Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 102 references

The Blandford-Znajek power from a slowly spinning black hole is universal across a wide class of spacetimes, while at high spin it depends on the spacetime parameters, offering a possible test of the Kerr hypothesis through jet-power measur

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 20:22 UTC pith:XLNQKXPU

load-bearing objection Solid formal extension of BZ power to generic spacetimes; high-spin discrimination claim outruns the expansion. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2602.23417 v2 pith:XLNQKXPU submitted 2026-02-26 gr-qc astro-ph.HEhep-th

Universality of the Blandford-Znajek emission in stationary and axisymmetric spacetimes

Filippo Camilloni , Luciano Rezzolla This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.HEhep-th PACS 04.70.-s
keywords Blandford-Znajek mechanismforce-free electrodynamicsjet powerblack-hole spacetime parameterizationKonoplya-Rezzolla-Zhidenko metricsplit-monopole magnetosphereKerr hypothesisblack-hole spin
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper asks whether the power of the jets that black holes launch—the Blandford-Znajek luminosity—can reveal the spacetime around the black hole, or whether it is the same for every theory of gravity. Working with a generic parameterization of stationary, axisymmetric black-hole spacetimes, the authors show that at lowest order the jet power is exactly universal: it scales as the square of the black hole's angular velocity with a coefficient independent of the spacetime. At next order, spacetime-dependent corrections appear, so two black holes spinning at the same high angular velocity can launch jets whose powers differ by tens of percent. The practical consequence is that measuring jet power from slowly rotating black holes cannot test gravity, while the same measurement for rapidly rotating black holes, combined with an independent spin measurement, could.

Core claim

The central result is a closed expression for the Blandford-Znajek power emitted by a split-monopole magnetosphere in any horizon-penetrating Konoplya-Rezzolla-Zhidenko spacetime, expanded to sixth order in the horizon angular velocity. The leading term has a coefficient that does not depend on any spacetime deformation parameter and matches the classic Blandford-Znajek result; all dependence on the spacetime is carried by the next-order coefficients, which involve the horizon values of two radial functions. When the deformation parameters vanish, the expression reduces to the known Kerr result. The paper reads this as evidence that the leading-order quadratic scaling is universal across sta

What carries the argument

The machinery is the split-monopole magnetosphere: a magnetic-field configuration pointing radially outward on one hemisphere and inward on the other, separated by an equatorial current sheet. The paper shows that this configuration solves the static Grad-Shafranov equation in every HP-KRZ spacetime, so it serves as the zeroth-order solution for a perturbative expansion in the black-hole spin. The force-free electrodynamics equations reduce to a radial problem whose solutions, computed numerically via a shooting method and fitted by polynomials in the deformation parameters, feed directly into the luminosity formula.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the assumption that the split-monopole field arrangement, which provably solves the static force-free equation in any HP-KRZ spacetime, is the topology that real magnetospheres adopt; if a different field geometry becomes favored in non-Kerr spacetimes, the universal leading-order scaling need not hold.

