuine derived consequence rather than an input disguised as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central formalism rests on standard perturbation theory and classical electrodynamics; no unrelated axioms are introduced. The main non-trivial assumptions are the frozen-field approximation, the compact-source/far-field limit, the unpolarized SGWB ensemble, WKB validity, and the simplified plasma model in the neutron-star application, all of which the authors state explicitly. No new particles, forces, dimensions, or fitted constants appear.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Linearized gravity and Maxwell equations: the GW amplitude h is small and the induced EM field is computed only to first order in h, neglecting back-reaction on the metric.
    Used throughout, stated in Sec. 2 around Eq. (2.3). Valid for GW amplitudes of interest but is a truncation.
  • domain assumption Static background magnetic field in the TT frame, with the field source unresponsive to the GW.
    Sec. 2, p. 3: 'we will work with static magnetic fields... GW frequency is larger than the eigenfrequencies of the system generating the magnetic fields.'
  • domain assumption Compact magnetized region and far-field observer: r >> r′, with only outgoing waves enforced by retarded time.
    Sec. 4.2, Eq. (4.14). Necessary for the Fourier-space formula Eq. (4.18).
  • domain assumption Ensemble of GWs is unpolarized: ⟨|h+|²⟩ = ⟨|h×|²⟩ and ⟨h*+ h×⟩ = 0.
    Sec. 2, Tab. 1 and the text before Eq. (2.13). Defines the SGWB case.
  • standard math WKB approximation for photon propagation with position-dependent effective mass µ(x), valid when |(µ²)′| ≪ ω³ and B′/B ≪ ω.
    Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.3) and App. E, Eqs. (E.3) and (E.7).
  • domain assumption Goldreich-Julian model of the neutron star magnetosphere with a dipole field and scalar photon effective mass.
    Sec. 5.2, Eq. (5.11) and footnote 11. The authors note this is valid only for r ≫ r_NS (p. 28).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gravitational Wave Scattering on Magnetic Fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QKSSPNIO

@misc{pith2026250716609,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gravitational Wave Scattering on Magnetic Fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QKSSPNIO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16609}
}
read the original abstract

The conversion of gravitational to electromagnetic waves in the presence of background magnetic fields is known as the inverse Gertsenshtein effect, analogous to the Primakoff effect for axions. Rephrasing this conversion as a classical electrodynamics problem in the far-field regime of a magnetized region, we derive the angular distribution of the intensity and polarization of the emitted electromagnetic waves. We discuss the interplay of the internal structure of the magnetic field, the polarization of the gravitational wave and the scattering angle, demonstrating for example that a dipolar field can convert an unpolarized stochastic gravitational wave background into polarized electromagnetic emission, with peak emission intensity along the equator. We moreover outline how to incorporate medium effects in this framework, necessary for a realistic 3D description of gravitational wave to photon conversion in the magnetosphere of neutron stars.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Probing Axion-Photon conversion via circular polarization imprints in the CMB $V$-mode observations

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Proposes that axion-photon conversion in pre-CMB helical magnetic fields imprints detectable V-mode polarization in the CMB, allowing CLASS 40 GHz observations to constrain ALP masses 10^{-10} to 10^{-8} eV and their ...

  2. Polarization Formalism for Photon-Gravitational Wave Mixing Around Magnetars

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Polarization formalism applied to Gertsenshtein mixing in magnetars yields bounds showing negligible stochastic GW background from magnetar EM emissions.

  3. First-Order Perturbations of Covariant Maxwell Equations in Gravitational Waves

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Derives first-order EM perturbation equations from covariant Maxwell equations in GW backgrounds, shows equivalence of formulations, and calculates that typical GW strains of 10^{-21} induce EM responses of order 10^{...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Gertsenshtein, Wave Resonance of Light and Gravitational Waves , Sov

    M.E. Gertsenshtein, Wave Resonance of Light and Gravitational Waves , Sov. Phys. JETP 14 (1962) 84. – 42 –

    work page 1962

  2. [2]

    Ejlli, D

    A. Ejlli, D. Ejlli, A.M. Cruise, G. Pisano and H. Grote, Upper limits on the amplitude of ultra-high-frequency gravitational waves from graviton to photon conversion , Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 1032 [ 1908.00232]

    arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    Ringwald, J

    A. Ringwald, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel and C. Tamarit,Gravitational Waves as a Big Bang Thermometer, JCAP 03 (2021) 054 [ 2011.04731]

