Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Volume-Distance-Ratio Asymptote and Spacetime Inextendibility

T0 review · 3 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 proves that a volume-to-distance mismatch near a singularity rules out strongly causal spacetime extensions.

desk verdict New VDR-based C0 inextendibility criteria are worth taking seriously; the C0,1 extension criterion rests on an unstated geodesic-regularity assumption and needs an added hypothesis or a different proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.23097 v4 pith:I3EAGIBY submitted 2025-07-30 gr-qc math-phmath.DGmath.MP

Pengyu Le This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcmath-phmath.DGmath.MP MSC 83C7553C50 PACS 04.20.Dw04.20.-q
keywords spacetimeinextendibilityvolume-distanceratiochronologicaldiamondslow-regularityLorentziangeometrystrongcosmiccensorshipMisnerFLRWspacetimesnakedsingularities
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 aims to establish a local geometric test for when a singular spacetime cannot be extended through a future boundary point. The test is built from the volume-distance ratio (VDR) of tiny chronological diamonds: in a globally hyperbolic spacetime whose metric is only continuous or Lipschitz, that ratio must tend to the same constant value it takes in Minkowski spacetime as the diamond shrinks. If, approaching a boundary point, the ratio fails to tend to that value, then no local strongly causal extension of the allowed low-regularity class can exist. The paper applies the criterion to prove inextendibility for the two-dimensional Misner quotient, for spatially flat FLRW spacetimes with linear scale factor near the singularity, and for a family of spherically symmetric self-similar naked singularities.

What carries the argument

The volume-distance ratio $\mathrm{VDR} = V/d^{n+1}$ is the central object: $V$ is the volume of a chronological diamond $I(p,q)$ and $d$ is the Lorentz distance between its vertices, with the target value $2\omega_n/(n+1)(1/2)^{n+1}$ being the value for a Minkowski diamond. The mechanism has two parts. First, Propositions 5.5 and 5.6 show that the VDR asymptote equals the Minkowski value in $C^0$ and $C^{0,1}$ globally hyperbolic spacetimes. Second, local null-non-accumulation for $C^0$ extensions, or $C^{0,1}$ regularity itself for $C^{0,1}$ extensions via Proposition 4.26, guarantees that the extension preserves small chronological diamonds and maps their pasts onto the original spacetime, so the original VDR limit must match the extension's. A mismatch then proves inextendibility.

What would settle it

Exhibit any spacetime with a local $C^{0,1}$ strongly-causal extension, or a locally null-non-accumulating $C^0$ strongly-causal extension, in which a future-exhausting geodesic sequence has $V_k/d_k^{n+1}$ not converging to $2\omega_n/(n+1)(1/2)^{n+1}$; that single example would refute the corresponding criterion. A direct first test would be a numerical computation of the VDR for the spatially spherical FLRW example inside a candidate smooth extension, where the predicted limit must hold if the theorem is correct.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that volume-distance asymptotics are universal enough to serve as an inextendibility detector in low regularity. In $C^0$ globally hyperbolic spacetimes, for a sequence converging from a timelike direction, $V_k/d_k^{n+1}$ converges to $2\omega_n/(n+1)(1/2)^{n+1}$; the same limit holds in $C^{0,1}$ spacetimes along chronological geodesics that satisfy the geodesic equation up to the boundary. The paper introduces local null-non-accumulation, the property that the extension's boundary point is not an accumulation point of the image of any future horismos, and shows that this property implies the extension preserves chronological diamonds and is locally past-chronological-diamond-surjective. Those two properties transfer the original spacetime's VDR asymptote to the extension, so a mismatch with the Minkowski value forces a contradiction. Consequently, failure of the VDR limit is an obstruction to extension, and the paper shows the obstruction is sharp enough to handle known examples including Misner spacetime, linear-scale-factor FLRW models, and self-similar naked singularities.

