Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

M87's magnetic field converts high-frequency gravitons into photons; the lack of excess light in its spectrum rules out gravitational-wave backgrounds one to five orders of magnitude stronger than earlier astrophysical limits.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 16:59 UTC pith:WKQ7WHNY

load-bearing objection A serious M87-based graviton-photon conversion calculation, but the SED comparison uses a 40-kpc emission region against core apertures—the claimed 1-5 order improvements likely don't survive a proper geometry treatment. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2604.01290 v2 pith:WKQ7WHNY submitted 2026-04-01 hep-ph astro-ph.HE

Constraints on High-Frequency Gravitational Waves from Graviton-Photon Conversion in the M87 Galaxy

Aman Gupta , Pratik Majumdar , Sourov Roy , Pratick Sarkar This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.HE
keywords high-frequency gravitational wavesinverse Gertsenshtein effectgraviton-photon conversionM87stochastic gravitational wave backgroundcharacteristic strain amplitudemulti-wavelength SEDgalactic magnetic field
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 uses the giant galaxy M87 as an indirect detector for gravitational waves at frequencies from 10^10 to 10^27 Hz, where no direct detector exists. A small fraction of passing gravitons should convert into photons in M87's strong magnetic field through the inverse Gertsenshtein effect, adding to the galaxy's measured radio-to-TeV emission. Since the observed broadband spectrum shows no unexplained excess on top of known astrophysical emission models, the authors derive upper limits on the gravitational-wave strain and energy density. They find their M87-based limits beat the previous Milky Way magnetic-field bounds by roughly one to five orders of magnitude, depending on frequency. If right, this makes high-frequency gravitational-wave backgrounds testable with existing astrophysical data.

Core claim

The central discovery claim is that the near-horizon magnetic field of M87's central black hole, not the weak kiloparsec-scale field, dominates graviton-photon conversion and turns M87 into a powerful high-frequency gravitational-wave screen. Using a piecewise electron-density and magnetic-field profile (electron density near 10^4 cm^-3 at the photon sphere falling as z^-3/2, transverse field about 1 G at 900 Schwarzschild radii falling as z^-0.72, then 10 microgauss beyond 10^4 Schwarzschild radii), the paper computes a total conversion probability four to six orders of magnitude larger than a uniform 10 microgauss field would give. Requiring the resulting photon flux not to exceed the resi

What carries the argument

The inverse Gertsenshtein effect: in an external magnetic field, a graviton and a photon mix because the gravitational perturbation couples to the electromagnetic field. The mixing is controlled by Delta_gamma = B_T / (sqrt(2) M_Pl), where B_T is the magnetic field perpendicular to the propagation direction; plasma density, QED vacuum polarization, and the cosmic microwave background contribute to the photon self-energy. The paper integrates the resulting 4x4 Schrodinger-like propagation equation numerically along a 40 kpc line of sight using piecewise M87 profiles, then converts the accumulated conversion probability into a photon flux at Earth. That flux is compared bin-by-bin with the 201

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that the near-horizon profiles—an electron density of 10^4 cm^-3 near the photon sphere falling as z^-3/2 and a transverse magnetic field of 1 G at 900 Schwarzschild radii falling as z^-0.72—hold along the actual line of sight through the accretion region where the conversion happens.

What would settle it

Measure the line-of-sight magnetic field and electron density between the M87 photon sphere and 10^4 Schwarzschild radii, for example through Faraday rotation of a background polarized source or horizon-resolving polarimetry. If the line-of-sight field is closer to 0.3 G or the density closer to 10^7 cm^-3, the inner-region conversion probability drops by orders of magnitude and the derived h_c limits weaken accordingly; if the field is stronger, the bounds tighten.

