Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Weyl-coupled photons cast a double black-hole shadow and a parity-protected backward birefringence signal that is exactly zero without the coupling.

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

2026-07-14 10:09 UTC pith:H7EM2H2M

load-bearing objection Solid computational unification of wave and geometric optics for Weyl-coupled photons; the new piece is the controlled two-polarization pipeline and the parity-protected backward signal, not the double shadow itself. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.10658 v1 pith:H7EM2H2M submitted 2026-07-12 gr-qc hep-th

Polarization-dependent observational signatures of Weyl-coupled photons around a black hole

Mao-Yuan Wan , Chen Wu This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-th
keywords Weyl-coupled photonsbirefringenceblack-hole shadowphoton ringscattering matrixgreybody factorsgravitational lensingmodified gravity
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 shows that a non-minimal coupling of photons to the Weyl tensor turns the vacuum around a Schwarzschild black hole into a birefringent medium: the two linear polarization states feel reciprocal optical metrics and therefore different photon spheres. The coupling α therefore splits the critical impact parameters, so each polarization casts its own shadow edge and photon ring; at α/M² = 0.75 the edges separate by 62 percent of the shadow radius. The authors compute a single, consistent set of wave-optical and geometric-optical observables for both polarizations—greybodies, absorption, differential cross sections, glories, shadows, rings, and null trajectories—using a Riccati–Hankel scattering-matrix extraction that keeps phase-sensitive quantities reliable and three independent ray tracers for the geometric chain. The cleanest observable they identify is the exact-backward intensity, which is identically zero when α = 0 and whose interference-null spacing directly measures the critical-curve splitting. A sympathetic reader cares because the same parity difference that produces the double shadow also supplies a background-free diagnostic of the coupling that is protected by the spin-1 helicity structure of electromagnetism.

Core claim

On a Schwarzschild background the Weyl coupling α splits the photon sphere and critical impact parameter of the two linear polarizations (PPM and PPL), producing a double shadow and a polarization-dependent photon ring; the two shadow edges separate by 62 percent of the shadow radius at α/M² = 0.75. The same splitting appears in every wave and geometric observable the authors compute, and the exact-backward cross section |g(π)|² vanishes identically at α = 0 by parity while its null spacing reads off b_PPL_c − b_PPM_c.

What carries the argument

The reciprocal light-cone factors W_PPM = 1/W_PPL that enter the two effective potentials; they force every photon-sphere-anchored quantity (shadow edges, glory spacing, absorption thresholds, Lyapunov exponents) to split in opposite directions, and they make the helicity-reversing amplitude g(θ) proportional to the parity difference S_M − S_E, so that the exact-backward flux is a pure birefringence signal.

Load-bearing premise

The optical metrics used for all shadow, ring, and capture results rescale only the angular sector and leave both polarizations sharing the ordinary Schwarzschild horizon; a fuller treatment of the coupling could tilt the radial light cone and move an effective horizon.

What would settle it

A polarization-resolved measurement of the exact-backward intensity that remains identically zero (within experimental noise) across a range of frequencies would rule out a non-zero α of the size considered, or a measured null spacing that fails to match π M / (b_PPL_c − b_PPM_c) would falsify the predicted interferometric readout of the critical-curve splitting.

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

If this is right

  • Polarized horizon-scale images should show two distinct critical curves whose fractional separation grows nearly linearly with α/M² (≈ 0.83 α/M²).
  • The photon-ring Lyapunov exponents split asymmetrically, so the contracting (PPM) sub-ring stack fades far faster than the expanding (PPL) stack.
  • The exact-backward flux is a pure parity-difference observable that is free of the mass–spin–inclination degeneracies that limit total-intensity shadow-size bounds.
  • Joint analysis of polarized ring shape and wave-optics birefringence can constrain α more tightly than either channel alone.
  • Any non-zero backward signal at θ = π is direct evidence that the electromagnetic parity degeneracy of Schwarzschild has been broken.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same parity-protected null structure that appears for charge Q in the Reissner–Nordström problem reappears here with α playing the role of Q, suggesting a common interferometric template for any parity-splitting deformation.
  • Because the geometric-optics reduction keeps the radial cone fixed, a future calculation that restores radial tilting could produce polarization-dependent horizons and therefore qualitatively new capture signatures not captured by the present double-shadow images.
  • Next-generation polarimetric arrays that resolve an 8 percent edge separation would already probe α/M² ∼ 0.1 even if the absolute shadow diameter remains mass-degenerate.
  • Extending the same Riccati–Hankel pipeline to Kerr would immediately test whether frame-dragging mixes the two polarizations enough to wash out the clean backward nulls.