What would settle it

Run a fully nonlinear force-free simulation of a rapidly spinning HP-KRZ black hole (MΩh ≳ 0.3, with non-zero ϱ or a1) and measure the extracted power; if the scaling with Ωh deviates from the paper's Eq. (56) by more than the quoted perturbative error, or the low-spin coefficient is not (2/3)πΨh², the universality claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Slowly rotating black holes of different types are indistinguishable by jet power alone; any measured jet power consistent with the quadratic scaling is consistent with all spacetimes in the KRZ class.
  • For horizon angular velocities above about 0.3 times the inverse mass, different spacetimes produce 20–30% differences in jet power, so a jet that is anomalously bright or dim relative to the Kerr prediction could flag deviations from general relativity.
  • The expressions provide the first analytic, theory-agnostic catalog of BZ jet-power curves, with the high-spin factor given as simple polynomial fits in the three main deformation parameters.
  • Independent measurements of the black-hole angular velocity are required to exploit this; without them, the degeneracy between spin and spacetime parameters cannot be broken.
  • The result can be tested and extended by fully nonlinear force-free or GRMHD simulations in the same parameterized spacetimes, and by higher-order analytic expansions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the split-monopole topology is not the one realized in real magnetospheres for non-Kerr spacetimes, the universality of the leading-order coefficient may fail; the paper itself lists this as its first limitation.
  • The sixth-order truncation is likely to be inaccurate near extremal spin, exactly the regime where the discrimination claim is most interesting; higher-order or non-polynomial corrections could alter the predicted deviations.
  • One could reverse the logic: for a black hole whose spin is measured independently, a jet-power measurement that matches the universal curve would tighten constraints on strong-field deviations, complementing horizon-scale imaging tests.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies the Blandford-Znajek power for force-free split-monopole magnetospheres around stationary, axisymmetric black holes described by the horizon-penetrating Konoplya-Rezzolla-Zhidenko metric restricted to the three deformation parameters (ϱ, a1, b1). The authors solve the Grad-Shafranov equation perturbatively in the spin parameter, derive the horizon angular velocity, and obtain Eq. (56): P_BZ = (2/3)π Ψ_h² Ω_h² [1 + O(Ω_h²) + O(Ω_h⁴)] + O(Ω_h⁷), where the leading coefficient is spacetime-independent and the next-to-leading terms depend on KRZ parameters through horizon quantities R^h_22, R^h_42, and R'^h_22. They compute these quantities with a Frobenius/shooting method and provide quadratic analytic fits. The main claimed implications are that slowly rotating black holes are degenerate in jet power, whereas rapidly rotating black holes can be discriminated at the 20–30% level. The paper also classifies sub-/quasi-/super-Kerr behaviors and quantifies spacetime deviations via the Kretschmann scalar.

Significance. If Eq. (56) and the parameter fits are correct, this is a useful theory-agnostic extension of the BZ mechanism and the first analytic demonstration that the leading-order BZ scaling is universal across a parametric family of non-Kerr metrics. The construction is transparent and internally well tested: the perturbative scheme is clearly laid out, the Kerr limit is recovered to ~10⁻¹⁷ in Eqs. (A9)–(A10), and the parameter-space constraints in Sec. II are a useful byproduct. The proposed use of jet power to discriminate Kerr from non-Kerr spacetimes at high spin is conceptually interesting and falsifiable. However, as discussed below, the quantitative discrimination claim currently overreaches because it is made in a regime where the perturbative truncation is uncontrolled.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV.A, Conclusion] The discrimination claim is made in a regime where the expansion parameter is not small. Eq. (56) is an expansion through O(Ω_h⁶); Fig. 4 highlights 20–30% differences for 2MΩ_h ≳ 0.6, which for Kerr corresponds to a_* ≈ 0.88, and the super-Kerr curves extend past 2MΩ_h = 1. At these values a_*⁴ ≈ 0.6, so omitted terms are not parametrically suppressed. Using the stated coefficients in Eq. (61) with ϱ = 0.03, the M⁴Ω_h⁴ term contributes about −11% at Ω_h = 0.3/M; the omitted O(Ω_h⁶) and non-polynomial terms (known for Kerr in Ref. [39]) could plausibly shift the curves by as much as the claimed inter-spacetime separation. The Conclusion's admission that the expression 'may be not very accurate when the BH spin approaches the extreme value a_* = 1' applies precisely to the regime used for the headline claim. I recommend adding a quantitative convergence check — e.g., comparing O(Ω²), O(Ω⁴
  2. [Sec. IV.A, Conclusion] The physical applicability of the result rests on the split-monopole topology, and the paper explicitly lists this as limitation #1. The split-monopole field is shown to solve the static Grad-Shafranov equation in any HP-KRZ background, but the dynamical question of which topology is realized around rapidly rotating non-Kerr black holes is not addressed; the simulations cited in support of split-monopole formation, Refs. [94,95], are general-relativistic. This is a legitimate premise for the formal result, but it should be carried explicitly into the abstract and Fig. 4: the statement that jet-power measurements of rapidly rotating BHs 'have the potential' to constrain spacetime is conditional on this topology being realized in non-Kerr magnetospheres, not just on the algebraic existence of the solution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (34)] The text says the expression is restricted 'to an expression at order O(Ω_h⁶)' but writes the remainder as O(Ω_h⁵). Please make the bookkeeping of the truncation order consistent.
  2. [Fig. 2] The legend labels such as 'a1 = 1' are easy to confuse with the spin parameter a_*. Please use a distinct notation in the legend or caption.
  3. [Sec. V.B, Eqs. (A11)–(A16)] The statement that the analytic approximations 'differ from the numerical ones at most by 5%' is not quantified in the text. Please report the fit residuals or the maximum deviation over the stated range.
  4. [Throughout] Minor language issues: 'for his importance' in the Introduction, 'a auniversal' in the Conclusion, and 'can be to used' in Sec. V/Conclusion should be corrected.
  5. [Abstract] The abstract says 'generic black-hole spacetimes', but the derivation is restricted to the three-parameter HP-KRZ subspace and to split-monopole topology. Please specify these restrictions in the abstract.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; Eq. (56) is a genuine perturbative output, not a fit or self-citation-derived statement.

