Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Charge in a new nonlinear-electrodynamics black-hole family shrinks the shadow, photon sphere, and ISCO, and light paths separate the model from Reissner–Nordström more clearly than massive orbits do.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-15 12:03 UTC pith:QOPK6RHS

load-bearing objection Routine but clean geodesic catalog for the authors’ own PINLED Y^n black holes; useful numbers, with the optical-geometry caveat left hanging. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.10097 v1 pith:QOPK6RHS submitted 2026-03-10 gr-qc hep-th

Optical and orbital characterization of spherically symmetric static black holes of self-gravitating new nonlinear electrodynamics model

\.Ilim \.Irfan \c{C}imdiker , Ali \"Ovg\"un , Yosef Verbin This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-th PACS 95.30.Sf04.70.-s97.60.Lf04.50.Kd
keywords Black holesNonlinear electrodynamicsLight deflectionShadowsParticle orbitsPhoton sphereISCO
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.

This paper maps the optical appearance and orbital dynamics of static, spherically symmetric black holes sourced by a Palatini-inspired nonlinear electrodynamics model (the PINLED Y^n family) coupled to Einstein gravity. Through a unified geodesic analysis it shows that, at fixed mass, raising the charge systematically pulls in the event horizon, the unstable photon sphere, the shadow seen by a distant observer, and the innermost stable circular orbit, while the nonlinearity index n is a milder correction. Null-geodesic observables—the photon sphere, critical capture impact parameter, shadow size, and light deflection near the photon sphere—display clearer departures from the Reissner–Nordström geometry than the ISCO does, especially at low mass and high charge. Classical light deflection and periastron advance supply complementary diagnostics. The authors present these radii and angles as a practical reference set for testing first-order nonlinear electrodynamics black holes against horizon-scale imaging and lensing data.

Core claim

For fixed black-hole mass, increasing the PINLED charge parameter q reduces the horizon, photon-sphere, shadow, and ISCO radii of the static Y^n solutions, and null-geodesic quantities discriminate these geometries from Reissner–Nordström more effectively than timelike circular-orbit diagnostics, with the nonlinearity index n remaining subleading.

What carries the argument

Unified geodesic analysis of the parametric PINLED Y^n metric, whose lapse is given through the energy-density parameter y; this yields compact algebraic conditions for the photon sphere and ISCO, the shadow radius ρ_s = ρ_ps / √f(ρ_ps), and the integrals for light deflection and periastron advance.

Load-bearing premise

The paper treats light as following ordinary metric null geodesics, even though nonlinear electrodynamics can make light rays follow a different effective optical geometry.

What would settle it

Compute the shadow and deflection using the effective optical geometry of the Y^n model and compare with the metric-null values; if the difference exceeds current EHT precision on M87* or Sgr A*, the tabulated shadow radii cannot be used as published.

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

If this is right

  • Shadow size and photon-sphere radius become the primary imaging discriminants of PINLED charge.
  • ISCO shifts, though smaller, still move the expected inner edge of thin accretion disks.
  • Light deflection near the photon sphere and periastron advance supply secondary consistency checks.
  • Higher n largely converges toward Reissner–Nordström, so n=2 is the most distinctive target.
  • The tabulated characteristic radii at fixed mass are ready templates for data confrontation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the NLED effective optical geometry differs appreciably from the metric for the Y^n model, the reported shadows and deflection angles would need recomputation before use as observational templates.
  • Extending the same geodesic pipeline to rotating PINLED solutions is the natural next step for direct comparison with EHT images of spinning sources.
  • Multi-channel tests that combine shadow size with ringdown or greybody factors could tighten joint bounds on charge and nonlinearity beyond imaging alone.
  • The low-mass, high-charge regime where PINLED–RN differences peak is rare for supermassive objects, so stellar-mass or intermediate-mass targets may prove more diagnostic.

