Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Locally Rotationally Symmetric Spacetimes in Einstein-Cartan Theory and Their Classification

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper derives the complete covariant equations for locally rotationally symmetric spacetimes with Weyssenhoff-fluid torsion in Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble gravity and classifies them into four globally separated classes.

desk verdict Useful 1+1+2 equation set and taxonomy for LRS Weyssenhoff spacetimes, but the global-separation claims for classes I and III rest on an invalid proof and don't yet hold. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.01840 v1 pith:DKLNM7UR submitted 2025-07-02 gr-qc math-phmath.MP

Ujjwal Agarwal , Sante Carloni This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcmath-phmath.MP MSC 83D0583C2083C05 PACS 04.20.-q04.50.Kd04.20.Jb
keywords locallyrotationallysymmetricspacetimesEinstein-Cartan-Sciama-KibbletheorytorsionWeyssenhofffluid1+1+2covariantformalismWeyltensorspacetimeclassificationexactsolutions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that every locally rotationally symmetric spacetime with nonzero torsion, sourced by a Weyssenhoff fluid — a semi-classical spinning fluid whose torsion reduces to a single scalar $\tau$ — is governed by one complete set of covariant equations (74)-(102) in Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble gravity, and falls into one of four classes whose defining properties are global, not merely local. The difference from General Relativity is structural: torsion breaks the simple rule $\Omega\xi=0$ that organises ordinary LRS spacetimes, so the classification must be built from the foliation the manifold admits, i.e. from whether the timelike and spacelike congruences can be hypersurface-orthogonal. In place of the GR variable $\Omega$, the controlling quantity is the combination $\Omega-\tau$ formed with the torsion scalar, while $\xi$ governs the twist of the preferred spatial direction. If the claim is right, models of spinning matter — neutron-star interiors, Bianchi cosmologies, gravitational-wave perturbations — can be studied in a coordinate-free setting and assigned a class that fixes which global notions of time and space exist. The paper also derives new exact solutions, including Gödel-type universes with torsion and a gravitationally silent dark-radiation spacetime.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the 1+1+2 covariant decomposition: every tensor is projected onto a timelike congruence $u^a$ and a preferred spacelike direction $e^a$, with a residual 2-dimensional surface projector $N_{ab}$; local rotational symmetry forces all vector and tensor fields on $N_{ab}$ to vanish, leaving kinematic variables $\{A,\Theta,\Sigma,\Omega,\phi,\xi\}$, Weyl scalars $\{E,\tilde{E},H_r,H_t,\bar{H}_r,\bar{H}_t\}$, and matter variables $\{\mu,p,\tau\}$. The Weyssenhoff spin Ansatz writes the torsion as $T^a{}_{bc}=2\tau\,u^a\eta_{bc}$, and the Frobenius condition with torsion then collapses to two simple statements: $u^a$ is hypersurface-orthogonal exactly when $\Omega-\tau=0$, and $e^a$ exactly when $\xi=0$. These two combinations are the classification variables; the consistency condition $\beta=0$ and the evolution and propagation equations let the paper promote local vanishing or non-vanishing of $\Omega-\tau$ and $\xi$ to global properties, which is what separation of classes means.