Load-bearing premise

The $C^{0,1}$ inextendibility criterion rests on the assumption that a timelike geodesic approaching the boundary remains differentiable enough to satisfy the geodesic equation and to reach the boundary with a well-defined timelike tangent; a merely Lipschitz metric does not by itself guarantee that structural input.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central criterion is correct, any spacetime whose chronological diamonds near a future boundary have a volume-distance ratio away from $2\omega_n/(n+1)(1/2)^{n+1}$ cannot be extended by a local $C^0$ locally null-non-accumulating strongly-causal extension.
  • The two-dimensional Misner spacetime is $C^0$ strongly-causal inextendible at its future boundary point.
  • Spatially flat FLRW spacetimes with scale factor $a(t) \sim |t|$ are $C^0$ locally null-non-accumulating strongly-causal inextendible at the future timelike boundary, which by time reversal covers the corresponding big-bang case.
  • The self-similar spherically symmetric naked-singularity spacetimes from scalar-field collapse with parameter $0<k<1$ admit no local $C^{0,1}$ strongly-causal extension at the scaling origin.
  • For $C^{0,1}$ extensions, local null-non-accumulation is automatic, so the volume-distance mismatch criterion applies to all $C^{0,1}$ strongly-causal extensions, not only those satisfying an extra structural condition.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same mismatch idea should be testable under weaker causality conditions such as past-distinguishing, and the Misner example already hints that the obstruction can survive beyond strong causality; extending the machinery in that direction is a natural next step.
  • Because the naked-singularity proof works through a uniform volume-form comparison with Minkowski spacetime, a similar comparison inequality could serve as an analytic or numerical check in other self-similar collapse solutions.
  • A direct generalization would replace the axis geodesic in the $C^{0,1}$ criterion by a merely maximizing causal curve, using the already-cited $C^{1,1}$ parametrization results, thereby relaxing the regularity demanded of the exhausting curve.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the volume-distance-ratio (VDR) of chronological diamonds and proves that in C^0 and C^{0,1} globally hyperbolic spacetimes the VDR of small diamonds approaches the Minkowski value under suitable hypotheses. It then formulates inextendibility criteria: if the VDR of diamonds exhausting a future boundary point does not approach the Minkowski value, the spacetime admits no strongly-causal extension of a specified regularity. Applications are given to Misner spacetime, spatially flat FLRW spacetimes with a(t) ~ |t|, and Christodoulou's class of spherically symmetric self-similar naked singularity spacetimes.