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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes static, spherically symmetric black holes of a Palatini-inspired nonlinear electrodynamics (PINLED) Y^n model minimally coupled to Einstein–Hilbert gravity. Using standard geodesic methods on the parametric metric of Verbin et al., it computes the photon sphere, critical impact parameter and shadow radius for null rays, circular orbits and the ISCO for massive probes, plus light deflection and periastron advance. The main reported trends are that, at fixed mass, increasing the dimensionless charge q contracts the horizon, photon sphere, shadow and ISCO radii relative to Schwarzschild, that null observables discriminate PINLED from Reissner–Nordström more clearly than the ISCO (especially at low mass and high charge), and that the nonlinearity index n is subleading. The work is framed as a reference template for comparing first-order NLED black holes with imaging and lensing data.

Significance. If the optical and orbital results are correctly identified with physical observables, the paper supplies a useful, self-contained catalogue of strong- and weak-field diagnostics for a new analytic NLED family, with explicit parametric formulae, RN/Schwarzschild comparisons, and tabulated characteristic radii (Table III). The geodesic reductions via the Einstein equation (Eqs. 3.6–3.8, 3.13–3.14) are clean and reusable. The practical impact is tempered by the finding that n-dependence is mild and that PINLED–RN differences are small outside a limited low-mass/high-charge window; the main added value is therefore a controlled template rather than a large phenomenological departure. Strengths include transparent derivation from the metric, multi-observable coverage, and clear comparison baselines.

major comments (3)
  1. [§I and §§III.B–IV] §I cites that NLED light propagation is governed by an effective optical geometry that can deviate from metric null geodesics ([49,50]), yet §§III.B–IV compute the photon sphere (3.12)–(3.14), shadow (3.18)–(3.19) and deflection (4.1)–(4.4) exclusively as metric null geodesics of (2.9). For the Y^n model with W(Y)=1−γY^{n−1} (Eq. 2.5), the optical metric is not in general conformal to g_μν. Without constructing that geometry, estimating the correction near ρ_ps, or explicitly scoping claims to geometric optics of the spacetime metric, the preferred discriminants (ρ_ps, ρ_s, b_crit, δ) are not demonstrated to be the physical EHT/lensing observables. Timelike results are unaffected; the null sector needs this justification or computation.
  2. [Abstract, Conclusion, Figs. 7–13] The abstract and Conclusion present the results as a practical reference for confronting current and forthcoming imaging/lensing data, but the text and Figs. 7–13 show that PINLED–RN differences in ρ_ps, ρ_s and δ are minute except at low mass and high (near-extremal) charge. For astrophysical masses relevant to M87* and Sgr A*, the discriminant power claimed for null observables is not quantified against EHT angular-resolution or charge bounds (e.g. [59,60]). Either restrict the claim to a theoretical template, or add a short estimate of fractional deviations at observationally allowed (q, m_BH) and state which observable could be constrained.
  3. [Table III] Table III, n=4 and q=4: ρ_s is listed as 13.0811, identical to the n=3, q=3.75 entry and inconsistent with the monotonic decrease of ρ_s with q seen for n=2 and n=3 (and with ρ_ps≈6.56). This looks like a copy-paste error and should be recomputed; if other table entries were generated the same way, a consistency check of the full table is needed before using it as the paper’s summary reference.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§VI Conclusion] Conclusion, paragraph on null geodesics: duplicated/garbled sentence (“provide a probe of departures… provide the clearest probe…”). Clean up for publication.
  2. [Fig. 9, §III.C] Notation: the radial coordinate is written both as ρ and, in the shadow sketch (Fig. 9 caption), as r; keep a single dimensionless radial symbol throughout.
  3. [Fig. 5] Fig. 5 panels (b) and (c) appear blank or incomplete in the manuscript text as provided; ensure all panels and RN dashed curves are present and legible.
  4. [§II] Eq. (2.4) and surrounding text: clarify the sign convention for γ and the condition (−1)^n γ>0 for positive energy density when quoting results for n=2,3,4.
  5. [Figs. 7–8, 11–12] Several figure captions say “Other parameter choices yield similar qualitative behavior” without stating the range checked; a brief note in the text would help reproducibility.
  6. [§§IV–VI, Fig. 13] Minor typos: “perihelion” vs “periastron” mixed in the Conclusion; “precesion”; “increses”; “Sch” for Schwarzschild in Fig. 13 legend. Standard copy-edit pass.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity: shadow/ISCO/deflection/precession are standard geodesic outputs from an input metric; self-citation supplies the background solutions only.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [§I (Introduction) and §II (PINLED black holes), citation [71]]
    "Within this framework, Verbin et al. [71] obtained new self-gravitating solutions, including spherically symmetric black holes, and identified a “Palatini Inspired NLED” (PINLED) model as a minimal and analytically tractable representative... For the PINLED Y^n black holes discussed here, the solution for the lapse function is written in a parametric representation..."

