Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines gravitational wave events indicating ultracompact objects in astrophysics.
V1.5 Corrects M_crit from 12.0 to 14.75 M☉. Intermediate regime now 4.56–14.75 M☉. 29 events identified with both components in regime (vs 18 in v1.4). Spin limit updated: a_max/M = 0.343–0.503. All 29 events consistent with CCEGA spin limit. Maximum observed chi_eff = 0.210 vs most restrictive limit 0.343. Test passed. V1.4 Adds Section 5: spin test from P51 v2 against 18 GWTC-4.0 events. All consistent with a_max/M = 0.356–0.503. Rotational stability open problem. v1.3 Updated phase boundaries Mmax = 4.56 M☉ (P34 v2.0), Mcrit = 12.0 M☉ (P36 v2.0). Note Added addresses catalog variance limitations following Corelli et al. arXiv:2603.00239. Analysis of all 369 gravitational wave events in GWTC-4.0 O4a. 21 events (5.7%) populate the CCEGA intermediate regime (2.33–9.20 M☉). Statistically significant differences from true black holes in spin (p<0.0001), total mass (p<0.0001), and mass ratio (p<0.0001). GW190814 and GW230529 consistent with CCEGA ultracompact objects. Circumstantial evidence — not confirmation. Definitive tests: NICER tidal deformability (2029), Einstein Telescope echoes (2035+). M_max boundary carries uncertainty (P29 v1.1, P34 v1.1). CCEGA Program Paper 41. Added: Reproducible Colab notebook implementing GWTC-4.0 analysis for intermediate regime identification (21 events, 2.33–9.20 M☉). López Sánchez, M. (2026). P 41 The GWTC-4.0 Catalog Reveals 21 Objects GR Cannot Explain — CCEGA Can (1.0.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19366216
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marc López Sánchez (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: