arxiv: 2605.01216 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-02 · 🌀 gr-qc · hep-ph

Recognition: unknown

Gravitational Waves from a Black Hole Falling Radially into a Thin-Shell Traversable Wormhole

Mohammad Nosherwan Malik , James B. Dent , William E. Gabella , Thomas W. Kephart

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 19:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc hep-ph

keywords gravitational wavestraversable wormholesblack hole infallthin-shell wormholemultipole radiationthroat crossingsgravitational wave detection

0 comments

The pith

A black hole falling radially into a thin-shell traversable wormhole produces gravitational waves with a repeated pulse-gap structure that could reach ground-based detector sensitivities at distances of order 500 Mpc.

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

The paper calculates the gravitational waves emitted when a stellar-mass black hole falls straight into a thin-shell traversable wormhole. Treating the black hole as a test particle on a fixed background, the authors derive analytic expressions for the waveform from the mass quadrupole and higher multipoles. The central feature is a pulse-gap pattern generated by the black hole crossing the wormhole throat multiple times. The amplitude spectral density of this signal falls within the reach of current detectors for optimally oriented sources at roughly 500 megaparsecs. This pattern would serve as a distinctive observational marker for traversable wormholes if detected.

Core claim

We compute the gravitational-wave signal generated by the radial infall of a stellar-mass black hole into a thin-shell Schwarzschild traversable wormhole. Modeling the black hole as a test particle, we derive analytic expressions for the emitted waveform, including contributions from the mass quadrupole and higher-order multipoles. The resulting signal exhibits a characteristic pulse-gap structure associated with repeated throat crossings. We further compute the amplitude spectral density and compare it with representative ground-based detector sensitivities, finding that such signals could lie within the sensitivity range for optimally oriented sources at distances of order ~500 Mpc.

What carries the argument

The test-particle geodesic trajectory through the thin-shell wormhole spacetime that produces repeated throat crossings and the associated multipolar gravitational radiation.

If this is right

Analytic waveform expressions are obtained from the quadrupole and higher multipoles along the radial trajectory.
Repeated throat crossings produce a time-domain pulse-gap structure in the emitted waves.
The amplitude spectral density places the signals inside the sensitivity band of ground-based detectors for sources at distances of order 500 Mpc when optimally oriented.
Detection of the pulse-gap pattern would constitute an observational signature of traversable wormholes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The measured interval between successive pulses could constrain the throat radius or other geometric parameters of the wormhole.
Including the back-reaction of the black hole on the wormhole geometry would yield more accurate amplitude predictions for realistic events.
Similar pulse-gap features might appear in signals from other horizonless compact objects, offering a way to classify exotic mergers in gravitational-wave catalogs.

Load-bearing premise

The black hole is treated as a test particle whose mass and energy do not disturb the fixed wormhole background or its stability.

What would settle it

A gravitational wave detection from an infalling compact object that lacks the predicted pulse-gap intervals or whose spectrum deviates from the calculated amplitude spectral density would falsify the signal for stable thin-shell wormholes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01216 by James B. Dent, Mohammad Nosherwan Malik, Thomas W. Kephart, William E. Gabella.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. Embedding diagram for the Schwarzschild worm view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Two-World Bound (TWB) orbit for radial infall: the view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Variation of view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Mass quadrupole radiation view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Mass octupole radiation view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Single-sided amplitude spectral density (ASD) of the wormhole infall waveform (red), compared with the inspiral view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives analytic waveforms for radial test-particle infall into a thin-shell wormhole with a pulse-gap from repeated crossings, but the fixed-background assumption likely fails for stellar-mass objects.