full rationale

The central result Eq. (56) is obtained by solving the force-free Grad-Shafranov equation order by order in the KRZ background. The split-monopole seed (51) is an explicit boundary condition, not a fitted target; the leading-order universality and the O(Omega_h^4) dependence on (rho, a1, b1) are outputs of the Znajek conditions and the perturbative equations, not inputs. The only numerical fitting in the paper (App. A, Eqs. A11-A16) is of the intermediate horizon coefficients R^h_22 and R^h_42, which are then used in Eq. (56); the BZ luminosity itself is never fitted to data. The Kerr limit is sanity-checked against the independent, parameter-free analytic values of Refs. [38,39]; even though [39] shares an author, it is not a load-bearing uniqueness claim and is verified to ~10^-17 in Eqs. (A9)-(A10). The adoption of the KRZ metric is an explicit model choice, not an ansatz smuggled in to force the result. The paper's own stated limitations (split-monopole topology, O(Omega_h^6) truncation near a_*=1) are validity/risk concerns and do not make the derivation circular. Hence no reduction of the derived prediction to its inputs is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on four kinds of input: (i) the KRZ metric ansatz with coefficients (ϱ,a1,b1), scanned by hand over admissible ranges; (ii) the constant horizon flux Ψ_h normalizing the power; (iii) the Kerr high-spin coefficients α≈1.38, β≈−11.25 imported from independent prior derivations and reproduced as the ϱ,a1,b1→0 limit; (iv) quadratic polynomial fits (A11)–(A16) to shooting-method values of R_22^h and R_42^h, which carry the claimed spacetime dependence into f_KRZ. The fit coefficients are the only numbers genuinely 'pulled' by this paper, and they approximate intermediate quantities rather than the final luminosity. No new physical entities (particles, fields, forces) are introduced; the 'GR-exclusion zone' is a parameter-space region, and Δ% is a diagnostic definition, not an entity.

