Exploring universal characteristics of neutron star matter with relativistic ab initio equations of state
Abstract
Starting from the relativistic realistic nucleon-nucleon () interactions, the relativistic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (RBHF) theory in the full Dirac space is employed to study neutron star properties. First, the one-to-one correspondence relation for gravitational redshift and mass is established and used to infer the masses of isolated neutron stars by combining gravitational redshift measurements. Next, the ratio of the moment of inertia to mass times radius squared as a function of the compactness is obtained, and is consistent with the universal relations in the literature. The moment of inertia for pulsar PSR J0737-3039A is predicted to be 1.356, 1.381, and by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with interactions Bonn A, B, and C, respectively. Finally, the quadrupole moment of neutron star is calculated under the slow-rotation and small-tidal-deformation approximation. The equations of state constructed by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space, together with those by the projection method and momentum-independence approximation, conform to universal -Love- relations as well. By combing the tidal deformability from GW170817 and the universal relations from relativistic ab initio methods, the moment of inertia of a neutron star with 1.4 solar mass is also deduced as .
I Introduction
Neutron stars are one of the most compact objects in the universe: their central densities can reach as high as 5 to 10 times the saturation density of nuclear matter, Lattimer and Prakash (2004), which is far beyond what can be achieved in terrestrial laboratories. Therefore, neutron stars are ideal laboratories for studying ultradense matter, and have established close connections among nuclear physics, particle physics, and astrophysics.
The astrophysical observations of the global properties of neutron stars provide important constraints for the equation of state (EOS) of dense matter Lattimer and Prakash (2007); Özel and Freire (2016); Lattimer and Prakash (2016); Burgio et al. (2021), which is the only ingredient needed to unveil the structure of neutron stars theoretically. The high-precision mass measurements of massive neutron stars constitute nowadays one of the most stringent astrophysical constraints on the nuclear EOS; such measurements include PSR J1614-2230 () Demorest et al. (2010); Fonseca et al. (2016), PSR J0348+0432 () Antoniadis et al. (2013), and PSR J0740+6620 () Cromartie et al. (2020); Fonseca et al. (2021). Recently, the Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) mission reported two independent Bayesian parameter estimations of the mass and equatorial radius of the millisecond pulsar PSR J0030+0451: and Riley et al. (2019) as well as and Miller et al. (2019). In combination with constraints from radio timing, gravitational wave (GW) observations, and nuclear physics experiments, these posterior distributions have been used to infer the properties of the dense matter EOS (see Ref. Riley et al. (2021) and references therein). Moreover, two independent Bayesian estimations of the radius for the massive millisecond pulsar PSR J0740+6620 have also been reported Riley et al. (2021); Miller et al. (2021).
Another unique probe for studying the properties of dense matter was extracted from the recent observation of GW signals emitted from a binary neutron star merger, i.e., GW170817 Abbott and et al. (2017). The tidal deformability, which denotes the mass quadrupole moment response of a neutron star to the strong external gravitational field induced by its companion Damour et al. (1992); Hinderer (2008); Flanagan and Hinderer (2008); Damour and Nagar (2009); Postnikov et al. (2010), can be inferred from the GW signals. The limits on the tidal deformability have been widely used to constrain the neutron star radius Fattoyev et al. (2018); Annala et al. (2018); Most et al. (2018); Tews et al. (2018), the asymmetric nuclear matter EOS Malik et al. (2018); Zhang et al. (2018); Tong et al. (2020), and hence the neutron skin thickness of 208Pb Fattoyev et al. (2018).
Besides, as rotating objects, the internal structures of neutron stars are strongly constrained by the moment of inertia, which can be determined from the measurements of spin-orbit coupling in double pulsar systems Lyne et al. (2004). Such a measurement of the moment of inertia for neutron star would have crucial implications for delimiting the EOS significantly Lattimer and Schutz (2005) and can be used to distinguish neutron stars from quark stars Yagi and Yunes (2013a). Special attention has been attracted by the system PSR J0737-3039 Burgay et al. (2003); Lyne et al. (2004); Kramer and Wex (2009), which is the only currently known double pulsar system. It is hoped that the moment of inertia of the 1.338 primary component in this system, i.e., PSR J0737-3039A, will be measured eventually to within 10% Kramer et al. (2021), and could be used to impose new constraints on the EOS Lattimer (2021).
The global properties of neutron stars, like masses, radii, tidal deformabilities, and moments of inertia are highly sensitive to the EOS for neutron star matter Lim et al. (2019); Li and Sedrakian (2019); Tong et al. (2022). Nevertheless, it has been shown Yagi and Yunes (2013a, b) that, for slowly rotating neutron stars, there exist universal relations between the moment of inertia , the tidal deformability (or Love number), and the quadrupole moment of neutron stars, i.e., the so-called -Love- relations, which are approximately independent of the internal composition and the EOS for neutron star matter. Wide attention has been attracted by these universal relations (see Ref. Yagi and Yunes (2017) for a review). Although so far the reasons for these universal behaviors are not well understood Yagi et al. (2014); Jiang and Yagi (2020), attempts have been made to combine the universal relations with GW detections to infer neutron star properties Landry and Kumar (2018); Kumar and Landry (2019).