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. The paper studies photons non-minimally coupled to the Weyl tensor on a Schwarzschild background, where the coupling α splits the two linear polarizations (PPM/PPL) into distinct optical metrics. Using the Chen–Jing master equation, the authors extract two-polarization scattering matrices via Riccati–Hankel matching and compute a unified suite of wave-optical observables (greybodies, absorption, differential cross sections, glories, and a parity-protected backward birefringence signal |g(π)|^{2}) together with geometric-optical ones (double shadow, photon-ring Lyapunov exponents, null trajectories). The central quantitative claims are that the critical impact parameters separate by 62% of the shadow radius at α/M^{2}=0.75 and that the backward signal vanishes identically at α=0, with null spacing set by b_PPL_c−b_PPM_c. Numerical controls (unitarity, free-potential test, optical-theorem consistency, convergence table, α=0 literature anchors) and three independent ray tracers support the results; α is treated as a phenomenological parameter inside the stability window.

Significance. If the results hold within the stated model, the work supplies a single, numerically controlled pipeline that links partial-wave scattering matrices to the double shadow and polarized photon ring for Weyl-coupled photons. The parity-protected backward signal |g(π)|^{2}, which is identically zero in the minimal theory and whose interference-null spacing reads off the critical-curve splitting, is a clean, falsifiable diagnostic. Explicit accuracy tests (max |S|−1 = 3.6 imes10^{-10}, free-potential |S−1|≤10^{-9}, optical-theorem consistency to 4 imes10^{-5}, Table 2 convergence, glory within 0.7° of Crispino et al.) and cross-validation by three ray tracers raise the reliability of the phase-sensitive and geometric claims above typical standards in the literature. The analysis functions as a constraint template for phenomenological α rather than a forecast for the QED-induced operator, which the authors correctly flag as unobservably small for astrophysical black holes.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. 2.3 and end of Sec. 6: the geometric-optics reduction V^±_geo = f W^±/r^{2} rescales only the angular sector and leaves the radial light cone dr/dt = ±f(r) unchanged, so both polarizations share the Schwarzschild horizon at r=2M. All shadow edges, photon-ring radii, Lyapunov exponents (Table 1), capture cross sections, and null trajectories rest on this truncation. The authors note that the full non-minimal coupling could tilt the radial cone and move an effective horizon; a short quantitative estimate of the size of that correction (or an explicit statement that the reported double-shadow and ring results are valid only inside the angular-only reduction) is needed for the geometric claims to be load-bearing.
  2. Sec. 7 and abstract: the 62% edge separation at α/M^{2}=0.75 and the fractional-separation formula ≈0.83 α/M^{2} are presented as observational diagnostics, yet the same section correctly states that such couplings do not arise from the QED operator for astrophysical black holes. The manuscript should more sharply separate the phenomenological template from any implication that current or near-future EHT/ngEHT data can constrain the Drummond–Hathrell coefficient; otherwise the observational-reach paragraph overstates the practical impact of the calculated splitting.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 1 caption and color bar: the label “a/M^{2}” should be “α/M^{2}” for consistency with the text and other figures.
  2. Eq. (2.5)–(2.6): the shared denominator r^{3}(r^{3}−8αM)^{2} is stated to lie inside the horizon for the admitted couplings; a one-line check that the zero never crosses r=2M for α/M^{2}∈[−0.25,0.75] would remove any residual regularity concern.
  3. Table 1: Lyapunov exponents are quoted per half-orbit; a brief reminder that successive subrings are demagnified by e^{-γ} (already in the caption) could also appear in the main text of Sec. 6 for readers who skip the table.
  4. Sec. 3.3: the Yennie reduction is applied with m=2; a short remark on why m=2 is sufficient for the displayed angular range (or a reference to the residual after m=1) would help reproducibility.
  5. References: the recent EHT polarimetry papers are cited; adding an explicit pointer to the ngEHT science case (or equivalent next-generation polarimetry roadmap) would strengthen the observational-implications paragraph without changing the scientific content.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: observables are computed forward from the Weyl-coupled action and master equation with α scanned as input, not fitted or defined from the targets.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The action (2.1) and modified Maxwell equation (2.2) yield the Chen–Jing master equation (2.3)–(2.6) with reciprocal light-cone factors W_PPM = 1/W_PPL; geometric optics then follows from the optical potential (2.7), producing the split photon spheres and critical impact parameters b_c^± listed in Table 1. Wave observables are obtained by Numerov integration plus Riccati–Hankel matching of the scattering matrix S_ℓ^±, with unitarity, free-potential, optical-theorem, convergence (Table 2), and literature-anchor checks at α=0. The double-shadow edges, glory spacing, and backward |g(π)|^{2} (which vanishes identically at α=0 by parity) are direct consequences of that matrix and of b_c^±(α); the null-spacing formula Δ(Mω)≈πM/(b_PPL_c−b_PPM_c) is an independent geometric estimate that is then verified against the partial-wave spectrum to a few percent, not a fit. Self-citations to the authors’ earlier absorption/scattering papers supply only numerical methodology; the load-bearing master equation and geometric-optics formulae are taken from Chen & Jing and from standard optical-metric reductions. α is treated as a free phenomenological parameter scanned inside the stability window; no target observable is used to define or fit an input. The angular-only truncation of the optical metric is an explicit modeling assumption, not a circular step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard Schwarzschild background, the Chen–Jing parity-separated master equation for Weyl-coupled photons, an angular-only geometric-optics reduction, and a phenomenological scan of α inside a stability window. α is the sole free parameter; no new particles or forces are invented. The ledger is small and mostly domain-standard; the main model choice that is not forced by prior data is the angular-only optical metric and the display of O(1) α/M² values.

