sign in sign up
<<
Home , Chandrasekhar limit, Primordial black hole

TIFR/TH/20-32, CERN-TH-2020-145

Low Mass Black Holes from Dark Core Collapse

Basudeb Dasgupta ID ,1, ∗ Ranjan Laha ID ,2, 3, † and Anupam Ray ID 1, ‡ 1Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400005, India 2Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland 3Centre for High Energy Physics, Indian Institute of Science, C. V. Raman Avenue, Bengaluru 560012, India (Dated: April 9, 2021) Unusual masses of black holes being discovered by gravitational wave experiments pose funda- mental questions about the origin of these black holes. Black holes with masses smaller than the Chandrasekhar limit ≈ 1.4 M are essentially impossible to produce through . We propose a new channel for production of low mass black holes: stellar objects catastrophically ac- crete non-annihilating , and the small dark core subsequently collapses, eating up the host and transmuting it into a . The wide range of allowed dark matter masses allows a smaller effective Chandrasekhar limit, and thus smaller mass black holes. We point out several avenues to test our proposal, focusing on the redshift dependence of the merger rate. We show that redshift dependence of the merger rate can be used as a probe of the transmuted origin of low mass black holes.

Introduction – The recent detections of GW190425 [1] 1 GeV cm−3 [13, 54]. (We use ~ = c = 1 units hereafter.) and GW190814 [2], which are either the heaviest The capture rate scales linearly with the ambient DM (NSs) or the lightest black holes (BHs) ever seen, and has a strong dependence on the velocity dis- −3 have ignited interest in O(1) M BHs [3–7]. Usual stellar persion, (¯v ), so an O(1) Gyr old NS in a DM dense 3 −3 evolution cannot lead to sub-Chandrasekhar mass BHs, region (ρχ = 10 GeV cm ) inside a and the observation of such black holes would augur new (¯v ∼ 10−5) can, in principle, implode due to a PBH physics. With the remarkable advances in gravitational transit. However, such overdense DM cores in a globular wave (GW) and multi-messenger astronomy, the detec- cluster are quite speculative and not yet well established. tion of a sub-Chandrasekhar mass (. 1.4 M ) BH may It has, in fact, been shown that globular clusters do not be just around the corner. have any DM over- [55–57]. Hence, the explana- The key question, assuming a future GW observa- tion of a sub-Chandrasekhar or O(1) M BH due to a tion of a merger involving a sub-solar-mass object, is PBH transit hinges on the contentious assumption of a how to pinpoint its identity? One recently popular can- high DM density in globular clusters, and remains uncer- didate is a primordial black hole (PBH). It is a well- tain until the provenance of globular clusters is settled. motivated dark matter (DM) candidate [8–11] that can In this Letter, we point out a simple mechanism that constitute all of the cosmological DM [12–14]. After a transmutes a sub-Chandrasekhar or O(1) M star to a critical reappraisal [15–18], numerous constraints now ex- comparable “low mass BH”, and propose several tests ist on their abundance ([19–45], see also [46–48] and ref- for the proposal focusing on the cosmic evolution of the erences therein). However, there is no mechanism that merger rates. DM candidates share the universal fea- naturally produces the correct abundance of PBHs. The ture that they have a mass and interactions with or- initial abundance of PBHs is exponentially sensitive to dinary matter. We show, without appealing to any the spectrum of density perturbations and the thresh- other exotic features, that this is sufficient for making old for collapse; fine-tuning of parameters is required to transmuted black holes (TBHs). Continued accumula- achieve the observed DM abundance [49]. tion of non-annihilating DM particles in the core, fol- An alternative possibility is that the low mass BHs lowed by their at a modified Chan- are of a non-primordial . DM accretion in a star drasekhar limit set by DM mass and spin, can produce arXiv:2009.01825v2 [astro-ph.HE] 8 Apr 2021 followed by its dark core collapse [50] or the exotic cool- sub-Chandrasekhar or O(1) M TBHs that are a viable ing of an atomic dark matter cloud [51] can lead to low alternative to PBHs. We answer a few basic questions: mass BHs. However, previously proposed models em- what particle physics parameter space can they explore, ploying a fermionic asymmetric DM with non-negligible how to test their origin, and especially, how to distinguish self-interaction or dark quantum electrodynamics are not them from PBHs? generic. Transit of a tiny PBH through a compact ob- Methods & Results – Transmutation of stellar objects ject and subsequent conversion of the host to a BH is also to BHs due to core collapse has been studied exten- thought to be a novel way to produce sub-Chandrasekhar sively, as a tool to set constraints on DM-nucleon scat- and O(1) M BHs [52, 53]. However, the estimated cap- tering cross section from the existence of old NSs [61–69], ture rate of a tiny PBH by a NS was recently shown from connection with type-Ia supernovae [70–73], as to be quite small, ∼ 10−17 yr−1 for a NS residing in a well as connections to several other astrophysical phe- Milky-Way-like with ambient DM density, ρχ = nomenon [74–78]. Non-annihilating DM [79, 80] scatters 2 3 3 - PandaX-II - -43 -43 Excluded from

10 -43 cm 10 cm PandaX-II Excluded from Transmuted BH existence of 10 Excluded from PSR J0437-4715 -43 existence of formation existence of 10 GeV -45 Transmuted BH PSR J0437-4715 GeV PSR J0437-4715 3 10 ρ 10 ] ] -45 ] formation ] χ ρ 10