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

If this is right

  • A stochastic high-frequency gravitational-wave background in the 10^10 to 10^27 Hz band must sit one to five orders of magnitude below the previously inferred Milky Way conversion limits, depending on frequency.
  • Because the inner roughly 1 G magnetic field drives the bound below about 10^15 Hz, the tightest constraints come from the radio-to-X-ray part of M87's spectrum rather than the gamma-ray band.
  • The limits apply to gravitational-wave sources active after cosmic recombination, the regime where the otherwise stronger Big Bang nucleosynthesis bound does not apply.
  • Using background-subtracted spectral models rather than simply comparing with the total observed flux strengthens the limits across the full band, while the flaring 2018 dataset gives essentially the same constraints, indicating insensitivity to transient emission.
  • The enhancement of the conversion probability by realistic spatial profiles, relative to constant-field estimates, is what makes the M87 limits substantially stronger at intermediate frequencies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Unstated in the paper: because the high-frequency conversion probability scales roughly as the square of the integrated transverse field, any galaxy with a stronger, better-measured line-of-sight field than M87 could yield proportionally tighter limits; the relevant metric is the line-of-sight field integral, not the galaxy's size.
  • Another extension the authors do not develop: the converted-photon signal should be spatially correlated with the orientation of M87's projected magnetic field, so a resolved map of the residual radio or X-ray surface brightness could distinguish a genuine graviton-photon echo from an isotropic astrophysical background.
  • The most consequential unresolved uncertainty is the extrapolation of the inner-region profiles; if the line-of-sight field is 0.3 G rather than 1 G, or the inner density is closer to 10^7 cm^-3 than 10^4 cm^-3, the claimed four-to-six order enhancement in conversion probability, and with it much of the one-to-five order improvement over Milky Way bounds, would not survive.
  • A practical corollary: future X-ray and MeV observatories that tighten the residuals in M87's spectral energy distribution would directly sharpen these gravitational-wave limits without requiring any new gravitational-wave infrastructure.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper derives constraints on a high-frequency stochastic gravitational-wave background (10^10–10^27 Hz) using graviton–photon conversion (inverse Gertsenshtein effect) in the magnetic field and plasma of M87. The authors construct piecewise radial profiles for the electron density and magnetic field (inner power-law region out to 10^4 r_s, outer region with n_e≈10^-2 cm^-3 and B≈10 μG out to 40 kpc), numerically compute the conversion probability, convert it to a photon flux at Earth via Eq. (43), and compare with the M87 broadband SED from the 2017 MWL campaign, using both a conservative bound and background-subtracted models. They report upper limits on h_c and Ω_gw h² that are claimed to improve on existing Milky Way–based constraints by 1–5 orders of magnitude. The mixing formalism in Sec. II is standard, and the numerical solver is validated against the analytic constant-field solution in Appendix A.

Significance. If the central result were established, it would provide the strongest astrophysical upper limits on the high-frequency GW background over a very broad band, using a single well-studied object. The paper has clear strengths: the formalism follows the established Gertsenshtein mixing framework; the numerical implementation is checked against an analytic solution (Fig. 8); the comparison uses public multi-wavelength data; and the calculation is a forward model with no parameter fitted to the target bound. However, the claimed improvements are not yet supported because of an apparent extended-source/aperture mismatch, the use of the most optimistic combination of the quoted environmental parameters, and an internal inconsistency in the stated frequency dependence of the inner-region contribution.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. V, Eq. (43)] The flux formula uses R=40 kpc for the conversion-region radius, which at d=16.8 Mpc corresponds to an angular size of roughly 16 arcmin. The SED data and background models in Sec. VI/Fig. 4 are for the compact M87 core: models 1a/1b are EHT-scale (few r_s) and model 2 is sub-parsec, while the radio and X-ray observations in the MWL campaign use apertures of ≲arcsec. The graviton-induced photons from the outer halo would be largely resolved out or outside the measured aperture. If only a fraction f_ap=(θ_ap/θ_source)^2 of the extended flux is collected, the predicted signal in the comparison (Eq. 44) is overestimated by up to ~10^6 in radio/X-ray bands, weakening the h_c limits by ~10^3 in those bands. The claimed O(4)–O(5) improvements in Sec. VIII are therefore not established unless the SED points are total-galaxy fluxes; this is not discussed in the paper.
  2. [Sec. IV, Eqs. (31)–(33)] The calculation fixes B_T(900 r_s)=1 G and n_0=10^4 cm^-3, i.e., the upper edge of the field range (0.3–1 G) and the lower edge of the density range (10^4–10^7 cm^-3) quoted in Sec. III. Since the inner-region contribution is what drives the claimed improvement over the Milky Way bound, the quoted observational uncertainties should be propagated. At minimum, the authors should show the opposite corner (0.3 G, n_0=10^7 cm^-3) and quantify the change in the limits. As it stands, the central result uses the most favorable combination of the stated environmental parameters.
  3. [Sec. VII, Fig. 5] The text states that the spatially varying field yields stronger constraints at f≲10^15 Hz because the inner region boosts the conversion probability at these energies. This appears inconsistent with Eqs. (32)–(34): at f=10^15 Hz, Δ_pl(inner)≈-2.7×10^8 kpc^-1 while Δ_gγ(inner)≈8.8×10^-4 kpc^-1, so the inner region is strongly plasma-suppressed and the outer 10 μG region should dominate. Either the description of the curves is inverted, or the numerical calculation implements different profiles. This must be checked and corrected because it directly affects the radio-band improvement claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that 10^27 Hz corresponds to photon energies up to 40 GeV; numerically 10^27 Hz corresponds to ~4.14 TeV. Please correct the conversion.
  2. [Sec. V, Eq. (43)] The units of Φ_h→γ are not stated. Eq. (43) is written in natural units, while Fig. 4 and Eq. (44) use erg cm^-2 s^-1. Please specify the conversion factor between the two conventions.
  3. [Sec. VI, Fig. 4] The caption says 'the figure is adopted from [111]' but the paper should state whether any modifications were made to the data/model curves and whether the plotted fluxes are νF_ν or F_ν with a frequency factor.
  4. [Sec. IV, Eq. (32)] The density profile uses n_0=10^4 cm^-3 at r_ph, but the text mentions n_e~10^4–10^7 cm^-3 at (5–10) r_g. The relation between the photon-sphere radius r_ph and r_g should be stated explicitly, since r_ph=1.5 r_s and r_g=r_s/2, so the normalization point is not the same as the quoted observational radius.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: M87 bound is a forward calculation against external SED data.