The robustness of the -Love- relations has been extensively studied with EOSs constructed from a variety of nuclear models (see Refs. Yagi and Yunes (2017); Wei et al. (2019) and references therein), including the relativistic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (RBHF) theory Müther et al. (1987); Brockmann and Machleidt (1990); Li et al. (1992); Engvik et al. (1996); Gross-Boelting et al. (1999); Katayama and Saito (2015). Since the 1980s the RBHF theory has played an important role in understanding the properties of dense nuclear matter from realistic nucleon-nucleon () interactions Anastasio et al. (1980, 1981). In the RBHF theory, the single-particle motion of the nucleon in nuclear matter is described with the Dirac equation, where the medium effects are absorbed into the single-particle potentials. In principle, the scalar and the vector components of the single-particle potentials should be determined in the full Dirac space Nuppenau et al. (1989), i.e., by considering the positive-energy states (PESs) and negative-energy states (NESs) simultaneously. However, to avoid the difficulties induced by NESs, the RBHF calculations are primarily performed in the Dirac space without NESs Müther et al. (1987); Brockmann and Machleidt (1990); Li et al. (1992); Engvik et al. (1996); Horowitz and Serot (1984); Gross-Boelting et al. (1999).
Recently, a self-consistent RBHF calculation in the full Dirac space was achieved for symmetric nuclear matter (SNM) Wang et al. (2021, 2022a) and asymmetric nuclear matter (ANM) Wang et al. (2022b). By decomposing the matrix elements of single-particle potential operator in the full Dirac space, the momentum-dependent scalar and vector components of the single-particle potentials are determined uniquely Wang et al. (2021). The long-standing controversy about the isospin dependence of the effective Dirac mass in relativistic ab initio calculations of ANM is also clarified Wang et al. (2022b).
The RBHF theory in the full Dirac space has been applied to neutron stars Wang et al. (2022b); Tong et al. (2022), where the mass, radius, and tidal deformability are calculated with realistic interactions Bonn A, B, and C Machleidt (1989). The maximum mass of a neutron star is found less than and the neutron star radius for is predicted about 12 km, which are consistent with the astrophysical observations of massive neutron stars and simultaneous mass-radius estimations by NICER Miller et al. (2019). The tidal deformabilities for a neutron star are predicted as 376, 473, and 459 for the three parametrizations of interactions respectively, and all lie in the region inferred from the revised analysis by LIGO and Virgo Collaborations Abbott and et al. (2018).
In this work, we employ the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space to study other global properties of neutron stars, including the gravitational redshift, moment of inertia, and quadrupole moment under the slow-rotation and small-tidal-deformation approximation. The main focus will be the relation between the moment of inertia and the compactness parameter, as well as the universal -Love- relations. This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, the theoretical framework of the RBHF theory and structure equations for neutron star properties are briefly described. The obtained results and discussions are presented in Sec. III. Finally, a summary is given in Sec. IV.
II Theoretical framework
II.1 The relativistic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock theory
In the RBHF calculations, one of the most important procedure is the self-consistent determination of the single-particle potential operator of the nucleons, which is generally divided into scalar and vector components Serot and Walecka (1986)
(1) |
Here is the unit vector parallel to the momentum . The quantities , , and are the scalar potential, the timelike part and the spacelike part of the vector potential.
In principle, the scalar and the vector components of the single-particle potentials can only be determined uniquely in the full Dirac space. However, to avoid the numerical difficulties in the full Dirac space, different approximations are proposed to extract the single-particle potentials in the Dirac space without NESs. The momentum-independence approximation Brockmann and Machleidt (1990) assumes that the single-particle potentials are independent of the momentum, and the spacelike component of the vector potential, , is negligible. The scalar potential and the timelike part of the vector potential, , are then extracted from the single-particle potential energies at two selected momenta. In the projection method Gross-Boelting et al. (1999), the effective interaction matrix, which is obtained by solving the in-medium scattering equation, is projected onto a complete set of five Lorentz invariant amplitudes, from which the single-particle potentials are calculated analytically. However, the choice of these Lorentz invariant amplitudes is not unique.