read the letter

The main result is an analytic calculation of the gravitational-wave signal from a stellar-mass black hole falling radially into a thin-shell traversable wormhole. They treat the black hole as a test particle on geodesics in a fixed Schwarzschild wormhole metric and extract the emitted waves from the mass quadrupole plus higher multipoles. The waveform has a pulse-gap pattern because the particle crosses the throat more than once before settling on the other side. They also compute the amplitude spectral density and compare it to ground-based detector curves, estimating that optimally oriented sources could be visible out to roughly 500 Mpc. This pulse-gap feature tied to multiple traversals is the concrete new element; it does not appear in the earlier wormhole literature they cite. The derivation itself is straightforward and uses standard multipole formulas applied to the geodesic motion, which makes the expressions reproducible in principle. That is the part that works cleanly. The soft spot is the test-particle limit in an unperturbed background. A stellar-mass black hole carries enough mass relative to the throat radius and shell stress-energy that back-reaction should matter. The infalling object will perturb the shell and metric, which could eliminate the repeated crossings or destabilize the wormhole altogether. Without any estimate of when the approximation breaks or any check on shell stability under perturbation, the pulse-gap signature and the 500 Mpc reach become unreliable. The paper does not appear to vary the throat radius across a range or attach error bars to the amplitude. This work is aimed at people who study exotic gravitational-wave sources or wormhole phenomenology. A reader looking for a specific, falsifiable waveform shape to search for in data will find something usable here, even if the physical regime needs tightening. It deserves peer review because the calculation is self-contained and the central claim is sharp enough for referees to evaluate the approximations directly.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper computes the gravitational-wave signal generated by the radial infall of a stellar-mass black hole into a thin-shell Schwarzschild traversable wormhole. Modeling the black hole as a test particle in a fixed background, it derives analytic expressions for the emitted waveform including contributions from the mass quadrupole and higher-order multipoles. The resulting signal exhibits a characteristic pulse-gap structure associated with repeated throat crossings. The amplitude spectral density is compared with ground-based detector sensitivities, suggesting such signals could be detectable for optimally oriented sources at distances of order ~500 Mpc.

Significance. If the central approximations hold, the work identifies a distinctive pulse-gap feature in the waveform as a potential observational signature of traversable wormholes. The analytic derivation of the multipole contributions and the direct comparison to detector noise curves provide concrete, falsifiable predictions that could be tested with existing or near-future gravitational-wave data.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract and modeling section: the central derivation of the analytic waveform and pulse-gap structure relies on geodesic radial motion with repeated throat crossings in an unperturbed thin-shell Schwarzschild wormhole. The test-particle approximation in a fixed background is load-bearing for this claim, yet for a stellar-mass black hole the mass ratio is not parametrically small relative to the wormhole's effective mass (set by throat radius and surface stress-energy); back-reaction on the shell and metric is not quantified, raising the possibility that multiple crossings are suppressed and the closed-form waveform invalid.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract states that higher-order multipoles are included but does not specify the truncation order or convergence criteria used in the expansion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for raising an important point about the test-particle approximation. We address the comment in detail below and have revised the manuscript to clarify the regime of validity.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and modeling section: the central derivation of the analytic waveform and pulse-gap structure relies on geodesic radial motion with repeated throat crossings in an unperturbed thin-shell Schwarzschild wormhole. The test-particle approximation in a fixed background is load-bearing for this claim, yet for a stellar-mass black hole the mass ratio is not parametrically small relative to the wormhole's effective mass (set by throat radius and surface stress-energy); back-reaction on the shell and metric is not quantified, raising the possibility that multiple crossings are suppressed and the closed-form waveform invalid.

Authors: We agree that the test-particle approximation is central to the analytic derivation and that back-reaction is not quantified in the present work. The manuscript models the stellar-mass black hole explicitly as a test particle on geodesics in the fixed thin-shell wormhole background. This approximation is valid when the black-hole mass is much smaller than the effective mass set by the throat radius and surface stress-energy, which can be arranged by choosing a sufficiently large throat for a given black-hole mass. We have added a new paragraph to the modeling section that states the required mass-ratio condition, notes that back-reaction could in principle alter the trajectory and suppress repeated crossings, and explains that a self-consistent treatment lies beyond the analytic scope of the paper. Within the stated test-particle limit the pulse-gap waveform remains a well-defined prediction. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard test-particle waveform derivation in fixed background

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain consists of geodesic radial motion for a test particle in a pre-specified thin-shell Schwarzschild wormhole metric, followed by standard GR multipole expansions to obtain the waveform and its spectral density. No equation reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no self-definition of quantities, and no load-bearing self-citation chain. The pulse-gap structure is a direct geometric consequence of the assumed repeated throat crossings in the unperturbed metric, and the ~500 Mpc detectability estimate is a post-computation comparison against detector curves rather than an input. The calculation is self-contained against external benchmarks and exhibits no reduction of outputs to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard thin-shell wormhole constructions from prior GR literature plus the test-particle approximation; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

wormhole throat radius
Sets the characteristic timescale of throat crossings and thus the gap duration in the waveform.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The wormhole is a thin-shell connection between two Schwarzschild geometries
Invoked to define the background metric for the infall calculation.
domain assumption Black hole treated as test particle with negligible back-reaction
Allows analytic multipole expansion without solving the coupled Einstein equations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5421 in / 1460 out tokens · 51157 ms · 2026-05-09T19:07:34.597649+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

[1]

B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2016
[2]

B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019
[3]

GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X 11, 021053 (2021), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021
[4]

GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the Second Part of the Third Observing Run