    The metric functions that serve as the sole input to every subsequent geodesic calculation are taken from a paper whose author list overlaps with the present one. This is ordinary and disclosed dependence on prior construction rather than a circular redefinition of the optical observables themselves; the photon-sphere, shadow, ISCO and deflection formulae remain independent computations once the metric is fixed. Hence only a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation burden.

full rationale

The paper takes the static spherically symmetric PINLED Y^n metric (parametric f(y), m(y), rho(y) from Eqs. (2.11)–(2.14)) as given input from prior construction and applies textbook geodesic analysis: effective potentials (3.3)/(3.5)/(3.10), circular-orbit conditions V_eff'=0 and V_eff''=0 yielding ISCO (3.8) and photon sphere (3.13)–(3.14), critical impact parameter to shadow radius (3.18)–(3.19), deflection integral (4.3)–(4.4), and periastron advance (5.2)–(5.3). None of these observables is fitted to data, defined in terms of itself, or forced by a uniqueness claim. The only self-reference is the disclosed citation of the authors’ own prior work for the existence and form of the solutions; that citation supplies the background geometry, not a redefinition or prediction of the optical/orbital quantities. The NLED optical-geometry caveat noted in the introduction is a possible correctness limitation on the physical interpretation of null geodesics, not a circular reduction of any equation to its own input. Consequently the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and exhibits no circular step that collapses a claimed result to a fitted constant or tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The optical/orbital results rest on Einstein–Hilbert gravity plus a specific first-order NLED Lagrangian whose black-hole solutions were constructed elsewhere, plus the modeling choice that photons follow metric null geodesics. Free parameters are the model’s charge, mass, nonlinearity index, and the overall NLED coupling scale absorbed into dimensionless units. No new particles or forces are invented here; the PINLED Y^n model is imported.

free parameters (4)
  • nonlinearity index n
    Integer/order parameter of the Y^n term in the defining function K; scanned at n=2,3,4 without derivation from a more fundamental principle.
  • dimensionless charge q
    Free charge parameter of the electrostatic solution; varied by hand across Schwarzschild-like and RN-like regimes.
  • black-hole mass m_BH
    Integration constant in the mass function; fixed or scanned as an external parameter of the geometry.
  • NLED coupling γ (via scale E and length ℓ)
    Sets the strength of the Y^n nonlinearity and the units used to nondimensionalize r, M, Q; sign constrained by energy positivity but magnitude is free.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Einstein–Hilbert gravity minimally coupled to the PINLED stress-energy, so G_μν = −κ T_μν with T from (2.6).
    Assumed throughout §II; no modified-gravity terms are included despite the Palatini-inspired origin of the matter sector.
  • domain assumption Test particles and photons follow metric geodesics of the static spherical line element (2.9).
    Used for all of §§III–V; conflicts with the paper’s own remark that NLED can induce an effective optical geometry.
  • domain assumption Energy density positivity requires (−1)^n γ > 0.
    Stated after (2.8) and imposed for the remainder of the analysis.
  • ad hoc to paper The PINLED Y^n Lagrangian and its self-gravitating electrostatic solutions are those of Verbin et al. (2025).
    The metric (2.11)–(2.14) is imported wholesale from Ref. [71]; the present paper does not re-derive existence or uniqueness.
  • standard math Standard conserved energy and angular momentum from Killing vectors; equatorial motion θ=π/2.
    Ordinary geodesic reduction in static spherical symmetry (§III).
invented entities (1)
  • PINLED Y^n model (first-order Palatini-inspired NLED with K = Z/4 − Y/2 + γ Y^n/(2n)) no independent evidence
    purpose: Source the static spherical black-hole metrics whose optical and orbital properties are computed.
    Introduced in the authors’ prior work and adopted here without new independent experimental evidence; independent_evidence remains false within this paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 26814 in / 3497 out tokens · 33084 ms · 2026-07-15T12:03:25.806643+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Horizon scale imaging and precision lensing have turned black holes into quantitative laboratories for strong gravity and for non standard electromagnetic physics. We study the optical appearance and orbital dynamics of a new class of static spherically symmetric black holes sourced by a Palatini inspired nonlinear electrodynamics model, minimally coupled to Einstein-Hilbert gravity. Using a unified geodesic analysis, we identify the key radii that organize the strong field phenomenology. For photons we determine the unstable photon sphere, the associated critical capture threshold, and the resulting shadow size for a distant observer, and we map how these observables respond to the charge and to the nonlinearity index $n$. For massive probes we compute circular orbits and the innermost stable circular orbit, clarifying the departure from the Schwarzschild and Reissner-Nordstr\"om cases. We then connect to classical tests by evaluating the light deflection angle and periastron advance, providing additional diagnostics that complement the shadow. Our results furnish a practical reference model for confronting first order nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with current and forthcoming imaging and lensing data.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Thermodynamics and orbital structure of anti-de Sitter black holes in Palatini-inspired nonlinear electrodynamics