full rationale

The central derivation is a forward calculation. Section IV computes the graviton–photon conversion probability P_h→γ by numerically propagating the coupled Eqs. (9)–(29) using the electron-density and magnetic-field profiles of Eqs. (32)–(33), which are taken from external observational and simulation references ([82], [104], EHT papers, IllustrisTNG, Marsh et al.), not from the present paper's own results. Section V converts this probability into a predicted photon flux via Eq. (43), with R = 40 kpc adopted as an input modeling choice. Section VII then compares this predicted flux to the observed M87 SED, either conservatively against the observed flux alone (Eq. 47) or against the residual after subtracting the astrophysical background models (Eqs. 44–46). The unknown quantity h_c enters only as a linear scaling of the predicted flux and is solved for as an upper limit; no parameter is fitted to the final bound. The claimed improvements over the Milky Way bound arise from the stronger near-horizon magnetic field adopted from the literature, not from any quantity that is defined in terms of the target constraint. The self-citations (Refs. [61, 62, 77, 80]) provide environmental or dark-matter context and are not load-bearing for the graviton–photon conversion calculation or for the SED comparison. The skeptic's aperture-mismatch concern (40 kpc source area versus compact-core SED) is a possible astrophysical systematic error in the normalization of Φ_h→γ, not a circularity: it concerns whether R and the SED aperture are consistently matched, not whether the prediction reduces to its inputs by construction. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or fitted parameter is imported from the authors' prior work. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation is a forward application of standard graviton–photon mixing; it introduces no new particles or forces. What the paper contributes is a set of environmental choices — inner B and n_e normalizations at the optimistic ends of their measured ranges, an outer B and n_e average, and R = 40 kpc — plus the use of fitted SED models as a no-systematic-uncertainty background. The key unstated assumption is the free escape of produced photons. These choices, not the mixing formalism, carry the uncertainty of the result.

