Contents 1 Introduction2 2 Classical Versus Quantum5 2.1 External Matter Kinematics6 2.2 Graviton Kinematics7 2.3 Truncation to Potential Region9 3 Building Integrands from Tree Amplitudes 13 3.1 General Considerations 13 3.2 Building Integrands using Generalized Unitarity 13 3.3 Gravity Tree Amplitudes from the Double Copy 14 4 Integrands at One Loop Using Four-Dimensional Helicity 18 4.1 Warm-up: Gauge-Theory Integrands 18 4.2 Gravity Integrands 23 5 Integrands at One Loop Using D-Dimensional Methods 26 5.1 Warm-up: Gauge-Theory Integrands 27 5.2 Gravity Integrands via BCJ Double Copy 30 6 Integrands at Two Loops 32 6.1 Warm-up: Gauge-Theory Generalized Cuts in Four Dimensions 34 6.2 Gravity Generalized Cuts in Four Dimensions 37 6.3 D-Dimensional Generalized Cuts 39 6.4 Merging the Cuts into an Integrand 39 7 Nonrelativistic Integration 43 7.1 General Procedure 43 7.2 One-Loop Examples 47 7.2.1 Triangle Diagram 48 7.2.2 Box Diagram 50 7.2.3 Crossed-Box Diagram 53 7.3 Two-Loop Examples 54 7.3.1 Double-Triangle Diagram 55 7.3.2 Double-Triangle Prime Diagram 57 7.3.3 H and Crossed-H Diagrams 60 7.3.4 Box-Triangle Diagram 63 7.3.5 Double-Box Diagram 65 7.3.6 Crossed-Double-Box Diagram 67 7.4 Quantum Contributions 68 7.5 Residue Method 69 { i { 8 Relativistic Integration 70 8.1 Method of Differential Equations 70 8.1.1 Integration-By-Parts Reduction 71 8.1.2 Differential Equations 72 8.1.3 Sample Differential Equations for the Diagram H[1; 1; 0; 0; 1; 1; 1; 0; 0] 74 8.1.4 Integration of Graphs 7 and 7¯. 75 8.2 Mellin-Barnes Integration 77 9 Scattering Amplitude 82 9.1 Post-Newtonian Expansion 83 9.2 Post-Minkowskian Expansion 85 10 Effective Field Theory 89 10.1 Formalism 89 10.2 Scattering Amplitude 90 10.3 Conservative Potential from Matching 92 11 Consistency Checks 93 11.1 Coordinate Transformation 94 11.2 Comparison of Scattering Amplitudes 95 11.3 Scattering Angle 97 11.3.1 Scattering Angle in the Post-Minkowskian Expansion 98 11.3.2 Angle Through 3PM and Comparison with Known Results 100 12 Discussion 101 12.1 Mass Singularities and Collinear Structure 101 12.1.1 Absence of Mass Singularity for q2 m2 103 12.1.2 Appearance of Mass Singularity for q2 m2 106 12.2 Four- vs. D-Dimensional Integrands 108 12.2.1 Integrand Comparison at One Loop 108 12.2.2 Integrand Comparison at Two Loops 110 12.3 Radiative Contributions to the Conservative Potential 112 13 Conclusion 113 A Notations and Conventions 117 B Tree Amplitudes for Unitarity Cuts 119 B.1 Four-Dimensional Tree Amplitudes 119 B.2 D-Dimensional Tree Amplitudes 120 C Series Resummation 122 { 1 { D Evaluation of H Diagram and Imaginary Part 123 1 Introduction The extraordinary detection of gravitational waves by the LIGO and Virgo collabora- tions [1,2] has opened a new window into the cosmos. Gravitational wave astronomy is now a critical tool for answering longstanding questions in astronomy and cosmology, and offers a test of gravity in violent environments never before probed by experiment. The LIGO and Virgo detectors boast an exquisite precision which will grow in fu- ture upgrades, thus demanding commensurately accurate theoretical predictions encoded in waveform templates utilized for detection and extraction of source parameters. These waveforms are constructed from an array of complementary approaches, including the effective one-body (EOB) formalism [3,4], numerical relativity [5{7], the self-force for- malism [8,9], and a number of perturbative methods for the inspiral phase, including the post-Newtonian (PN) [10, 11] and post-Minkowskian (PM) [12{22] approximations, as well as the nonrelativistic general relativity (NRGR) formalism [23] based on effective field the- ory (EFT). For recent reviews see Refs. [24{29] and references therein. In the coming years, further improvements in high-precision theoretical predictions from general relativity will be essential given expected improvements in detector sensitivity. During the early inspiral phase, the gravitational field is weak and the constituents of binary black hole system are non-relativistic. In the PN approximation, we organize the interaction Hamiltonian as an expansion in Gm v2 1 ; (1.1) ∼ r j j where G is Newton's constant and m is the total mass of the binary system, while v and r are the relative velocity and position between the black holes in units with c = 1. The PN expansion is a double expansion in the velocity squared and the inverse separation in units of the Schwarzschild radius, which are of order each other due to the virial theorem. The powers in G and v corresponding to each PN order are depicted in Fig.1. In the present work we focus on conservative dynamics. The PN perturbative frame- work is well-established with a long history dating back to the leading 1PN correction to the Newtonian gravitational potential, which was computed by Einstein, Infeld, and