2 2 10 2 2 = χ -45 = radiation = ρ 1 = 10 ρ radiation radiation χ 1 χ = GeV GeV χ = χ -47 ρ

1 ρ XENON1T 10 radiation GeV cm 10 3 cm cm - cm cm [ cm [ ρ 3 [ [ GeV χ cm - - -47 = 3 3 10 3 Transmuted BH n n 10 n n -45 Hawking

ρ Hawking χ cm χ GeV χ -47 χ χ -49 Hawking = 10 formation 10 - cm 10 10 3 σ 3 σ - σ σ 3 Hawking GeV cm -49 -3 Efficient -51 Bosonic DM 10 Fermionic DM Bosonic DM Efficient Fermionic DM 10 Efficient -49 mϕ ∞ mϕ ∞ Efficient 10 mϕ = 10 MeV mϕ = 10 MeV 10-53 10-51 10-47 10 103 105 107 105 107 109 10 103 105 107 107 109

mχ [GeV] mχ [GeV] mχ [GeV] mχ [GeV]

FIG. 1. DM mass and scattering cross section required for a dark core collapse and subsequent transmutation of a 1.3 M NS to a comparable mass BH are shown in the red shaded regions. The two panels on the left (respectively, right) correspond to interaction between DM and stellar nuclei mediated by an infinitely heavy mediator, i.e., mφ  recoil momentum (resp. 10 MeV scalar). Scenarios with non-annihilating bosonic or fermionic DM are marked. Two representative values of ambient DM 3 −3 3 −3 density, ρχ = 1 and 10 GeV cm (only for the right panel, ρχ = 10 and 10 GeV cm ), are considered. Exclusion limits from underground direct detection experiments PandaX-II [58] and XENON1T [59] as well as from existence of an ∼ 7 Gyr old nearby PSR J0437-4715 [60–63] are also shown by the gray shaded regions. Green hatched regions mark the parameter space where efficient Hawking evaporation stops the implosion of the NS. The region of no thermalization is many orders of magnitude below [62], and is not shown for clarity.

10 with stellar nuclei, gets captured via single [81, 82] or and & O(10 ) GeV, respectively. multiple scattering [83–85], and accumulates inside a stel- Fig.1 shows the DM parameter space where a NS lar object linearly with time. A precise estimate of the (with mass 1.3 M ) can transmute to a low mass BH total number of captured DM particles inside a stellar for either bosonic or fermionic DM, for two choices of object can be found in [63, 86] for interactions medi- ambient DM density. DM-nucleon interactions medi- ated by any arbitrary mass mediators, and in the con- ated by an infinitely heavy mediator (light mediator of tact interaction approximation, respectively. Transmu- mass 10 MeV) is assumed in the first (last) two pan- tation occurs when the captured DM particles satisfy els. In the contact interaction approximation, asymmet- the collapse criterion, i.e., N | ≥ max N Cha,N self, χ tage χ χ ric bosonic (fermionic) DM of mass O(100) GeV (O(1) where N | is the total number of DM particles ac- χ tage PeV) in a DM dense environment can lead to a sub- cumulated within a celestial object throughout its age Chandrasekhar mass BH. For DM-nucleon interaction t . N Cha and N self, respectively, denote the Chan- age χ χ mediated via lighter mediators, transmutation of com- drasekhar limit (which depends on the DM particle spin) pact objects is easier, as exclusion limits weaken and and the number of DM particles required for initiat- implosions can be achieved with a wider range of pa- ing the self-gravitating collapse. For bosonic (fermionic) rameters. Similar analysis can also be performed for a DM, zero point energy is provided by the Heisenberg un- (WD). However, because of the certainty (Pauli exclusion). The Chandrasekhar limit, lower baryonic density compared to a NS, the implosion N Cha, for bosonic DM, ∼ 1.5 × 1034 (100 GeV/m )2 can χ χ criterion is harder to achieve for a WD. For implosion be met more easily than for its fermionic counterpart, of a solar mass WD with ambient DM density 103 GeV ∼ 1.8 × 1051 (100 GeV/m )3, explaining an easier trans- χ cm−3, the scattering cross section has to be 10−44 cm2 mutation for bosonic DM [61, 62]. The required number & for a 10 PeV asymmetric bosonic DM, whereas, the cor- of DM particles for self-gravitation, N self, does not de- χ responding cross-section for a NS with the same ambient pend on the spin statistics of the DM particles, and is DM density is ∼ 10−48 cm2. The transmutation does set by the condition that DM density has to exceed the not happen for small DM masses, causing the cutoff on baryonic density within the stellar core [61]. the left side of the red shaded region in Fig.1. This is because the number of DM particles required for initiat- Once the number of captured DM particles satisfies the ing self-gravitation (N self ), as well as the Chandrasekhar collapse criterion, dark core collapse can ensue and a tiny χ cha self 5/2 BH is formed within the stellar object. This BH accumu- limit (Nχ ), increases for lighter DM [Nχ ∼ 1/mχ , cha 2 3  lates matter from the host star and transmutes the star Nχ ∼ 1/mχ 1/mχ for bosonic (fermionic) DM] and into a comparable mass BH. For typical NS parameters, the number of captured DM particles is not sufficient to −20 if this tiny BH is lighter than ∼ 10 M , it evaporates satisfy the dark core collapse criterion. Note that, we faster than its mass accretion rate and cannot transmute do not consider the possibility of Bose-Einstein conden- the NS to a BH [63, 66]. For non-annihilating bosonic sate (BEC) formation because the temperature required 2/3 and fermionic DM, transmutation of a typical NS ceases for BEC formation, TBEC ≈ (2π/mχ)(nχ/2.612) [61] 7 due to efficient Hawking evaporation for masses & O(10 ) is almost always less than the core temperature of the 3

