Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Effects of eccentricity on accreting binary black holes: MHD simulations in full GR reveal novel periodicities in jet power and synchrotron spectra

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Eccentric binary black holes imprint their orbital period on accretion, jet power, and synchrotron light.

desk verdict The accretion and Poynting results are the real news; the synchrotron periodicity is a plausible but load-bearing add-on that depends on an assumption the authors themselves flag. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12375 v2 pith:TV3IEI27 submitted 2025-04-16 astro-ph.HE gr-qc

Vikram Manikantan , Vasileios Paschalidis , Gabriele Bozzola This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEgr-qc
keywords eccentricbinaryblackholescircumbinaryaccretiondisksgeneral-relativisticmagnetohydrodynamicsjetPoyntingluminositysynchrotronemissionmultimessengerastronomyminidisksgravitationalwaves
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

Eccentricity, not just spin or mass ratio, may set the clock on which a supermassive binary black hole eats its surrounding disk and shines. The paper reports full general-relativistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations of equal-mass, nonspinning binaries at separations near 20 gravitational radii, with measured eccentricities of 0.00, 0.17, and 0.31. When the orbit is eccentric, the rest-mass accretion rate peaks at pericenter, so accretion modulates at the binary's orbital period; the jet's Poynting luminosity and the optically thin synchrotron emission from the jet do the same. A quasicircular binary instead accreting at about 1.4 times the orbital frequency shows no stable jet or synchrotron orbital modulation. This matters because the periodicities give observers a way to identify eccentric supermassive binaries and to connect electromagnetic flares to gravitational-wave bursts from the same source.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the pericenter-driven collapse of the Hill sphere: as an eccentric binary approaches pericenter, the gravitational sphere of influence around each black hole shrinks to nearly the size of the innermost stable circular orbit, forcing gas to plunge onto the horizon before it can circularize. This creates one accretion episode per orbit, at pericenter, which is why the accretion rate, the jet Poynting luminosity, and the synchrotron emission all carry a Fourier peak at the orbital frequency. The synchrotron channel additionally relies on a post-processing assumption that nonthermal electrons carry 10% of the local magnetic energy density, which converts the oscillating magnetic field in the jet into an oscillating light curve. Fourier power spectra of the accretion rate, Poynting luminosity, and frequency-binned spectral energy distributions are what expose these periodicities and separate the eccentric from the quasicircular cases.

What would settle it

Take a candidate supermassive binary with an independently measured orbital period, for example from LISA gravitational-wave timing or from a periodic radio flare, and test whether the spacing of its optically thin synchrotron bursts above the self-absorption frequency equals the orbital period and equals the gravitational-wave burst spacing; a mismatch would kill the claimed smoking gun. A cheaper check is to repeat the radiative transfer with the electron energy decoupled from the magnetic energy, driving the coupling fraction toward zero, and see whether the orbital-period peak in the simulated spectral energy distribution vanishes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At pericenter the Hill sphere of each black hole shrinks until it nearly coincides with the innermost stable circular orbit, so incoming tidal streams plunge to the horizon instead of forming a persistent minidisk; at apocenter the Hill sphere refills from the circumbinary disk. This periodic filling and draining produces accretion-rate peaks at every pericenter passage, and the paper shows the same period in jet power and in the optically thin synchrotron light curve. For the quasicircular binary the accretion periodicity sits near 1.4 times the orbital frequency, the jet power varies only on a slow timescale of about 0.2 times the orbital frequency, and the synchrotron variability does not keep a consistent frequency when the electron power-law or integration start point is changed. The eccentric cases also spend more time in a low synchrotron state than in a high state, matching the expectation that the binary lingers near apocenter. The paper's headline observational claim is that the spacing between successive electromagnetic bursts from an eccentric binary should equal the spacing between successive gravitational-wave bursts, because both are set by the same orbital clock.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted synchrotron variability assumes that nonthermal electrons keep an energy density equal to 10% of the local magnetic energy density; if real jet electrons do not re-energize in step with the oscillating magnetic field, the orbital-period synchrotron modulation could vanish even though the accretion and Poynting periodicities would remain.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An eccentric supermassive binary should show electromagnetic bursts spaced by exactly one orbital period whenever the observed band is optically thin synchrotron from the jet, across a range of electron power-law indices and binary masses.
  • The interval between gravitational-wave bursts and the interval between electromagnetic bursts should be the same for eccentric binaries, giving a multimessenger test that does not require resolving the two black holes.
  • Accretion variability near 1.4 times the orbital frequency, as seen in the quasicircular case, can be read as evidence for a nearly circular binary; a transition eccentricity between the 1.4 and 1.0 regimes should exist and could be mapped by future simulations.
  • Eccentric binaries should appear to be in a low synchrotron state most of the time, with brief flares at pericenter, which affects how survey cadences should be designed to catch them.
  • The quasicircular jet's slow variability at about 0.2 times the orbital frequency, if confirmed by longer evolutions, means jet power does not simply track accretion rate for circular binaries, so jet-based binary diagnostics must account for eccentricity.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the assumed electron–magnetic coupling weakens, the synchrotron modulation would fade while accretion and Poynting periodicities remain; comparing the three channels in real data would then measure how efficiently jet electrons re-energize.
  • The Hill-sphere-to-ISCO mechanism should generalize to unequal masses and spinning black holes, so the threshold eccentricity for orbital-period behavior likely depends on spin and mass ratio through the value of the innermost stable circular orbit and the Hill-sphere size.
  • At larger separations, where the pericenter Hill sphere stays well outside the innermost stable circular orbit, the model predicts persistent minidisks and a weakened orbital-period modulation, a trend that longer-separation eccentric simulations could test.
  • The coincidence of gravitational-wave and electromagnetic burst spacing is a periodicity claim, not a simultaneity claim; with better light-travel modeling the measured lag between bursts could constrain the jet speed and geometry.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents 3+1 full-GR GRMHD simulations of equal-mass, nonspinning black hole binaries with target eccentricities 0, 0.15, and 0.3 (measured eccentricities 0.00, 0.17, and 0.31) embedded in a thick circumbinary torus at major axis a = 20M. The authors measure the rest-mass accretion rate, Hill-sphere rest masses, and outgoing Poynting luminosity, and post-process the jet with a flat-spacetime synchrotron radiative transfer calculation. They report that eccentric binaries show accretion-rate, Poynting-luminosity, and optically thin synchrotron variability at the orbital frequency, whereas the quasicircular run shows accretion modulation at approximately 1.4 f_orb and less robust jet/synchrotron periodicities. They further propose that equal inter-burst spacing between gravitational-wave and electromagnetic bursts is a smoking-gun signature of eccentric supermassive binary black holes.