What would settle it

One concrete check: find any solution of equations (74)-(102) with $\Omega-\tau=0$, $\xi\neq0$, and $\tau\neq0$ on an open set — the paper's class III analysis forces such a configuration to collapse to $\tau=\Omega=A=\phi=0$, so its mere existence would refute the claim that TLRS class III is torsion-free. As a second check, evolve the same system from initial data with $\mu+p\neq0$ and $\tau\neq0$ everywhere but $\xi=0$ on one open set and $\xi\neq0$ on a disjoint set; if such data remain solutions, the separation of class I fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the system (74)-(102) is the complete covariant description of torsional locally rotationally symmetric (TLRS) spacetimes sourced by a Weyssenhoff fluid in Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble gravity, and that these spacetimes admit a four-class taxonomy. Class I ($\Omega-\tau\neq0$, $\xi=0$) is stationary, admits no foliation orthogonal to the timelike congruence, and splits into subclass IA ($\mu+p\neq0$) and subclass IB ($\tau\neq0$); class II ($\Omega-\tau=0=\xi$) is foliated by both congruences and needs no matter condition; class III ($\Omega-\tau=0$, $\xi\neq0$) is forced by the field equations to be torsion-free and therefore coincides with the LRS class III of General Relativity; class IV collects everything else, including all spacetimes with $\mu+p=0$ and $\tau=0$. A central structural result is that the relation $\Omega\xi=0$ underlying the GR classification has no torsion analogue: generically $(\Omega-\tau)\,\xi\neq0$, because the spin induces an energy flux $q=2\xi\tau$ in the metric energy-momentum tensor and breaks the perfect-fluid condition. The paper further shows that the magnetic part of the Weyl tensor is no longer algebraically determined by kinematic variables — the scalar $H_t$ carries a derivative of $\tau$ along the preferred direction $e^a$, so gravitational-wave structure in torsion spacetimes differs from its GR counterpart.

Load-bearing premise

The classification's global separation rests on global matter conditions the paper assumes rather than derives from the field equations — for class I, $\mu+p\neq0$ or $\tau\neq0$ at every point; for class III, $\mu+p\neq0$ with $\tau=0$ — so a fluid with $\mu+p=0$ and $\tau=0$ on any subregion cannot be assigned a single separated class and falls into class IV.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any TLRS spacetime sourced by a Weyssenhoff fluid can be assigned to one of four classes, and for classes I-III the local values of $\Omega-\tau$ and $\xi$ are forced to hold globally once the stated matter conditions are met.
  • TLRS class III coincides with LRS class III of General Relativity because torsion must vanish there, so the Weyssenhoff coupling generates no genuinely new foliation-orthogonal spacetimes of this type.
  • TLRS class I spacetimes are stationary ($\Theta=0=\Sigma$) and admit no global time; the Gödel-type solutions the paper derives include a branch in which $\tau$ stays a free constant, leaving torsion to act on geodesics and closed time-like curves independently of the kinematics.
  • The magnetic Weyl scalars are not fixed by kinematics alone — $H_t$ carries a derivative of $\tau$ — so prescribing the conformal structure can close the system without an equation of spin density, as in the gravitationally silent dark-radiation solution.
  • The same system is the foundation the paper proposes for junction conditions and for perturbative studies of stellar interiors in Einstein-Cartan theory, extending existing GR results to torsion spacetimes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Read as a stability statement, the degenerate matter condition $\mu+p=0$, $\tau=0$ acts like a phase boundary: any equation of state that crosses $\mu+p=0$ inside a star would push the surrounding spacetime toward class IV, making the loss of global foliation a potential signature of phase transitions in dense spin matter.
  • The paper's remark that a generic frame might require a thermodynamic rather than foliation-based definition of class IV suggests a frame-invariant reformulation of the taxonomy using the metric energy-momentum projections $\{\mu,p,\Pi,q\}$ as primary labels — a natural next step the paper leaves implicit.
  • Because class IV can splice GR-like patches ($\tau=0$) with ECSK patches, numerically evolving equations (74)-(102) on a class IV region would clarify whether the suspected failure of the Cauchy problem is genuine or an artifact of the comoving frame.
  • The Gödel-type branch with free $\tau$ is a concrete laboratory for closed time-like curves: computing the geodesic structure as a function of $\tau$ would reveal whether torsion enlarges or shrinks the region containing such curves, an effect the paper flags without computing.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a 1+1+2 covariant decomposition of locally rotationally symmetric spacetimes with torsion in Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble gravity, sourced by a Weyssenhoff fluid. It derives evolution, propagation, mixed, constraint, and consistency equations (Sec. IV.E), identifies hypersurface-orthogonality conditions for the comoving frame (Sec. IV.D), and proposes a four-class taxonomy of TLRS spacetimes based on the variables Omega-tau and xi (Sec. VI). It claims that classes I-III are globally separated, and it applies class I to obtain Godel-type solutions with torsion, a gravitationally silent dark-radiation spacetime, and a canonical-vacuum solution supported by shearing pressure (Sec. VII).