104

15 104 ]

1 NS-NS merger - yr PBH-PBH merger 3 3 - 10 10 103

4 mχ = 10 GeV -45 2 σχn = 10 cm 102 5 102 TBH-TBH merger m 104 GeV = NS observed of Number

Gpc [ rate Merger χ -47 2 WD observed of Number σχn = 10 cm TBH-TBH merger 10 0 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 Redshift Mass[M ⊙] Mass[M ⊙]

FIG. 2. Cosmic evolution of the binary merger rates and mass distributions of the compact objects provide a simple yet novel technique to determine the stellar or primordial origin of BHs. The left panel corresponds to the cosmic evolution of the binary PBH, NS, and TBH merger rates. For the binary NS and TBH merger rate, cosmic star formation rate is adopted from [87] and they are normalized to the recent LIGO-VIRGO measurement [88]. Non-annihilating bosonic DM with mass of 10 TeV and DM-nucleon scattering cross section of 10−45 and 10−47 cm2 in the contact approximation are assumed for the estimation of binary TBH merger rate. The PBH merger rate is estimated by considering 1.3 M − 1.3 M PBH binary and a dark matter −3 53/37 fraction fPBH = 10 , which enters as fPBH [89, 90]. The middle (right) panel corresponds to the mass distribution of all observed NSs (WDs) [91, 92]. Mass distributions of the progenitors can be compared against some well-motivated PBH mass distributions to examine the origin of low mass BHs.

6 stellar object (T = 2.1 × 10 K) that we consider. Θ {t − tf − τtrans [mχ, σχn, ρext,i(t)]} . (2) How would one detect these low mass BHs and could one distinguish them from other compact objects? We In Eq. (2), we assume that NS binaries live in Milky- now attempt to address these two questions. In the Way-like and are distributed uniformly in r = left panel of Fig.2 we show the redshift evolution of (0.01, 0.1) kpc, where r denotes the distance from the the binary merger rates for PBHs, NSs, and TBHs (for Galactic Center. Binning r into K bins and denoting th two representative choices of DM mass mχ and DM- the fraction of NS binaries in the i bin as fi one has nucleon scattering cross section σχn). The merger rate fi = 1/K. We further assume that fi do not evolve with th of PBH binaries keeps rising with higher redshift as time, but the ambient DM density in the i bin, ρext,i, the PBH binaries can form efficiently in the early Uni- does evolve with time. We assume that the DM den- verse [18, 89, 90, 93, 94]. On the other hand, the merger sity in each halo is given by the Navarro-Frank-White  2 rate of binary NSs, RNS(t)[95] traces the cosmic star for- profile ρext(r) = ρs/ (r/rs)(1 + r/rs) , such that the mation rate [87, 96] average density within the virial radius rvir is 200ρc(z). The parameters ρs and rs are expressible in terms of Z t dPm dρ∗ the critical density of the Universe ρc(z), the concen- RNS(t) = dtf (t − tf )λ (tf ) , (1) tf =t∗ dt dt tration parameter c200 = rvir/rs, and the mass inside the virial radius M200. For like galaxies we 12 and peaks at an O(1) redshift when the star formation take c200 = 13.31 and M200 = 0.82 × 10 M [97], so dρ∗ rate is highest. In Eq. (1), dt (tf ) denotes the cosmic star the time evolution of ρext,i is determined by evolution  3 formation rate at binary formation time tf , λ is the num- of ρc(z) = ρc(0) ΩΛ + Ωm(1 + z) , where Ωm, ΩΛ are ber of coalescing NS binaries per unit star forming mass, the present day density parameters for matter and dark dPm and dt (t − tf ) is the probability density distribution of energy, respectively [49]. From the expression for the binary NSs merging within the time interval (t−tf ) after merger rate, it is evident that the rate of TBH binary −5 −1 formation. For this analysis, we have used λ = 10 M , mergers decreases with increase in τtrans. Therefore, for a 8 earliest star formation time (t∗) = 4.9 × 10 year which fixed DM mass and DM-nucleon scattering cross section, dPm −1 corresponds to z = 10, dt ∝ (t−tf ) [95], and adopted the merger rate of TBH binaries decreases with higher the cosmic star formation rate from [87]. The merger rate redshift because NS binaries at higher redshift do not of TBH binaries, RTBH(t), is systematically lower than have the time for DM accretion required for implosion. of NS binaries, RNS(t), as only a fraction of them im- Of course, given a DM mass, decrease in DM-nucleon plode depending on the time required for transmutation scattering cross section leads to higher τtrans, and, hence, (τtrans), and depends on the NS population in the galax- lower merger rate. ies as well as evolution of the DM density in the galaxies, This distinct redshift dependence of the merger rates, especially at higher redshifts, can be measured with the Z t X dPm dρ∗ R (t) = f dt (t − t )λ (t )× upcoming third generation GW detectors like Cosmic TBH i f dt f dt f i tf =t∗ Explorer [98], Einstein Telescope (ET) [99] and 4