Significance. The VDR asymptote is derived from local flatness without free parameters or fitting, so it provides a genuinely geometric obstruction that is independent of curvature estimates. The local null-non-accumulation condition is a new structural property of extensions and is used to isolate exactly when the VDR criterion applies. The C^0 criterion is proved in a largely self-contained way, and the applications to Misner and FLRW are concrete and checkable. If fully justified, the C^{0,1} criterion would be a substantial addition to low-regularity inextendibility results, complementing the holonomy and curvature-blow-up approaches in the literature.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.7, Proposition 4.26; Theorem 6.2] The proof of Proposition 4.26 applies Lemma 4.25 to γ̃ = φ∘γ, but it never verifies the hypotheses of Lemma 4.25 for γ̃. Lemma 4.25 requires γ̃ to satisfy the classical geodesic equation with respect to the extension metric and requires the derivatives d g̃_{μν} to exist along γ̃. Because φ is a smooth embedding between manifolds of equal dimension, φ(M) is open in M̃ and φ is a local isometry, which implies that γ̃ is indeed a g̃-geodesic and that g̃ is smooth along γ̃; however, this argument is not given and is essential. The theorem as written depends on this unstated fact, and Theorem 6.2 and its application in Theorem 8.5 inherit the dependency. Please either supply the missing justification explicitly or state that the C^{0,1} criterion applies only to extensions that are geodesic-regular along the image of γ.
  2. [§6.3, Theorem 6.3] The proof of the Misner application asserts that the VDR of I(p,o) is strictly smaller than the Minkowski value 1/2, but no computation or argument is provided. The strict inequality is the entire content of the application, since Theorem 6.1 only yields inextendibility when the VDR fails to converge to the Minkowski value. A proof of this strict inequality, or a precise reference, is needed before the application can be considered established.
  3. [§6.1, proof of Theorem 6.1] In the proof, the step 'by Proposition 4.5' appears to be a citation error; the intended result is the VDR asymptote of Proposition 5.5. Moreover, Proposition 5.5 is stated for diamonds I(p,q_k) with q_k converging to p from the future, whereas the diamonds in Theorem 6.1 have the boundary point q̂ as the upper vertex and the lower vertex q'_k approaching q̂ from the past. The proof needs either a past-directed version of Proposition 5.5 or an explicit time-reversal argument to justify applying the Minkowski asymptote in this setting.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; §5.3] The abstract states that in C^{0,1} spacetimes the VDR converges to the Minkowski value, but Proposition 5.6 shows this only under an additional geodesic-regularity hypothesis (existence of Christoffel symbols along the curve). The abstract should be qualified to match the theorem.
  2. [§2.1, Definition 2.2] In the definition of D±(V), 'interests' should be 'intersects'.
  3. [§5.3, Proposition 5.6(a)] The proof invokes [LLS21, Theorem 1.1] to obtain a C^{1,1} parameterization, but then writes 'take t to be the arc-length parameter so that |γ'| = 1'; it should be made clear that this holds for that parameterization.
  4. [§6.2, Theorem 6.2] The statement is grammatically an 'if' clause without a 'then'; consider rephrasing as 'If there exists ... then no local C^{0,1} strongly-causal extension exists.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the VDR Minkowski asymptote is derived from local flatness and then used as an external benchmark, so the inextendibility criteria are not equivalent to their inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Proposition 5.5 and Proposition 5.6 derive the Minkowski VDR constant 2ω_n/(n+1)(1/2)^{n+1} directly from δ-simple coordinates and the distance and volume estimates in Lemmas 5.3 and 5.4; no fitted parameter or normalization is chosen to reproduce the target value. The C0 criterion in Theorem 6.1 compares boundary VDR values against this fixed constant, using local null-non-accumulation only to establish chronological-diamond preservation and past-chronological-diamond surjection, not to impose the VDR asymptote by definition. The C^{0,1} criterion in Theorem 6.2 likewise obtains null-non-accumulation from Proposition 4.26; when Lemma 4.25 is applied to φ∘γ, the hypotheses are satisfied along the embedded image because the extension metric is smooth on φ(M), so any concern about the existence of dg_{μν} along γ is a regularity-gap correctness issue rather than a circularity. The applications to Misner spacetime, spatially flat FLRW spacetimes, and Christodoulou's naked singularity spacetimes compute VDRs by independent volume comparisons and compare them with the same fixed Minkowski benchmark. The only self-citation, [Le23], concerns causal diamonds and isoperimetric problems and is not load-bearing in the main proof. The paper is therefore not circular; the reader's score of 0 is confirmed.

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

The central claims rest on standard causality theory for continuous metrics and on a regularity assumption for geodesics in C0,1 extensions. No free parameters are fitted, and no new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)
  • standard math Standard causality theory for C0 spacetimes: global hyperbolicity implies strong causality, local causal convexity, and compactness of causal diamonds (see [Sä16], [GKSS20]).
    Used in Proposition 5.5 (the by-global-hyperbolicity step) and throughout Sections 3 and 4 to control causal diamonds and extensions.
  • domain assumption Existence of future-directed chronological geodesics satisfying the geodesic equation with Christoffel symbols existing along the curve, and the extension lemma (Lemma 4.25) that such geodesics are Lipschitz-differentiable at the boundary point in C0,1 extensions.
    Required by Proposition 4.26 and Theorem 6.2 to ensure C0,1 strongly-causal extensions are null-non-accumulating.
  • standard math The future-boundary construction via terminal indecomposable past sets (TIFs) and the definition of distance d(p,\hat q) as a supremum over exhausting sequences (following Geroch-Kronheimer-Penrose).
    Basis for Definitions 3.1 and 3.4 and for the notion of exhausting \hat q used in the inextendibility criteria.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Volume-Distance-Ratio Asymptote and Spacetime Inextendibility." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I3EAGIBY

@misc{pith2026250723097,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Volume-Distance-Ratio Asymptote and Spacetime Inextendibility},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I3EAGIBY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.23097}
}
abstract