Significance. If the equations and the classification are correct, this paper supplies a useful framework for ECSK cosmology and stellar-model applications. Its strengths are the systematic derivation of the full covariant system with no fitted parameters, the explicit foliation conditions, the novel exact solutions, and the clear physical interpretation of the Weyl-torsion coupling. The main weakness is that the global separation of classes I-III is not established by the arguments given; because that separation is part of the central claim, Section VI needs substantial repair or the classification claims need to be reformulated as local or conditional on global matter assumptions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. VI, Eqs. (112)-(115)] The proof by negation leading to Eq. (115) is invalid. If (Omega-tau)xi=0, Eq. (112) does not imply gamma=0: at a point with xi=0 it reduces to (Omega-tau)xi-dot=0, and at a point with Omega-tau=0 it reduces to (Omega-dot - tau-dot)xi=0. Equation (113) behaves similarly. Thus the claim that 'since, in general, gamma is nonzero' one can rule out (Omega-tau)xi=0 does not follow. This argument should be repaired or removed; as written it is used to motivate the existence and genericity of TLRS class IV.
  2. [Sec. VI.A, Eq. (83); Sec. VI.C, Eq. (74)] The separation proofs for classes I and III use an invalid pointwise-to-neighborhood inference. In class I, at a point x with xi=0 and Omega-tau nonzero, the authors derive Sigma|x = (2/3)Theta|x and, using the global matter condition, Theta|x=0. This makes xi-dot|x and xi-hat|x vanish, but Eq. (83) is not homogeneous in xi: away from x its source (Omega-tau)(2Sigma - Theta/3) need not vanish unless 2Sigma - Theta/3 vanishes in a neighborhood, which is not shown. Similarly, in class III, Eq. (74) gives (Omega-dot - tau-dot)|x = xi|x A|x; the global condition mu+p not equal to 0 gives A|x=0, but the equation is sourced by xi(A-phi) away from x unless A-phi vanishes in a neighborhood. Vanishing of a function and its first derivatives at one point does not imply vanishing on an open set. Additional constraints or a proper initial-value argument are needed.
  3. [Sec. VI.B; Sec. V, Eq. (106)] The argument that (Omega-tau)=0=xi at a single point propagates to a neighborhood is also incomplete. From Eqs. (74), (75), (82), and (83), the vanishing of the variables and their first derivatives at x only guarantees vanishing along the integral curves of u^a and e^a through x; to conclude vanishing in an open set one must specify initial data on a hypersurface and use well-posedness, or derive extra constraints that force the source terms to vanish in a neighborhood. The same gap appears in the GR separation proof reviewed in Section V. Since the separation of classes is a central claim, this requires a rigorous treatment rather than the 'overlapping neighborhoods' heuristic.
  4. [Sec. VI.A-VI.D; Sec. VIII] The global separation and completeness claims are conditional on externally imposed matter conditions that are not consequences of the field equations: TLRS class I requires mu+p not equal to 0 or tau not equal to 0 at every point, and TLRS class III requires mu+p not equal to 0 and tau=0 globally. The manuscript acknowledges this in places, but the abstract and conclusions state the separation of the first three classes without this qualification. Without such global matter assumptions, a spacetime satisfying the local class-I condition on one patch and the local class-III condition on another is not globally class I or III and is relegated to class IV. The classification theorem should be stated explicitly as conditional on these global matter hypotheses, or the separation claims should be weakened.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. V and Sec. VI] The 'exponential solution' statements used to show that nonzero values persist are unnecessary, since continuity of the variables already gives a neighborhood of nonvanishing; the real difficulty is propagation of vanishing, which is not addressed.
  2. [Sec. IV.E] The set of equations is called 'complete,' but Eqs. (80), (88), and (92) are later stated to be redundant; please clarify whether completeness refers to the full system including redundant equations or to a minimal independent set.
  3. [Sec. IV.E, Eqs. (99)-(100)] The simplification of the consistency conditions using Eqs. (98) and (102) is nontrivial; a short derivation or a supplemental file would help independent verification of the final forms.
  4. [Sec. VI and Sec. VIII] The frame dependence of the classification is stated only in the conclusions; it should be stated at the start of Section VI, since all class definitions and the foliation conditions are made in the comoving frame.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the TLRS equations and classification are derived within the paper from ECSK field equations and the 1+1+2 decomposition; the self-citations are background, not load-bearing.