Only by decomposing the matrix elements of in the full Dirac space, can the Lorentz structure and momentum dependence of single-particle potentials be uniquely determined Nuppenau et al. (1989). The theoretical framework for the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space has been described in detail in Ref. Wang et al. (2021) for SNM and Ref. Tong et al. (2022) for ANM. In this work this method is used to construct the EOS of neutron star matter, which is regarded as beta equilibrium nuclear matter consisting of protons, neutrons, electrons, and muons Krastev and Sammarruca (2006). Using the relativistic Bonn A potential Machleidt (1989), the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space for nuclear matter is applicable for density in the range 0.08-0.57 . For lower density in the crust of a neutron star, the EOS introduced with the Baym-Bethe-Pethick (BBP) Baym et al. (1971) and Baym-Pethick-Sutherland (BPS) model Baym et al. (1971) is used. For higher density, we follow the strategy proposed in Ref. Rhoades and Ruffini (1974) and applied in Refs. Gandolfi et al. (2012); Wang et al. (2022b), where the neutron-star matter EOS above a critical density is replaced with the maximally stiff or causal one, which predicts the most rapid increase of pressure with energy density without violating the causality limit.
II.2 Mass, radius, gravitational redshift, and tidal deformability
The stable configurations of a cold, spherically symmetric, and nonrotating neutron star can be obtained from the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov (TOV) equations Oppenheimer and Volkoff (1939); Tolman (1939). Adopting natural units , the TOV equations are given by
(2a) | ||||
(2b) |
where is the pressure at neutron star radius , is the total neutron star mass inside a sphere of radius , and is the total energy density. These differential equations can be solved numerically with a given central pressure and . The quantity for denotes the radius of the neutron star, and is its mass. The gravitational redshift which relates the mass of the neutron star to its radius is defined as
(3) |
Since the radius of the neutron star is harder to observe relative to its mass, the simultaneous measurements of the mass and the gravitational redshift would provide a clear radius determination.
The tidal deformability is defined as
(4) |
where is the compactness parameter. The second Love number Hinderer (2008); Hinderer et al. (2010) is calculated by
(5) |
where is the solution of the following nonlinear, first-order differential equation
(6) |
Here the two functions and depend on the known mass, radius, pressure, and energy density profiles of the star:
(7a) | ||||
(7b) |
The differential equation (6) for can be solved together with the TOV equations and the initial condition .
II.3 The moment of inertia
The moment of inertia is calculated under the slow-rotation approximation pioneered by Hartle and Thorne Hartle (1967); Hartle and Thorne (1968), where the frequency of a uniformly rotating neutron star is far smaller than the Kepler frequency at the equator:
(8) |
In the slow-rotation approximation the moment of inertia of a uniformly rotating, axially symmetric neutron star is given by the following expression Fattoyev and Piekarewicz (2010):
(9) |
The quantity is a radially dependent metric function and is defined as
(10) |
The frame-dragging angular velocity is usually obtained by the dimensionless relative frequency , which satisfies the following second-order differential equation:
(11) |
where for . The relative frequency is subject to the following two boundary conditions
(12a) | ||||
(12b) |
It should be noted that under the slow-rotation approximation the moment of inertia does not depend on the stellar frequency .
II.4 The quadrupole moment
It has been shown Yagi and Yunes (2013a, b) that there exist universal relations between the moment of inertia, the Love number, and the quadrupole moment of neutron stars. Physically, the moment of inertia quantifies how fast a neutron star can spin for a fixed angular momentum, the quadrupole moment describes how much a neutron star is deformed away from sphericity due to rotation, and the Love number characterizes how easily a neutron star can be deformed due to an external tidal field. These quantities can be computed by numerically solving for the interior and exterior gravitational field of a neutron star in a slow-rotation Hartle (1967); Hartle and Thorne (1968) approximation and in a small-tidal-deformation approximation Hinderer (2008); Hinderer et al. (2010). In this work the quadrupole moment is calculated by following the detailed instructions described in Ref. Yagi and Yunes (2013b). In order to investigate the universal -Love- relations, the following dimensionless quantities are introduced:
(13) |
III Results and discussions

In the left panel of Fig. 1, the speed of sound squared for neutron star matter from the RBHF theory with potential Bonn A is depicted as a function of density. The results calculated with the projection method and momentum-independence approximation show slowly increasing tendencies with the increase of density. In the full Dirac space, the speed of sound squared increases quickly with the density, and reaches 0.77 at . Above this density, the amplitude of scalar potential exceeds the nucleon rest mass, and the RBHF iteration in the full Dirac space is very difficult to achieve. This fact might be related to the extension of the Bonn potential to the full Dirac space, which was determined with PESs only. When the central density of a neutron star is fixed at , our calculations could support a neutron star with mass equal to . To further explore the maximum mass of a neutron star from the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space, we continue with an EOS where the speed of sound is equal to the speed of light Rhoades and Ruffini (1974); Gandolfi et al. (2012); Wang et al. (2022b) (red dotted line). This would provide an upper bound on the maximum mass of a neutron star.
