How does orbital decay timescale compare between post-Newtonian and full general relativity treatments?

# Orbital Decay: Post-Newtonian vs. Full General Relativity

This is an excellent technical question, but the provided archive doesn't directly address orbital decay timescales or compare decay rates between post-Newtonian (PN) and numerical relativity approaches.

The closest relevant work is [AG-2026.03-639], which analytically derives secular changes in orbital energy, angular momentum, and the Carter constant for bound orbits in Kerr spacetime through 6th post-Newtonian order. This *does* capture energy loss (the driver of orbital decay) in a PN framework and validates against high-precision numerical Teukolsky solutions. The paper notes how eccentricity affects PN convergence and accuracy — a key factor in whether PN predictions of decay timescale remain trustworthy as an orbit tightens. However, it doesn't present explicit timescale comparisons or quantify systematic errors in decay rates between the two regimes.

[AG-2024.09-444] compares PN and numerically relativistic waveforms in eccentric orbits across multiple modes and eccentricities, which implicitly constrains orbital dynamics; but again, it focuses on waveform accuracy rather than decay timescale differences.

For a direct answer to how orbital decay timescales *differ* between PN and full GR — and the physical regimes where that difference becomes significant — you'd need papers specifically benchmarking decay predictions in both frameworks, which aren't represented here.