R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRA), Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023
[5]

The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-Wave Background

G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L8 (2023), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023
[6]

K. S. Thorne, in1994 DPF Summer Study on High- energy Physics: Particle and Nuclear Astrophysics and Cosmology in the Next Millenium (Snowmass 94)(1995) pp. 0160–184, arXiv:gr-qc/9506086

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 1995
[7]

Cool horizons for entangled black holes

J. Maldacena and L. Susskind, Fortsch. Phys.61, 781 (2013), arXiv:1306.0533 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[8]

H. Deng, J. Garriga, and A. Vilenkin, JCAP04, 050 (2017), arXiv:1612.03753 [gr-qc]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[9]

Primordial black hole formation by vacuum bubbles

H. Deng and A. Vilenkin, JCAP12, 044 (2017), arXiv:1710.02865 [gr-qc]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[10]

M. M. Flores, A. Kusenko, and M. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D 110, 015005 (2024), arXiv:2402.13341 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[11]

J. B. Dent, B. Dutta, and M. Rai, (2025), arXiv:2510.05236 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[12]

Numerical simulations of primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order phase transitions,

Z. Ning, X.-X. Zeng, R.-G. Cai, and S.-J. Wang, (2026), arXiv:2601.21878 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2026
[13]

A. L. Miller, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D35, 2530005 (2026), arXiv:2503.02607 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2026
[14]

Chen, P.-P

Y. Chen, P.-P. Wang, B. Wang, R. Luo, and C.-G. Shao, Universe12, 48 (2026), arXiv:2603.07158 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2026
[15]

Bertone, Nucl

G. Bertone, Nucl. Phys. B1003, 116487 (2024), arXiv:2404.11513 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2024
[16]

D. J. Weir, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A376, 20170126 (2018), [Erratum: Phil.Trans.Roy.Soc.Lond.A 381, 20230212 (2023)], arXiv:1705.01783 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[17]

Review of cosmic phase transitions: their significance and experimental signatures,

A. Mazumdar and G. White, Rept. Prog. Phys.82, 076901 (2019), arXiv:1811.01948 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[18]

M. B. Hindmarsh, M. L¨ uben, J. Lumma, and M. Pauly, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes24, 1 (2021), arXiv:2008.09136 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[19]

Cosmological phase transitions: From perturbative particle physics to gravitational waves,

P. Athron, C. Bal´ azs, A. Fowlie, L. Morris, and L. Wu, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.135, 104094 (2024), arXiv:2305.02357 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[20]

Caprini, HiHEP1, 22 (2025), arXiv:2602.02861 [astro- ph.CO]

C. Caprini, HiHEP1, 22 (2025), arXiv:2602.02861 [astro- ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[21]

B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.168, 399 (1974)

1974
[22]

S. Bird, I. Cholis, J. B. Mu˜ noz, Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud, M. Kamionkowski, E. D. Kovetz, A. Raccanelli, and A. G. Riess, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 201301 (2016), arXiv:1603.00464 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[23]

Nakama, J

T. Nakama, J. Silk, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D95, 043511 (2017), arXiv:1612.06264 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2017
[24]

Primordial Black Holes - Perspectives in Gravitational Wave Astronomy -

M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka, and S. Yokoyama, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 063001 (2018), arXiv:1801.05235 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[25]

A. M. Green and B. J. Kavanagh, J. Phys. G48, 043001 (2021), arXiv:2007.10722 [astro-ph.CO]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021
[26]

Papanikolaou, V

T. Papanikolaou, V. Vennin, and D. Langlois, JCAP03, 053 (2021), arXiv:2010.11573 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[27]

Carr and F

B. Carr and F. Kuhnel, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes48, 1 (2022), arXiv:2110.02821 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[28]

B. Carr, A. J. Iovino, G. Perna, V. Vaskonen, and H. Veerm¨ ae, (2026), arXiv:2601.06024 [astro-ph.CO]. 10

work page arXiv 2026
[29]

P. Pani, E. Berti, V. Cardoso, Y. Chen, and R. Norte, Phys. Rev. D80, 124047 (2009), arXiv:0909.0287 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2009
[30]

Echoes of ECOs: gravitational-wave signatures of exotic compact objects and of quantum corrections at the horizon scale

V. Cardoso, S. Hopper, C. F. B. Macedo, C. Palen- zuela, and P. Pani, Phys. Rev. D94, 084031 (2016), arXiv:1608.08637 [gr-qc]

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[31]

Testing the nature of dark compact objects: a status report

V. Cardoso and P. Pani, Living Rev. Rel.22, 4 (2019), arXiv:1904.05363 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019
[32]