full rationale

After tracing the derivation chain, I find no circular reduction. The governing equations are obtained by projecting the Ricci identities (56)-(57), the type-I and type-II Bianchi identities, and the conservation equation (8) onto the 1+1+2 basis; the Weyssenhoff torsion form (48) and the hypersurface-orthogonality condition (64)/(69) are used as independent geometric and field-theoretic inputs, not as consequences of the final equations. The TLRS classification in Section VI is explicitly definitional: the classes are stipulated in terms of the foliation variables Omega-tau and xi, together with stated global matter conditions, and the properties of each class are then derived from the equations rather than assumed. No parameter is fitted to a target and later relabeled as a prediction. The references to the authors' prior work, e.g. [29] for the 1+1+2 torsion formalism, are background guides; the present paper re-derives the projection equations, so these citations are not load-bearing reductions. Some local-to-global separation arguments, especially in Sections VI.A and VI.C, and the proof-by-negation at Eqs. (112)-(115), are mathematically questionable as written, but those are correctness gaps, not instances in which a conclusion is identical to an input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central classification depends on standard differential geometry and on the domain assumptions of ECSK theory with a Weyssenhoff fluid. The only ad hoc elements are the global matter conditions needed for class separation. No new particles, forces, or physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • tau0 = integration constant
    Integration constant in the torsion density tau = tau0/r^2 for the silent torsional spacetime in Section VIIB; not fitted to data.
  • c = integration constant
    Integration constant in phi^2 = 4p0 + 2c/r^2; determines the radial profile of the expansion scalar.
  • p0 = constant
    Constant energy density and pressure for the equation of state p = -mu/3 in Section VIIB.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble field equations (10)-(11) with Weyssenhoff hypermomentum (20)-(23).
    The paper's equations all follow from this chosen matter-geometry coupling; it is a postulate of the model.
  • domain assumption The torsion tensor takes the form T^a_bc = 2*tau*u^a*eta_bc under the LRS and comoving assumptions (48).
    Restricts torsion to a single scalar tau; used in deriving the spin equation (60) and the foliation conditions.
  • standard math Under LRS, every geometric and matter tensor is determined by the scalar set (73).
    Standard 1+1+2 reduction from Refs. [19,20]; not re-derived in this paper.
  • standard math Frobenius theorem with torsion: the hypersurface orthogonality condition (64) governs foliation.
    Imported from differential geometry; used in Section IVD to obtain (66)-(67).
  • ad hoc to paper Global matter conditions: mu+p != 0 or tau != 0 for TLRS class I, and mu+p != 0 with tau = 0 for TLRS class III, are global by definition.
    Imposed to make the class-separation proofs work; not implied by the field equations, as the authors acknowledge.
  • domain assumption An equation of state p = p(mu) and a spin-density relation tau = tau(mu) are supplied externally to close the system.
    Required for explicit solutions (Section IVE); the paper does not derive them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Locally Rotationally Symmetric Spacetimes in Einstein-Cartan Theory and Their Classification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DKLNM7UR

@misc{pith2026250701840,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Locally Rotationally Symmetric Spacetimes in Einstein-Cartan Theory and Their Classification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DKLNM7UR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.01840}
}
read the original abstract