free parameters (5)
  • inner electron density normalization n_0 = 10^4 cm^-3 at r_ph
    Eqs. (30)/(32): n_e = n_0 (z/r_ph)^{-3/2}. The text reports n_e ~ 10^4–10^7 cm^-3 at (5–10) r_g; the paper adopts the low end, which minimizes plasma decoherence and maximizes the conversion probability at intermediate frequencies.
  • inner magnetic-field normalization = 1 G at 900 r_s
    Eqs. (31)/(33) allow (0.3–1) G; the paper uses the upper end, B = 1 G (z/900 r_s)^{-0.72}. Conversion probability scales as B^2 at low frequencies, so this choice boosts P by ~10× relative to 0.3 G.
  • outer magnetic-field strength = 10 μG
    Assumed constant average over 10^4 r_s < z < 40 kpc, motivated by Illustris TNG and Marsh et al. profiles (Fig. 2 right). This average controls the high-frequency (QED-dominated) and low-frequency (plasma-dominated) conversion regimes.
  • outer electron density = 10^-2 cm^-3
    Assumed constant from 10^4 r_s to 40 kpc (Eq. 32); sets the plasma-suppression cutoff at f < 10^14 Hz and changes the shape of the h_c(f) limits at radio frequencies.
  • conversion-region extent R = 40 kpc
    Fiducial truncation in the flux formula Eq. (43), justified as the scale beyond which B is negligible and called an 'effective oscillation length' by the authors. Φ ∝ R², so this choice scales the absolute limits.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Cold-plasma dispersion (photon effective mass ω_pl) and the graviton–photon mixing Hamiltonian of Refs. [54, 55, 89]
    The entire calculation inherits the standard inverse-Gertsenshtein formalism, including the WKB reduction of the linearized Einstein–Maxwell system (Eqs. (4)–(20)).
  • domain assumption The incoming graviton background is isotropic, unpolarized, and homogeneous across the M87 region
    Needed for the flux formula Eq. (43) (one-way graviton flux through the conversion sphere) and for the polarization averaging in Eqs. (27)–(29).
  • domain assumption Conversion-produced photons escape the M87 environment without subsequent absorption or scattering
    Unstated in Secs. V–VII. The inner accretion region is dense and magnetized; at radio frequencies (where the claimed improvement is ~5 orders) synchrotron self-absorption and free-free opacity are known to be significant, so converted radio photons may be re-absorbed rather than added to the observed flux.
  • domain assumption The SED models 1a/1b/2 (fit to the same 2017 MWL data in Ref. [111]) represent the astrophysical background with no systematic uncertainty in the χ² analysis
    Eq. (45) uses experimental σ_i only; the residuals between the fitted models and the data are attributed to the GW signal, which overstates the statistical reach.
  • domain assumption The M87 line of sight samples spherically symmetric B(z) and n_e(z) with z the de-projected radius
    Eqs. (32)–(33) treat the jet-dominated inner region as spherically averaged; the actual magnetic geometry (jet at ~17° to the line of sight, helical fields) is not modeled.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 23403 in / 42232 out tokens · 378317 ms · 2026-08-02T16:59:49.550413+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

High-frequency gravitational waves, particularly in the range $f \gtrsim 10^{10}~\mathrm{Hz}$, represent a compelling probe of physics beyond the Standard Model. Due to the absence of direct detection methods in this frequency regime, alternative strategies may be pursued. One promising approach involves the conversion of gravitons into photons in the presence of magnetic fields, a process known as the inverse Gertsenshtein effect. In this study, we explore such graviton-to-photon conversions occurring within the magnetic field environment of the M87 galaxy, utilizing realistic models for the galactic magnetic field and plasma density structure. We use the broadband electromagnetic spectrum of M87, ranging from millimeter to TeV gamma rays, to search for hidden contributions from graviton-photon conversions. In the well-constrained frequency range $10^{10}$-$10^{27}~\mathrm{Hz}$, the lack of excess emission allows us to place improved bounds on the gravitational wave strain amplitude $h_c$ or on spectral energy density $\Omega_{\mathrm{gw}} h^2$. We find that our results from M87 yield substantially stronger constraints compared to existing bounds derived from Milky Way magnetic field considerations, with improvements ranging from one to five orders of magnitude depending on the frequency band, thereby enhancing the prospects for probing high-frequency gravitational wave backgrounds through indirect electromagnetic signatures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.01290 by Aman Gupta, Pratick Sarkar, Pratik Majumdar, Sourov Roy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Profiles of the free-electron number density in the M87 galaxy. The left panel shows the plasma density in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Radial profiles of the magnetic field strength in the M87 galaxy. The left panel shows near-horizon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Total unpolarized graviton–to–photon conversion probability as a function of photon frequency. The red [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Multi wavelength broadband spectral energy distribution (SED) of M87 observed during the EHT campaign [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Conservative constraints derived from the M87 analysis assuming a propagation distance of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Impact of different astrophysical models on the constraints obtained from the M87 analysis. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Comparison of the constraints (conservative) derived from two datasets published following independent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Left panel: Graviton–photon conversion probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

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

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

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

  2. Radio Emission from High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Point Sources

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Radio telescopes outperform other experiments at detecting high-frequency gravitational waves from primordial black hole mergers and boson clouds through conversion to radio signals in magnetic fields.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 84 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [7]

    Reardon et al.,Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,Astrophys

    D.J. Reardon et al.,Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023) L6 [2306.16215]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [8]

    Rosado,Gravitational wave background from binary systems,Phys

    P.A. Rosado,Gravitational wave background from binary systems,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 084004 [1106.5795]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  3. [9]

    Sesana,Prospects for Multiband Gravitational-Wave Astronomy after GW150914,Phys

    A. Sesana,Prospects for Multiband Gravitational-Wave Astronomy after GW150914,Phys. Rev. Lett.116 (2016) 231102 [1602.06951]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  4. [10]