2 −1 −1 MNS [M ] mχ [GeV] σχn [cm ] aLIGO [yr ] ET [yr ] plosion of stellar objects, detection of a low mass BH in 1.0 104 10−47 0.2; 0; 0.2 672; 3; 675 a DM deficient region will prefer a primordial origin. Co- 1.0 104 10−45 0.3; 0; 0.3 2982; 32; 3014 existence of a low mass BH and a NS of similar age can 1.3 104 10−47 0.4; 0; 0.4 1451; 84; 1535 also be a strong evidence of its primordial origin, as the 4 −45 1.3 10 10 0.8; 0; 0.8 5916; 880; 6796 required parameter space for such transmutation will be disfavored by the existence of the companion NS. Since TABLE I. Possible detection rates of TBH binaries for ad- the DM dense inner regions potentially contain a large vanced LIGO (aLIGO) and Einstein Telescope (ET), number of NSs [102], detection of an ∼ O(1) Gyr old NS estimated using the procedure in the text, for representative by the radio telescopes like FAST [103] and SKA [104] choices of NS mass MNS, dark matter mass mχ and DM- will significantly strengthen the exclusion limits. As a nucleon scattering cross section σχn. The radius of the pro- consequence, the allowed parameter space for dark core genitors are taken to be 10.6 km. The three numbers in the last two columns are for low redshift (z ≤ 1); high redshift collapse-induced transmutation of a stellar object will (z > 1); and total, respectively. shrink. Mass distributions of the compact objects provide yet another powerful way to distinguish TBHs from PBHs. space-based GW detector Pre-DECIGO [100] which Since, the TBHs track the mass distribution of their pro- will distinguish the transmutation via implosion scenario genitors, it can be compared against well-motivated PBH from PBHs. In TableI, we estimate the possible detec- mass distributions to statistically determine the stellar or tion rates of TBH binary mergers. The expected detec- primordial origin of BHs. The last two panels of Fig.2 tion rate, ND, is simply given by [95, 101] correspond to the mass distribution of all observed NSs and white dwarfs, progenitors of the TBHs. It would Z ∞ 2 4πDc (z) take a striking coincidence for the PBH mass distribu- ND = dz RTBH(z) tion to coincide with these distributions. Ref. [105], that z=0 (1 + z)H(z) "  5/6# appeared as our paper was being readied, establishes this ρ0 DL(z) 1.2M × Cθ , (3) technique in more detail. 8 r0 (1 + z)Mc With imminent ground and space-based GW detec- tors, about one binary NS merger event is expected per R z dz0 where Dc(z) = 0 H(z0) denotes the comoving radial dis- week [106]. Considering the huge number of expected tance and DL(z) = (1 + z) Dc(z) denotes the luminosity events, the greatly improved sky localization of the GW distance respectively. H(z) is the Hubble rate at redshift events with a multi-detector network [106], as well as the z and we use the cosmological parameters determined by GW lensing [107], the implosion scenario can easily be the latest observations [49]. The angular de- tested in the near future. Observationally, there also pendence of the signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) is encoded exist several ways to distinguish a TBH binary from a within the variable θ, and the cumulative distribution of binary NS. The peak signal frequency of a binary NS θ is denoted by Cθ [101]. The chirp mass of the coa- merger is much lower than that of a binary BH merger lescing binary is denoted by Mc, and ρ0, r0 are the SNR due to the less compact nature of NSs compared to the threshold for GW detection and the characteristic dis- similar mass BHs [50]. The amount of ejected NS mate- tance sensitivities of the GW detectors. For this analy- rial during merger is much larger if one of the components sis, we have considered ρ0 = 8, and r0 = 80 (1591) Mpc is a BH, and therefore, an unusually bright transient for aLIGO (ET)[95]. One finds that already aLIGO would favor a low mass TBH-NS merger [108]. Besides, would be sensitive to DM parameters that are not ruled the dimensionless tidal deformability parameter, which 4 out by other data at present, e.g., mχ = 10 GeV and is zero for a BH and ∼ 100 for a typical NS, and the −45 2 −1 σχn = 10 cm . Suppose ND = 5916 yr in the low strength of tidal heating can also be used to probe this redshift bin, which could be due to mergers of 1.3 M implosion scenario [109, 110]. More importantly, possible PBH binaries with fPBH = 0.0019 or 1.3 M TBH bi- detection of an associated electromagnetic counterpart 4 −45 2 naries with mχ = 10 GeV, σχn = 10 cm . 1 ET- from radio wavelengths to gamma rays can also distin- yr worth of high redshift data can discriminate between guish binary BHs from binary NSs or BH-NS merger. these two model points using shape-information alone Summary & Outlook – Sub-Chandrasekhar mass BHs (i.e., with same normalization at low redshift): the PBH cannot be explained by stellar evolution and will herald binaries will have 787 events in the high redshift bin, new physics. PBHs are the most discussed explanation whereas TBH binaries will have 880, indicating puta- of these objects. The notable existing alternative propos- tively ≥ 3σ discrimination between said TBH and PBH als [50–52] are either not effective or appeal to baroque model points, with statistical errors only. DM models. We study a simple mechanism for trans- The ambient DM density around a sub-Chandrasekhar mutation of compact objects that can produce low mass or O(1) M BH is a simple yet powerful probe of the ori- BHs without fine-tuning. Non-zero interactions with stel- gin of the BH. Since a DM rich environment favors im- lar nuclei, which is a universal feature of DM models, is 5 sufficient for such transmutations if annihilations are ab- [8] Y. B. . N. Zel’dovich, I. D., The Hypothesis of Cores sent. For sub-Chandrasekhar mass progenitor, the im- Retarded during Expansion and the Hot