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Berlin, D

    A. Berlin, D. Blas, R. Tito D’Agnolo, S.A.R. Ellis, R. Harnik, Y. Kahn et al., Detecting high-frequency gravitational waves with microwave cavities , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 116011 [2112.11465]

    arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Berlin, D

    A. Berlin, D. Blas, R. Tito D’Agnolo, S.A.R. Ellis, R. Harnik, Y. Kahn et al., Electromagnetic cavities as mechanical bars for gravitational waves , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 084058 [2303.01518]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    DALI collaboration, Discovery prospects with the Dark-photons & Axion-like particles Interferometer, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 062002 [ 2303.03997]

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Dielectric Haloscopes as Gravitational Wave Detectors

    V. Domcke, S.A.R. Ellis and J. Kopp, Dielectric haloscopes as gravitational wave detectors , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 035031 [ 2409.06462]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Domcke and C

    V. Domcke and C. Garcia-Cely, Potential of radio telescopes as high-frequency gravitational wave detectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 021104 [ 2006.01161]

    arXiv 2021

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    A. Ito, K. Kohri and K. Nakayama, Probing high frequency gravitational waves with pulsars , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 063026 [ 2305.13984]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    A. Ito, K. Kohri and K. Nakayama, Gravitational Wave Search through Electromagnetic Telescopes, PTEP 2024 (2024) 023E03 [ 2309.14765]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Dandoy, T

    V. Dandoy, T. Bert´ olez-Mart ´ ınez and F. Costa,High Frequency Gravitational Wave Bounds from Galactic Neutron Stars , 2402.14092

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    McDonald and S.A.R

    J.I. McDonald and S.A.R. Ellis, Resonant conversion of gravitational waves in neutron star magnetospheres, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 103003 [ 2406.18634]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Hong, Z.-Z

    W. Hong, Z.-Z. Tao, P. He and T.-J. Zhang, Faint Radio Signals from Very High-Frequency Gravitational Waves in the Strong Astrophysical Magnetic Field , 2412.05338

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    Kushwaha and R.K

    A. Kushwaha and R.K. Jain, Constraining circular polarization of high-frequency gravitational waves with CMB , 2502.12517

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    Matsuo and A

    H. Matsuo and A. Ito, Graviton-photon conversion in blazar jets as a probe of high-frequency gravitational waves, 2505.08457

  8. [16]

    Primakoff, Photoproduction of neutral mesons in nuclear electric fields and the mean life of the neutral meson , Phys

    H. Primakoff, Photoproduction of neutral mesons in nuclear electric fields and the mean life of the neutral meson , Phys. Rev. 81 (1951) 899

    1951

  9. [17]

    Raffelt and L

    G. Raffelt and L. Stodolsky, Mixing of the Photon with Low Mass Particles , Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 1237

    1988

  10. [18]

    Darling, New Limits on Axionic Dark Matter from the Magnetar PSR J1745-2900 , Astrophys

    J. Darling, New Limits on Axionic Dark Matter from the Magnetar PSR J1745-2900 , Astrophys. J. Lett. 900 (2020) L28 [ 2008.11188]

    2020 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Darling, Search for Axionic Dark Matter Using the Magnetar PSR J1745-2900 , Phys

    J. Darling, Search for Axionic Dark Matter Using the Magnetar PSR J1745-2900 , Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 121103 [ 2008.01877]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Battye, J

    R.A. Battye, J. Darling, J.I. McDonald and S. Srinivasan, Towards robust constraints on axion dark matter using PSR J1745-2900 , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) L021305 [ 2107.01225]. – 43 –

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Foster, S.J

    J.W. Foster, S.J. Witte, M. Lawson, T. Linden, V. Gajjar, C. Weniger et al., Extraterrestrial Axion Search with the Breakthrough Listen Galactic Center Survey , Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 251102 [ 2202.08274]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Battye, M.J

    R.A. Battye, M.J. Keith, J.I. McDonald, S. Srinivasan, B.W. Stappers and P. Weltevrede, Searching for time-dependent axion dark matter signals in pulsars , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 063001 [2303.11792]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    McDonald and S.J

    J.I. McDonald and S.J. Witte, Generalized ray tracing for axions in astrophysical plasmas , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 103021 [ 2309.08655]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    McDonald, B

    J.I. McDonald, B. Garbrecht and P. Millington, Axion-photon conversion in 3D media and astrophysical plasmas, JCAP 12 (2023) 031 [ 2307.11812]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Gin´ es, D

    E.U. Gin´ es, D. Noordhuis, C. Weniger and S.J. Witte, Numerical analysis of resonant axion-photon mixing , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 083007 [ 2405.08865]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    McDonald and P

    J.I. McDonald and P. Millington, Axion-photon mixing in 3D: classical equations and geometric optics, JCAP 09 (2024) 072 [ 2407.11192]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Beutter, A

