Vortices and waves in light dark matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a galactic halo like the Milky Way, bosonic dark matter particles lighter than about 100 eV have a de Broglie wavelength larger than the average inter-particle separation and are therefore well described as a set of classical waves. This applies to, for instance, the QCD axion as well as to lighter axion-like particles such as fuzzy dark matter. We show that the interference of waves inside a halo inevitably leads to vortices, locations where chance destructive interference takes the density to zero. The phase of the wavefunction has non-trivial winding around these points. This can be interpreted as a non-zero velocity circulation, so that vortices are sites where the fluid velocity has a non-vanishing curl. Using analytic arguments and numerical simulations, we study the properties of vortices and show they have a number of universal features: (1) In three spatial dimensions, the generic defects take the form of vortex rings. (2) On average there is about one vortex ring per de Broglie volume and (3) generically only single winding (± 1) vortices are found in a realistic halo. (4) The density near a vortex scales as r 2 while the velocity goes as 1/ r , where r is the distance to vortex. (5) A vortex segment moves at a velocity inversely proportional to its curvature scale so that smaller vortex rings move faster, allowing momentary motion exceeding escape velocity. We discuss observational/experimental signatures from vortices and, more broadly, wave interference. In the ultra-light regime, gravitational lensing by interference substructures leads to flux anomalies of 5–10 % in strongly lensed systems. For QCD axions, vortices lead to a diminished signal in some detection experiments but not in others. We advocate the measurement of correlation functions by axion detection experiments as a way to probe and capitalize on the expected interference substructures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".