REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by
Quasinormal modes for coherent quantum black holes
T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read The ringdown quasinormal modes of a coherent quantum black hole deviate from Schwarzschild: for a core of size 0.7 Schwarzschild radii the damping time grows by about 5 percent, making the core size potentially visible in merger…
desk verdict Solid new QNM tables for a quantum-corrected metric, but the paper's '~5%' summary conflicts with its own even-parity table, where the dominant mode shifts ~15% and is flagged non-convergent. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing object is the quantum-corrected potential $V_q(r)=-(M/r)\,\mathrm{erf}(r/R_s)$: the error function is the Gaussian regulator that turns the classical divergence into an integrable singularity at $r=0$ and defines the core size $R_s$. This potential enters the metric function $f_q=1+2V_q$, from which the paper builds the effective potentials for scalar, electromagnetic, odd-parity and even-parity gravitational perturbations. Each perturbation obeys a Schrödinger-like equation in the tortoise coordinate $r_*$ defined by $dr_*/dr=1/f(r)$, and the frequencies are extracted with the WKB condition of Ref. [6] truncated with Padé approximants of order $[6/7]$. The mechanism of the argument is that the core changes the height and width of the effective potential barrier, which shifts the imaginary part $\omega_I$ more than the real part $\omega_R$.
What would settle it
One decisive check is a fully numerical computation of the fundamental $l=2$, $n=0$ even-parity gravitational mode at $R_s=0.7R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$; the WKB table marks this entry with a question mark, so if a converged calculation does not reproduce an imaginary part about 5 percent smaller than the Schwarzschild value $-0.178$, the claimed lengthening is a WKB artifact rather than a property of the coherent quantum black hole geometry.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central claim is that the coherent quantum black hole metric of Eq. (6) is not spectroscopically identical to Schwarzschild outside the horizon. Using the WKB approximation with Padé improvement, the paper computes the fundamental and first overtones for scalar ($j=0$), electromagnetic ($j=1$), and gravitational ($j=2$) perturbations. For a quantum core $R_s=0.5 R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$ the quasinormal frequencies agree with Schwarzschild at the level of about 0.5 percent, but for $R_s=0.7 R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$ the imaginary part is systematically about 5 percent smaller in magnitude while the real part shifts little. A smaller imaginary part means longer-lived modes, so the ringdown signal would persist noticeably longer than in general relativity. The paper also establishes that the event horizon exists only for $R_s \lesssim 0.84 R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$ and that $R_s=R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$ corresponds to a horizonless black hole mimicker, so the quoted deviations apply to the black hole regime.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing assumption is that the coherent-state mean-field construction leading to $V_q=-(M/r)\,\mathrm{erf}(r/R_s)$ describes the actual spacetime of a physical black hole; if that metric is only an ad hoc phenomenological regulator, the computed frequencies describe a toy model, not an observational prediction.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The damping time of the fundamental ringdown modes becomes up to about 5 percent longer for a core size $R_s=0.7R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$, so the duration of a merger's ringdown carries information about the quantum core.
- The real part of the quasinormal frequencies stays nearly unchanged, so the oscillation pitch of the ringdown is a poor probe of the core while the decay envelope is the sensitive observable.
- For a smaller core $R_s=0.5R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$, deviations are only about 0.5 percent, so detecting the effect requires either large cores or high-precision next-generation detectors.
- The horizon exists only for $R_s\lesssim0.84R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$; larger cores are horizonless mimickers whose oscillation spectrum depends on unknown surface boundary conditions, so the quoted deviations do not extend beyond this range.
Reading between the lines
- I infer that if the geometry is real, existing GR-based ringdown templates would fit the inspiral and merger well but leave a small systematic residual in the damping tail; rescaling the template damping time by $|\omega_I|^{-1}$ would test the effect on archival merger events.
- A natural next calculation is to replace the WKB estimate with a fully numerical time-domain or continued-fraction computation in the regime $R_s\gtrsim0.7R_{\mathrm{Sch}}$, where several entries in the tables fail to converge; the 5 percent figure should be treated as provisional until confirmed there.