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    An exact AdS extension of the PINLED black hole is derived from the Einstein-Hilbert action plus nonlinear EM sector, preserving the original parametric form while adding the standard AdS lapse term, followed by full ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 66 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Abuter et al

    R. Abuter et al. (GRAVITY), Detection of the Schwarzschild precession in the orbit of the star S2 near the Galactic centre massive black hole, Astron. Astrophys.636, L5 (2020), arXiv:2004.07187 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  2. [2]

    Akiyama et al

    K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett.875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238 [astro- 26 ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    Akiyama et al

    K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius 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

  4. [4]

    Johannsen and D

    T. Johannsen and D. Psaltis, Testing the No-Hair Theorem with Observations in the Electromagnetic Spectrum: II. Black-Hole Images, Astrophys. J.718, 446 (2010), arXiv:1005.1931 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  5. [5]

    A. E. Broderick, T. Johannsen, A. Loeb, and D. Psaltis, Testing the No-Hair Theorem with Event Horizon Telescope Observations of Sagittarius A*, Astrophys. J.784, 7 (2014), arXiv:1311.5564 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    Johannsen, A

    T. Johannsen, A. E. Broderick, P. M. Plewa, S. Chatzopoulos, S. S. Doeleman, F. Eisenhauer, V. L. Fish, R. Genzel, O. Gerhard, and M. D. Johnson, Testing General Relativity with the Shadow Size of Sgr A*, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 031101 (2016), arXiv:1512.02640 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    Bambi, Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation, Rev

    C. Bambi, Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 025001 (2017), arXiv:1509.03884 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Younsi, A

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    Grenzebach, V

    A. Grenzebach, V. Perlick, and C. L¨ ammerzahl, Photon Regions and Shadows of Kerr-Newman-NUT Black Holes with a Cosmological Constant, Phys. Rev. D89, 124004 (2014), arXiv:1403.5234 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    R. A. Hennigar, M. B. J. Poshteh, and R. B. Mann, Shadows, Signals, and Stability in Einsteinian Cubic Gravity, Phys. Rev. D97, 064041 (2018), arXiv:1801.03223 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Kuang, Z.-Y

    X.-M. Kuang, Z.-Y. Tang, B. Wang, and A. Wang, Constraining a modified gravity theory in strong gravitational lensing and black hole shadow observations, Phys. Rev. D106, 064012 (2022), arXiv:2206.05878 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    Bronzwaer and H

    T. Bronzwaer and H. Falcke, The Nature of Black Hole Shadows, Astrophys. J.920, 155 (2021), arXiv:2108.03966 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Vagnozzi, C

