SciPost Submission Page
Ruling out QCD phase transition as a PBH origin of LIGO/Virgo events
by Joaquim Iguaz Juan
This is not the latest submitted version.
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Joaquim Iguaz Juan |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202211_00038v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | Nov. 21, 2022, 4:49 p.m. |
| Submitted by: | Joaquim Iguaz Juan |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | 14th International Conference on Identification of Dark Matter (IDM2022) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Phenomenological |
Abstract
The best-motivated scenario for a sizable primordial black hole (PBH) contribution to the LIGO/Virgo binary black hole mergers invokes the QCD phase transition, which nat- urally enhances the probability to form PBH with masses of stellar scale. We reconsider the expected mass function associated not only to the QCD phase transition proper, but also the e+e− annihilation process, and analyze the constraints on this scenario from a number of observations. We find that the scenario is not viable, unless an ad hoc mass evolution for the PBH mass function and a cutoff in power-spectrum very close to the QCD scale are introduced by hand.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2022-11-29 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202211_00038v1, delivered 2022-11-29, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.6232
Report
This manuscript is very useful and should be accepted by SciPost Physics Proceedings after several changes.
Requested changes
-
Most importantly, the manuscript is too long to fit the journal's requirements. I suggest the author reduce sections 2 and 3 significantly, to make it around 4 pages.
-
There are many references missing in the manuscript, showing as "[REF]" or "??" now. This needs to be corrected. Also, a "to" is missing "In order check", among some minor typos.
-
I suggest the author mention that the exclusion only applies to CMB-like primordial spectrum in the abstract. Now it sounds too strong.
Author: Joaquim Iguaz on 2022-11-30 [id 3090]
(in reply to Report 1 on 2022-11-29)We would like to thank the referee for their appreciation of our manuscript. In the following, we reply to their comments and list the changes made to the manuscript:
1) The length has been considerably reduced. We hope it now fits the journal requirements.
2) References corrected.
3) It is now mentioned in the abstract that we assume a CMB-like power spectrum.
Attachment:
SciPost_LaTeX_Template.pdf
Anonymous on 2022-11-30 [id 3093]
(in reply to Joaquim Iguaz on 2022-11-30 [id 3090])I believe the author has addressed the concerns in the report, and can be accepted for SciPost Physics Proceedings now.
Anonymous on 2022-11-30 [id 3092]
(in reply to Joaquim Iguaz on 2022-11-30 [id 3090])Please resubmit an updated version.