- Because the paper's metric is static and spherically symmetric while real merger remnants are rotating, whether the core imprint survives in the ringdown of a rotating black hole is an open extension the paper does not address.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript studies a static, spherically symmetric spacetime with the quantum-corrected potential Vq=-(M/r) erf(r/Rs), inherited from earlier coherent-state quantisation work. After reviewing the horizon, photon-ring, and critical-impact-parameter properties of this geometry, it computes quasinormal-mode frequencies for scalar, electromagnetic, and odd/even gravitational perturbations using a [6/7] Padé-improved WKB method. The central claim is that, for a quantum core of size Rs=0.7 R_Sch, the imaginary parts of the frequencies are about 5% smaller than in Schwarzschild, implying longer ringdown decay times that might be observable with next-generation gravitational-wave detectors.
Significance. If the reported deviations are quantitatively correct, the paper supplies a concrete, falsifiable prediction linking a quantum-core scale to ringdown observables, which is of genuine interest to strong-field gravity and gravitational-wave tests. The manuscript is transparent about the limitations of the WKB method, explicitly flags non-convergent entries, and presents the perturbation potentials explicitly. These strengths make the paper a useful starting point, but the numerical basis of the headline claim needs to be strengthened before the observational forecast can be accepted.
major comments (3)
- [Section 4, Tables 1-4] The central quantitative claim that the imaginary part of omega becomes 'of the order of 5% smaller' for Rs=0.7 R_Sch is not supported uniformly by the tabulated data and is contradicted by the most astrophysically relevant mode. In Table 4, the even-parity gravitational ell=2, n=0 mode changes from Im omega=-0.178 (Schwarzschild) to Im omega=-0.152 at Rs=0.7 R_Sch, a reduction of roughly 15%, and this entry is marked with a question mark for non-convergence. Several other even-parity entries shift by 10-25%, and even at Rs=0.5 R_Sch the n=2, ell=2 entry in Table 4 slightly violates the statement that the imaginary part is always smaller in magnitude than Schwarzschild. The text should quantify the variation by sector, explicitly exclude or justify non-converged entries, and avoid presenting the 5% figure as the mode-independent prediction.
- [Section 3, Eq. (36); Tables 1-4] The WKB frequencies are the sole numerical evidence for the ringdown prediction, yet they carry no error estimates and are not checked against an independent method. Section 3 correctly notes that there is no proof of convergence for the WKB series and that including higher orders can worsen the estimate; nonetheless, the observational claim depends on the magnitude of the Im omega shifts. Many entries at Rs=0.7 R_Sch, including the dominant even-parity gravitational mode, are flagged as non-convergent. The authors should provide a fully numerical solution of Eq. (27) with boundary conditions (28)-(31), or at least a quantitative convergence study of the Padé-WKB results, before the abstract's ringdown statement can be regarded as supported.
- [Appendix A, Eq. (34)] The even-parity gravitational potential in Eq. (34) is the central input for the dominant ringdown mode, but its derivation in Appendix A is only sketched. After the gauge choices encoded in Eqs. (58)-(59), the text states that 'a short calculation' and a 'straightforward, even though tedious' reduction lead to Eq. (34), without showing the intermediate steps and without verifying that the expression reproduces the Zerilli potential in the Schwarzschild limit f=1-2M/r. Given the size and complexity of Eq. (34), this omission makes Table 4 impossible to check; the authors should provide the missing derivation or an independent verification.
minor comments (6)
- [Section 2, Eq. (17)] The displayed horizon-existence bound appears to read Rs < 4M sqrt(pi), but the quoted numerical value 1.13 R_Sch corresponds to 4M/sqrt(pi); please correct the typesetting, since the printed formula is otherwise wrong by a factor of pi.
- [Section 4] The sentence 'the horizon exists only for inner cores of size Rs <~ 0.84 R_Sch' conflicts with Eq. (17), which gives Rs < 1.13 R_Sch for the existence of a horizon; the 0.84 R_Sch bound is the stricter condition for the core to be hidden inside the horizon. Please rephrase this sentence to distinguish the two conditions.