    S. Vagnozzi, C. Bambi, and L. Visinelli, Concerns regarding the use of black hole shadows as standard rulers, Class. Quant. Grav.37, 087001 (2020), arXiv:2001.02986 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Y. Chen, R. Roy, S. Vagnozzi, and L. Visinelli, Superradiant evolution of the shadow and photon ring of Sgr A⋆, Phys. Rev. D106, 043021 (2022), arXiv:2205.06238 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    Boyeneni, J

    S. Boyeneni, J. Wu, and E. R. Most, Unveiling the Electrodynamic Nature of Spacetime Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 101401 (2025), arXiv:2504.15978 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    J. L. Synge, The Escape of Photons from Gravitationally Intense Stars, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 131, 463 (1966)

    1966

  17. [17]

    Perlick and O

    V. Perlick and O. Y. Tsupko, Calculating black hole shadows: Review of analytical studies, Phys. Rept. 947, 1 (2022), arXiv:2105.07101 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [19]

    Bozza, Gravitational lensing in the strong field limit, Phys

    V. Bozza, Gravitational lensing in the strong field limit, Phys. Rev. D66, 103001 (2002), arXiv:gr- qc/0208075

    arXiv 2002

  19. [20]

    K. S. Virbhadra and G. F. R. Ellis, Schwarzschild black hole lensing, Phys. Rev. D62, 084003 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9904193

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  20. [21]

    Claudel, K

    C.-M. Claudel, K. S. Virbhadra, and G. F. R. Ellis, The Geometry of photon surfaces, J. Math. Phys. 42, 818 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0005050

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  21. [22]

    K. S. Virbhadra, Relativistic images of Schwarzschild black hole lensing, Phys. Rev. D79, 083004 (2009), arXiv:0810.2109 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [23]

    Capozziello, E

    S. Capozziello, E. Battista, and S. De Bianchi, Null geodesics, causal structure, and matter accretion in Lorentzian-Euclidean black holes, Phys. Rev. D112, 044009 (2025), arXiv:2507.08431 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [24]

    S. E. Gralla, D. E. Holz, and R. M. Wald, Black Hole Shadows, Photon Rings, and Lensing Rings, Phys. Rev. D100, 024018 (2019), arXiv:1906.00873 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [25]

    Lambiase, D

    G. Lambiase, D. J. Gogoi, R. C. Pantig, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Shadow and quasinormal modes of the rotating Einstein–Euler–Heisenberg black holes, Phys. Dark Univ.48, 101886 (2025), arXiv:2406.18300 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [26]

    Uniyal, S

    A. Uniyal, S. Chakrabarti, R. C. Pantig, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Nonlinearly charged black holes: Shadow and thin-accretion disk, New Astron.111, 102249 (2024), arXiv:2303.07174 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [27]

    Born and L

    M. Born and L. Infeld, Foundations of the new field theory, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A144, 425 (1934)

    1934

  27. [28]

    Euler and B

    H. Euler and B. Kockel, The scattering of light by light in Dirac’s theory, Naturwiss23, 246 (1933)

    1933

  28. [29]

    Heisenberg and H

    W. Heisenberg and H. Euler, Consequences of Dirac’s theory of positrons, Z. Phys.98, 714 (1936), arXiv:physics/0605038

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1936

  29. [30]

    D. P. Sorokin, Introductory Notes on Non-linear Electrodynamics and its Applications, Fortsch. Phys. 70, 2200092 (2022), arXiv:2112.12118 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [31]

    Novello, S

    M. Novello, S. E. Perez Bergliaffa, and J. M. Salim, Singularities in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Class. Quant. Grav.17, 3821 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0003052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  31. [32]

    G. W. Gibbons and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Born-Infeld theory and stringy causality, Phys. Rev. D63, 064006 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0008052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  32. [33]

    H. A. Gonzalez, M. Hassaine, and C. Martinez, Thermodynamics of charged black holes with a nonlinear electrodynamics source, Phys. Rev. D80, 104008 (2009), arXiv:0909.1365 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [34]