Cosmological ploded BH is a viable alternative to PBHs, whereas, for Model, Soviet Astron. AJ (Engl. Transl. ), 10 (1967) a heavier mass progenitor, it can also possibly explain 602. [9] S. Hawking, Gravitationally collapsed objects of very the lighter companions of recent anomalous GW events. low mass, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 152 (1971) 75. Cosmic evolution of the merger rate and the mass distri- [10] B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Black holes in the early butions of the progenitors are simple yet powerful probes Universe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 168 (1974) 399. of our proposal. Observation of an associated electro- [11] G. F. Chapline, Cosmological effects of primordial magnetic counterpart along with a GW event, as well as black holes, Nature 253 (1975) 251. a precise measurement of the tidal deformability parame- [12] A. Katz, J. Kopp, S. Sibiryakov and W. Xue, ter, can differentiate merger of such TBHs from a binary Femtolensing by Dark Matter Revisited, JCAP 1812 (2018) 005[ 1807.11495]. NS merger or a BH-NS merger. Importantly, possible [13] P. Montero-Camacho, X. Fang, G. Vasquez, M. Silva detection of any low mass BH in a DM deficient envi- and C. M. Hirata, Revisiting constraints on ronment or accompanied by an old NS can falsify our asteroid-mass primordial black holes as dark matter proposal. Improved sky localization with multi-detector candidates, JCAP 1908 (2019) 031[ 1906.05950]. networks as well as sub-arc-second precision of a GW [14] N. Smyth, S. Profumo, S. English, T. Jeltema, event from GW lensing can also shed light on this topic K. McKinnon and P. Guhathakurta, Updated in the near future. Constraints on Asteroid-Mass Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 063005 Acknowledgments – We thank Parameswaran Ajith, [1910.01285]. Manjari Bagchi, Anumita Bose, and Lankeswar Dey for [15] LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, B. P. Abbott useful discussions. B.D. is supported by the Dept. of et al., Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Atomic Energy (Govt. of India) research project under Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 Project Identification No. RTI 4002, the Dept. of Science (2016) 061102[ 1602.03837]. and Technology (Govt. of India) through a Swarnajayanti [16] S. Bird, I. Cholis, J. B. Mu˜noz,Y. Ali-Haimoud, Fellowship, and by the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft through M. Kamionkowski, E. D. Kovetz et al., Did LIGO detect dark matter?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) a Max Planck Partner Group. R.L. thanks CERN The- 201301[ 1603.00464]. ory group for support. [17] S. Clesse and J. Garcia-Bellido, The clustering of massive Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter: measuring their mass distribution with Advanced LIGO, Phys. Dark Univ. 15 (2017) 142[ 1603.05234]. [18] M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka and S. Yokoyama, ∗ [email protected] Primordial Black Hole Scenario for the † [email protected] Gravitational-Wave Event GW150914, Phys. Rev. Lett. ‡ [email protected] 117 (2016) 061101[ 1603.08338]. [1] LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, B. Abbott [19] A. Arbey, J. Auffinger and J. Silk, Constraining et al., GW190425: Observation of a Compact Binary primordial black hole masses with the isotropic gamma Coalescence with Total Mass ∼ 3.4M , Astrophys. J. ray background, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 023010 Lett. 892 (2020) L3[ 2001.01761]. [1906.04750]. [2] LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, R. Abbott [20] S. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Gao, L. E. Strigari and et al., GW190814: Gravitational Waves from the S. Watson, Planck Constraint on Relic Primordial Coalescence of a 23 Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Black Holes, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 083006 Solar Mass Compact Object, Astrophys. J. Lett. 896 [1612.07738]. (2020) L44[ 2006.12611]. [21] H. Poulter, Y. Ali-Haimoud, J. Hamann, M. White [3] J. Flitter, J. B. Munoz and E. D. Kovetz, Outliers in and A. G. Williams, CMB constraints on ultra-light the LIGO Black Hole Mass Function from Coagulation primordial black holes with extended mass in Dense Clusters, 2008.10389. distributions, 1907.06485. [4] T. Kinugawa, T. Nakamura and H. Nakano, Formation [22] M. Boudaud and M. Cirelli, Voyager 1 e± Further of mass gap compact object and black hole binary from Constrain Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter, Population III stars, PTEP 2021 (2021) 021E01 Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 041104[ 1807.03075]. [2007.13343]. [23] W. DeRocco and P. W. Graham, Constraining [5] S. Clesse and J. Garcia-Bellido, GW190425 and Primordial Black Hole Abundance with the Galactic GW190814: Two candidate mergers of primordial 511 keV Line, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 251102 black holes from the QCD epoch, 2007.06481. [1906.07740]. [6] K. Jedamzik, Consistency of Primordial Black Hole [24] R. Laha, Primordial Black Holes as a Dark Matter Dark Matter with LIGO/Virgo Merger Rates, Phys. Candidate Are Severely Constrained by the Galactic Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 051302[ 2007.03565]. Center 511 keV γ -Ray Line, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 [7] K. Vattis, I. S. Goldstein and S. M. Koushiappas, (2019) 251101[ 1906.09994]. Could the 2.6 M object in GW190814 be a primordial [25] B. Dasgupta, R. Laha and A. Ray, and black hole?, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 061301 positron constraints on spinning primordial black hole [2006.15675]. dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 101101 6