Based on the EOS from the RBHF theory, the mass-radius relations of a neutron star can be calculated from the TOV equations, which are shown in the right panel of Fig. 1. The 68% and 95% contours of the joint probability density distribution of the mass and radius of PSR J0030+0451 Miller et al. (2019) and PSR J0740+6620 Miller et al. (2021) from the NICER analysis are also shown. It can be found that the results obtained in the full Dirac space, with the projection method, and with the momentum-independence approximation are consistent with the recent constraints by NICER. The maximum masses predicted by the three methods are , , and respectively, which are consistent with the available astrophysical constraints from massive neutron star observations, such as PSR J1614-2230 () Demorest et al. (2010); Fonseca et al. (2016), PSR J0348+0432 () Antoniadis et al. (2013), and PSR J0740+6620 () Cromartie et al. (2020); Fonseca et al. (2021). The radii of a neutron star from the three methods are , , and , respectively.
Model | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
() | (km) | (fm-3) | (fm-3) | (MeV) | (MeV) | (MeV) | |
Full Dirac space | 2.43 | 11.97 | 0.46 | 0.188 | -15.40 | 33.1 | 65.2 |
Projection method | 2.31 | 12.38 | 0.42 | 0.179 | -16.15 | 34.7 | 68.8 |
Mom.-ind. app. | 2.18 | 12.35 | 0.43 | 0.178 | -15.36 | 33.2 | 67.3 |
In Table 1 we summarize the maximum mass of a neutron star and the radius and the central density for a neutron star obtained by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space, together with those obtained with the projection method and momentum-independence approximation. The smallest value for found in the full Dirac space corresponds to the softest EOS for neutron star matter below a density of about 0.4 fm-3. This fact can be further related to nuclear matter properties, which are also summarized in Tab. 1, including the binding energy per nucleon , the symmetry energy , and its slope . It is found that the symmetry energy and its slope at the saturation density obtained in the full Dirac space are the smallest among the three methods. This explains the reason for smallest and shows how important it is to take both the PESs and NESs into account.

Figure 2 shows the relations between the gravitational redshift of a neutron star with its mass and radius obtained by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with the potentials Bonn A, B, and C. It can be seen that the - relation is not strongly affected by the interactions. With the increase of mass, the gravitational redshift shows a monotonically increasing behavior. A backbending phenomenon is found for the gravitational redshift with the decrease of radius, similar to the case for - relations as shown in Fig. 1.
System | Gravitational redshift | Mass | Radius |
---|---|---|---|
RBS 1223 Hambaryan et al. (2014) | |||
RX J1856.5-3754 Hambaryan et al. (2014) | |||
RX J0720.4-3125 Hambaryan, V. et al. (2017) |
The clear one-to-one correspondence relation for gravitational redshift and mass established in the left panel in Fig. 2 can be used to infer the mass of a isolated neutron star, when the observation of the gravitational redshift is provided. In Fig. 2, astrophysical observations of gravitational redshift for isolated neutron stars RX J0720.4-3125 Hambaryan, V. et al. (2017), RBS 1223 Hambaryan et al. (2014), and RX J1856.5-3754 Hambaryan et al. (2014) are shown as shadow bands. The predicted masses by combining these observations and the theoretical calculations from the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with Bonn A potential are listed in the third column of Table 2. The uncertainties are from the gravitational redshift measurements. In Table 2 the corresponding radii are also shown in the last column.

In Fig. 3 we display the ratio of the moment of inertia to as a function of the compactness parameter obtained by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with interactions Bonn A, B, and C. Lattimer et al. Lattimer and Schutz (2005) showed that, in the absence of phase transition and other effects that strongly soften the EOS at supranuclear densities, there is a relatively unique relation between the quantity and :
(14) |
This relation is shown as the purple band in Fig. 3. It is found that our results are consistent with the universal relations obtained in Ref. Lattimer and Schutz (2005) for the range where . The derivation for smaller compactness is unimportant, since the observational evidence for neutron star masses and radii lie in the ranges of and respectively, which leads to the range of compactness as . Lim and collaborators Lim et al. (2019) have investigated neutron star moments of inertia from Bayesian posterior probability distributions of the nuclear EOSs that incorporate information from microscopic many-body theory and empirical data of finite nuclei. The probability distribution for is shown as in Fig. 3. They found that over the entire range of neutron star compactness , their results can be well fitted with the following formula:
(15) |
This result is also shown as the orange dashed line in Fig. 3. It can be seen that our results are very close to that obtained by Lim et al., especially for the neutron stars with small compactness.
Model | Potential | [km] | |
A | 1.356 | 11.94 | |
Full Dirac space | B | 1.381 | 12.11 |
C | 1.407 | 12.26 | |
A | 1.440 | 12.34 | |
Projection method | B | 1.465 | 12.49 |
C | 1.487 | 12.60 | |
A | 1.431 | 12.32 | |
Mom.-ind. approx. | B | 1.452 | 12.46 |
C | 1.471 | 12.57 | |
Variational calculation (APR) Morrison et al. (2004) | AV18 UIX* | 1.24 | 11.56 |
GW170817 universal relations Landry and Kumar (2018) | |||
Bayesian analysis Lim et al. (2019) |
Although the ratio of the neutron star moment of inertia to has a universal function of the compactness parameter , the moment of inertia itself depends sensitively on the neutron star’s internal structure. It has been suggested Lattimer and Schutz (2005) that a measurement accuracy of 10% for is sufficient to place strong constraints on the EOS.