    Lamberts, S

    A. Lamberts, S. Blunt, T.B. Littenberg, S. Garrison-Kimmel, T. Kupfer and R.E. Sanderson, Predicting the LISA white dwarf binary population in the Milky Way with cosmological simulations,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.490(2019) 5888 [1907.00014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  5. [11]

    Robson, N.J

    T. Robson, N.J. Cornish and C. Liu,The construction and use of LISA sensitivity curves,Class. Quant. Grav.36(2019) 105011 [1803.01944]. [12]KAGRA, Virgo, LIGO Scientificcollaboration, Upper limits on the isotropic gravitational-wave background from Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo’s third observing run,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 022004 [2101.12130]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  6. [13]

    Aggarwal et al.,Challenges and opportunities of gravitational-wave searches at MHz to GHz frequencies,Living Rev

    N. Aggarwal et al.,Challenges and opportunities of gravitational-wave searches at MHz to GHz frequencies,Living Rev. Rel.24(2021) 4 [2011.12414]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  7. [14]

    Babak, C

    S. Babak, C. Caprini, D.G. Figueroa, N. Karnesis, P. Marcoccia, G. Nardini et al.,Stochastic gravitational wave background from stellar origin binary black holes in LISA,JCAP08(2023) 034 [2304.06368]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  8. [15]

    Grishchuk,Amplification of gravitational waves in an isotropic universe,Sov

    L.P. Grishchuk,Amplification of gravitational waves in an isotropic universe,Sov. Phys. JETP40(1975) 409

    1975

  9. [16]

    Starobinsky,Spectrum of relict gravitational radiation and the early state of the universe,JETP Lett.30(1979) 682

    A.A. Starobinsky,Spectrum of relict gravitational radiation and the early state of the universe,JETP Lett.30(1979) 682

    1979

  10. [17]

    Rubakov, M.V

    V.A. Rubakov, M.V. Sazhin and A.V. Veryaskin, Graviton Creation in the Inflationary Universe and the Grand Unification Scale,Phys. Lett. B115(1982) 189

    1982

  11. [18]

    Kim, H.P

    J.E. Kim, H.P. Nilles and M. Peloso,Completing natural inflation,JCAP01(2005) 005 [hep-ph/0409138]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  12. [19]

    Peloso and C

    M. Peloso and C. Unal,Trajectories with suppressed tensor-to-scalar ratio in Aligned Natural Inflation, JCAP06(2015) 040 [1504.02784]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  13. [20]

    Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA

    N. Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. IV: Probing inflation with gravitational waves,JCAP12(2016) 026 [1610.06481]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [21]

    Domcke, M

    V. Domcke, M. Pieroni and P. Bin´ etruy,Primordial gravitational waves for universality classes of pseudoscalar inflation,JCAP06(2016) 031 [1603.01287]. 16

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  15. [22]

    Garcia-Bellido, M

    J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso and C. Unal, Gravitational waves at interferometer scales and primordial black holes in axion inflation,JCAP12 (2016) 031 [1610.03763]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [23]

    Figueroa and F

    D.G. Figueroa and F. Torrenti,Gravitational wave production from preheating: parameter dependence, JCAP10(2017) 057 [1707.04533]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  17. [24]

    Kanemura and K

    S. Kanemura and K. Kaneta,Gravitational waves from particle decays during reheating,Phys. Lett. B855 (2024) 138807 [2310.12023]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [25]

    Caprini et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA

    C. Caprini et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions,JCAP04(2016) 001 [1512.06239]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [26]

    Caprini and D.G

    C. Caprini and D.G. Figueroa,Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 163001 [1801.04268]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [27]

    Caprini et al.,Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update, JCAP03(2020) 024 [1910.13125]

    C. Caprini et al.,Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update, JCAP03(2020) 024 [1910.13125]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  21. [28]

    Hindmarsh, M

    M.B. Hindmarsh, M. L¨ uben, J. Lumma and M. Pauly, Phase transitions in the early universe,SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes24(2021) 1 [2008.09136]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [29]

    Gouttenoire,Beyond the Standard Model Cocktail, Springer Theses, Springer, Cham (2022), 10.1007/978-3-031-11862-3, [2207.01633]

    Y. Gouttenoire,Beyond the Standard Model Cocktail, Springer Theses, Springer, Cham (2022), 10.1007/978-3-031-11862-3, [2207.01633]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [30]

    Athron, C

    P. Athron, C. Bal´ azs, A. Fowlie, L. Morris and L. Wu, Cosmological phase transitions: From perturbative particle physics to gravitational waves,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.135(2024) 104094 [2305.02357]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [31]

    Vilenkin and E.P.S

    A. Vilenkin and E.P.S. Shellard,Cosmic Strings and Other Topological Defects, Cambridge University Press (7, 2000)

    2000

  25. [32]