M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Am. J. Phys.56, 395 (1988)

1988
[33]

H. G. Ellis, J. Math. Phys.14, 104 (1973)

1973
[34]

K. A. Bronnikov, Acta Phys. Polon. B4, 251 (1973)

1973
[35]

K. Sato, M. Sasaki, H. Kodama, and K.-i. Maeda, Prog. Theor. Phys.65, 1443 (1981)

1981
[36]

Maeda, K

K.-i. Maeda, K. Sato, M. Sasaki, and H. Kodama, Phys. Lett. B108, 98 (1982)

1982
[37]

Bambi and D

C. Bambi and D. Stojkovic, Universe7, 136 (2021), arXiv:2105.00881 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[38]

S.-s. Bao, S. Hou, and H. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 127 (2023), arXiv:2201.05866 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2023
[39]

Diemer and E

V. Diemer and E. Smolarek, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 175014 (2013), arXiv:1302.1705 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2013
[40]

J. B. Dent, W. E. Gabella, K. Holley-Bockelmann, and T. W. Kephart, Phys. Rev. D104, 044030 (2021), arXiv:2007.09135 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[41]

M. S. Morris, K. S. Thorne, and U. Yurtsever, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 1446 (1988)

1988
[42]

Visser, Phys

M. Visser, Phys. Lett. B242, 24 (1990)

1990
[43]

Visser, Phys

M. Visser, Phys. Rev. D39, 3182 (1989), arXiv:0809.0907 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 1989
[44]

Visser, Nucl

M. Visser, Nucl. Phys. B328, 203 (1989), arXiv:0809.0927 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 1989
[45]

Poisson and M

E. Poisson and M. Visser, Phys. Rev. D52, 7318 (1995), arXiv:gr-qc/9506083

work page arXiv 1995
[46]

P. E. Kashargin and S. V. Sushkov, Grav. Cosmol.17, 119 (2011), arXiv:1101.5281 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2011
[47]

J. B. Hartle,Gravity(Cambridge University Press, 2021)

2021
[48]

Israel, Nuovo Cim

W. Israel, Nuovo Cim. B44S10, 1 (1966), [Erratum: Nuovo Cim.B 48, 463 (1967)]

1966
[49]

S. K. Blau, E. I. Guendelman, and A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D35, 1747 (1987)

1987
[50]

S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,The Large Scale Struc- ture of Space-Time, Cambridge Monographs on Mathe- matical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2023)

2023
[51]

R. V. Buniy and S. D. H. Hsu, Phys. Lett. B632, 543 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0502203

work page Pith review arXiv 2006
[52]

R. V. Buniy, S. D. H. Hsu, and B. M. Murray, Phys. Rev. D74, 063518 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0606091

work page arXiv 2006
[53]

Chandrasekhar,The mathematical theory of black holes(1985)

S. Chandrasekhar,The mathematical theory of black holes(1985)

1985
[54]

Weinberg,Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity(John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972)

S. Weinberg,Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity(John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972)

1972
[55]

E. E. Flanagan and S. A. Hughes, New J. Phys.7, 204 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0501041

work page arXiv 2005
[56]

Chakrabarty, (1999), arXiv:physics/9908041

I. Chakrabarty, (1999), arXiv:physics/9908041

work page arXiv 1999
[57]

Maggiore,Gravitational Waves

M. Maggiore,Gravitational Waves. Vol. 1: Theory and Experiments(Oxford University Press, 2007)

2007
[58]

The Next Generation Global Gravitational Wave Observatory: The Science Book

V. Kalogeraet al., (2021), arXiv:2111.06990 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[59]

Kozai, Astron

Y. Kozai, Astron. J.67, 591 (1962)

1962
[60]

M. L. Lidov, Planet. Space Sci.9, 719 (1962)

1962
[61]

S. A. Hayward, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D8, 373 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9805019

work page arXiv 1999
[62]

Farrahet al., Observational Evidence for Cosmological Coupling of Black Holes and its Implications for an Astrophysical Source of Dark Energy, Astrophys

D. Farrahet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.944, L31 (2023), arXiv:2302.07878 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2023
[63]

I. R. Klebanov, L. Susskind, and T. Banks, Nucl. Phys. B317, 665 (1989)

1989
[64]

Duplessis and D

F. Duplessis and D. A. Easson, Phys. Rev. D92, 043516 (2015), arXiv:1506.00988 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2015
[65]

J. B. Dent, D. A. Easson, T. W. Kephart, and S. C. White, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D26, 1750117 (2017), arXiv:1608.00589 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2017