- [Figure 2 caption] The caption labels both gravitational panels as 'bottom left'; the odd-parity panel should presumably be labeled 'bottom right'.
- [Eqs. (9)-(10), (21)-(26)] The symbol m is used for the Misner-Sharp mass, for the scalar field mass, and for the azimuthal quantum number. Please rename at least one of these to avoid confusion for the reader.
- [Section 3] The Mathematica code for the WKB calculations and Fig. 1 is said to be available upon request; for reproducibility, please deposit the code and data in a permanent public repository.
- [Abstract and Section 4] The observational phrasing should explicitly state that Eq. (6) is an input inherited from Refs. [1,2] and that Rs is a free regulator of the model, so the ringdown prediction is conditional on that coherent-state construction.
Circularity Check
No circularity: the QNM spectrum is a derived consequence of the imported quantum potential, not an input.
full rationale
The paper imports Vq = -(M/r) erf(r/Rs) from Refs [1,2] as the coherent quantum black hole geometry. This is a model premise, not a consequence of the QNM calculation. The quasinormal-mode section solves the standard Regge-Wheeler/Zerilli-type problems (Eqs. 25-34) with Vq inserted and computes omega via the WKB/Padé formula (Eq. 36); the tabulated frequencies follow from these equations and are not used to define Vq, Rs, or any parameter of the model. In particular, Rs is a free UV regulator set in advance (Rs = 0.5 RSch and 0.7 RSch), not fitted to the QNM data, so the claimed ~5% shift in Im omega is a computed consequence rather than a renamed input. The presence of self-citations in Refs [1,2,3,11] documents the origin of the model, but the target result—the QNM spectrum and its deviation from Schwarzschild—is an independent external prediction of that input geometry. The WKB non-convergence caveats are a numerical-correctness concern, not a circularity; they do not make the output equivalent to the input. No equation in the paper defines the geometry in terms of the QNM frequencies, so there is no circular step.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (1)
- Rs (quantum core size / UV regulator) =
not fitted; numerical examples at 0.5 R_Sch and 0.7 R_Sch
assumptions (3)
- domain assumption The quantum-corrected Schwarzschild metric with Vq = -(M/r) erf(r/Rs) is the correct effective spacetime for a coherent quantum black hole.
- domain assumption The WKB expansion with Pade approximant [6/7] gives reliable quasinormal mode frequencies for the potentials considered.
- domain assumption Gravitational perturbations decouple from the background matter perturbations because the background source is an unspecified field.
invented entities (1)
-
Quantum core (matter core) of size Rs
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Quasinormal modes for coherent quantum black holes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BPH75NWE
@misc{pith2026250508415,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Quasinormal modes for coherent quantum black holes},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BPH75NWE}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08415}
}
read the original abstract
Coherent quantum black holes are quantum geometries obtained by means of a mean-field-like approach to the gravitational interaction. This procedure attenuates the classical spacetime singularities of general relativity by replacing them with integrable singularities in the quantum-corrected geometry. After discussing some relevant observables for a novel geometry for spherically symmetric black holes, we investigate the quasinormal modes spectrum of scalar, electromagnetic, and gravitational fields for the proposed model. The results indicate potential deviations from general relativity, the magnitude of which is gauged by the value of the ultraviolet regulator of the model (physically identifiable as a matter core). Observations of the ringdown phase in black hole mergers could help detect such deviations.
Figures
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Gravitational quasinormal modes of the Hayward spacetime
Gravitational quasinormal modes of the Hayward black hole are computed with WKB and time-domain methods, showing that the quantum parameter gamma raises frequencies, weakens damping, and acts slightly more on the firs...