    Blanco-Pillado and K.D

    J.J. Blanco-Pillado and K.D. Olum,Stochastic gravitational wave background from smoothed cosmic string loops,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 104046 [1709.02693]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [33]

    Auclair et al.,Probing the gravitational wave background from cosmic strings with LISA,JCAP04 (2020) 034 [1909.00819]

    P. Auclair et al.,Probing the gravitational wave background from cosmic strings with LISA,JCAP04 (2020) 034 [1909.00819]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  27. [34]

    Gouttenoire, G

    Y. Gouttenoire, G. Servant and P. Simakachorn, Beyond the Standard Models with Cosmic Strings, JCAP07(2020) 032 [1912.02569]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  28. [35]

    Servant and P

    G. Servant and P. Simakachorn,Ultrahigh frequency primordial gravitational waves beyond the kHz: The case of cosmic strings,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 103538 [2312.09281]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [36]

    Brito, V

    R. Brito, V. Cardoso and P. Pani,Superradiance: New Frontiers in Black Hole Physics,Lect. Notes Phys.906 (2015) pp.1 [1501.06570]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  30. [37]

    Anantua, R

    R. Anantua, R. Easther and J.T. Giblin,GUT-Scale Primordial Black Holes: Consequences and Constraints,Phys. Rev. Lett.103(2009) 111303 [0812.0825]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  31. [38]

    Dolgov and D

    A.D. Dolgov and D. Ejlli,Relic gravitational waves from light primordial black holes,Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 024028 [1105.2303]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  32. [39]

    Fujita, M

    T. Fujita, M. Kawasaki, K. Harigaya and R. Matsuda, Baryon asymmetry, dark matter, and density perturbation from primordial black holes,Phys. Rev. D 89(2014) 103501 [1401.1909]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [40]

    Dong, W.H

    R. Dong, W.H. Kinney and D. Stojkovic,Gravitational wave production by Hawking radiation from rotating primordial black holes,JCAP10(2016) 034 [1511.05642]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  34. [41]

    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. D104(2021) 023524 [2012.12189]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  35. [42]

    Franciolini, A

    G. Franciolini, A. Maharana and F. Muia,Hunt for light primordial black hole dark matter with ultrahigh-frequency gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. D 106(2022) 103520 [2205.02153]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  36. [43]

    Gehrman, B

    T.C. Gehrman, B. Shams Es Haghi, K. Sinha and T. Xu,Baryogenesis, primordial black holes and MHz–GHz gravitational waves,JCAP02(2023) 062 [2211.08431]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [44]

    Gehrman, B

    T.C. Gehrman, B. Shams Es Haghi, K. Sinha and T. Xu,The primordial black holes that disappeared: connections to dark matter and MHz-GHz gravitational Waves,JCAP10(2023) 001 [2304.09194]. [45]LIGO Scientific, VIRGOcollaboration, Characterization of the LIGO detectors during their sixth science run,Class. Quant. Grav.32(2015) 115012 [1410.7764]. [46]LIGO Sc...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [48]

    Hild et al.,Sensitivity Studies for Third-Generation Gravitational Wave Observatories,Class

    S. Hild et al.,Sensitivity Studies for Third-Generation Gravitational Wave Observatories,Class. Quant. Grav. 28(2011) 094013 [1012.0908]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  39. [49]

    Punturo et al.,The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory,Class

    M. Punturo et al.,The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory,Class. Quant. Grav.27(2010) 194002. [50]LIGO Scientificcollaboration,Exploring the Sensitivity of Next Generation Gravitational Wave Detectors,Class. Quant. Grav.34(2017) 044001 [1607.08697]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  40. [51]

    Gertsenshtein and V.I

    M.E. Gertsenshtein and V.I. Pustovoit,On the detection of low frequency gravitational waves,Sov. Phys. JETP16(1962) 433

    1962

  41. [52]

    Macedo and A.H

    P.G. Macedo and A.H. Nelson,PROPAGATION OF GRA VITATIONAL WA VES IN A MAGNETIZED PLASMA,Phys. Rev. D28(1983) 2382

    1983

  42. [53]

    Cruise,The potential for very high-frequency gravitational wave detection,Class

    A.M. Cruise,The potential for very high-frequency gravitational wave detection,Class. Quant. Grav.29 (2012) 095003

    2012

  43. [54]

    Dolgov and D

    A.D. Dolgov and D. Ejlli,Conversion of relic gravitational waves into photons in cosmological magnetic fields,JCAP12(2012) 003 [1211.0500]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  44. [55]