Significance. If the main claims hold, this is a valuable step: it is one of the first systematic full-GR MHD studies of eccentric binary black hole accretion at relativistic separations, and it connects accretion dynamics to jet and synchrotron variability in a way that could inform multi-messenger searches. Strengths include the use of a gauge-invariant orbital frequency from the GW f22 phase for periodogram normalization, explicit sensitivity checks for integration start height, mass, and electron power-law index, and a candid discussion of limitations. The accretion-rate and Poynting-luminosity periodicities are internally consistent and supported by the shown time series and PSDs. However, the synchrotron variability claim, one of the two proposed EM smoking guns, depends on an electron-energy equipartition assumption that the text itself says is required, and the Fourier statistics for the eccentric runs rest on only about four to five orbital cycles.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section VI and Appendix B (Eqs. B5-B8)] The abstract and Section IV C present orbital-period synchrotron variability as a robust, smoking-gun result. The radiative transfer model fixes the nonthermal electron distribution by setting the electron energy density to ζ times the magnetic energy density, with ζ = 0.1, at every snapshot (Eqs. B5-B8). The manuscript contains a direct internal contradiction: Appendix B states that "this choice does not affect the variability of our synchrotron emission," while Section VI states that if the electron and magnetic energy density are not linked, "variability is not as clear." Because the periodic re-injection of electrons into instantaneous equipartition with the oscillating magnetic field is precisely what imprints the orbital period on the synchrotron light curve, the authors should either provide a test with a time-lagged or evolving ζ and a physically motivated cooling or re-acceleration timescale, or explicitly demote the synchrotron modulation to a conditional prediction rather than a demonstrated signature.
  2. [Section II C 1, Figs. 2, 5, 7] The eccentric-run PSDs use time windows of about 2500M (3000-5500M for accretion; 4000-7000M and 4000-6500M for jet and synchrotron). With orbital periods of roughly 500-600M, this corresponds to only about four to five orbital cycles, giving a frequency resolution of order 0.2 f_orb. The central distinction between a peak at f_orb and a peak at, say, 1.2-1.4 f_orb is therefore only marginally resolved for the eccentric cases. Please report the measured peak widths, show periodograms from half-window subsets, and ideally extend the e = 0.17 run to confirm that the dominant peak remains at f_orb rather than drifting with the window choice.
  3. [Section V and Fig. 8] The coincidence between GW and EM bursts is presented as a smoking-gun signature, but the alignment is controlled by the assumed jet velocity vjet, which the authors estimate as about 0.5 from Poynting extraction at different radii and about 0.1-0.2 from fluid velocities near the jet base. For the e = 0.17 binary, the GW-to-EM delay changes from roughly 100M to near zero depending on which estimate is used. The robust statement is that the inter-burst spacing is the same for GW and EM signals; the simultaneity claim should be removed or accompanied by a propagation-delay model with an explicit uncertainty range for vjet.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption reads "the dominant frequencies of the accretion are variability" and should read "the dominant frequencies of the accretion variability."
  2. [Section VI heading] The heading "SUMMARY AND DICUSSION" contains a typo and should be "SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION."
  3. [Appendix A, Eq. (A6)] Equation (A6) has an unmatched parenthesis in the factor (1 - 4t/τ)^{1/4}; the mathematical expression should be checked and corrected.
  4. [Appendix B, Eq. (B9) paragraph] The text "time-indepedent radiative transfer equation" contains a typo; it should be "time-independent."
  5. [Section II B, gauge condition citation] The generalized Lorenz gauge condition is attributed to reference [64], but the damping-parameter implementation is cited to [84]; please verify that [64] is the correct source for the gauge choice, as the generalized Lorenz gauge is usually associated with Etienne et al. 2012.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the f_orb periodicities are measured against an independently extracted GW orbital frequency, and the synchrotron variability follows from simulated B-field evolution under an explicitly stated equipartition assumption.

full rationale

The paper's central periodicities are obtained by Fourier transforming independently simulated time series (rest-mass accretion rate, Poynting luminosity, synchrotron SED) and normalizing the frequency axis by an orbital frequency derived from the gravitational-wave f22 phase, not from the EM signals themselves. The peak at f_orb for eccentric binaries is therefore a measured property of the MHD evolution, not a normalization artifact. The synchrotron variability is computed from the standard synchrotron emissivity and absorption coefficients (Eqs. B1-B2) with the electron energy density set to 10% of the local magnetic energy density (Eqs. B5-B8); this is an external microphysical input (ζ = 0.1) rather than a restatement of the target periodicity. The paper honestly flags the assumption's importance in Section VI: "If we do not assume that the electron and magnetic energy density are linked, then variability is not as clear." That is a limitation, not circularity, because the prediction is conditional on a stated physical assumption and remains falsifiable. The only fitted quantity, the jet velocity vjet used for retarded-time alignment in Section V, is transparently described as a fit to Poynting light curves and does not affect the claimed smoking-gun property, which is the equality of the GW and EM burst spacings; a uniform time shift cannot change the spacing between bursts. Self-citations, including reference to the authors' prior work [59] for the e = 0.31 case, are not load-bearing because this paper presents its own simulations and the e = 0.17 confirmation. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained: the periodicities are extracted from the GRMHD data, the orbital frequency is measured independently, and the EM predictions are explicit consequences of the simulated magnetic-field evolution under clearly stated assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard simulation initial data and on post-processing assumptions for synchrotron emission. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The most consequential assumption is the electron-magnetic energy equipartition link because the paper itself ties the robustness of the synchrotron variability to it.