[1912.01014]. [42] M. W. Sammons, J.-P. Macquart, R. D. Ekers, R. M. [26] R. Laha, J. B. Munoz and T. R. Slatyer, INTEGRAL Shannon, H. Cho, J. X. Prochaska et al., First constraints on primordial black holes and particle dark Constraints on Compact Dark Matter from Fast Radio matter, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 123514[ 2004.00627]. Burst Microstructure, Astrophys. J. 900 (2020) 122 [27] Macho collaboration, R. Allsman et al., MACHO [2002.12533]. project limits on black hole dark matter in the 1-30 [43] P. Lu, V. Takhistov, G. B. Gelmini, K. Hayashi, solar mass range, Astrophys. J. Lett. 550 (2001) L169 Y. Inoue and A. Kusenko, Constraining Primordial [astro-ph/0011506]. Black Holes with Dwarf Galaxy Heating, Astrophys. J. [28] EROS-2 collaboration, P. Tisserand et al., Limits on Lett. 908 (2021) L23[ 2007.02213]. the Macho Content of the from the [44] H. Kim, A constraint on light primordial black holes EROS-2 Survey of the , Astron. from the interstellar medium temperature, 2007.07739. Astrophys. 469 (2007) 387[ astro-ph/0607207]. [45] R. Laha, P. Lu and V. Takhistov, Gas Heating from [29] H. Niikura, M. Takada, S. Yokoyama, T. Sumi and Spinning and Non-Spinning Evaporating Primordial S. Masaki, Constraints on Earth-mass primordial black Black Holes, 2009.11837. holes from OGLE 5-year microlensing events, Phys. [46] B. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda and J. Yokoyama, Rev. D 99 (2019) 083503[ 1901.07120]. Constraints on Primordial Black Holes, 2002.12778. [30] D. Croon, D. McKeen, N. Raj and Z. Wang, [47] B. Carr and F. Kuhnel, Primordial Black Holes as Subaru-HSC through a different lens: Microlensing by Dark Matter: Recent Developments, Ann. Rev. Nucl. extended dark matter structures, Phys. Rev. D 102 Part. Sci. 70 (2020) 355[ 2006.02838]. (2020) 083021[ 2007.12697]. [48] A. M. Green and B. J. Kavanagh, Primordial Black [31] M. Oguri, J. M. Diego, N. Kaiser, P. L. Kelly and Holes as a dark matter candidate, J. Phys. G 48 T. Broadhurst, Understanding caustic crossings in (2021) 4[ 2007.10722]. giant arcs: characteristic scales, event rates, and [49] Planck collaboration, N. Aghanim et al., Planck 2018 constraints on compact dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 97 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. (2018) 023518[ 1710.00148]. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6[ 1807.06209]. [32] M. Zumalacarregui and U. Seljak, Limits on [50] C. Kouvaris, P. Tinyakov and M. H. Tytgat, stellar-mass compact objects as dark matter from NonPrimordial Solar Mass Black Holes, Phys. Rev. gravitational lensing of type Ia supernovae, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 221102[ 1804.06740]. Lett. 121 (2018) 141101[ 1712.02240]. [51] S. Shandera, D. Jeong and H. S. G. Gebhardt, [33] LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, B. Abbott Gravitational Waves from Binary Mergers of Subsolar et al., Search for Subsolar Mass Ultracompact Binaries Mass Dark Black Holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) in Advanced LIGO’s Second Observing Run, Phys. 241102[ 1802.08206]. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 161102[ 1904.08976]. [52] F. Capela, M. Pshirkov and P. Tinyakov, Constraints [34] A. H. Nitz and Y.-F. Wang, Search for gravitational on primordial black holes as dark matter candidates waves from high-mass-ratio compact-binary mergers of from capture by neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) stellar mass and sub-solar mass black holes, Phys. Rev. 123524[ 1301.4984]. Lett. 126 (2021) 021103[ 2007.03583]. [53] V. Takhistov, Transmuted Gravity Wave Signals from [35] B. J. Kavanagh, D. Gaggero and G. Bertone, Merger Primordial Black Holes, Phys. Lett. B 782 (2018) 77 rate of a subdominant population of primordial black [1707.05849]. holes, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 023536[ 1805.09034]. [54] Y. G´enolini,P. Serpico and P. Tinyakov, Revisiting [36] T. D. Brandt, Constraints on MACHO Dark Matter primordial black hole capture into neutron stars, Phys. from Compact Stellar Systems in Ultra-Faint Dwarf Rev. D 102 (2020) 083004[ 2006.16975]. Galaxies, Astrophys. J. Lett. 824 (2016) L31 [55] C. Conroy, A. Loeb and D. N. Spergel, Evidence [1605.03665]. against Dark Matter Halos Surrounding the Globular [37] M. A. Monroy-Rodriguez and C. Allen, The end of the Clusters MGC1 and NGC 2419, Astrophys. J. 741 MACHO era- revisited: new limits on MACHO masses (2011) 72[ 1010.5783]. from halo wide binaries, Astrophys. J. 790 (2014) 159 [56] S. Naoz and R. Narayan, Globular Clusters and Dark [1406.5169]. Satellite Galaxies through the Stream Velocity, [38] P. D. Serpico, V. Poulin, D. Inman and K. Kohri, Astrophys. J. Lett. 791 (2014) L8[ 1407.3795]. Cosmic microwave background bounds on primordial [57] T. J. Hurst and A. R. Zentner, On the Ejection of black holes including accretion, Phys. Dark Matter from Globular Clusters, Mon. Not. Roy. Rev. Res. 2 (2020) 023204[ 2002.10771]. Astron. Soc. 494 (2020) 4687[ 1910.00665]. [39] A. Hektor, G. Hutsi, L. Marzola, M. Raidal, [58] PandaX-II collaboration, X. Ren et al., Constraining V. Vaskonen and H. Veermae, Constraining Primordial Dark Matter Models with a Light Mediator at the Black Holes with the EDGES 21-cm Absorption Signal, PandaX-II Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 023503[ 1803.09697]. 021304[ 1802.06912]. [40] J. Manshanden, D. Gaggero, G. Bertone, R. M. [59] XENON collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Dark Matter Connors and M. Ricotti, Multi-wavelength Search Results from a One Ton-Year Exposure of astronomical searches for primordial black holes, JCAP XENON1T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 111302 06 (2019) 026[ 1812.07967]. [1805.12562]. [41] A. Hektor, G. Hutsi and M. Raidal, Constraints on [60] R. N. Manchester, G. B. Hobbs, A. Teoh and primordial black hole dark matter from Galactic center M. Hobbs, The Australia Telescope National Facility X-ray observations, Astron. Astrophys. 618 (2018) pulsar catalogue, Astron. J. 129 (2005) 1993 A139[ 1805.06513]. [astro-ph/0412641]. 7