free parameters (4)
  • Kerr high-spin coefficients α, β = α ≈ 1.38 (Tanabe & Nagataki 2008), β ≈ −11.25 (Camilloni et al. 2022)
    Anchor the Kerr limit of f_KRZ in Eqs. (58)–(60); adopted from independent prior derivations rather than derived here. Not tuned in this paper, but they set the baseline from which KRZ deviations are measured.
  • Polynomial fit coefficients for R_22^h and R_42^h = Eqs. (A11)–(A16), e.g., R_22^h(ϱ) ≈ R_22^h(0) + 0.647ϱ + 1.458ϱ²
    Fitted to shooting-method data over ϱ, a1, b1 ∈ [−0.1, 0.1]; these carry the claimed spacetime dependence into f_KRZ via Eqs. (58)–(60). The 5% accuracy statement is global, with no per-parameter error analysis.
  • KRZ deformation parameters ϱ, a1, b1 = Scanned ranges; analytic fits restricted to [−0.1, 0.1]
    Define the spacetime family; 'different spacetimes' in the central claim are choices of these parameters. Their admissible values are bounded by the horizon conditions in Sec. II (Fig. 1).
  • Horizon magnetic flux Ψ_h = Held constant in the perturbative construction (Sec. IV.A)
    Normalization of the split-monopole; standard external input in BZ calculations. The universal leading coefficient 2/3π is stated per unit Ψ_h², so Ψ_h must come from accretion modeling.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Force-free electrodynamics governs the magnetosphere (T_em ≫ T_mat, F^μν J_ν = 0)
    Sec. III; the entire BZ machinery requires the plasma to be dynamically passive and the electric field screened. This is standard in the BZ program but is a physical assumption about the environment.
  • domain assumption Stationary, axisymmetric, reflection-symmetric magnetosphere with the degenerate 2-form Faraday tensor (22)
    Sec. III.A; restricts to aligned, time-independent configurations and excludes time-dependent or non-axisymmetric field evolution.
  • domain assumption Low-spin perturbative ansatz (35): Ψ ~ O(a_*⁰), Ω_f, I ~ O(a_*)
    Sec. IV; the expansion in a_* is the skeleton of the derivation. No convergence proof is given; the paper relies on the structure matching the known Kerr case.
  • domain assumption Split-monopole is the leading-order magnetosphere (Eq. 51) and is the physically relevant topology
    Sec. IV.A; universality of κ = 1/6π is demonstrated for this topology. Its astrophysical relevance rests on GR simulations [94,95], which are not reproduced for non-Kerr spacetimes. The paper lists this as limitation #1.
  • ad hoc to paper KRZ metric restricted to (ϱ, a1, b1) is an adequate theory-agnostic representation of stationary axisymmetric BH spacetimes
    Sec. II; the 'generic' claim is only as broad as the parameterization and its convergence. The restriction to three parameters is made 'to keep the discussion at a level that can be handled analytically' and is justified by citing [73].
  • domain assumption Znajek regularity conditions at horizon and infinity (25)–(26) fix the poloidal current and field angular velocity
    Sec. III.A; standard in the BZ literature. The inner/outer light-surface conditions (27) are not used, which the paper notes is adequate for computing the horizon power to the order reached.
  • standard math Separability ansatz (38)–(39) with Gegenbauer angular eigenfunctions
    Sec. IV; reduces the Grad-Shafranov equation to ODEs (44). The angular part is the same as in Schwarzschild; the radial operator L_r^(ℓ) depends on all KRZ parameters via R_M, R_B.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 30276 in / 23538 out tokens · 209700 ms · 2026-08-02T20:22:36.362983+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The Blandford-Znajek (BZ) mechanism is widely recognised as the most compelling process to extract rotational energy from an accreting black hole and power the emission of relativistic jets. We explore the universality of this process for generic black-hole spacetimes within the Konoplya-Rezzolla-Zhidenko formalism and find that the lowest-order contribution to the BZ power is invariant across different black-hole spacetimes. We also show that at the next-leading-order, different black-hole spacetimes will lead to different BZ luminosities. As a result, while slowly rotating black holes cannot be distinguished via measurements of their jet power, rapidly rotating ones have the potential of providing information on the strong-field properties of the spacetime when independent measurements of the BZ luminosity and of the black-hole angular velocity are available.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.23417 by Filippo Camilloni, Luciano Rezzolla.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Range of variation of the BH angular velocity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Variation of the relative spacetime deviation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Variation of the BZ luminosity in a generic KRZ spacetime [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Colormap showing the relative deviation between the BZ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Dependence of the horizon values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

102 extracted references · 64 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collabo- ration, Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    An expression for the latter can be algebraically derived from the near-horizon Frobenius series for the functionR 22(r)(see Eq. (A4)) and reads (generalising this expression for arbitrary choices of the KRZ parameters is straightforward) R′h 22 := (1 +b 1)2 6Rh 22(1 +a 1 −2ϱ)−(1 +ϱ) 2 (1−a 1 −2ϱ) 2 .(57) Using this relation, the calculation of the BZ pow...

  3. [3]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Su- permassive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett.875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    left solution

    In particular we construct a “left solution”,R L(˜x), by integrating the equations from the horizon˜x= 0up to a matching point˜x m, where the horizon boundary condition is consistent with Eq.(A4). The left solu- tions, thus, depend on the near-horizon shooting coefficients Rh 22 andR h

  5. [5]

    right solution

    Analogously, a “right solution”,R R(˜x), can be constructed by integrating the equations from the infinity x= 1down to a matching point˜x m, where we set an asymp- totic boundary conditions consistent with the expansion (A5). The right solutions depend on the asymptotic shooting coeffi- cientsC ∞ 22 andC ∞ 42. We expect that a unique solution can be pinne...