free parameters (6)
  • target and measured orbital eccentricity = e = 0.00, 0.17, 0.31
    Initial tangential momenta scaled by sqrt(1-e); measured eccentricities from a 5-parameter fit to orbital separation (Eq. A8). Sets the regime under study, not fitted to the periodicity result.
  • Eddington ratio xi and radiative efficiency eta = 0.1, 0.1
    Used to scale accretion rate, densities, magnetic fields, and SED luminosities (Eqs. B10-B14). Luminosities scale with these choices; periodicities do not.
  • electron energy fraction zeta = 0.1
    Sets minimum electron energy E1 via Eq. B8. The paper states synchrotron variability becomes unclear if electron energy is not tied to magnetic energy, so this choice is load-bearing for the EM variability claim.
  • electron power-law index p = 2.5 (and 3, 4 for checks)
    Chosen for the fiducial SED; variability said to be insensitive to p for eccentric binaries, but this is not shown in the displayed time series.
  • jet velocity for retarded time vjet = ~0.5 (or 0.1-0.2)
    Estimated by aligning Poynting luminosity light curves at different extraction radii (Section V). Controls the phase lag between GW and EM bursts in Fig. 8; the equal-spacing claim is independent.
  • Fourier transform time windows = 3000-5500M (accretion), 4000-7000/6500M (jet/SED)
    Analysis choices for PSDs; authors argue accretion peak is insensitive, but quasicircular jet variability is admitted to require longer evolutions.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The power-law torus initial condition describes a relaxed circumbinary disk around the binary.
    The torus is an equilibrium solution for a single BH of the same mass (Refs. [41,55]); initial disk properties shape cavity and minidisk formation.
  • domain assumption Ideal MHD with no radiation feedback or cooling is adequate for sub-Eddington accretion.
    The authors set xi = 0.1 and note feedback can drive winds and cool the disk; this may affect minidisk persistence and jet variability.
  • ad hoc to paper Nonthermal electrons follow a power-law distribution with energy density equal to 10% of magnetic energy density.
    Motivated by PIC simulations and equipartition, but not derived; the synchrotron variability claim weakens without this link (Section VI).
  • domain assumption Radiative transfer in flat spacetime with the fast-light approximation from z >= 50M is adequate.
    Ignores GR ray bending, redshift, and light travel time; authors expect O(10%) corrections and say exact values will change.
  • domain assumption Newtonian Hill sphere radii estimate each BH's region of influence.
    Used to argue pericenter Hill sphere approaches ISCO, depleting minidisks; authors note the Hill sphere is neither gauge invariant nor relativistic.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Effects of eccentricity on accreting binary black holes: MHD simulations in full GR reveal novel periodicities in jet power and synchrotron spectra." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TV3IEI27

@misc{pith2026250412375,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Effects of eccentricity on accreting binary black holes: MHD simulations in full GR reveal novel periodicities in jet power and synchrotron spectra},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TV3IEI27}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12375}
}
abstract

We perform simulations of magnetohydrodynamic accretion onto equal-mass, nonspinning binary black holes in 3+1 full general relativity addressing the effects of orbital eccentricity. We find that binary black holes with non-negligible eccentricity accrete matter with periodicity that matches the binary orbital period, whereas quasicircular binaries exhibit accretion rate modulation at approximately $\sim 0.7\times$ their binary orbital period. Additionally, we find that the total jet luminosity is modulated at the orbital period for eccentric binaries, while quasicircular binaries only exhibit long-term modulations. We perform a radiative transfer calculation of the dual jet synchrotron emission and demonstrate that the optically thin synchrotron emission varies on the binary orbital period for eccentric binaries. Moreover, eccentric binaries spend more time in a {\it low} state, where the synchrotron emission is minimum, than in a {\it high} state, where the synchrotron emission peaks. The quasicircular binary also exhibits variability in its optically thin synchrotron emission but the exact frequency of variability does not appear robust against different parameters. Our suite of simulations is an essential step towards providing a comprehensive catalog of multimessenger theoretical models that will enable studies of supermassive binary black holes detectable across the electromagnetic and gravitational wave spectra.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12375 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Rest-mass density ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Left column: total rest-mass accretion rates (solid black line) onto both black holes and total rest-mass contained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. where the ISCO and Hill radius are nearly iden￾tical at apocenter (t/M = 4290.3). Therefore, matter from the accretion streams plunges into the BHs before it can circularize into minidisks. This both explains the disappearance of minidisks at pericenter ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Contours of the fluid magnetization, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Top: Poynting luminosity normalized to the average accretion rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. SEDs of synchrotron emission from the SMBBH dual jet. We show the specific luminosity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Left: frequency of the synchrotron SED vs time for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Top row: we plot the amplitude of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The orbits of our non-spinning, binary black holes with measured eccentricities of 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Milliarcsecond astrometric oscillations in active galactic nuclei as a precursor of multi-messenger gravitational wave events

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The quasar J0204+1514 shows a 7.9-year astrometric wobble that the authors model as a supermassive black hole binary destined to emit gravitational waves.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

139 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    As is common, and motivated by the aforemen- tioned studies, we adopt a power-law electron dis- tribution throughout the jet

  2. [2]

    charge neutrality)

    We determine the electron power-law distribution by setting the electron energy density equal to 10% of the magnetic field energy density and the number density of electrons equal to the number density of protons (i.e. charge neutrality)

  3. [3]

    This is because we do not perform a general relativistic calculation, therefore our integration of the radiative transfer equation must be in approximately flat spacetime

    We begin integrating at r/M = 50. This is because we do not perform a general relativistic calculation, therefore our integration of the radiative transfer equation must be in approximately flat spacetime

  4. [4]

    fast light

    We adopt the “fast light” approximation; we solve the radiative transfer equation on a slice of con- stant coordinate time. This approximation is valid when the medium does not change much while light travels through it. In our calculations, it is valid for the optically thin frequencies, which are the main focus here

  5. [5]

    low” state, where the synchrotron emission is at a minimum, than in a “high

    We do not treat special relativistic effects. This assumption is consistent with the fact that the fluid bulk velocity in the incipient jets in our simulations is only mildly relativistic (Γ ∼ 1.15), especially at the low heights above the BHs which dominate the synchrotron emission in our calculations. Lastly, we report results only from the viewing angl...

  6. [6]

    The accretion rate onto eccentric binaries varies with time and exhibits periodicity with frequency f ∼ forb, unlike quasicircular binaries whose ac- cretion rate variability exhibits peak periodicity at f∼ 1.4forb

  7. [7]

    However, eccentric binary minidisks are quickly depleted at pericenter for the relativistic separations we study here

    Quasicircular binaries at separation d = 20M have a persistent minidisk structure throughout their orbit. However, eccentric binary minidisks are quickly depleted at pericenter for the relativistic separations we study here. Consequently, quasicir- cular binaries have persistent nodes of low density in their cavity that are an order of magnitude less dens...