In Table 3, we show the momenta of inertia and radius for PSR J0737-3039A predicted by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with three parametrizations for interactions. The results obtained by the projection method Gross-Boelting et al. (1999); van Dalen et al. (2004) and momentum-independence approximation Brockmann and Machleidt (1990) are also shown. The RBHF theory in the full Dirac space leads to minimum values compared to the approximations in the Dirac space without NESs. This is understandable since the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space gives the minimum radius of a neutron star for the fixed canonical mass, as shown in Table 1.
The moment of inertia for PSR J0737-3039A predicted by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space with Bonn A is , which is very close to the most probable value obtained from Bayesian analysis (95% credibility) Lim et al. (2019). The result from the nonrelativistic ab initio variational calculations Akmal et al. (1998) is also shown in Table 3, where the Argonne interaction (AV18) Wiringa et al. (1995) is used, together with the relativistic boost corrections to the two-nucleon interaction as well as three-nucleon interactions modeled with the Urbana force Pudliner et al. (1995). The nonrelativistic ab initio calculation leads to a moment of inertia smaller that what we obtain, similarly to the case for radius. In Ref. Landry and Kumar (2018), by using well-known universal relations among neutron star observables, the reported 90% credible bound on the tidal deformability from GW170817 Abbott and et al. (2018) has been translated into a direct constraint on the moment of inertia of PSR J0737-3039A, giving . It can be seen that the results with the three methods for RBHF theory are consistent with this constraint.


Let us now compare the EOSs obtained by the relativistic ab initio calculations, i.e., the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space, projection method, and momentum-independence approximation with Bonn potentials, to the universal -Love- relations. The -Love as well as -Love relations and - relations are shown in the top panels of Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. The dimensionless moment of inertia and dimensionless quadrupole moment are defined in Eq. (15). A single parameter along the curve is the mass or compactness, which increases to the left of the plots. Similarly to Ref. Yagi and Yunes (2017), we only show data with the mass of an isolated, nonrotating configuration in the range with representing the maximum mass for such a configuration. One observes that the universal relations hold very well. Since the relations are insensitive to EOS, one can construct a single fit (black solid curves) given by Yagi and Yunes (2013b, 2017)
(16) |
where coefficients are listed in Table 4. These coefficients are very close to that in Ref. Yagi and Yunes (2017), where a large number of EOSs are considered. The bottom panels of Figs. 4 and 5 show the absolute fractional difference between all the data and the fit, which is less than in the whole range.
The universal relations between and allows one to extract the momenta of inertia of a neutron star with solar mass, , from the tidal deformability from GW170817. The revised analysis from LIGO and Virgo Collaborations, Abbott and et al. (2018), corresponds to as shown in the left panel of Fig. 4. From and the relation we obtain . These values are consistent with the results and in Ref. Landry and Kumar (2018), where the -Love relation is obtained by using a large set of candidate neutron star EOSs based on relativistic mean-field and Skyrme-Hartree-Fock theory.

1.493 | 0.06409 | 0.02104 | ||||
1.387 | 0.5722 | 0.01043 | ||||
0.1899 | 0.09937 | 0.04380 |
IV Summary
In summary, the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space has been employed to study the gravitational redshift, moment of inertia, and quadrupole moment of neutron star under the slow-rotation and small-tidal-deformation approximation. The one-to-one correspondence relation for gravitational redshift and mass is established and used to infer the masses of isolated neutron stars by combining gravitational redshift measurements. The ratio of the moment of inertia to as a function of the compactness is obtained, and is consistent with the universal relations shown by Lattimer et al. Lattimer and Schutz (2005) and that from Bayesian posterior probability distributions by Lim et al. Lim et al. (2019). Using interactions Bonn A, B, and C, the moment of inertia for pulsar PSR J0737-3039A is predicted to be , , and , which are consistent with the constraint translated from the tidal deformability deduced from GW170817 with universal relations among neutron star observables. The EOSs constructed by the RBHF theory in the full Dirac space, together with those by the projection method and momentum-independence approximation, are compared successfully to universal -Love- relations. By combing the tidal deformability from GW170817 and the numerical fitting for these universal relations from relativistic ab initio EOSs, the moment of inertia of neutron star with 1.4 solar mass is deduced as .
Acknowledgements.