  6. [6]

    W. H. Press and S. A. Teukolsky, Floating Orbits, Superradiant Scattering and the Black-hole Bomb, Nature238, 211 (1972)

    1972

  7. [7]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW170817: Obser- vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star In- spiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Denardo and R

    G. Denardo and R. Ruffini, On the energetics of reissner nord- strøm geometries, Physics Letters B45, 259 (1973)

    1973

  9. [9]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittar- ius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittar- ius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way, Astrophys. J. Lett.930, L12 (2022), arXiv:2311.08680 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    Penrose and R

    R. Penrose and R. M. Floyd, Extraction of Rotational Energy from a Black Hole, Nature Physical Science229, 177 (1971)

    1971

  11. [11]

    Koide, Magnetic extraction of black hole rotational energy: Method and results of general relativistic magnetohydrody- namic simulations in Kerr space-time, Phys

    S. Koide, Magnetic extraction of black hole rotational energy: Method and results of general relativistic magnetohydrody- namic simulations in Kerr space-time, Phys. Rev. D67, 104010 (2003)

    2003

  12. [12]

    J. M. Bardeen, W. H. Press, and S. A. Teukolsky, Rotating Black Holes: Locally Nonrotating Frames, Energy Extraction, and Scalar Synchrotron Radiation, Astrophys. J.178, 347 (1972)

    1972

  13. [13]

    Ba ˜nados, J

    M. Ba ˜nados, J. Silk, and S. M. West, Kerr black holes as parti- cle accelerators to arbitrarily high energy, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 111102 (2009)

    2009

  14. [14]

    S. M. Wagh, S. V . Dhurandhar, and N. Dadhich, Revival of Pen- rose process for astrophysical applications., Bulletin of the As- tronomical Society of India13, 76 (1985)

    1985

  15. [15]

    R. K. Williams, Extracting x-rays, gamma-rays, and relativis- tic e- e+ pairs from supermassive Kerr black holes using the Penrose mechanism, Phys. Rev. D51, 5387 (1995)

    1995

  16. [16]

    W. E. East and F. Pretorius, Superradiant instability and back- reaction of massive vector fields around kerr black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 041101 (2017)

    2017

  17. [17]

    Koide and K

    S. Koide and K. Arai, Energy Extraction from a Rotating Black Hole by Magnetic Reconnection in the Ergosphere, Astrophys. J.682, 1124 (2008), arXiv:0805.0044 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  18. [18]

    Comisso and F

    L. Comisso and F. A. Asenjo, Magnetic reconnection as a mech- anism for energy extraction from rotating black holes, Phys. Rev. D103, 023014 (2021)

    2021

  19. [19]

    J. D. Schnittman and J. H. Krolik, Evolution of a Binary Black Hole with a Retrograde Circumbinary Accretion Disk, Astro- phys. J.806, 88 (2015), arXiv:1504.00311 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Brito, V

    R. Brito, V . Cardoso, and P. Pani, Superradiance: New Fron- tiers in Black Hole Physics, Lect. Notes Phys.906, pp.1 (2015), arXiv:1501.06570 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  21. [21]

    R. D. Blandford and R. L. Znajek, Electromagnetic extraction of energy from Kerr black holes, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 179, 433 (1977)

    1977

  22. [22]

    A and are used in the next sec- tion

    Their expression as function of the KRZ parameters(ϱ, a 1, b1)is com- puted explicitly in App. A and are used in the next sec- tion. • When the KRZ parameters vanish, that is, when the KRZ spacetime reduces to the Kerr solution, the termsR h 22,R h 42, andR ′h 22 assume their general- relativistic expressions, i.e.,R h 22 = (6π 2 −49)/72, R′h 22 = (6π 2 −...

  23. [23]

    Parfrey, A

    K. Parfrey, A. Philippov, and B. Cerutti, First-Principles Plasma Simulations of Black-Hole Jet Launching, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 035101 (2019), arXiv:1810.03613 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [24]

    Meringolo, F

    C. Meringolo, F. Camilloni, and L. Rezzolla, Electromagnetic Energy Extraction from Kerr Black Holes: Ab Initio Calcula- tions, Astrophys. J. Lett.992, L8 (2025), arXiv:2507.08942 [gr- qc]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Camilloni and L

    F. Camilloni and L. Rezzolla, Self-consistent Multidimensional Penrose Process Driven by Magnetic Reconnection, Astrophys. J. Lett.982, L31 (2025), arXiv:2411.04184 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Narayan, B