[61] S. D. McDermott, H.-B. Yu and K. M. Zurek, dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 28 (2013) 1330028 Constraints on Scalar Asymmetric Dark Matter from [1305.4939]. Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars, Phys. Rev. [81] W. H. Press and D. N. Spergel, Capture by the of D85 (2012) 023519[ 1103.5472]. a galactic population of weakly interacting massive [62] R. Garani, Y. Genolini and T. Hambye, New Analysis particles, Astrophys. J. 296 (1985) 679. of Constraints on Asymmetric Dark [82] A. Gould, Resonant enhancements in weakly Matter, JCAP 1905 (2019) 035[ 1812.08773]. interacting massive particle capture by the earth, [63] B. Dasgupta, A. Gupta and A. Ray, Dark matter Astrophys. J. 321 (1987) 571. capture in celestial objects: light mediators, [83] J. Bramante, A. Delgado and A. Martin, Multiscatter self-interactions, and complementarity with direct stellar capture of dark matter, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) detection, JCAP 10 (2020) 023[ 2006.10773]. 063002[ 1703.04043]. [64] I. Goldman and S. Nussinov, Weakly Interacting [84] C. Ilie, J. Pilawa and S. Zhang, Comment on Massive Particles and Neutron Stars, Phys. Rev. D40 ”Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter”, Phys. (1989) 3221. Rev. D 102 (2020) 048301[ 2005.05946]. [65] A. de Lavallaz and M. Fairbairn, Neutron Stars as [85] B. Dasgupta, A. Gupta and A. Ray, Dark matter Dark Matter Probes, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 123521 capture in celestial objects: Improved treatment of [1004.0629]. multiple scattering and updated constraints from white [66] C. Kouvaris and P. Tinyakov, Excluding Light dwarfs, JCAP 1908 (2019) 018[ 1906.04204]. Asymmetric Bosonic Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. [86] N. F. Bell, G. Busoni, S. Robles and M. Virgato, 107 (2011) 091301[ 1104.0382]. Improved Treatment of Dark Matter Capture in [67] N. F. Bell, A. Melatos and K. Petraki, Realistic Neutron Stars, JCAP 09 (2020) 028[ 2004.14888]. neutron star constraints on bosonic asymmetric dark [87] P. Madau and M. Dickinson, Cosmic Star Formation matter, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 123507[ 1301.6811]. History, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 52 (2014) 415 [68] J. Bramante, K. Fukushima and J. Kumar, Constraints [1403.0007]. on bosonic dark matter from observation of old neutron [88] LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, R. Abbott stars, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 055012[ 1301.0036]. et al., Population Properties of Compact Objects from [69] J. Bramante, K. Fukushima, J. Kumar and the Second LIGO-Virgo Gravitational-Wave Transient E. Stopnitzky, Bounds on self-interacting dark Catalog, 2010.14533. matter from observations of old neutron stars, Phys. [89] M. Raidal, C. Spethmann, V. Vaskonen and Rev. D89 (2014) 015010[ 1310.3509]. H. Veermae, Formation and Evolution of Primordial [70] R. Janish, V. Narayan and P. Riggins, Type Ia Black Hole Binaries in the Early Universe, JCAP 02 supernovae from dark matter core collapse, Phys. Rev. (2019) 018[ 1812.01930]. D 100 (2019) 035008[ 1905.00395]. [90] Z.-C. Chen and Q.-G. Huang, Merger Rate [71] P. W. Graham, R. Janish, V. Narayan, S. Rajendran Distribution of Primordial-Black-Hole Binaries, and P. Riggins, White Dwarfs as Dark Matter Astrophys. J. 864 (2018) 61[ 1801.10327]. Detectors, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 115027 [91]F. Ozel¨ and P. Freire, Masses, Radii, and the Equation [1805.07381]. of State of Neutron Stars, Ann. Rev. Astron. [72] J. Bramante, Dark matter ignition of type Ia Astrophys. 54 (2016) 401[ 1603.02698]. supernovae, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 141301 [92] F. M. Jim´enez-Esteban, S. Torres, [1505.07464]. A. Rebassa-Mansergas, G. Skorobogatov, E. Solano, [73] J. F. Acevedo and J. Bramante, Supernovae Sparked C. Cantero et al., A white dwarf catalogue from By Dark Matter in White Dwarfs, Phys. Rev. D 100 Gaia-DR2 and the Virtual Observatory, Monthly (2019) 043020[ 1904.11993]. Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 480 (2018) [74] J. Bramante and T. Linden, Detecting Dark Matter 4505[ 1807.02559]. with Imploding in the Galactic Center, Phys. [93] M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka and S. Yokoyama, Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 191301[ 1405.1031]. Primordial black holes—perspectives in gravitational [75] J. Bramante and T. Linden, On the r-Process wave astronomy, Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) Enrichment of Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies, Astrophys. 063001[ 1801.05235]. J. 826 (2016) 57[ 1601.06784]. [94] Y. Ali-Ha¨ımoud,E. D. Kovetz and M. Kamionkowski, [76] J. Fuller and C. Ott, Dark Matter-induced Collapse of Merger rate of primordial black-hole binaries, Phys. Neutron Stars: A Possible Link Between Fast Radio Rev. D 96 (2017) 123523[ 1709.06576]. Bursts and the Missing Pulsar Problem, Mon. Not. [95] S. R. Taylor and J. R. Gair, Cosmology with the lights Roy. Astron. Soc. 450 (2015) L71[ 1412.6119]. off: standard sirens in the Einstein Telescope era, [77] J. Bramante, T. Linden and Y.-D. Tsai, Searching for Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 023502[ 1204.6739]. dark matter with neutron star mergers and quiet [96] C. Porciani and P. Madau, On the Association of kilonovae, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 055016 gamma-ray bursts with massive stars: implications for [1706.00001]. number counts and lensing statistics, Astrophys. J. [78] W. E. East and L. Lehner, Fate of a neutron star with 548 (2001) 522[ astro-ph/0008294]. an endoparasitic black hole and implications for dark [97] M. Cautun, A. Ben´ıtez-Llambay, A. J. Deason, C. S. matter, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 124026[ 1909.07968]. Frenk, A. Fattahi, F. A. G´omezet al., The milky way [79] K. M. Zurek, Asymmetric Dark Matter: Theories, total mass profile as inferred from Gaia DR2, Monthly Signatures, and Constraints, Phys. Rept. 537 (2014) Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 494 (2020) 91[ 1308.0338]. 4291[ 1911.04557]. [80] K. Petraki and R. R. Volkas, Review of asymmetric 8