We thank Yeunhwan Lim for providing the probability distribution data for the moment of inertia from the Bayesian analysis and Armen Sedrakian for carefully reading the manuscript. This work was partly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 12147102, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Grants No. 2020CDJQY-Z003 and No. 2021CDJZYJH-003, and the MOST-RIKEN Joint Project “Ab initio investigation in nuclear physics.” Part of this work was achieved by using the supercomputer OCTOPUS at the Cybermedia Center, Osaka University under the support of the Research Center for Nuclear Physics of Osaka University.References
- Lattimer and Prakash (2004) J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Science 304, 536 (2004).
- Lattimer and Prakash (2007) J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Physics Reports 442, 109 (2007).
- Özel and Freire (2016) F. Özel and P. Freire, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 54, 401 (2016).
- Lattimer and Prakash (2016) J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Physics Reports 621, 127 (2016).
- Burgio et al. (2021) G. Burgio, H.-J. Schulze, I. Vidaña, and J.-B. Wei, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 120, 103879 (2021).
- Demorest et al. (2010) P. B. Demorest, T. Pennucci, S. M. Ransom, M. S. E. Roberts, and J. W. T. Hessels, Nature 467, 1081 (2010).
- Fonseca et al. (2016) E. Fonseca et al., ApJ 832, 167 (2016).
- Antoniadis et al. (2013) J. Antoniadis et al., Science 340, 1233232 (2013).
- Cromartie et al. (2020) H. T. Cromartie, E. Fonseca, S. M. Ransom, P. B. Demorest, Z. Arzoumanian, H. Blumer, P. R. Brook, M. E. DeCesar, T. Dolch, J. A. Ellis, R. D. Ferdman, E. C. Ferrara, N. Garver-Daniels, P. A. Gentile, M. L. Jones, M. T. Lam, D. R. Lorimer, R. S. Lynch, M. A. McLaughlin, C. Ng, D. J. Nice, T. T. Pennucci, R. Spiewak, I. H. Stairs, K. Stovall, J. K. Swiggum, and W. W. Zhu, Nature Astronomy 4, 72 (2020).
- Fonseca et al. (2021) E. Fonseca, H. T. Cromartie, T. T. Pennucci, P. S. Ray, A. Y. Kirichenko, S. M. Ransom, P. B. Demorest, I. H. Stairs, Z. Arzoumanian, L. Guillemot, A. Parthasarathy, M. Kerr, I. Cognard, P. T. Baker, H. Blumer, P. R. Brook, M. DeCesar, T. Dolch, F. A. Dong, E. C. Ferrara, W. Fiore, N. Garver-Daniels, D. C. Good, R. Jennings, M. L. Jones, V. M. Kaspi, M. T. Lam, D. R. Lorimer, J. Luo, A. McEwen, J. W. McKee, M. A. McLaughlin, N. McMann, B. W. Meyers, A. Naidu, C. Ng, D. J. Nice, N. Pol, H. A. Radovan, B. Shapiro-Albert, C. M. Tan, S. P. Tendulkar, J. K. Swiggum, H. M. Wahl, and W. W. Zhu, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 915, L12 (2021).
- Riley et al. (2019) T. E. Riley, A. L. Watts, S. Bogdanov, P. S. Ray, R. M. Ludlam, S. Guillot, Z. Arzoumanian, C. L. Baker, A. V. Bilous, D. Chakrabarty, K. C. Gendreau, A. K. Harding, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, S. M. Morsink, and T. E. Strohmayer, The Astrophysical Journal 887, L21 (2019).
- Miller et al. (2019) M. C. Miller, F. K. Lamb, A. J. Dittmann, S. Bogdanov, Z. Arzoumanian, K. C. Gendreau, S. Guillot, A. K. Harding, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, R. M. Ludlam, S. Mahmoodifar, S. M. Morsink, P. S. Ray, T. E. Strohmayer, K. S. Wood, T. Enoto, R. Foster, T. Okajima, G. Prigozhin, and Y. Soong, The Astrophysical Journal 887, L24 (2019).
- Riley et al. (2021) T. E. Riley, A. L. Watts, P. S. Ray, S. Bogdanov, S. Guillot, S. M. Morsink, A. V. Bilous, Z. Arzoumanian, D. Choudhury, J. S. Deneva, K. C. Gendreau, A. K. Harding, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, M. Loewenstein, R. M. Ludlam, C. B. Markwardt, T. Okajima, C. Prescod-Weinstein, R. A. Remillard, M. T. Wolff, E. Fonseca, H. T. Cromartie, M. Kerr, T. T. Pennucci, A. Parthasarathy, S. Ransom, I. Stairs, L. Guillemot, and I. Cognard, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 918, L27 (2021).
- Miller et al. (2021) M. C. Miller, F. K. Lamb, A. J. Dittmann, S. Bogdanov, Z. Arzoumanian, K. C. Gendreau, S. Guillot, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, M. Loewenstein, S. M. Morsink, P. S. Ray, M. T. Wolff, C. L. Baker, T. Cazeau, S. Manthripragada, C. B. Markwardt, T. Okajima, S. Pollard, I. Cognard, H. T. Cromartie, E. Fonseca, L. Guillemot, M. Kerr, A. Parthasarathy, T. T. Pennucci, S. Ransom, and I. Stairs, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 918, L28 (2021).