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
Geometry and thermodynamics of coherent quantum black holes,
R. Casadio, “Geometry and thermodynamics of coherent quantum black holes,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D31(2022) 2250128
work page 2022
-
[2]
Horizon quantum mechanics for coherent quantum black holes,
W. Feng, A. Giusti, and R. Casadio, “Horizon quantum mechanics for coherent quantum black holes,”Eur. Phys. J. Plus140(2025) 145
work page 2025
-
[3]
Quantum Reissner-Nordström geometry: Singularity and Cauchy horizon,
R. Casadio, A. Giusti, and J. Ovalle, “Quantum Reissner-Nordström geometry: Singularity and Cauchy horizon,”Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 124026
work page 2022
-
[4]
Quasinormal modes of black holes and black branes,
E. Berti, V. Cardoso, and A. O. Starinets, “Quasinormal modes of black holes and black branes,”Class. Quant. Grav.26(2009) 163001. 13
work page 2009
-
[5]
Quasinormal modes of stars and black holes,
K. D. Kokkotas and B. G. Schmidt, “Quasinormal modes of stars and black holes,”Living Rev. Rel.2(1999) 2
work page 1999
-
[6]
S. Iyer and C. M. Will, “Black Hole Normal Modes: A WKB Approach. 1. Foundations and Application of a Higher Order WKB Analysis of Potential Barrier Scattering,”Phys. Rev. D 35(1987) 3621
work page 1987
-
[7]
Faraoni,Cosmological and Black Hole Apparent Horizons
V. Faraoni,Cosmological and Black Hole Apparent Horizons. Springer, 2015
work page 2015
-
[8]
R. Casadio, A. Giusti, and J. Ovalle, “Quantum rotating black holes,”JHEP05(2023) 118
work page 2023
Show all 20 references
-
[9]
Space-Times with Integrable Singularity,
V. N. Lukash and V. N. Strokov, “Space-Times with Integrable Singularity,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. A28(2013) 1350007
2013
-
[10]
Gravitational vacuum condensate stars,
P. O. Mazur and E. Mottola, “Gravitational vacuum condensate stars,”Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 101(2004) 9545–9550,arXiv:gr-qc/0407075
2004 arXiv
-
[11]
Observational properties of coherent quantum black holes,
A. Urmanov, H. Chakrabarty, and D. Malafarina, “Observational properties of coherent quantum black holes,”Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 044030
2024
-
[12]
Quantization of the electromagnetic field outside static black holes and its application to low-energy phenomena,
L. C. B. Crispino, A. Higuchi, and G. E. A. Matsas, “Quantization of the electromagnetic field outside static black holes and its application to low-energy phenomena,”Phys. Rev. D 63(2001) 124008. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 80, 029906 (2009)]
2001
-
[13]
Quasinormal behavior of the d-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole and higher order WKB approach,
R. A. Konoplya, “Quasinormal behavior of the d-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole and higher order WKB approach,”Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 024018
2003
-
[14]
Quasinormal modes of black holes. The improved semianalytic approach,
J. Matyjasek and M. Opala, “Quasinormal modes of black holes. The improved semianalytic approach,”Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 024011
2017
-
[15]
Higher order WKB formula for quasinormal modes and grey-body factors: recipes for quick and accurate calculations,
R. A. Konoplya, A. Zhidenko, and A. F. Zinhailo, “Higher order WKB formula for quasinormal modes and grey-body factors: recipes for quick and accurate calculations,”Class. Quant. Grav.36(2019) 155002
2019
-
[16]
Ringdown mode amplitudes of precessing binary black holes,
F. Nobili, S. Bhagwat, C. Pacilio, and D. Gerosa, “Ringdown mode amplitudes of precessing binary black holes,”arXiv:2504.17021 [gr-qc]
-
[17]
The Science of the Einstein Telescope,
A. Abacet al., “The Science of the Einstein Telescope,”arXiv:2503.12263 [gr-qc]
-
[18]
Stability of a Schwarzschild singularity,
T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, “Stability of a Schwarzschild singularity,”Phys. Rev.108(1957) 1063–1069
1957
-
[19]
Gravitational perturbations of spherically symmetric systems. I. The exterior problem.,
V. Moncrief, “Gravitational perturbations of spherically symmetric systems. I. The exterior problem.,”Annals Phys.88(1974) 323–342
1974
-
[20]
Effective potential for even parity Regge-Wheeler gravitational perturbation equations,
F. J. Zerilli, “Effective potential for even parity Regge-Wheeler gravitational perturbation equations,”Phys. Rev. Lett.24(1970) 737–738. 14
1970
Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.