Why don't two-scalar theories naturally suppress scalarization in the stellar-mass range that LIGO observes?

Your question cuts to a technical puzzle in modified gravity: why don't two-scalar theories produce the mass-dependent "window" of scalarization that some researchers have proposed to reconcile LIGO observations (which see no sign of scalarization) with pulsar timing arrays (which may require it)?

The key issue is hierarchy and coupling signs [AG-2025.06-675]. When you start with two scalar fields and integrate out the heavier one to produce an effective single-field theory, the resulting effective field theory doesn't inherit the right structure. Specifically, the coupling between the remaining scalar and gravity either has the wrong sign or the scales don't stack up correctly to suppress scalarization at stellar mass while allowing it only at supermassive scales [AG-2025.06-675].

Two-scalar theories *can* evade black hole uniqueness—that is, they allow black holes to carry scalar hair through curvature-induced and spin-induced mechanisms [AG-2025.06-675]. But this doesn't automatically give you mass selectivity. The problem is that the mechanisms driving scalarization don't naturally turn on and off in the narrow mass window LIGO probes (~10–100 solar masses) while remaining dormant for stellar-mass objects.

This matters because LIGO sees no gravitational-wave signatures of scalarization in its observed mergers [AG-2024.10-366], yet some interpretations of pulsar timing array data hint at effects that *could* arise from supermassive black hole scalarization [AG-2025.05-311]. A theory that naturally suppresses the effect at LIGO masses but permits it only for supermassive holes would elegantly resolve the tension—but two-scalar models don't naturally deliver this [AG-2025.06-675].

In short: the scaling laws and interaction strengths in two-field theories don't conspire to produce a sharp mass threshold that separates the LIGO and PTA regimes.