  8. [8]

    However, the latter variability is not as pronounced and requires longer simulations to confirm

    Eccentric binaries launch jets with a Poynting lu- minosity that exhibits periodicity with frequency f ∼ forb, while that of quasicircular binaries ex- hibits periodicity with f∼ 0.2forb. However, the latter variability is not as pronounced and requires longer simulations to confirm

Show all 139 references
  1. [9]

    This variability is agnostic to the choice of electron distribution power-law as long as we determine the electron energy density to be a fraction of the mag- netic energy density

    Optically thin synchrotron emission from the jet exhibits variability f∼ forb for eccentric binaries. This variability is agnostic to the choice of electron distribution power-law as long as we determine the electron energy density to be a fraction of the mag- netic energy density

  2. [10]

    This is a smoking gun signature of SMBBHs with non- negligible eccentricity

    The delay between consecutive gravitational wave bursts and the delay between consecutive optically thin synchrotron emission bursts is the same. This is a smoking gun signature of SMBBHs with non- negligible eccentricity. Our suite of simulations and the results derived from ...

    2000

  3. [11]

    In the calculations we perform, we integrate α out of the equation by assuming that the electrons follow an isotropic pitch angle distribution be- tween 0 < α < π/2

    Radiative Transfer Equation We use the definitions for synchrotron emissivity jν and absorption coefficient αν of [126], jν = √ 3q2CB sinα mec2(p + 1) mecν 3qB sinα −(p−1)/2 Γ 3p + 19 12 Γ 3p− 1 12 , (B1) αν = √ 3q 8πme 3q 2πm3ec5 p/2 C(B sinα)(p+2)/2 Γ 3p + 2 12 Γ 3p + 22 12 ...

  4. [12]

    Implementation We consider the special case where the observer is di- rectly along the line of sight of the jet (i.e. θ = 0). In our simulation, this means the observer is at x = y = 0 at some vertical distance above the BBH. We integrate along one line of sight and consider t...

  5. [13]

    M. C. Begelman, R. D. Blandford, and M. J. Rees, Na- ture 287, 307 (1980), number: 5780 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group. 5 Note that while the total luminosity output from our calculations depends on η, our reported periodicities do not

    1980

  6. [14]

    S. D. M. White and C. S. Frenk, The Astro- physical Journal 379, 52 (1991), aDS Bibcode: 1991ApJ...379...52W

    1991

  7. [15]

    Rodriguez, G

    C. Rodriguez, G. B. Taylor, R. T. Zavala, Y. M. Pihlstrm, and A. B. Peck, The Astrophysical Journal 697, 37 (2009), aDS Bibcode: 2009ApJ...697...37R

    2009

  8. [16]

    Volonteri, F

    M. Volonteri, F. Haardt, and P. Madau, The Astrophys- ical Journal 582, 559 (2003), publisher: IOP ADS Bib- 21 code: 2003ApJ...582..559V

    2003

  9. [17]

    Milosavljevi and D

    M. Milosavljevi and D. Merritt, The Astrophysical Jour- nal 596, 860 (2003), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2003

  10. [18]

    Milosavljevi and D

    M. Milosavljevi and D. Merritt, AIP Conference Pro- ceedings 686, 201 (2003)

    2003

  11. [19]

    Gualandris, J

    A. Gualandris, J. I. Read, W. Dehnen, and E. Bortolas, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society464, 2301 (2017), arXiv:1609.09383 [astro-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Vasiliev, F

    E. Vasiliev, F. Antonini, and D. Merritt, The Astrophys- ical Journal 810, 49 (2015), arXiv:1505.05480 [astro- ph]

    2015 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Alonso-lvarez, J

    G. Alonso-lvarez, J. M. Cline, and C. Dewar, Physical Review Letters 133, 021401 (2024), publisher: Ameri- can Physical Society

    2024

  14. [22]

    S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky, Black holes, white dwarfs and neutron stars. The physics of compact ob- jects (1983) publication Title: A Wiley-Interscience Publication ADS Bibcode: 1983bhwd.book.....S

    1983

  15. [23]

    X. Chen, P. Madau, A. Sesana, and F. K. Liu, The Astrophysical Journal 697, L149 (2009), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2009

  16. [24]

    S. Li, P. Berczik, X. Chen, F. K. Liu, R. Spurzem, and Y. Qiu, The Astrophysical Journal883, 132 (2019), aDS Bibcode: 2019ApJ...883..132L

    2019

  17. [25]

    Bogdanovic, M

    T. Bogdanovic, M. C. Miller, and L. Blecha, Living Reviews in Relativity 25, 3 (2022), arXiv:2109.03262 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    J. I. Thorpe, J. Ziemer, I. Thorpe, J. Livas, J. W. Conklin, R. Caldwell, E. Berti, S. T. McWilliams, R. Stebbins, D. Shoemaker, E. C. Ferrara, S. L. Lar- son, D. Shoemaker, J. S. Key, M. Vallisneri, M. Era- cleous, J. Schnittman, B. Kamai, J. Camp, G. Mueller, J. Bellovary, N...

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Colpi, K

    M. Colpi, K. Holley-Bockelmann, T. Bogdanovic, P. Natarajan, J. Bellovary, A. Sesana, M. Tremmel, J. Schnittman, J. Comerford, E. Barausse, E. Berti, M. Volonteri, F. Khan, S. McWilliams, S. Burke- Spolaor, J. Hazboun, J. Conklin, G. Mueller, and S. Larson, arXiv e-prints , ar...

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Amaro-Seoane, J

    P. Amaro-Seoane, J. Andrews, M. Arca Sedda, A. Askar, Q. Baghi, R. Balasov, I. Bartos, S. S. Bav- era, J. Bellovary, C. P. L. Berry, E. Berti, S. Bianchi, L. Blecha, S. Blondin, T. Bogdanovi, S. Boissier, M. Bonetti, S. Bonoli, E. Bortolas, K. Breivik, P. R. Capelo, L. Caramet...