    Toshmatov, Z

    B. Toshmatov, Z. Stuchl´ ık, J. Schee, and B. Ahmedov, Electromagnetic perturbations of black holes in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D97, 084058 (2018), arXiv:1805.00240 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [35]

    Harada, Neutron stars in scalar tensor theories of gravity and catastrophe theory, Phys

    T. Harada, Neutron stars in scalar tensor theories of gravity and catastrophe theory, Phys. Rev. D57, 4802 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9801049

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  35. [36]

    Ayon-Beato and A

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, Regular black hole in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrody- namics, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 5056 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9911046

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  36. [37]

    Ayon-Beato and A

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, The Bardeen model as a nonlinear magnetic monopole, Phys. Lett. B 28 493, 149 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0009077

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  37. [38]

    Ayon-Beato and A

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, New regular black hole solution from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B464, 25 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9911174

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  38. [39]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Regular magnetic black holes and monopoles from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D63, 044005 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0006014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  39. [40]

    Dymnikova, Regular electrically charged structures in nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to general relativity, Class

    I. Dymnikova, Regular electrically charged structures in nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to general relativity, Class. Quant. Grav.21, 4417 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0407072

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  40. [41]

    Balart and E

    L. Balart and E. C. Vagenas, Regular black holes with a nonlinear electrodynamics source, Phys. Rev. D90, 124045 (2014), arXiv:1408.0306 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  41. [42]

    Fan and X

    Z.-Y. Fan and X. Wang, Construction of Regular Black Holes in General Relativity, Phys. Rev. D94, 124027 (2016), arXiv:1610.02636 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [43]

    Hassaine and C

    M. Hassaine and C. Martinez, Higher-dimensional charged black holes solutions with a nonlinear elec- trodynamics source, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 195023 (2008), arXiv:0803.2946 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  43. [44]

    Maeda, M

    H. Maeda, M. Hassaine, and C. Martinez, Lovelock black holes with a nonlinear Maxwell field, Phys. Rev. D79, 044012 (2009), arXiv:0812.2038 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  44. [45]

    Cataldo and A

    M. Cataldo and A. Garcia, Three dimensional black hole coupled to the Born-Infeld electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B456, 28 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9903257

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  45. [46]

    Cataldo and A

    M. Cataldo and A. Garcia, Regular (2+1)-dimensional black holes within nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D61, 084003 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0004177

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  46. [47]

    G. W. Gibbons and D. A. Rasheed, Electric - magnetic duality rotations in nonlinear electrodynamics, Nucl. Phys. B454, 185 (1995), arXiv:hep-th/9506035

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  47. [48]

    G. W. Gibbons and D. A. Rasheed, Sl(2,R) invariance of nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to an axion and a dilaton, Phys. Lett. B365, 46 (1996), arXiv:hep-th/9509141

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  48. [49]

    Novello, V

    M. Novello, V. A. De Lorenci, J. M. Salim, and R. Klippert, Geometrical aspects of light propagation in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D61, 045001 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/9911085

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  49. [50]

    V. A. De Lorenci, R. Klippert, M. Novello, and J. M. Salim, Light propagation in nonlinear electrody- namics, Phys. Lett. B482, 134 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0005049

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  50. [51]

    E. F. Eiroa, Gravitational lensing by Einstein-Born-Infeld black holes, Phys. Rev. D73, 043002 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511065

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  51. [52]

    Perlick, O

    V. Perlick, O. Y. Tsupko, and G. S. Bisnovatyi-Kogan, Influence of a plasma on the shadow of a spherically symmetric black hole, Phys. Rev. D92, 104031 (2015), arXiv:1507.04217 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  52. [53]

    S. G. Ghosh, A nonsingular rotating black hole, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 532 (2015), arXiv:1408.5668 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [54]

    Toshmatov, Z

    B. Toshmatov, Z. Stuchl´ ık, and B. Ahmedov, Generic rotating regular black holes in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D95, 084037 (2017), arXiv:1704.07300 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  54. [55]