We present the complete set of covariant equations that govern the locally rotationally symmetric torsion spacetimes sourced by Weyssenhoff fluid in Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble gravity. Using these equations, we can explore in detail the peculiar relationship between conformal structure and torsion. We develop a comprehensive scheme to categorize these torsional spacetimes into distinct classes. We explicitly analyze the properties of each class and obtain novel analytical solutions to the gravitational field equations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    (128) This subclass is an extension of the LRS class I of General Relativity and can be reduced to LRS I if one imposes τ = 0

    TLRS class IAThe matter fluid must satisfy the condition on the equation of statep = p(µ) such that µ + p(µ) ̸= 0 . (128) This subclass is an extension of the LRS class I of General Relativity and can be reduced to LRS I if one imposes τ = 0. The matter fluid can be of two types: a spin matter fluid withµ + p >0, or a generalization of phantom matter flui...

    work page

  2. [2]

    (129) The spacetime of this subclass cannot be reduced to General Relativity

    TLRS class IBThe matter fluid must satisfy the condition on the hypermomentum τ ̸= 0 . (129) The spacetime of this subclass cannot be reduced to General Relativity. Typically, we expect the condition on the matter fluid to be global. Thus, we shall have either TLRS class IA or class IB spacetimes if the matter fluid satisfies (128) or (129), respectively....

    work page

  3. [3]

    (163) Given µ, the rest of the variables, but τ, can be algebraically determined

    Setting ϕ = 0, we obtain A = Hr = Ht = Hr = Ht = 0 , (162) Ω2 = p = µ = − 3 2 E . (163) Given µ, the rest of the variables, but τ, can be algebraically determined. Notice that the torsion variable τ is left independent, i.e., it does not influence the kinematics of the spacetime. In this case, all the covariant variables are the same as one would have had...

    work page

  4. [4]

    (161) implies µ + p = 2τ Ω

    For ϕ ̸= 0, Eq. (161) implies µ + p = 2τ Ω . (164) Squaring this condition and using (159), we obtain τ 2 = 3 (µ + p)2 7µ + 5p . (165) Then, given an equation of state and the energy density, one can determine all other covariant variables. As the conditions µ + p ̸= 0 and τ ̸= 0 are simultaneously satisfied, this spacetime belongs to both TLRS class IA a...

    work page

  5. [5]

    F. W. Hehl, P. von der Heyde, G. D. Kerlick, and J. M. Nester, Rev. Mod. Phys.48, 393 (1976)

    1976

  6. [6]

    D. W. Sciama, Recent Developments in General Relativity (Pergamon, New York, 1962). 19

    work page 1962

  7. [7]

    T. W. B. Kibble, J. Math. Phys.2, 212 (1961)

    work page 1961

  8. [8]

    F. W. Hehl, P. von der Heyde, and G. D. Kerlick, Phys. Rev. D10, 1066 (1974)

    work page 1974

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Weyssenhoff and A

    J. Weyssenhoff and A. Raabe, Acta Phys. Polon.9, 7 (1947)

    1947

  2. [10]

    Y. N. Obukhov and V. A. Korotky, Classical and Quantum Gravity4, 1633 (1987)

    1987

  3. [11]

    Halbwachs, Nuclear Physics18, 716 (1960)

    F. Halbwachs, Nuclear Physics18, 716 (1960)

    1960

  4. [12]

    Mathisson, Acta Phys

    M. Mathisson, Acta Phys. Polon.6, 163 (1937)

    1937

  5. [13]

    Frenkel, Zeitschrift fur Physik37, 243 (1926)

    J. Frenkel, Zeitschrift fur Physik37, 243 (1926)

    1926

  6. [14]

    Papapetrou and R

    A. Papapetrou and R. E. Peierls, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences209, 248 (1951)

    1951

  7. [15]

    A. Y. Potekhin, Physics-Uspekhi53, 1235 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    B. P. Abbott and et al., Physical Review Letters119 (2017), 10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    Y.-F. Cai, S. Capozziello, M. De Laurentis, and E. N. Saridakis, Rept. Prog. Phys.79, 106901 (2016), arXiv:1511.07586 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Kopczyński, Physics Letters A43, 63 (1973)