    2023

  21. [29]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, M. R. Aber- nathy, F. Acernese, and Others (LIGO Scientific Col- laboration and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    Afzal, G

    A. Afzal, G. Agazie, A. Anumarlapudi, A. M. Archibald, Z. Arzoumanian, P. T. Baker, B. Bcsy, J. J. Blanco- Pillado, L. Blecha, K. K. Boddy, A. Brazier, P. R. Brook, S. Burke-Spolaor, R. Burnette, R. Case, et al. , The Astrophysical Journal Letters 951, L11 (2023), publisher: T...

    2023

  23. [31]

    P. A. Rosado, A. Sesana, and J. Gair, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society 451, 2417 (2015), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2015MN- RAS.451.2417R

    2015

  24. [32]

    L. Z. Kelley, L. Blecha, L. Hernquist, A. Sesana, and S. R. Taylor, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 477, 964 (2018), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2018MNRAS.477..964K

    2018

  25. [33]

    Aggarwal, Z

    K. Aggarwal, Z. Arzoumanian, P. T. Baker, A. Bra- zier, M. R. Brinson, P. R. Brook, S. Burke-Spolaor, S. Chatterjee, J. M. Cordes, N. J. Cornish, F. Craw- ford, K. Crowter, H. T. Cromartie, M. DeCesar, P. B. Demorest, T. Dolch, et al. , The Astrophysical Jour- nal 880, 116 (20...

    2019

  26. [34]

    Babak, M

    S. Babak, M. Falxa, G. Franciolini, and M. Pieroni, Physical Review D 110, 063022 (2024), publisher: American Physical Society

    2024

  27. [35]

    K. G. Arun, E. Belgacem, R. Benkel, L. Bernard, E. Berti, G. Bertone, M. Besancon, D. Blas, C. G. B¨ ohmer, R. Brito, G. Calcagni, A. Cardenas-Avenda˜ no, K. Clough, M. Crisostomi, V. De Luca, et al. , Living Reviews in Relativity 25, 4 (2022), arXiv:2205.01597 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Rodriguez, G

    C. Rodriguez, G. B. Taylor, R. T. Zavala, A. B. Peck, L. K. Pollack, and R. W. Romani, The As- trophysical Journal 646, 49 (2006), aDS Bibcode: 2006ApJ...646...49R

    2006

  29. [37]

    Charisi, I

    M. Charisi, I. Bartos, Z. Haiman, A. M. Price-Whelan, and S. Mrka, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronom- ical Society 454, L21 (2015), aDS Bibcode: 2015MN- RAS.454L..21C

    2015

  30. [38]

    M. J. Graham, S. G. Djorgovski, D. Stern, A. J. Drake, A. A. Mahabal, C. Donalek, E. Glikman, S. Larson, and E. Christensen, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society 453, 1562 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    T. Liu, S. Gezari, M. Ayers, W. Burgett, K. Chambers, K. Hodapp, M. E. Huber, R.-P. Kudritzki, N. Metcalfe, J. Tonry, R. Wainscoat, and C. Waters, The Astrophys- ical Journal 884, 36 (2019), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2019

  32. [40]

    O’Neill, S

    S. O’Neill, S. Kiehlmann, A. C. S. Readhead, M. F. Aller, R. D. Blandford, I. Liodakis, M. L. Lister, P. Mrz, C. P. O’Dea, T. J. Pearson, V. Ravi, M. Vallisneri, K. A. Cleary, M. J. Graham, K. J. B. Grainge, M. W. Hodges, T. Hovatta, A. Lhteenmki, J. W. Lamb, T. J. W. Lazio, W...

    2022

  33. [41]

    Kiehlmann, P

    S. Kiehlmann, P. Vergara De La Parra, A. Sullivan, A. Synani, I. Liodakis, A. Readhead, M. Graham, M. Begelman, R. Blandford, K. Chatziioannou, Y. Ding, F. Harrison, D. Homan, T. Hovatta, S. Kulkarni, et al., PKS 2131-021 – Discovery of Strong Coherent Sinu- soidal Variations ...

    2024

  34. [42]

    J. L. Gmez, E. Traianou, T. P. Krichbaum, A. P. Lobanov, A. Fuentes, R. Lico, G.-Y. Zhao, G. Bruni, Y. Y. Kovalev, A. Lhteenmki, P. A. Voitsik, M. M. Lisakov, E. Angelakis, U. Bach, C. Casadio, I. Cho, 22 L. Dey, A. Gopakumar, L. I. Gurvits, S. Jorstad, Y. A. Kovalev, M. L. Li...

    2022

  35. [43]

    J. C. Runnoe, M. Eracleous, A. Pennell, G. Mathes, T. Boroson, S. Sigursson, T. Bogdanovi, J. P. Halpern, J. Liu, and S. Brown, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 468, 1683 (2017)

    2017

  36. [44]

    S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. J. Levan, D. Li, N. C. Stone, A. I. Zabludoff, Z. Cao, T. Wevers, D. R. Pasham, C. Lewin, and E. Kara, The Astrophysical Journal 970, 116 (2024), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2024ApJ...970..116W

    2024

  37. [45]

    Komossa, V

    S. Komossa, V. Burwitz, G. Hasinger, P. Predehl, J. S. Kaastra, and Y. Ikebe, The Astrophysical Jour- nal 582, L15 (2003), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2003ApJ...582L..15K

    2003

  38. [46]

    J. M. Comerford, D. Pooley, R. S. Barrows, J. E. Greene, N. L. Zakamska, G. M. Madejski, and M. C. Cooper, The Astrophysical Journal 806, 219 (2015), aDS Bibcode: 2015ApJ...806..219C

    2015

  39. [47]

    J. C. Bright and V. Paschalidis, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 520, 392 (2023), arXiv:2210.15686 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Haiman, C

    Z. Haiman, C. Xin, T. Bogdanovi, P. A. Seoane, M. Bonetti, J. A. Casey-Clyde, M. Charisi, M. Colpi, J. Davelaar, A. De Rosa, D. J. D’Orazio, K. Futrowsky, P. Gandhi, A. W. Graham, J. E. Greene, M. Habouzit, D. Haggard, K. Holley-Bockelmann, X. Liu, A. Man- giagli, A. Mastrobuo...

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    L. Piro, M. Colpi, J. Aird, A. Mangiagli, A. C. Fabian, M. Guainazzi, S. Marsat, A. Sesana, P. McNamara, M. Bonetti, E. M. Rossi, N. R. Tanvir, J. G. Baker, G. Belanger, T. Dal Canton, O. Jennrich, M. L. Katz, and N. Luetzgendorf, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical So...

    2023

  42. [50]

    J. E. Barnes, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomi- cal Society 333, 481 (2002)

    2002

  43. [51]

    Artymowicz and S

    P. Artymowicz and S. H. Lubow, The Astro- physical Journal 421, 651 (1994), aDS Bibcode: 1994ApJ...421..651A

    1994

  44. [52]

    A. I. MacFadyen and M. Milosavljevi, The Astrophysi- cal Journal 672, 83 (2008), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2008

  45. [53]

    R. Gold, V. Paschalidis, M. Ruiz, S. L. Shapiro, Z. B. Etienne, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Physical Review D 90, 104030 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    B. D. Farris, P. Duffell, A. I. MacFadyen, and Z. Haiman, The Astrophysical Journal 783, 134 (2014), aDS Bibcode: 2014ApJ...783..134F

    2014

  47. [55]

    D. B. Bowen, M. Campanelli, J. H. Krolik, V. Mewes, and S. C. Noble, The Astrophysical Journal 838, 42 (2017), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2017

  48. [56]

    Paschalidis, J

    V. Paschalidis, J. Bright, M. Ruiz, and R. Gold, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 910, L26 (2021), arXiv:2102.06712 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Palenzuela, L

    C. Palenzuela, L. Lehner, and S. L. Liebling, Science 329, 927 (2010), arXiv:1005.1067 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Moesta, D

    P. Moesta, D. Alic, L. Rezzolla, O. Zanotti, and C. Palenzuela, Astrophys. J. Lett. 749, L32 (2012), arXiv:1109.1177 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  51. [59]

    M. J. Avara, J. H. Krolik, M. Campanelli, S. C. No- ble, D. Bowen, and T. Ryu, Accretion onto a Su- permassive Black Hole Binary Before Merger (2023), arXiv:2305.18538 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  52. [60]

    D. J. Munoz, D. Lai, K. Kratter, and R. Miranda, The Astrophysical Journal 889, 114 (2020), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2020

  53. [61]

    J. R. Westernacher-Schneider, J. Zrake, A. MacFadyen, and Z. Haiman, Physical Review D 106, 103010 (2022), arXiv:2111.06882 [astro-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Lai and D

    D. Lai and D. J. Munoz, Circumbinary Accretion: From Binary Stars to Massive Binary Black Holes (2023), arXiv:2211.00028 [astro-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  55. [63]

    DeLaurentiis, Z

    S. DeLaurentiis, Z. Haiman, J. R. Westernacher- Schneider, L. M. Krauth, J. Davelaar, J. Zrake, and A. MacFadyen, Relativistic Binary Precession: Impact on Eccentric Binary Accretion and Multi-Messenger As- tronomy (2024), arXiv:2405.07897 [astro-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Porter, S

    K. Porter, S. C. Noble, E. M. Gutierrez, J. Pelle, M. Campanelli, J. Schnittman, and B. J. Kelly, A Pa- rameter Study of the Electromagnetic Signatures of an Analytical Mini-Disk Model for Supermassive Binary Black Hole Systems (2024), arXiv:2407.04089 [astro-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Gold, Galaxies 7, 63 (2019)

    R. Gold, Galaxies 7, 63 (2019)

    2019

  58. [66]

    Cattorini and B

    F. Cattorini and B. Giacomazzo, Astropart. Phys. 154, 102892 (2024), arXiv:2401.02521 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    A. Khan, V. Paschalidis, M. Ruiz, and S. L. Shapiro, Physical Review D 97, 044036 (2018), arXiv:1801.02624 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [68]

    M. Ruiz, A. Tsokaros, and S. L. Shapiro, General Rel- ativistic Magnetohydrodynamic Simulations of Accre- tion Disks Around Tilted Binary Black Holes of Unequal Mass (2023), arXiv:2302.09083 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Cattorini, S

    F. Cattorini, S. Maggioni, B. Giacomazzo, F. Haardt, M. Colpi, and S. Covino, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 930, L1 (2022), arXiv:2202.08282 [astro-ph, physics:gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Fedrigo, F

    G. Fedrigo, F. Cattorini, B. Giacomazzo, and M. Colpi, Physical Review D 109, 103024 (2024), publisher: APS ADS Bibcode: 2024PhRvD.109j3024F

    2024

  63. [71]

    Manikantan, V

    V. Manikantan, V. Paschalidis, and G. Bozzola, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2411.11955 (2024), arXiv:2411.11955 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    P. C. Peters and J. Mathews, Physical Review 131, 435 (1963)

    1963

  65. [73]

    Gualandris, F

    A. Gualandris, F. M. Khan, E. Bortolas, M. Bonetti, A. Sesana, P. Berczik, and K. Holley-Bockelmann, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society511, 4753 (2022)

    2022

  66. [74]

    Valli, C

    R. Valli, C. Tiede, A. Vigna-Gmez, J. Cuadra, M. Siwek, J.-Z. Ma, D. J. D’Orazio, J. Zrake, and S. E. de Mink, Long-term Evolution of Binary Orbits Induced by Cir- cumbinary Disks (2024), arXiv:2401.17355 [astro-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Franchini, A

    A. Franchini, A. Prato, C. Longarini, and A. Sesana, On the behaviour of eccentric sub-pc massive black hole binaries embedded in massive discs (2024), publication Title: arXiv e-prints ADS Bibcode: 2024arXiv240200938F

    2024

  68. [76]

    B. D. Farris, R. Gold, V. Paschalidis, Z. B. Etienne, 23 and S. L. Shapiro, Physical Review Letters 109, 221102 (2012), publisher: American Physical Society

    2012

  69. [77]

    M. A. Abramowicz, B. Czerny, J. P. Lasota, and E. Szuszkiewicz, ApJ 332, 646 (1988)

    1988

  70. [78]

    Roedig, M

    C. Roedig, M. Dotti, A. Sesana, J. Cuadra, and M. Colpi, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 415, 3033 (2011), publisher: OUP ADS Bib- code: 2011MNRAS.415.3033R

    2011

  71. [79]