This paper develops geometric criteria for determining the inextendibility of spacetimes near singularities based on asymptotic analysis of volume-distance relationships. We introduce and analyze the asymptotic behavior of the volume-distance-ratio (VDR), defined as the ratio of volumes of small chronological diamonds to appropriate powers of distances between their vertices. In $\mathrm{C}^0$ and $\mathrm{C}^{0,1}$ spacetimes (which are weaker than the classical $\mathrm{C}^2$ regularity), we prove that VDR converges to the Minkowski value as chronological diamonds approach accumulation points. The central contribution is the establishment of inextendibility criteria showing that failure of VDR convergence to the Minkowski value implies inextendibility of the spacetime. These criteria apply to spacetime extensions satisfying $\mathrm{C}^0$ locally null-non-accumulating strongly-causal conditions and $\mathrm{C}^{0,1}$ strongly-causal conditions, where the local null-non-accumulation condition is introduced as a fundamental structural property ensuring the validity of VDR-based inextendibility criteria. Concrete applications demonstrate the power and scope of these methods. We prove that $2$-dimensional Misner spacetime is $\mathrm{C}^0$ strongly-causal inextendible and that spatially flat FLRW spacetimes with linear scale factor behavior are $\mathrm{C}^0$ locally null-non-accumulating strongly-causal inextendible. Furthermore, we establish $\mathrm{C}^{0,1}$ strongly-causal inextendibility for Christodoulou's class of spherically symmetric self-similar naked singularity spacetimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.23097 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Inclusions of cones 4.2 Null cut locus and future horismos Definition 4.3. Let (M, g) be a spacetime. For p ≺ q ∈ M, define Ωp,q as the set of all future-directed causal curves from p to q. The Lorentz distance d(p, q) is given by d(p, q) = sup γ∈Ωp,q {L[γ]}, where L[γ] = R I p −g( ˙γ, γ˙)dt is the length of γ : I → M. Definition 4.4 (Future horismos, null cut locus). Let (M, g) be a C 2 globally hyperbolic spacetim… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Coordinate future timelike cone of hyperbolic angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Interior instability of naked singularities of a scalar field

    gr-qc 2025-08 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    Nonlinear interior perturbations below a regularity threshold make k-self-similar scalar-field naked singularities collapse into trapped surfaces and black holes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    An, Xinliang: Naked singularity censoring with anisotropic apparent horizon. Ann. of Math. (2) 201 (2025), no. 3, 775–908

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Acta Math

    Choquet-Bruhat, Yvonne: Th\'eor\`eme d'existence pour certains syst\`emes d'\'equations aux d\'eriv\'ees partielles non lin\'eaires. Acta Math. 88 (1952), 141–225

    work page 1952

  3. [3]

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: The formation of black holes and singularities in spherically symmetric gravitational collapse. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 44 (1991), no. 3, 339–373

    work page 1991

  4. [4]

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: Bounded variation solutions of the spherically symmetric Einstein-scalar field equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 46 (1993), no. 8, 1131–1220

    work page 1993

  5. [5]

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: Examples of naked singularity formation in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field. Ann. of Math. (2) 140 (1994), no. 3, 607–653

    work page 1994

  6. [6]

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: The instability of naked singularities in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field. Ann. of Math. (2) 149 (1999), no. 1, 183–217

    work page 1999

  7. [7]

    Classical Quantum Gravity 16 (1999), no

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: On the global initial value problem and the issue of singularities. Classical Quantum Gravity 16 (1999), no. 12A, A23–A35

    work page 1999

  8. [8]

    EMS Monographs in Mathematics

    Christodoulou, Demetrios: The formation of black holes in general relativity. EMS Monographs in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z\"urich, 2009. x+589 pp

    work page 2009

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    E.: On Lorentzian causality with continuous metrics

    Chru\'sciel, Piotr T.; Grant, James D. E.: On Lorentzian causality with continuous metrics. Classical Quantum Gravity 29 (2012), no. 14, 145001, 32 pp

    2012

  2. [10]

    Dafermos, Mihalis: Stability and instability of the Cauchy horizon for the spherically symmetric Einstein-Maxwell-scalar field equations. Ann. of Math. (2) 158 (2003), no. 3, 875–928