- Abbott and et al. (2017) B. P. Abbott and et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and VIRGO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017).
- Damour et al. (1992) T. Damour, M. Soffel, and C. Xu, Phys. Rev. D 45, 1017 (1992).
- Hinderer (2008) T. Hinderer, Astrophys. J. 677, 1216 (2008).
- Flanagan and Hinderer (2008) E. E. Flanagan and T. Hinderer, Phys. Rev. D 77, 021502 (2008).
- Damour and Nagar (2009) T. Damour and A. Nagar, Phys. Rev. D 80, 084035 (2009).
- Postnikov et al. (2010) S. Postnikov, M. Prakash, and J. M. Lattimer, Phys. Rev. D 82, 024016 (2010).
- Fattoyev et al. (2018) F. J. Fattoyev, J. Piekarewicz, and C. J. Horowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 172702 (2018).
- Annala et al. (2018) E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, and A. Vuorinen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 172703 (2018).
- Most et al. (2018) E. R. Most, L. R. Weih, L. Rezzolla, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 261103 (2018).
- Tews et al. (2018) I. Tews, J. Margueron, and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. C 98, 045804 (2018).
- Malik et al. (2018) T. Malik, N. Alam, M. Fortin, C. Providência, B. K. Agrawal, T. K. Jha, B. Kumar, and S. K. Patra, Phys. Rev. C 98, 035804 (2018).
- Zhang et al. (2018) N.-B. Zhang, B.-A. Li, and J. Xu, The Astrophysical Journal 859, 90 (2018).
- Tong et al. (2020) H. Tong, P. Zhao, and J. Meng, Phys. Rev. C 101, 035802 (2020).
- Lyne et al. (2004) A. G. Lyne, M. Burgay, M. Kramer, A. Possenti, R. Manchester, F. Camilo, M. A. McLaughlin, D. R. Lorimer, N. D’Amico, B. C. Joshi, J. Reynolds, and P. C. C. Freire, Science 303, 1153 (2004).
- Lattimer and Schutz (2005) J. M. Lattimer and B. F. Schutz, The Astrophysical Journal 629, 979 (2005).
- Yagi and Yunes (2013a) K. Yagi and N. Yunes, Science 341, 365 (2013a).
- Burgay et al. (2003) M. Burgay, N. D’Amico, A. Possenti, R. N. Manchester, A. G. Lyne, B. C. Joshi, M. A. McLaughlin, M. Kramer, J. M. Sarkissian, F. Camilo, V. Kalogera, C. Kim, and D. R. Lorimer, Nature 426, 531 (2003).
- Kramer and Wex (2009) M. Kramer and N. Wex, Classical and Quantum Gravity 26, 073001 (2009).
- Kramer et al. (2021) M. Kramer, I. H. Stairs, R. N. Manchester, N. Wex, A. T. Deller, W. A. Coles, M. Ali, M. Burgay, F. Camilo, I. Cognard, T. Damour, G. Desvignes, R. D. Ferdman, P. C. C. Freire, S. Grondin, L. Guillemot, G. B. Hobbs, G. Janssen, R. Karuppusamy, D. R. Lorimer, A. G. Lyne, J. W. McKee, M. McLaughlin, L. E. Münch, B. B. P. Perera, N. Pol, A. Possenti, J. Sarkissian, B. W. Stappers, and G. Theureau, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041050 (2021).
- Lattimer (2021) J. Lattimer, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 71, 433 (2021).
- Lim et al. (2019) Y. Lim, J. W. Holt, and R. J. Stahulak, Phys. Rev. C 100, 035802 (2019).
- Li and Sedrakian (2019) J. J. Li and A. Sedrakian, Phys. Rev. C 100, 015809 (2019).
- Tong et al. (2022) H. Tong, C. Wang, and S. Wang, The Astrophysical Journal 930, 137 (2022).
- Yagi and Yunes (2013b) K. Yagi and N. Yunes, Phys. Rev. D 88, 023009 (2013b).
- Yagi and Yunes (2017) K. Yagi and N. Yunes, Physics Reports 681, 1 (2017).
- Yagi et al. (2014) K. Yagi, L. C. Stein, G. Pappas, N. Yunes, and T. A. Apostolatos, Phys. Rev. D 90, 063010 (2014).
- Jiang and Yagi (2020) N. Jiang and K. Yagi, Phys. Rev. D 101, 124006 (2020).
- Landry and Kumar (2018) P. Landry and B. Kumar, The Astrophysical Journal 868, L22 (2018).
- Kumar and Landry (2019) B. Kumar and P. Landry, Phys. Rev. D 99, 123026 (2019).