    R. Narayan, B. Paczynski, and T. Piran, Gamma-ray bursts as the death throes of massive binary stars, Astrophys. J. Lett.395, L83 (1992), astro-ph/9204001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  27. [27]

    M. A. Abramowicz and P. C. Fragile, Foundations of black hole accretion disk theory, Living Rev. Relativity16, 10.12942/lrr- 2013-1 (2013)

    doi:10.12942/lrr- 2013

  28. [28]

    M. Ruiz, S. L. Shapiro, and A. Tsokaros, Multimessenger Bi- nary Mergers Containing Neutron Stars: Gravitational Waves, Jets, andγ-Ray Bursts, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sci- ences8, 39 (2021), arXiv:2102.03366 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  29. [29]

    Narayan and J

    R. Narayan and J. E. McClintock, Observational evidence for a correlation between jet power and black hole spin, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.419, L69 (2012), arXiv:1112.0569 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  30. [30]

    Eichler, M

    D. Eichler, M. Livio, T. Piran, and D. N. Schramm, Nucleosyn- thesis, neutrino bursts and gamma-rays from coalescing neutron stars, Nature340, 126 (1989)

    1989

  31. [31]

    W. E. East, L. Lehner, S. L. Liebling, and C. Palenzuela, Multimessenger Signals from Black Hole-Neutron Star Merg- ers without Significant Tidal Disruption, Astrophysical Journal Lett.912, L18 (2021), arXiv:2101.12214 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Rezzolla, B

    L. Rezzolla, B. Giacomazzo, L. Baiotti, J. Granot, C. Kou- veliotou, and M. A. Aloy, The Missing Link: Merging Neu- tron Stars Naturally Produce Jet-like Structures and Can Power Short Gamma-ray Bursts, Astrophys. J. Letters732, L6 (2011), arXiv:1101.4298 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  33. [33]

    Palenzuela, S

    C. Palenzuela, S. L. Liebling, D. Neilsen, L. Lehner, O. L. Ca- ballero, E. O’Connor, and M. Anderson, Effects of the micro- physical equation of state in the mergers of magnetized neutron stars with neutrino cooling, Phys. Rev. D92, 044045 (2015), arXiv:1505.01607 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  34. [34]

    M. Ruiz, R. N. Lang, V . Paschalidis, and S. L. Shapiro, Binary Neutron Star Mergers: A Jet Engine for Short Gamma-Ray Bursts, Astrophys. J. Lett.824, L6 (2016), arXiv:1604.02455 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    Ciolfi, The key role of magnetic fields in binary neutron star mergers, General Relativity and Gravitation52, 59 (2020), arXiv:2003.07572 [astro-ph.HE]

    R. Ciolfi, The key role of magnetic fields in binary neutron star mergers, General Relativity and Gravitation52, 59 (2020), arXiv:2003.07572 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VIII. Physical Interpreta- tion of the Polarized Ring, Astrophys. J. Lett.964, L26 (2024)

    2024

  37. [37]

    Hayashi, K

    K. Hayashi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y . Sekiguchi, and M. Shi- bata, Jet from Binary Neutron Star Merger with Prompt 19 Black Hole Formation, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 211407 (2025), arXiv:2410.10958 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarization of the Ring, As- trophys. J. Lett.910, L12 (2021), arXiv:2105.01169 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VIII. Magnetic Field Structure near The Event Horizon, Astrophys. J. Lett.910, L13 (2021), arXiv:2105.01173 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarization of the Ring, Astrophys. J. Lett.964, L25 (2024)

    2024

  41. [41]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Kerr black holes with scalar hair, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 221101 (2014)

    2014

  42. [42]

    GR-exclusion zone

    This requires solving the ordinary differential equations for the ra- dial magnetic-flux functionsR 22(r)andR 42(r)by combin- ing the Frobenius expansions with a shooting method (see App. A for details). In this way, we are able to cover ef- ficiently the whole space of parameters(a ∗, ϱ, a1, b1)while ensuring that for vanishing KRZ parameters we recover ...

