Test black holes, scattering amplitudes, and perturbations of Kerr spacetime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that amplitudes for quantum higher-spin massive particles exchanging gravitons lead, via a classical limit, to results for scattering of spinning black holes in general relativity, when the massive particles are in a certain way minimally coupled to gravity. Such limits of such amplitudes suggest, at least at lower orders in spin, up to second order in the gravitational constant $G$, that the classical aligned-spin scattering function for an arbitrary-mass-ratio two-spinning-black hole system can be obtained by a simple kinematical mapping from that for a spinning test black hole scattering off a stationary background Kerr black hole. Here we test these suggestions, at orders beyond the reach of the post-Newtonian and post-Minkowskian results used in their initial partial verifications, by confronting them with results from general-relativistic ``self-force'' calculations of the linear perturbations of a Kerr spacetime sourced by a small orbiting body, here considering only results for circular orbits in the equatorial plane. We translate between scattering and circular-orbit results by assuming the existence of a local-in-time canonical Hamiltonian governing the conservative dynamics of generic (bound and unbound) aligned-spin orbits, while employing the associated first law of spinning binary mechanics. To the extent possible with available self-force results, we confirm, through linear order in the mass ratio, some previous conjectures which would begin to fill in the spin-dependent parts of the conservative dynamics for arbitrary-mass-ratio aligned-spin binary black holes at the fourth-and-a-half and fifth post-Newtonian orders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".