    Siwek, L

    M. Siwek, L. Z. Kelley, and L. Hernquist, Signatures of Circumbinary Disk Dynamics in Multi-Messenger Pop- ulation Studies of Massive Black Hole Binaries (2024), arXiv:2403.08871 [astro-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Yadav, M

    J. Yadav, M. Das, S. Barway, and F. Combes, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2106.12441 (2021), arXiv:2106.12441 [astro-ph.GA]

    2021 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Y. Ni, T. Di Matteo, N. Chen, R. Croft, and S. Bird, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 940, L49 (2022)

    2022

  74. [82]

    T. Ryu, R. Perna, Z. Haiman, J. P. Ostriker, and N. C. Stone, MNRAS 473, 3410 (2018), arXiv:1709.06501 [astro-ph.GA]

    2018 arXiv

  75. [83]

    R. J. Truant, D. Izquierdo-Villalba, A. Sesana, G. M. Shaifullah, and M. Bonetti, Resolving the nano-Hz grav- itational wave sky: the detectability of eccentric binaries with PTA experiments (2024), arXiv:2407.12078 [astro- ph]

    2024 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Ansorg, B

    M. Ansorg, B. Brgmann, and W. Tichy, Physi- cal Review D 70, 064011 (2004), aDS Bibcode: 2004PhRvD..70f4011A

    2004

  77. [85]

    Paschalidis, Z

    V. Paschalidis, Z. B. Etienne, R. Gold, and S. L. Shapiro, (2013), arXiv:1304.0457 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  78. [86]

    M. T. P. Liska, N. Kaaz, G. Musoke, A. Tchekhovskoy, and O. Porth, ApJL 944, L48 (2023), arXiv:2210.10198 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Bai and J

    X.-N. Bai and J. M. Stone, ApJ 767, 30 (2013), arXiv:1210.6661 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  80. [88]

    S. A. Balbus and J. F. Hawley, The Astrophysical Jour- nal 376, 214 (1991)

    1991

  81. [89]

    Z. B. Etienne, V. Paschalidis, R. Haas, P. Moesta, and S. L. Shapiro, Classical and Quantum Gravity 32, 175009 (2015), arXiv:1501.07276 [astro-ph, physics:gr- qc]

    2015 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Werneck, S

    L. Werneck, S. Cupp, T. Assumpo, S. R. Brandt, C.-H. Cheng, P. Diener, J. Doherty, Z. Etienne, R. Haas, T. P. Jacques, B. Karaka, K. Topolski, B.-J. Tsao, M. Alcu- bierre, D. Alic, et al. , The einstein toolkit (2023), to find out more, visit http://einsteintoolkit.org

    2023

  83. [91]

    Goodale, G

    T. Goodale, G. Allen, G. Lanfermann, J. Mass´ o, T. Radke, E. Seidel, and J. Shalf, in Vector and Paral- lel Processing – VECPAR’2002, 5th International Con- ference, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Springer, Berlin, 2003)

    2002

  84. [92]

    Schnetter, S

    E. Schnetter, S. Hawley, and I. Hawke, Astrophysics Source Code Library , ascl:1611.016 (2016), aDS Bib- code: 2016ascl.soft11016S

    2016

  85. [93]

    E. F. Toro, Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: A Practical Introduction (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009)

    2009

  86. [94]

    Colella and P

    P. Colella and P. R. Woodward, Journal of Computa- tional Physics 54, 174 (1984)

    1984

  87. [95]

    Porth, K

    O. Porth, K. Chatterjee, R. Narayan, C. F. Gammie, Y. Mizuno, P. Anninos, J. G. Baker, M. Bugli, C.-k. Chan, J. Davelaar, L. Del Zanna, Z. B. Etienne, P. C. Fragile, B. J. Kelly, M. Liska, S. Markoff,et al., The As- trophysical Journal Supplement Series 243, 26 (2019), aDS Bib...

    2019

  88. [96]

    Z. B. Etienne, V. Paschalidis, Y. T. Liu, and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D 85, 024013 (2012), arXiv:1110.4633 [astro-ph.HE]

    2012 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Shibata and T

    M. Shibata and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. D 52, 5428 (1995)

    1995

  90. [98]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D 59, 024007 (1998)

    1998

  91. [99]

    Sperhake, Physical Review D76, 104015 (2007), pub- lisher: American Physical Society

    U. Sperhake, Physical Review D76, 104015 (2007), pub- lisher: American Physical Society

    2007

  92. [100]

    J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D.-I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, Physical Review Letters 96, 111102 (2006), publisher: American Physical Society

    2006

  93. [101]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlo- chower, Physical Review Letters 96, 111101 (2006), publisher: American Physical Society

    2006

  94. [102]

    Thornburg, cqg 21, 743 (2004), gr-qc/0306056

    J. Thornburg, cqg 21, 743 (2004), gr-qc/0306056

    2004 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Bozzola, The Journal of Open Source Software 6, 3099 (2021), arXiv:2104.06376 [gr-qc]

    G. Bozzola, The Journal of Open Source Software 6, 3099 (2021), arXiv:2104.06376 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Pe- terson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Polat, Y. ...

    2020

  97. [105]

    Witek, M

    H. Witek, M. Zilhao, G. Bozzola, M. Elley, G. Ficarra, T. Ikeda, N. Sanchis-Gual, and H. Silva, Canuda: a public numerical relativity library to probe fundamental physics (2021)

    2021

  98. [106]

    Witek and M

    H. Witek and M. Zilh˜ ao, Canuda code (2015)

    2015

  99. [107]

    D. P. Hamilton and J. A. Burns, Icarus 92, 118 (1991)

    1991

  100. [108]

    M. D. Duez, Y. T. Liu, S. L. Shapiro, and B. C. Stephens, Physical Review D 72, 024028 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0503420

    2005 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Lodato, S

    G. Lodato, S. Nayakshin, A. R. King, and J. E. Pringle, MNRAS 398, 1392 (2009), arXiv:0906.0737 [astro-ph.CO]

    2009 arXiv

  102. [110]

    J.-M. Shi, J. H. Krolik, S. H. Lubow, and J. F. Hawley, The Astrophysical Journal 749, 118 (2012), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2012

  103. [111]

    S. C. Noble, B. C. Mundim, H. Nakano, J. H. Kro- lik, M. Campanelli, Y. Zlochower, and N. Yunes, The Astrophysical Journal 755, 51 (2012), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2012

  104. [112]