    2003

  3. [11]

    arXiv:1710.01722 [gr-qc] (2017)

    Dafermos, Mihalis; Luk, Jonathan: The interior of dynamical vacuum black holes I: The C^0 -stability of the Kerr Cauchy horizon. arXiv:1710.01722 [gr-qc] (2017). To appear in Ann. of Math

    2017

  4. [12]

    Fathi, Albert; Siconolfi, Antonio: On smooth time functions. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 152 (2012), no. 2, 303–339

    2012

  5. [13]

    Galloway, Gregory J.; Ling, Eric: Some remarks on the C^0 -(in)extendibility of spacetimes. Ann. Henri Poincar\'e 18 (2017), no. 10, 3427–3447

    2017

  6. [14]

    Galloway, Gregory J.; Ling, Eric; Sbierski, Jan: Timelike completeness as an obstruction to C^0 -extensions. Comm. Math. Phys. 359 (2018), no. 3, 937–949

    2018

  7. [15]

    W.; Solodukhin, S

    Gibbons, G. W.; Solodukhin, S. N.: The geometry of small causal diamonds. Phys. Lett. B 649 (2007), no. 4, 317–324

    2007

  8. [16]

    Graf, Melanie: Singularity theorems for C^1 -Lorentzian metrics. Comm. Math. Phys. 378 (2020), no. 2, 1417–1450

    2020

  9. [17]

    E.; Kunzinger, Michael; Steinbauer, Roland: The Hawking-Penrose singularity theorem for C^ 1,1 -Lorentzian metrics

    Graf, Melanie; Grant, James D. E.; Kunzinger, Michael; Steinbauer, Roland: The Hawking-Penrose singularity theorem for C^ 1,1 -Lorentzian metrics. Comm. Math. Phys. 360 (2018), no. 3, 1009–1042

    2018

  10. [18]

    Classical Quantum Gravity 35 (2018), no

    Graf, Melanie; Ling, Eric: Maximizers in Lipschitz spacetimes are either timelike or null. Classical Quantum Gravity 35 (2018), no. 8, 087001, 6 pp

    2018

  11. [19]

    E.; Kunzinger, Michael; S\"amann, Clemens Inextendibility of spacetimes and Lorentzian length spaces

    Grant, James D. E.; Kunzinger, Michael; S\"amann, Clemens Inextendibility of spacetimes and Lorentzian length spaces. Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 55 (2019), no. 1, 133–147

    2019

  12. [20]

    Classical Quantum Gravity 34 (2017), no

    Jubb, Ian: The geometry of small causal cones. Classical Quantum Gravity 34 (2017), no. 9, 094005, 20 pp

    2017

  13. [21]

    Klainerman, Sergiu; Rodnianski, Igor: On the breakdown criterion in general relativity. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 23 (2010), no. 2, 345–382

    2010

  14. [22]

    Klainerman, Sergiu; Rodnianski, Igor; Szeftel, Jeremie: The bounded L^2 curvature conjecture. Invent. Math. 202 (2015), no. 1, 91–216

    2015

  15. [23]

    Kunzinger, Michael; Ohanyan, Argam; Schinnerl, Benedict; Steinbauer, Roland The Hawking-Penrose singularity theorem for C^1 -Lorentzian metrics. Comm. Math. Phys. 391 (2022), no. 3, 1143–1179

    2022

  16. [24]

    Classical Quantum Gravity 32 (2015), no

    Kunzinger, Michael; Steinbauer, Roland; Vickers, James A.: The Penrose singularity theorem in regularity C^ 1,1 . Classical Quantum Gravity 32 (2015), no. 15, 155010, 12 pp

    2015

  17. [25]

    Hawking's singularity theorem for C^ 1,1 -metrics

    Kunzinger, Michael; Steinbauer, Roland; Stojkovi\'c, Milena; Vickers, James A. Hawking's singularity theorem for C^ 1,1 -metrics. Classical Quantum Gravity 32 (2015), no. 7, 075012, 19 pp

    2015

  18. [26]