- Wei et al. (2019) J.-B. Wei, A. Figura, G. F. Burgio, H. Chen, and H.-J. Schulze, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 46, 034001 (2019).
- Müther et al. (1987) H. Müther, M. Prakash, and T. Ainsworth, Phys. Lett. B 199, 469 (1987).
- Brockmann and Machleidt (1990) R. Brockmann and R. Machleidt, Phys. Rev. C 42, 1965 (1990).
- Li et al. (1992) G. Q. Li, R. Machleidt, and R. Brockmann, Phys. Rev. C 45, 2782 (1992).
- Engvik et al. (1996) L. Engvik, E. Osnes, M. Hjorth-Jensen, G. Bao, and E. Ostgaard, The Astrophysical Journal 469, 794 (1996).
- Gross-Boelting et al. (1999) T. Gross-Boelting, C. Fuchs, and A. Faessler, Nucl. Phys. A 648, 105 (1999).
- Katayama and Saito (2015) T. Katayama and K. Saito, Phys. Lett. B 747, 43 (2015).
- Anastasio et al. (1980) M. R. Anastasio, L. S. Celenza, and C. M. Shakin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 2096 (1980).
- Anastasio et al. (1981) M. R. Anastasio, L. S. Celenza, and C. M. Shakin, Phys. Rev. C 23, 2273 (1981).
- Nuppenau et al. (1989) C. Nuppenau, Y. Lee, and A. MacKellar, Nucl. Phys. A 504, 839 (1989).
- Horowitz and Serot (1984) C. Horowitz and B. D. Serot, Phys. Lett. B 137, 287 (1984).
- Wang et al. (2021) S. Wang, Q. Zhao, P. Ring, and J. Meng, Phys. Rev. C 103, 054319 (2021).
- Wang et al. (2022a) S. Wang, H. Tong, and C. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 105, 054309 (2022a).
- Wang et al. (2022b) S. Wang, H. Tong, Q. Zhao, C. Wang, P. Ring, and J. Meng, Phys. Rev. C 106, L021305 (2022b).
- Machleidt (1989) R. Machleidt, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 19, 189 (1989).
- Abbott and et al. (2018) B. P. Abbott and et al. (The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 161101 (2018).
- Serot and Walecka (1986) B. Serot and J. Walecka, Advance in Nuclear Physics 16, 1 (1986).
- Krastev and Sammarruca (2006) P. G. Krastev and F. Sammarruca, Phys. Rev. C 74, 025808 (2006).
- Baym et al. (1971) G. Baym, H. A. Bethe, and C. J. Pethick, Nuclear Physics A 175, 225 (1971).
- Baym et al. (1971) G. Baym, C. Pethick, and P. Sutherland, Astrophys. J. 170, 299 (1971).
- Rhoades and Ruffini (1974) C. E. Rhoades and R. Ruffini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 324 (1974).
- Gandolfi et al. (2012) S. Gandolfi, J. Carlson, and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. C 85, 032801(R) (2012).
- Oppenheimer and Volkoff (1939) J. R. Oppenheimer and G. M. Volkoff, Phys. Rev. 55, 374 (1939).
- Tolman (1939) R. C. Tolman, Phys. Rev. 55, 364 (1939).
- Hinderer et al. (2010) T. Hinderer, B. D. Lackey, R. N. Lang, and J. S. Read, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123016 (2010).
- Hartle (1967) J. B. Hartle, Astrophys. J. 150, 1005 (1967).
- Hartle and Thorne (1968) J. B. Hartle and K. S. Thorne, The Astrophysical Journal 153, 807 (1968).
- Fattoyev and Piekarewicz (2010) F. J. Fattoyev and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C 82, 025810 (2010).
- Hambaryan et al. (2014) V. Hambaryan, R. Neuhäuser, V. Suleimanov, and K. Werner, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 496, 012015 (2014).
- Hambaryan, V. et al. (2017) Hambaryan, V., Suleimanov, V., Haberl, F., Schwope, A. D., Neuhäuser, R., Hohle, M., and Werner, K., A&A 601, A108 (2017).
- van Dalen et al. (2004) E. N. E. van Dalen, C. Fuchs, and A. Faessler, Nucl. Phys. A 744, 227 (2004).
- Morrison et al. (2004) I. A. Morrison, T. W. Baumgarte, S. L. Shapiro, and V. R. Pandharipande, The Astrophysical Journal 617, L135 (2004).
- Akmal et al. (1998) A. Akmal, V. R. Pandharipande, and D. G. Ravenhall, Phys. Rev. C 58, 1804 (1998).
- Wiringa et al. (1995) R. B. Wiringa, V. G. J. Stoks, and R. Schiavilla, Phys. Rev. C 51, 38 (1995).
- Pudliner et al. (1995) B. S. Pudliner, V. R. Pandharipande, J. Carlson, and R. B. Wiringa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4396 (1995).