free parameters (1)
  • α/M² (Weyl–photon coupling, dimensionless) = display range up to 0.75; QED estimate ~10⁻³⁵ (solar mass)
    Scanned by hand over {−0.25,0,0.25,0.5,0.75} to resolve polarization splitting. Not fitted to data; treated as a phenomenological EFT parameter. All quantitative splits (62% shadow separation, null spacings, γ±) scale with this choice.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Schwarzschild background metric f(r)=1−2M/r with no backreaction of the photon field.
    Stated in Sec. 2.2; all potentials, geodesics, and shadows are computed on this fixed geometry.
  • domain assumption Chen–Jing master equation: Weyl-coupled Maxwell equation separates into two parity sectors with effective potentials V±_ℓ involving W± and C± (Eqs. 2.3–2.6).
    Adopted from Ref. [5]; the entire wave-optics pipeline is a numerical solution of this equation.
  • ad hoc to paper Geometric-optics reduction rescales only the angular sector by W±, leaving the radial light cone unchanged (V±_geo = f W± / r²).
    Sec. 2.3 and closing paragraph of Sec. 6; authors note the full coupling could tilt the radial cone. All shadow, ring, and capture claims use this truncation.
  • domain assumption Stability/regularity window −M²/2 < α < M² (with odd-sector lower bound from time-domain growth).
    Sec. 2.1, following Ref. [5]; justifies the displayed α values as dynamically allowed.
  • standard math Standard partial-wave construction of spin-1 amplitudes f,g from parity combinations of S^E and S^M, with Yennie reduction for the long-range tail.
    Sec. 3.2; follows Crispino et al. and related black-hole scattering literature.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 21964 in / 3679 out tokens · 39090 ms · 2026-07-14T10:09:31.289337+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

A photon coupled non-minimally to the Weyl tensor propagates differently in its two linear polarization states: the vacuum around a black hole becomes a birefringent medium. On a Schwarzschild background the coupling $\alpha$ splits the photon sphere and the critical impact parameter of the two polarizations, producing a double shadow and a polarization-dependent photon ring; the two shadow edges separate by $62\%$ of the shadow radius at $\alpha/M^2=0.75$. We compute a unified set of wave-optical and geometric-optical observables for both polarizations across a range of $\alpha$: greybody factors, absorption cross sections, differential cross sections and their glories, a backward birefringence signal, shadows, photon rings, and null trajectories. The two-polarization scattering matrices are extracted with a Riccati--Hankel matching scheme that keeps the phase-sensitive observables reliable, and the geometric-optics chain is cross-validated with three independent ray tracers. The cleanest diagnostic is the backward signal: it is protected by parity and vanishes identically at $\alpha=0$.