    Dymnikova and E

    I. Dymnikova and E. Galaktionov, Regular rotating electrically charged black holes and solitons in non-linear electrodynamics minimally coupled to gravity, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 165015 (2015), arXiv:1510.01353 [gr-qc]. 29

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  55. [56]

    Kumar, A

    R. Kumar, A. Kumar, and S. G. Ghosh, Testing Rotating Regular Metrics as Candidates for Astro- physical Black Holes, Astrophys. J.896, 89 (2020), arXiv:2006.09869 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  56. [57]

    Toshmatov, B

    B. Toshmatov, B. Ahmedov, and D. Malafarina, Can a light ray distinguish charge of a black hole in nonlinear electrodynamics?, Phys. Rev. D103, 024026 (2021), arXiv:2101.05496 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  57. [58]

    Akiyama et al

    K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. The Shadow and Mass of the Central Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett.875, L6 (2019), arXiv:1906.11243 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  58. [59]

    Kocherlakota et al

    P. Kocherlakota et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), Constraints on black-hole charges with the 2017 EHT observations of M87*, Phys. Rev. D103, 104047 (2021), arXiv:2105.09343 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  59. [60]

    Vagnozzi et al., Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A, Class

    S. Vagnozzi et al., Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 165007 (2023), arXiv:2205.07787 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  60. [61]

    Allahyari, M

    A. Allahyari, M. Khodadi, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, Magnetically charged black holes from non- linear electrodynamics and the Event Horizon Telescope, JCAP02, 003, arXiv:1912.08231 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1912

  61. [62]

    P. V. P. Cunha and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Shadows and strong gravitational lensing: a brief review, Gen. Rel. Grav.50, 42 (2018), arXiv:1801.00860 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  62. [63]

    Okyay and A

    M. Okyay and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Nonlinear electrodynamics effects on the black hole shadow, deflection angle, quasinormal modes and greybody factors, JCAP01(01), 009, arXiv:2108.07766 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [64]

    Uniyal, R

    A. Uniyal, R. C. Pantig, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Probing a non-linear electrodynamics black hole with thin accretion disk, shadow, and deflection angle with M87* and Sgr A* from EHT, Phys. Dark Univ.40, 101178 (2023), arXiv:2205.11072 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  64. [65]

    G. J. Olmo and D. Rubiera-Garcia, Palatinif(R) Black Holes in Nonlinear Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D84, 124059 (2011), arXiv:1110.0850 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  65. [66]

    M. E. Rodrigues, E. L. B. Junior, G. T. Marques, and V. T. Zanchin, Regular black holes inf(R) gravity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D94, 024062 (2016), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 94, 049904 (2016)], arXiv:1511.00569 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  66. [67]

    M. E. Rodrigues and M. V. de Sousa Silva, Bardeen Regular Black Hole With an Electric Source, JCAP 06, 025, arXiv:1802.05095 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [68]

    Berej, J

    W. Berej, J. Matyjasek, D. Tryniecki, and M. Woronowicz, Regular black holes in quadratic gravity, Gen. Rel. Grav.38, 885 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0606185

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  68. [69]

    Capozziello, S

    S. Capozziello, S. De Bianchi, and E. Battista, Avoiding singularities in Lorentzian-Euclidean black holes: The role of atemporality, Phys. Rev. D109, 104060 (2024), arXiv:2404.17267 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  69. [70]

    Rasanen and Y

    S. Rasanen and Y. Verbin, Palatini formulation for gauge theory: implications for slow-roll inflation, Open Journal of Astrophysics6, 10.21105/astro.2211.15584 (2023), arXiv:2211.15584 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.21105/astro.2211.15584 2023

  70. [71]

    Verbin, B

    Y. Verbin, B. Pulice, A. ¨Ovg¨ un, and H. Huang, New black hole solutions of second and first order formulations of nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D111, 084061 (2025), arXiv:2412.20989 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  71. [72]

    Plebanski, Lectures on Non-Linear Electrodynamics, Nordita, Copenhagen (1970)

    J. Plebanski, Lectures on Non-Linear Electrodynamics, Nordita, Copenhagen (1970)

    1970