Hoff- man [11]. Later pioneering work derived the full 2PN [30], 3PN [31{34], and 4PN [35{43] expressions for the conservative potential. More recently, 5PN static contributions have also been computed [44, 45]. In contrast, the PM expansion is organized differently, including instead contributions to all orders in velocity at fixed order in G. So when we refer to the nPM correction, we refer to a contribution which, when expanded in v, generates all PN terms at order Gn. In particular, when expanded to v6 order, the 3PM result gives a previously unknown contribution to the 5PN potential. The powers in G and v corresponding to each PM { 2 { 0PN 1PN 2PN 3PN 4PN 5PN 6PN 7PN 1PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + v6 + v8 + v10 + v12 + v14 + ... ) G1 2PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + v6 + v8 + v10 + v12 + ... ) G2 3PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + v6 + v8 + v10 + ... ) G3 4PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + v6 + v8 + ... ) G4 5PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + v6 + ... ) G5 6PM ( 1 + v2 + v4 + ... ) G6 . Figure 1: A summary of known results for the two-body potential for spinless black holes in the PN and PM expansions, outlined in blue and green regions respectively. The new 3PM result summarized in Ref. [59] and discussed at length in this paper is highlighted in the shaded (red) region. The overlap gives strong crosschecks on any calculations in either approach. order are shown Fig.1. This expansion has recently received new attention [21, 46{63], based in part on the connection of classical physics to quantum scattering amplitudes [64{ 71]. Relativistic scattering amplitudes are naturally organized as a series in powers of the coupling G, keeping all orders in the velocity, and for this purpose we define the PM potential to be n 1 G V (p; r) = c (p2) ; (1.2) r n n=1 X j j where the coefficients c are functions of p v which contain arbitrarily high powers in n ∼ the velocity. Of course, whether the new information in PM dynamics can be directly used to improve gravitational wave templates for inspiraling binary systems requires detailed study, e.g. along the lines of Ref. [72]. Nonetheless, at the very least, as can be seen from Fig.1 the PM approximation is complementary to the PN approximation, providing results for a subset of terms at each PN order. The primary goal of this paper is to develop efficient methods for high-precision pre- dictions of the dynamics of gravitationally bound compact objects. By using scattering amplitudes as the starting point, we take advantage of the enormous progress in the past decade for computing and understanding them in gravitational theories, with systematically improvable precision. This includes applying generalized unitarity [73{80] and double-copy constructions [81{83], which have enabled explicit (super)gravity calculations at remark- ably high orders of perturbation theory [84, 84{91]. The double copy allows us to express gravitational scattering amplitudes in terms of corresponding simpler gauge theory ampli- tudes, while generalized unitarity gives a means for building loop amplitudes from simpler tree amplitudes. As we shall see, these can also be combined with spinor-helicity meth- ods [92{94] which then yield amazingly compact expressions for unitarity cuts that contain all information required to build the classical potential at 3PM. The central idea in relating scattering amplitudes to the orbital dynamics of com- { 3 { pact binaries is that both processes are governed by the same underlying theory. By construction, the effective two-body potential in Eq. (1.2) reproduces the same physics as the full gravitational theory for kinematics defined by massive bodies interacting via a classical long-range force. We can therefore extract the effective potential from scattering amplitudes, which are convenient to calculate using modern field theory tools. This was demonstrated long ago [64{68], and recently revived using EOB [22] and EFT [69, 70] methods, including those that incorporate corrections to all orders in velocity. The EFT approach has led to new results for the PM potential at higher orders [58, 59]. As we shall see, EFT methods are not only useful for systematically mapping scattering amplitudes to classical potentials but also for efficiently dealing with the integrals encountered in the full theory [58]. The combination of these key ingredients from the modern amplitudes program and effective field theory led to a remarkably compact expression for the classical 3PM con- servative two-body potential [59]. This result is state of the art. As shown in Fig.1, it provides new information not obtained previously by PN or effective one-body methods, and a strong independent crosscheck of known terms in the PN expansion.