    W. Kopczyński, Physics Letters A43, 63 (1973)

    1973

  11. [19]

    Trautman, Nature Phys

    A. Trautman, Nature Phys. Sci.242, 7 (1973)

    1973

  12. [20]

    Stewart and

    J. Stewart and . Hájíček, Nature Phys. Sci. 244, 96 (1973)

    1973

  13. [21]

    Capozziello, G

    S. Capozziello, G. Lambiase, and C. StornaioloI, Annalen der Physik513, 713–727 (2001)

    2001

  14. [22]

    G. F. R. Ellis, Journal of Mathematical Physics8, 1171 (1967)

    1967

  15. [23]

    J.M.StewartandG.F.R.Ellis,JournalofMathematical Physics 9, 1072 (1968)

    1968

  16. [24]

    H. v. Elst and G. F. R. Ellis, Classical and Quantum Gravity 13, 1099–1127 (1996)

    1996

  17. [25]

    Cosmological models (cargèse lectures 1998),

    G. F. R. Ellis and H. van Elst, “Cosmological models (cargèse lectures 1998),” (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/9812046 [gr-qc]

    2008 arXiv

  18. [26]

    C.A.ClarksonandR.K.Barrett,ClassicalandQuantum Gravity 20, 3855–3884 (2003)

    2003

  19. [27]

    Betschart and C

    G. Betschart and C. A. Clarkson, Classical and Quantum Gravity 21, 5587–5607 (2004)

    2004

  20. [28]

    Clarkson, Physical Review D 76 (2007), 10.1103/physrevd.76.104034

    C. Clarkson, Physical Review D 76 (2007), 10.1103/physrevd.76.104034

    2007 doi

  21. [29]

    Carloni and D

    S. Carloni and D. Vernieri, Phys. Rev. D 97, 124056 (2018)

    2018

  22. [30]

    Carloni and D

    S. Carloni and D. Vernieri, Phys. Rev. D 97, 124057 (2018), arXiv:1709.03996 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  23. [31]

    R. M. Wald, General Relativity (The University of Chicago Press, 1984)

    1984

  24. [32]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 1973)

    1973

  25. [33]

    Luz and S

    P. Luz and S. Carloni, Physical Review D100 (2019), 10.1103/physrevd.100.084037

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    A primer on energy conditions,

    E. Curiel, “A primer on energy conditions,” inTowards a Theory of Spacetime Theories(Springer New York, 2017) p. 43–104

    2017

  27. [35]

    Kobayashi and K

    S. Kobayashi and K. Nomizu,Foundations of differential geometry. I, Intersci. Tracts Pure Appl. Math., Vol. 15 (Interscience Publishers, New York, NY, 1963)

    1963

  28. [36]

    61,012502(2020), arXiv:1909.00018 [gr-qc]

    P.LuzandF.C.Mena,J.Math.Phys. 61,012502(2020), arXiv:1909.00018 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    van de Venn, U

    A. van de Venn, U. Agarwal, and D. Vasak, Physical Review D110 (2024), 10.1103/physrevd.110.064082

    2024 doi

  30. [38]

    M. P. Dabrowski, T. Stachowiak, and M. Szydlowski, Phys. Rev. D68, 103519 (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0307128

    2003 arXiv

  31. [39]

    K. J. Ludwick, Modern Physics Letters A32, 1730025 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    N. F. Naidu, S. Carloni, and P. Dunsby, Phys. Rev. D 106, 124023 (2022), arXiv:2210.06867 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    P. S. Florides, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A337, 529 (1974)

    1974

  34. [42]

    J. L. Rosa and S. Carloni, Physical Review D109 (2024), 10.1103/physrevd.109.104037

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    Luz and S

    P. Luz and S. Carloni, Classical and Quantum Gravity 41, 235012 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Luz and S

    P. Luz and S. Carloni, Phys. Rev. D110, 084055 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Luz and S

    P. Luz and S. Carloni, Phys. Rev. D110, 084054 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.