    Ejlli and V.R

    D. Ejlli and V.R. Thandlam,Graviton-photon mixing, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 044022 [1807.00171]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  45. [56]

    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. C79(2019) 1032 [1908.00232]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  46. [57]

    Ejlli,Graviton-photon mixing

    D. Ejlli,Graviton-photon mixing. Exact solution in a constant magnetic field,JHEP06(2020) 029 [2004.02714]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  47. [58]

    Cembranos, M.G

    J.A.R. Cembranos, M.G. Ortiz and P. Mart ´ ın-Moruno, Graviton-photon oscillation in a cosmic background for a general theory of gravity,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 104001 [2302.08186]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [59]

    Palessandro and T

    A. Palessandro and T. Rothman,A simple derivation of the Gertsenshtein effect,Phys. Dark Univ.40 17 (2023) 101187 [2301.02072]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  49. [60]

    Raffelt and L

    G. Raffelt and L. Stodolsky,Mixing of the Photon with Low Mass Particles,Phys. Rev. D37(1988) 1237

    1988

  50. [61]

    S. Roy, P. Sarkar, S. Sau and S. SenGupta,Exploring axions through the photon ring of a spherically symmetric black hole,JCAP11(2023) 099 [2310.05908]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [62]

    Poddar, S

    T.K. Poddar, S. Roy and P. Sarkar,Photon-dark photon oscillation in M87 and Crab Nebula environments,2601.15985

    arXiv

  52. [63]

    Kanno, A

    S. Kanno, A. Mukuno, J. Soda and K. Ueda,A peak in the power spectrum of primordial gravitational waves induced by primordial dark magnetic fields,JCAP05 (2023) 052 [2301.13540]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  53. [64]

    Ramazanov, R

    S. Ramazanov, R. Samanta, G. Trenkler and F.R. Urban,Shimmering gravitons in the gamma-ray sky,JCAP06(2023) 019 [2304.11222]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  54. [65]

    A. Ito, K. Kohri and K. Nakayama,Gravitational Wave Search through Electromagnetic Telescopes, PTEP2024(2024) 023E03 [2309.14765]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  55. [66]

    T. Liu, J. Ren and C. Zhang,Limits on High-Frequency Gravitational Waves in Planetary Magnetospheres,Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 131402 [2305.01832]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [67]

    Dandoy, V

    V. Dandoy, V. Domcke and F. Rompineve,Search for scalar induced gravitational waves in the international pulsar timing array data release 2 and NANOgrav 12.5 years datasets,SciPost Phys. Core6(2023) 060 [2302.07901]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  57. [68]

    A. Ito, K. Kohri and K. Nakayama,Probing high frequency gravitational waves with pulsars,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 063026 [2305.13984]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  58. [69]

    Matsuo and A

    H. Matsuo and A. Ito,Graviton-photon conversion in blazar jets as a probe of high-frequency gravitational waves,JCAP10(2025) 061 [2505.08457]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [70]

    Schenk, K

    S. Schenk, K. Schmieden and P. Schwaller,Signatures of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves in Electromagnetic Cavities,2512.20592

    arXiv

  60. [71]

    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]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  61. [72]

    Y. He, S.K. Giri, R. Sharma, S. Mtchedlidze and I. Georgiev,Inverse Gertsenshtein effect as a probe of high-frequency gravitational waves,JCAP05(2024) 051 [2312.17636]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [73]

    Nomura, K

    K. Nomura, K. Saito and J. Soda,Observing axions through photon ring dimming of black holes,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 123505 [2212.03020]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  63. [74]

    Lacroix, C

    T. Lacroix, C. Bœhm and J. Silk,Ruling out thermal dark matter with a black hole induced spiky profile in the M87 galaxy,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 043510 [1505.00785]. [75]HA WCcollaboration,Search for decaying dark matter in the Virgo cluster of galaxies with HA WC,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 043034 [2309.03973]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  64. [76]

    Phoroutan-Mehr and H.-B

    M. Phoroutan-Mehr and H.-B. Yu,Relaxing constraints on dark matter annihilation near the supermassive black hole in M87,Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 115033 [2411.18751]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  65. [77]

    A. Kar, S. Roy and P. Sarkar,Constraining eV-scale axion-like particle dark matter: insights from the M87 Galaxy,JCAP05(2025) 100 [2501.01860]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [78]

    Davies and P

    E.Y. Davies and P. Mocz,Fuzzy Dark Matter Soliton Cores around Supermassive Black Holes,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.492(2020) 5721 [1908.04790]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  67. [79]