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

47 extracted references · 26 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Drummond and S.J

    I.T. Drummond and S.J. Hathrell,QED vacuum polarization in a background gravitational field and its effect on the velocity of photons,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 343

    1980

  2. [2]

    Faster than light

    R.D. Daniels and G.M. Shore,“Faster than light” photons and charged black holes,Nucl. Phys. B425(1994) 634 [hep-th/9310114]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  3. [3]

    Balakin and J.P.S

    A.B. Balakin and J.P.S. Lemos,Non-minimal coupling for the gravitational and electromagnetic fields: a general system of equations,Class. Quantum Grav.22(2005) 1867

    2005

  4. [4]

    Turner and L.M

    M.S. Turner and L.M. Widrow,Inflation-produced, large-scale magnetic fields,Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 2743

    1988

  5. [5]

    Chen and J

    S. Chen and J. Jing,Dynamical evolution of the electromagnetic perturbation with Weyl corrections,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 064058

    2013

  6. [6]

    Chen and J

    S. Chen and J. Jing,Strong gravitational lensing for the photons coupled to Weyl tensor in a Schwarzschild black hole spacetime,JCAP2015(2015) 002 [1502.01088]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  7. [7]

    Heisenberg and H

    W. Heisenberg and H. Euler,Folgerungen aus der diracschen theorie des positrons,Z. Phys.98 (1936) 714

    1936

  8. [8]

    I., Astrophys

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration,First M87 event horizon telescope results. I., Astrophys. J. Lett.875(2019) L1

    2019

  9. [9]

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration,First M87 event horizon telescope results. VII. polarization of the ring,Astrophys. J. Lett.910(2021) L12

    2021

  10. [10]

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration,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(2022) L12

    2022

  11. [11]

    singularity

    R.A. Matzner,Scattering of massless scalar waves by a Schwarzschild “singularity”,J. Math. Phys.9(1968) 163. – 17 –

    1968

  12. [12]

    Sanchez,Absorption and emission spectra of a Schwarzschild black hole,Phys

    N. Sanchez,Absorption and emission spectra of a Schwarzschild black hole,Phys. Rev. D18 (1978) 1030

    1978

  13. [13]

    Futterman, F.A

    J.A.H. Futterman, F.A. Handler and R.A. Matzner,Scattering from Black Holes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)

    1988

  14. [14]

    Andersson,Scattering of massless scalar waves by a Schwarzschild black hole: A phase-integral study,Phys

    N. Andersson,Scattering of massless scalar waves by a Schwarzschild black hole: A phase-integral study,Phys. Rev. D52(1995) 1808

    1995

  15. [15]

    Glampedakis and N

    K. Glampedakis and N. Andersson,Scattering of scalar waves by rotating black holes,Class. Quantum Grav.18(2001) 1939 [gr-qc/0102100]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  16. [16]

    Das, G.W

    S.R. Das, G.W. Gibbons and S.D. Mathur,Universality of low energy absorption cross sections for black holes,Phys. Rev. Lett.78(1997) 417 [hep-th/9609052]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  17. [17]

    Crispino, S.R

    L.C.B. Crispino, S.R. Dolan and E.S. Oliveira,Electromagnetic wave scattering by Schwarzschild black holes,Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 231103

    2009

  18. [18]

    Crispino, S.R

    L.C.B. Crispino, S.R. Dolan, A. Higuchi and E.S. de Oliveira,Inferring black hole charge from backscattered electromagnetic radiation,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 064027

    2014

  19. [19]

    Decanini, A

    Y. Decanini, A. Folacci and B. Raffaelli,Resonance and absorption spectra of the Schwarzschild black hole for massive scalar perturbations: A complex angular momentum analysis,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 084035 [1108.5076]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  20. [20]

    Dolan,Scattering of long-wavelength gravitational waves,Phys

    S.R. Dolan,Scattering of long-wavelength gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 044004 [0710.4252]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  21. [21]

    Stratton, L.C.S

    T. Stratton, L.C.S. Leite, S.R. Dolan and L.C.B. Crispino,Series reduction method for scattering of planar waves by Kerr–Newman black holes,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 044025 [2004.10773]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    Wan and C