  43. [43]

    Tchekhovskoy, R

    A. Tchekhovskoy, R. Narayan, and J. C. McKinney, Black Hole Spin and The Radio Loud/Quiet Dichotomy of Active Galactic Nuclei, Astrophys. J.711, 50 (2010), arXiv:0911.2228

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  44. [44]

    Tanabe and S

    K. Tanabe and S. Nagataki, Extended monopole solution of the Blandford-Znajek mechanism: Higher order terms for a Kerr parameter, Phys. Rev. D78, 024004 (2008), arXiv:0802.0908 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Camilloni, O

    F. Camilloni, O. J. C. Dias, G. Grignani, T. Harmark, R. Oliv- eri, M. Orselli, A. Placidi, and J. E. Santos, Blandford-Znajek monopole expansion revisited: novel non-analytic contribu- tions to the power emission, Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2022(7), 32, arXiv:2201.11068 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    Sen, Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory, Phys

    A. Sen, Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 1006 (1992), hep-th/9204046

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  47. [47]

    J. Bardeen, Non-singular general relativistic gravitational col- lapse, inProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Gravitation and the Theory of Relativity(Tbilisi, USSR, 1968) p. 87

    1968

  48. [48]

    S. A. Hayward, Formation and evaporation of regular black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 031103 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0506126

    arXiv 2006

  49. [49]

    Yunes and F

    N. Yunes and F. Pretorius, Dynamical Chern-Simons Modified Gravity. I. Spinning Black Holes in the Slow-Rotation Approx- imation, Phys. Rev. D79, 084043 (2009), arXiv:0902.4669 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  50. [50]

    Alexander and N

    S. Alexander and N. Yunes, Chern-Simons Modified General Relativity, Phys. Rept.480, 1 (2009), arXiv:0907.2562 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  51. [51]

    Bambi, Testing the Kerr-nature of stellar-mass black hole candidates by combining the continuum-fitting method and the power estimate of transient ballistic jets, Phys

    C. Bambi, Testing the Kerr-nature of stellar-mass black hole candidates by combining the continuum-fitting method and the power estimate of transient ballistic jets, Phys. Rev. D85, 043002 (2012), arXiv:1201.1638 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  52. [52]

    Younsi, A

    Z. Younsi, A. Zhidenko, L. Rezzolla, R. Konoplya, and Y . Mizuno, New method for shadow calculations: Application to parametrized axisymmetric black holes, Phys. Rev. D94, 084025 (2016), arXiv:1607.05767 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  53. [53]

    Mizuno, Z

    Y . Mizuno, Z. Younsi, C. M. Fromm, O. Porth, M. De Lau- rentis, H. Olivares, H. Falcke, M. Kramer, and L. Rezzolla, The current ability to test theories of gravity with black hole shadows, Nature Astronomy2, 585 (2018), arXiv:1804.05812 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  54. [54]

    Uniyal, I

    A. Uniyal, I. K. Dihingia, Y . Mizuno, and L. Rezzolla, The fu- ture ability to test theories of gravity with black-hole shadows, Nature Astron.1, 8 (2025), arXiv:2511.03789 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Banerjee, B

    I. Banerjee, B. Mandal, and S. SenGupta, Signatures of Einstein-Maxwell dilaton-axion gravity from the observed jet power and the radiative efficiency, Phys. Rev. D103, 044046 (2021), arXiv:2007.03947 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    J. Dong, N. Pati ˜no, Y . Xie, A. C´ardenas-Avenda˜no, C. F. Gam- mie, and N. Yunes, Blandford-Znajek process in quadratic grav- ity, Phys. Rev. D105, 044008 (2022), arXiv:2111.08758 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Chanson and M

    A. Chanson and M. J. Rodriguez, Signatures of extra dimen- sions in black hole jets, Phys. Rev. D106, 084052 (2022), arXiv:2206.10644 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Chatterjee, Z

    K. Chatterjee, Z. Younsi, P. Kocherlakota, and R. Narayan, On the Universality of Energy Extraction from Black Hole Space- times, Astrophys. J. Lett.991, L58 (2025), arXiv:2310.20043 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Peng and X.-H

    J. Peng and X.-H. Feng, Blandford–Znajek process in Ein- steinian cubic gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 818 (2023), arXiv:2305.12891 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    R. Yang, S. Chen, and J. Jing, Effects of tidal charge on Blandford-Znajek process around braneworld black holes, Pre- print (2025), arXiv:2510.24143 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    G. Pei, S. Nampalliwar, C. Bambi, and M. J. Middle- ton, Blandford-Znajek mechanism in black holes in alter- native theories of gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 534 (2016), arXiv:1606.04643 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  62. [62]