    M. Beutter, A. Pargner, T. Schwetz and E. Todarello, Axion-electrodynamics: a quantum field calculation, JCAP 02 (2019) 026 [ 1812.05487]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Mirizzi, G.G

    A. Mirizzi, G.G. Raffelt and P.D. Serpico, Photon-axion conversion in intergalactic magnetic fields and cosmological consequences, Lect. Notes Phys. 741 (2008) 115 [ astro-ph/0607415]

    2008 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Pshirkov and S.B

    M.S. Pshirkov and S.B. Popov, Conversion of Dark matter axions to photons in magnetospheres of neutron stars , J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 108 (2009) 384 [ 0711.1264]

    2009 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Wang and D

    C. Wang and D. Lai, Axion-photon Propagation in Magnetized Universe , JCAP 06 (2016) 006 [1511.03380]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Masaki, A

    E. Masaki, A. Aoki and J. Soda, Photon-Axion Conversion, Magnetic Field Configuration, and Polarization of Photons , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 043519 [ 1702.08843]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    A. Hook, Y. Kahn, B.R. Safdi and Z. Sun, Radio Signals from Axion Dark Matter Conversion in Neutron Star Magnetospheres , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 241102 [ 1804.03145]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Foster, Y

    J.W. Foster, Y. Kahn, O. Macias, Z. Sun, R.P. Eatough, V.I. Kondratiev et al., Green Bank and Effelsberg Radio Telescope Searches for Axion Dark Matter Conversion in Neutron Star Magnetospheres, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 171301 [ 2004.00011]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Buckley, P.S.B

    J.H. Buckley, P.S.B. Dev, F. Ferrer and F.P. Huang, Fast radio bursts from axion stars moving through pulsar magnetospheres , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 043015 [ 2004.06486]

    2021 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Witte, D

    S.J. Witte, D. Noordhuis, T.D.P. Edwards and C. Weniger, Axion-photon conversion in neutron star magnetospheres: The role of the plasma in the Goldreich-Julian model , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 103030 [ 2104.07670]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Millar, S

    A.J. Millar, S. Baum, M. Lawson and M.C.D. Marsh, Axion-photon conversion in strongly magnetised plasmas, JCAP 11 (2021) 013 [ 2107.07399]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    De Miguel and C

    J. De Miguel and C. Otani, Axion-photon multimessenger astronomy with giant flares , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) L041302 [ 2201.04059]

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Dessert, D

    C. Dessert, D. Dunsky and B.R. Safdi, Upper limit on the axion-photon coupling from magnetic white dwarf polarization , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 103034 [ 2203.04319]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Caputo and G

    A. Caputo and G. Raffelt, Astrophysical Axion Bounds: The 2024 Edition , PoS COSMICWISPers (2024) 041 [ 2401.13728]. – 44 –

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Smarra and P

    C. Smarra and P. Carenza, Axion-photon conversion down to the nonrelativistic regime , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 063021 [ 2410.02662]

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    J. Fan, L. Li and C. Sun, Pulse and Polarization Structures in Axion-Converted X-rays from Pulsars, 2501.12440

  34. [42]

    Ter¸ cas, J.T

    H. Ter¸ cas, J.T. Mendon¸ ca and R. Bingham,Resonant axion-plasmon conversion in neutron star magnetospheres, 2502.12983

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    Einstein, A New Formal Interpretation of Maxwell’s Field Equations of Electrodynamics , Sitzungsber

    A. Einstein, A New Formal Interpretation of Maxwell’s Field Equations of Electrodynamics , Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. ) 1916 (1916) 184

    1916

  36. [44]

    Landau and E.M

    L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifschits, The Classical Theory of Fields , vol. Volume 2 of Course of Theoretical Physics, Pergamon Press, Oxford (1975)

    1975

  37. [45]

    Kushwaha and R.K

    A. Kushwaha and R.K. Jain, Maximal chirality transfer in the photon-graviton conversion in the early Universe , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 023517 [ 2410.07338]

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    J.-K. Li, W. Hong and T.-J. Zhang, Polarization Properties of the Electromagnetic Response to High-frequency Gravitational Wave , 2504.13115

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    Chiba, R

    W. Chiba, R. Jinno and K. Nomura, Graviton-photon conversion in stochastic magnetic fields, 2505.10926

  40. [48]

    De Logi and A.R

    W.K. De Logi and A.R. Mickelson, Electrogravitational Conversion Cross-Sections in Static Electromagnetic Fields, Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 2915

    1977

  41. [49]

    Herman, A

    N. Herman, A. F¨ uzfa, L. Lehoucq and S. Clesse, Detecting planetary-mass primordial black holes with resonant electromagnetic gravitational-wave detectors , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 023524 [2012.12189]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Domcke, C