[98] S. M. Koushiappas and A. Loeb, Maximum redshift of [105] V. Takhistov, G. M. Fuller and A. Kusenko, Test for gravitational wave merger events, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 the Origin of Solar Mass Black Holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2017) 221104[ 1708.07380]. 126 (2021) 071101[ 2008.12780]. [99] LIGO Scientific collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., [106] KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, VIRGO collaboration, Exploring the Sensitivity of Next Generation B. Abbott et al., Prospects for Observing and Gravitational Wave Detectors, Class. Quant. Grav. 34 Localizing Gravitational-Wave Transients with (2017) 044001[ 1607.08697]. Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living [100] T. Nakamura et al., Pre-DECIGO can get the smoking Rev. Rel. 21 (2018) 3[ 1304.0670]. gun to decide the astrophysical or cosmological origin [107] O. A. Hannuksela, T. E. Collett, M. C¸alı¸skan and of GW150914-like binary black holes, PTEP 2016 T. G. F. Li, Localizing merging black holes with (2016) 093E01[ 1607.00897]. sub-arcsecond precision using gravitational-wave [101] S. R. Taylor, J. R. Gair and I. Mandel, Hubble without lensing, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 498 (2020) 3395 the Hubble: Cosmology using advanced [2004.13811]. gravitational-wave detectors alone, Phys. Rev. D 85 [108] H. Yang, W. E. East and L. Lehner, Can we (2012) 023535[ 1108.5161]. distinguish low mass black holes in neutron star [102] B. R. Safdi, Z. Sun and A. Y. Chen, Detecting binaries?, Astrophys. J. 856 (2018) 110[ 1710.05891]. Dark Matter with Radio Lines from Neutron Star [109] M. Fasano, K. W. Wong, A. Maselli, E. Berti, Populations, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 123021 V. Ferrari and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Distinguishing [1811.01020]. double neutron star from neutron star-black hole binary [103] R. Nan, D. Li, C. Jin, Q. Wang, L. Zhu, W. Zhu et al., populations with gravitational wave observations, Phys. The Five-Hundred Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope Rev. D 102 (2020) 023025[ 2005.01726]. (fast) Project, International Journal of Modern [110] S. Datta, K. S. Phukon and S. Bose, Recognizing black Physics D 20 (2011) 989[ 1105.3794]. holes in gravitational-wave observations: Telling apart [104] A. Weltman et al., Fundamental physics with the impostors in mass-gap binaries, 2004.05974. , Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 37 (2020) e002[ 1810.02680].