    F. G. Lopez Armengol and G. E. Romero, Effects of Scalar- Tensor-Vector Gravity on relativistic jets, Astrophys. Space Sci. 362, 214 (2017), arXiv:1611.09918 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  63. [63]

    Camilloni, T

    F. Camilloni, T. Harmark, M. Orselli, and M. J. Rodriguez, Blandford-Znajek jets in MOdified Gravity, Journal of Cosmol- ogy and Astroparticle Physics2024(1), 47, arXiv:2307.06878 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [64]

    M. E. Urtubey and D. P ´erez, Magnetic field geometry in ro- tating wormhole spacetimes, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1178 (2025), arXiv:2510.19013 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Konoplya, L

    R. Konoplya, L. Rezzolla, and A. Zhidenko, General parametrization of axisymmetric black holes in metric theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D93, 064015 (2016), arXiv:1602.02378 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  66. [66]

    Rezzolla and A

    L. Rezzolla and A. Zhidenko, New parametrization for spheri- cally symmetric black holes in metric theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D90, 084009 (2014), arXiv:1407.3086 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  67. [67]

    Johannsen and D

    T. Johannsen and D. Psaltis, Metric for rapidly spinning black holes suitable for strong-field tests of the no-hair theorem, Phys. Rev. D83, 124015 (2011), arXiv:1105.3191 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  68. [68]

    Johannsen, Photon Rings around Kerr and Kerr-like Black Holes, Astrophys

    T. Johannsen, Photon Rings around Kerr and Kerr-like Black Holes, Astrophys. J.777, 170 (2013), arXiv:1501.02814 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  69. [69]

    Cardoso, P

    V . Cardoso, P. Pani, and J. Rico, On generic parametrizations of spinning black-hole geometries, Phys. Rev. D89, 064007 (2014), arXiv:1401.0528 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  70. [70]

    R. A. Konoplya, J. Kunz, and A. Zhidenko, Blandford-Znajek mechanism in the general stationary axially-symmetric black- hole spacetime, JCAP12(12), 002, arXiv:2102.10649 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  71. [71]

    Tchekhovskoy, R

    A. Tchekhovskoy, R. Narayan, and J. C. McKinney, Efficient generation of jets from magnetically arrested accretion on a rapidly spinning black hole, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.418, L79 (2011), arXiv:1108.0412 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  72. [72]

    J. B. Achour, ´E. Gourgoulhon, and H. Roussille, Black hole photon ring beyond General Relativity: an integrable parametrization, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2025(10), 012, arXiv:2506.09882 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  73. [73]

    Kocherlakota and L

    P. Kocherlakota and L. Rezzolla, Accurate mapping of spheri- cally symmetric black holes in a parametrized framework, Phys. Rev. D102, 064058 (2020), arXiv:2007.15593 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  74. [74]

    Akiyama,et al., 20 First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama,et al., 20 First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. Test- ing the Black Hole Metric, Astrophys. J. Lett.930, L17 (2022)

    2022

  75. [75]

    Cassing and L

    M. Cassing and L. Rezzolla, Equilibrium non-self-gravitating tori around black holes in parametrized spherically symmet- ric space-times, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.522, 2415 (2023), arXiv:2302.09135 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  76. [76]

    Ma and L

    Y . Ma and L. Rezzolla, Horizon-penetrating form of parametrized metrics for static and stationary black holes, Phys. Rev. D110, 024032 (2024), arXiv:2404.06509 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    R. A. Konoplya, Z. Stuchl ´ık, and A. Zhidenko, Axisymmet- ric black holes allowing for separation of variables in the Klein-Gordon and Hamilton-Jacobi equations, Phys. Rev. D97, 084044 (2018), arXiv:1801.07195 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  78. [78]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, General parametrization of black holes: The only parameters that matter, Phys. Rev. D101, 124004 (2020), arXiv:2001.06100 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [79]

    C. M. Will, The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment, Living Rev. Relativity9, 3 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0510072

    arXiv 2006

  80. [80]

    Kocherlakota and L

    P. Kocherlakota and L. Rezzolla, Distinguishing gravita- tional and emission physics in black hole imaging: spheri- cal symmetry, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.513, 1229 (2022), arXiv:2201.05641 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

Showing first 80 references.