    V. Domcke, C. Garcia-Cely and N.L. Rodd, Novel Search for High-Frequency Gravitational Waves with Low-Mass Axion Haloscopes , Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 041101 [ 2202.00695]

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Domcke, C

    V. Domcke, C. Garcia-Cely, S.M. Lee and N.L. Rodd, Symmetries and selection rules: optimising axion haloscopes for Gravitational Wave searches , JHEP 03 (2024) 128 [2306.03125]

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Weinberg, Cosmology, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2008)

    S. Weinberg, Cosmology, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2008)

    2008

  45. [53]

    Anile and R.A

    A.M. Anile and R.A. Breuer, Gravitational Stokes Parameters , APJ 189 (1974) 39

    1974

  46. [54]

    Seto and A

    N. Seto and A. Taruya, Polarization analysis of gravitational-wave backgrounds from the correlation signals of ground-based interferometers: Measuring a circular-polarization mode , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 103001 [ 0801.4185]

    2008 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Press, R.H

    N/A., W.H. Press, R.H. Price and S.A. Teukolsky, Problem Book in Relativity and Gravitation, Princeton University Press (9, 2017)

    2017

  48. [56]

    Boccaletti, V

    D. Boccaletti, V. De Sabbata, P. Fortini and C. Gualdi, Conversion of photons into gravitons and vice versa in a static electromagnetic field , Nuovo Cim. B 70 (1970) 129

    1970

  49. [57]

    Addazi, S

    A. Addazi, S. Capozziello and Q. Gan, Resonant Graviton-Photon Conversion with Stochastic Magnetic Field in the Expanding Universe , 2401.15965

    arXiv

  50. [58]

    Ikeda, Y

    T. Ikeda, Y. Kaku, S. Kanno and J. Soda, Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion , 2507.01609

    arXiv

  51. [59]

    Long and E.D

    A.J. Long and E.D. Schiappacasse, Resonant conversion of axion dark radiation into – 45 – terahertz electromagnetic radiation in a neutron star magnetosphere , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 103020 [ 2408.04551]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Goldreich and W.H

    P. Goldreich and W.H. Julian, Pulsar electrodynamics, Astrophys. J. 157 (1969) 869

    1969

  53. [61]

    Melrose and R

    D.B. Melrose and R. Yuen, Pulsar Electrodynamics: an unsolved problem , J. Plasma Phys. 82 (2016) 635820202 [ 1604.03623]

    2016 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Ratzinger, S

    W. Ratzinger, S. Schenk and P. Schwaller, A coordinate-independent formalism for detecting high-frequency gravitational waves, JHEP 08 (2024) 195 [ 2404.08572]

    2024 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Hu and M.J

    W. Hu and M.J. White, A CMB polarization primer , New Astron. 2 (1997) 323 [astro-ph/9706147]

    1997 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Dodelson and F

    S. Dodelson and F. Schmidt, Modern Cosmology, Academic Press (2020), 10.1016/C2017-0-01943-2

    2020 doi

  57. [65]

    Baumann, Cosmology, Cambridge University Press (7, 2022), 10.1017/9781108937092

    D. Baumann, Cosmology, Cambridge University Press (7, 2022), 10.1017/9781108937092

    2022 doi

  58. [66]

    Raffelt, Plasmon Decay Into Low Mass Bosons in Stars , Phys

    G.G. Raffelt, Plasmon Decay Into Low Mass Bosons in Stars , Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 1356

    1988

  59. [67]

    Aggarwal et al., Challenges and Opportunities of Gravitational Wave Searches above 10 kHz, 2501.11723

    N. Aggarwal et al., Challenges and Opportunities of Gravitational Wave Searches above 10 kHz, 2501.11723

  60. [68]

    Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the Invisible Axion , Phys

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

    1983

  61. [69]

    Graham, I.G

    P.W. Graham, I.G. Irastorza, S.K. Lamoreaux, A. Lindner and K.A. van Bibber, Experimental Searches for the Axion and Axion-Like Particles , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 65 (2015) 485 [ 1602.00039]

    2015 arXiv

  62. [70]

    13 (2017) 584 [ 1705.02290]

    CAST collaboration, New CAST Limit on the Axion-Photon Interaction , Nature Phys. 13 (2017) 584 [ 1705.02290]

    2017 arXiv

  63. [71]

    IAXO collaboration, Physics potential of the International Axion Observatory (IAXO) , JCAP 06 (2019) 047 [ 1904.09155]

    2019 arXiv

  64. [72]

    J.A. Dror, H. Murayama and N.L. Rodd, Cosmic axion background , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 115004 [ 2101.09287]. – 46 –

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.