    Tiwari, C.-H

    V. Tiwari, C.-H. Chan, T. Bogdanovi´ c, Y.- F. Jiang, S. W. Davis, and S. Ferrel, arXiv e-prints 10.48550/arXiv.2502.18584 (2025), arXiv:arXiv:2502.18584 [astro-ph.HE]

    2025 doi arXiv

  105. [113]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. G. Naculich, Phys. Rev. D 75, 067502 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0701037

    2007 arXiv

  106. [114]

    R. D. Blandford and R. L. Znajek, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 179, 433 (1977)

    1977

  107. [115]

    R. Gold, V. Paschalidis, Z. B. Etienne, S. L. Shapiro, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Phys. Rev. D 89, 064060 (2014)

    2014

  108. [116]

    Combi, F

    L. Combi, F. G. L. Armengol, M. Campanelli, S. C. No- ble, M. Avara, J. H. Krolik, and D. Bowen, Astrophys. J. 928, 187 (2022), arXiv:2109.01307 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  109. [117]

    C. C. Cheung, D. E. Harris, and L. Stawarz, The As- trophysical Journal 663, L65 (2007), publisher: IOP Publishing. 24

    2007

  110. [118]

    R. C. Walker, P. E. Hardee, F. B. Davies, C. Ly, and W. Junor, The Astrophysical Journal 855, 128 (2018)

    2018

  111. [119]

    J. Y. Kim, T. P. Krichbaum, R. S. Lu, E. Ros, U. Bach, M. Bremer, P. de Vicente, M. Lindqvist, and J. A. Zen- sus, Astronomy and Astrophysics 616, A188 (2018), aDS Bibcode: 2018A&A...616A.188K

    2018

  112. [120]

    Alves, J

    E. Alves, J. Zrake, and F. Fiuza, Physical Review Let- ters 121, 245101 (2018), publisher: American Physical Society

    2018

  113. [121]

    T. E. Medina-Torrejn, E. M. d. G. D. Pino, L. H. S. Kadowaki, G. Kowal, C. B. Singh, and Y. Mizuno, The Astrophysical Journal 908, 193 (2021), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2021

  114. [122]

    E. M. Gutirrez, L. Combi, G. E. Romero, and M. Cam- panelli, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical So- ciety 532, 506 (2024)

    2024

  115. [123]

    Petropoulou, L

    M. Petropoulou, L. Sironi, A. Spitkovsky, and D. Gi- annios, The Astrophysical Journal 880, 37 (2019), pub- lisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2019

  116. [124]

    Tsouros and N

    A. Tsouros and N. D. Kylafis, A&A 603, L4 (2017), arXiv:1706.05227 [astro-ph.HE]

    2017 arXiv

  117. [125]

    T. P. Greene, D. M. Kelly, J. Stansberry, J. Leisen- ring, E. Egami, E. Schlawin, L. Chu, K. W. Hodapp, and M. Rieke, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, In- struments, and Systems 3, 035001 (2017), aDS Bibcode: 2017JATIS...3c5001G

    2017

  118. [126]

    G. H. Rieke, G. S. Wright, T. B¨ oker, J. Bouwman, L. Colina, A. Glasse, K. D. Gordon, T. P. Greene, M. G¨ udel, T. Henning, K. Justtanont, P. O. Lagage, M. E. Meixner, H. U. Nørgaard-Nielsen, T. P. Ray, M. E. Ressler, E. F. van Dishoeck, and C. Waelkens, PASP 127, 584 (2015),...

    2015 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Ivezi, S

    Z. Ivezi, S. M. Kahn, J. A. Tyson, B. Abel, E. Acosta, R. Allsman, D. Alonso, Y. AlSayyad, S. F. Anderson, J. Andrew, J. R. P. Angel, G. Z. Angeli, R. Ansari, P. Antilogus, C. Araujo, et al., The Astrophysical Jour- nal 873, 111 (2019), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2019ApJ...873..111I

    2019

  120. [128]

    E. L. Wright, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 118, 1711 (2006), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2006PASP..118.1711W

    2006

  121. [129]

    M. A. Scott and A. C. S. Readhead, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 180, 539 (1977), pub- lisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 1977MNRAS.180..539S

    1977

  122. [130]

    R. A. Chevalier, The Astrophysical Journal 499, 810 (1998), publisher: IOP Publishing

    1998

  123. [131]

    Panaitescu and P

    A. Panaitescu and P. Kumar, The Astrophysical Journal 571, 779 (2002), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2002

  124. [132]

    Sesana, C

    A. Sesana, C. Roedig, M. T. Reynolds, and M. Dotti, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society420, 860 (2012)

    2012

  125. [133]

    Charisi, S

    M. Charisi, S. R. Taylor, J. Runnoe, T. Bogdanovic, and J. R. Trump, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society 510, 5929 (2022), arXiv:2110.14661 [astro-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  126. [134]

    T. J. Boerner, S. Deems, T. R. Furlani, S. L. Knuth, and J. Towns, in Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing 2023: Computing for the Common Good, PEARC ’23 (Association for Computing Machin- ery, New York, NY, USA, 2023) pp. 173–176

    2023

  127. [135]

    M. A. Shaikh, V. Varma, H. P. Pfeiffer, A. Ramos- Buades, and M. van de Meent, Phys. Rev. D 108, 104007 (2023), arXiv:2302.11257 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  128. [136]

    Boschini, N

    M. Boschini, N. Loutrel, D. Gerosa, and G. Fumagalli, Orbital eccentricity in general relativity from catastro- phe theory (2024), arXiv:2411.00098

    2024 arXiv

  129. [137]

    W. M. Smart and E. b. R. M. Green, Textbook on Spher- ical Astronomy (1977)

    1977

  130. [138]

    Rybicki and A

    G. Rybicki and A. Lightman, Radiative Processes in Astrophysics, A Wiley-Interscience publication (Wiley, 1991)

    1991

  131. [139]

    C. T. Christy, K. D. Alexander, R. Margutti, M. Wieringa, Y. Cendes, R. Chornock, T. Laskar, E. Berger, M. Bietenholz, D. L. Coppejans, F. D. Colle, T. Eftekhari, T. W.-S. Holoien, T. Matsumoto, J. C. A. Miller-Jones, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, R. Saxton, and S. v. Velzen, The Astrophys...

    2024

Pith tools

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