    N. Bar, K. Blum, T. Lacroix and P. Panci,Looking for ultralight dark matter near supermassive black holes, JCAP07(2019) 045 [1905.11745]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  68. [80]

    Sarkar,Exploring Ultralight Dark Matter Self-Coupling via the Gravitational Wave Background, 2504.19505

    P. Sarkar,Exploring Ultralight Dark Matter Self-Coupling via the Gravitational Wave Background, 2504.19505. [81]Event Horizon Telescopecollaboration,First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VIII. Magnetic Field Structure near The Event Horizon,Astrophys. J. Lett. 910(2021) L13 [2105.01173]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [82]

    Ro et al.,Spectral analysis of a parsec-scale jet in M 87: Observational constraint on the magnetic field strengths in the jet,Astron

    H. Ro et al.,Spectral analysis of a parsec-scale jet in M 87: Observational constraint on the magnetic field strengths in the jet,Astron. Astrophys.673(2023) A159 [2303.01014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  70. [83]

    M. Kino, F. Takahara, K. Hada, K. Akiyama, H. Nagai and B.W. Sohn,Magnetization degree at the jet base of M87 derived from the event horizon telescope data: Testing magnetically driven jet paradigm,Astrophys. J.803(2015) 30 [1502.03900]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  71. [84]

    K. Hada, M. Kino, H. Nagai, A. Doi, Y. Hagiwara, M. Honma et al.,VLBI Observations of the Jet in M87 During the Very-High-Energy Gamma-ray Flare in April 2010,Astrophys. J.760(2012) 52 [1210.4942]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  72. [85]

    Hada et al.,High-Sensitivity 86GHz (3.5mm) VLBI Observations of M87: Deep Imaging of the Jet Base at a 10 Schwarzschild-Radius Resolution,Astrophys

    K. Hada et al.,High-Sensitivity 86GHz (3.5mm) VLBI Observations of M87: Deep Imaging of the Jet Base at a 10 Schwarzschild-Radius Resolution,Astrophys. J. 817(2016) 131 [1512.03783]. [86]VERITAScollaboration,VERITAS 2008 - 2009 monitoring of the variable gamma-ray source M87, Astrophys. J.716(2010) 819 [1005.0367]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  73. [87]

    Kim, T.P

    J.Y. Kim, T.P. Krichbaum, R.S. Lu, E. Ros, U. Bach, M. Bremer et al.,The limb-brightened jet of M87 down to 7 Schwarzschild radii scale,Astron. Astrophys.616 (2018) A188 [1805.02478]. [88]Event Horizon Telescope, Fermi Large Area Telescope, H.E.S.S., MAGIC, VERITAS, EA VN collaboration,Broadband multi-wavelength properties of M87 during the 2018 EHT campa...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  74. [89]

    Lella, F

    A. Lella, F. Calore, P. Carenza and A. Mirizzi, Constraining gravitational-wave backgrounds from conversions into photons in the Galactic magnetic field,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 083042 [2406.17853]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [90]

    Fixsen,The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background,Astrophys

    D.J. Fixsen,The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background,Astrophys. J.707(2009) 916 [0911.1955]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  76. [91]

    Mirizzi and D

    A. Mirizzi and D. Montanino,Stochastic conversions of TeV photons into axion-like particles in extragalactic magnetic fields,JCAP12(2009) 004 [0911.0015]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  77. [92]

    Dobrynina, A

    A. Dobrynina, A. Kartavtsev and G. Raffelt, Photon-photon dispersion of TeV gamma rays and its role for photon-ALP conversion,Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 083003 [1412.4777]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [93]

    Kartavtsev, G

    A. Kartavtsev, G. Raffelt and H. Vogel,Extragalactic photon-ALP conversion at CTA energies,JCAP01 (2017) 024 [1611.04526]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  79. [94]

    Ning and B.R

    O. Ning and B.R. Safdi,Leading Axion-Photon Sensitivity with NuSTAR Observations of M82 and M87,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 171003 [2404.14476]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  80. [95]

    Marsh, H.R

    M.C.D. Marsh, H.R. Russell, A.C. Fabian, B.P. McNamara, P. Nulsen and C.S. Reynolds,A New 18 Bound on Axion-Like Particles,JCAP12(2017) 036 [1703.07354]. [96]Event Horizon Telescopecollaboration,First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. II. Array and Instrumentation,Astrophys. J. Lett.875(2019) L2 [1906.11239]. [97]Event Horizon Telescopecollaboration,Fi...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

Showing first 80 references.