    Lange, Christian; Lytchak, Alexander; S\"amann, Clemens Lorentz meets Lipschitz. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 25 (2021), no. 8, 2141–2170

    2021

  19. [27]

    Li, Junbin; Liu, Jue: A robust proof of the instability of naked singularities of a scalar field in spherical symmetry. Comm. Math. Phys. 363 (2018), no. 2, 561–578

    2018

  20. [28]

    Li, Junbin; Liu, Jue: Instability of spherical naked singularities of a scalar field under gravitational perturbations. J. Differential Geom. 120 (2022), no. 1, 97–197

    2022

  21. [29]

    Ling, Eric: The big bang is a coordinate singularity for k=-1 inflationary FLRW spacetimes. Found. Phys. 50 (2020), no. 5, 385–428

    2020

  22. [30]

    arXiv:2404.08257 [gr-qc] (2024)

    Ling, Eric: The C^0 -inextendibility of some spatially flat FLRW spacetimes. arXiv:2404.08257 [gr-qc] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Luk, Jonathan: Weak null singularities in general relativity. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 31 (2018), no. 1, 1–63

    2018

  24. [32]

    The interior of the black hole region

    Luk, Jonathan; Oh, Sung-Jin: Strong cosmic censorship in spherical symmetry for two-ended asymptotically flat initial data I. The interior of the black hole region. Ann. of Math. (2) 190 (2019), no. 1, 1–111

    2019

  25. [33]

    Luk, Jonathan; Oh, Sung-Jin: Strong cosmic censorship in spherical symmetry for two-ended asymptotically flat initial data II: the exterior of the black hole region. Ann. PDE 5 (2019), no. 1, Paper No. 6, 194 pp

    2019

  26. [34]

    arXiv:2408.05257 [gr-qc] (2024)

    Miethke, Benedikt: C^0 -inextendibility of the Kasner spacetime. arXiv:2408.05257 [gr-qc] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Minguzzi, Ettore: Causality theory for closed cone structures with applications. Rev. Math. Phys. 31 (2019), no. 5, 1930001, 139 pp

    2019

  28. [36]

    Global Anal

    Minguzzi, E.; Suhr, S.: Some regularity results for Lorentz-Finsler spaces.(English summary) Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 56 (2019), no. 3, 597–611

    2019

  29. [37]

    CERN preprint Report No

    Myrheim Jan: Statistical geometry. CERN preprint Report No. CERN-TH-2538, 1978, 13pp

    1978

  30. [38]

    General relativity

    Penrose, Roger: Singularities and time-asymmetry. General relativity. An Einstein centenary survey. Edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge-New York, 1979, 581–638

    1979

  31. [39]

    S\"amann, Clemens: Global hyperbolicity for spacetimes with continuous metrics. Ann. Henri Poincar\'e 17 (2016), no. 6, 1429–1455

    2016

  32. [40]

    Sbierski, Jan: The C^0 -inextendibility of the Schwarzschild spacetime and the spacelike diameter in Lorentzian geometry. J. Differential Geom. 108 (2018), no. 2, 319–378

    2018

  33. [41]

    Sbierski, Jan: On the proof of the C^0 -inextendibility of the Schwarzschild spacetime. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 968 (2018), 012012, 16 pp

    2018

  34. [42]

    Duke Math

    Sbierski, Jan: On holonomy singularities in general relativity and the C^ 0,1 _ loc -inextendibility of space-times. Duke Math. J. 171 (2022), no. 14, 2881–2942

    2022

  35. [43]

    arXiv:2312.07443 [gr-qc] (2023)

    Sbierski, Jan: The C^0 -inextendibility of a class of FLRW spacetimes. arXiv:2312.07443 [gr-qc] (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    arXiv:2409.18838 [gr-qc] (2023)

    Sbierski, Jan: Lipschitz inextendibility of weak null singularities from curvature blow-up. arXiv:2409.18838 [gr-qc] (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Wang, Jinzhao: Geometry of small causal diamonds. Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 6, 064020, 14 pp

    2019

  38. [46]

    Wang, Qian: Improved breakdown criterion for Einstein vacuum equations in CMC gauge. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 65 (2012), no. 1, 21–76

    2012

Pith tools

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