    M.-Y. Wan and C. Wu,Absorption and scattering of massless scalar wave from regular black holes,Gen. Rel. Grav.54(2022) 148 [2212.01798]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Wan and C

    M.-Y. Wan and C. Wu,Absorption and scattering of a high dimensional non-commutative black hole,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 28 [2301.07449]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    Cao and Y

    W.-G. Cao and Y. Xie,Weak deflection gravitational lensing for photons coupled to Weyl tensor in a Schwarzschild black hole,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 191

    2018

  25. [25]

    Huang, S

    Y. Huang, S. Chen and J. Jing,Double shadow of a regular phantom black hole as photons couple to the Weyl tensor,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 594 [1606.04634]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    Zhang, S

    Z. Zhang, S. Chen, X. Qin and J. Jing,Polarized image of a Schwarzschild black hole with a thin accretion disk as photon couples to Weyl tensor,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 991 [2106.07981]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    faster than light

    G.M. Shore,“faster than light” photons in gravitational fields: Causality, anomalies and horizons,Nucl. Phys. B460(1996) 379 [gr-qc/9504041]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  28. [28]

    Yennie, D.G

    D.R. Yennie, D.G. Ravenhall and R.N. Wilson,Phase-shift calculation of high-energy electron scattering,Phys. Rev.95(1954) 500

    1954

  29. [29]

    Lima Junior, C.L

    H.C.D. Lima Junior, C.L. Benone and L.C.B. Crispino,Scalar scattering by black holes and wormholes,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 638

    2022

  30. [30]

    Synge,The escape of photons from gravitationally intense stars,Mon

    J.L. Synge,The escape of photons from gravitationally intense stars,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 131(1966) 463

    1966

  31. [31]

    Falcke, F

    H. Falcke, F. Melia and E. Agol,Viewing the shadow of the black hole at the Galactic center, Astrophys. J. Lett.528(2000) L13 [astro-ph/9912263]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  32. [32]

    Cunha and C.A.R

    P.V.P. Cunha and C.A.R. Herdeiro,Shadows and strong gravitational lensing: a brief review, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.50(2018) 42 [1801.00860]. – 18 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  33. [33]

    Perlick and O.Y

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  34. [34]

    A. Bohn, W. Throwe, F. H´ ebert, K. Henriksson, D. Bunandar, M.A. Scheel et al.,What does a binary black hole merger look like?,Class. Quantum Grav.32(2015) 065002 [1410.7775]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  35. [35]

    James, E

    O. James, E. von Tunzelmann, P. Franklin and K.S. Thorne,Gravitational lensing by spinning black holes in astrophysics, and in the movie Interstellar,Class. Quantum Grav.32(2015) 065001 [1502.03808]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  36. [36]

    Sharma, L

    A. Sharma, L. Medeiros, G.N. Wong, C.-k. Chan, G. Halevi, P.D. Mullen et al.,Mahakala: A Python-based modular ray-tracing and radiative transfer algorithm for curved spacetimes, Astrophys. J.985(2025) 40 [2304.03804]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Vincent, T

    F.H. Vincent, T. Paumard, E. Gourgoulhon and G. Perrin,GYOTO: a new general relativistic ray-tracing code,Class. Quantum Grav.28(2011) 225011 [1109.4769]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  38. [38]

    Dexter and E

    J. Dexter and E. Agol,A fast new public code for computing photon orbits in a Kerr spacetime, Astrophys. J.696(2009) 1616 [0903.0620]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  39. [39]

    Ford and J.A

    K.W. Ford and J.A. Wheeler,Semiclassical description of scattering,Ann. Phys. (NY)7 (1959) 259

    1959

  40. [40]

    Matzner, C

    R.A. Matzner, C. DeWitt-Morette, B. Nelson and T.-R. Zhang,Glory scattering by black holes, Phys. Rev. D31(1985) 1869

    1985

  41. [41]

    Anninos, C

    P. Anninos, C. DeWitt-Morette, R.A. Matzner, P. Yioutas and T.-R. Zhang,Orbiting cross sections: Application to black hole scattering,Phys. Rev. D46(1992) 4477

    1992

  42. [42]

    Gralla, D.E

    S.E. Gralla, D.E. Holz and R.M. Wald,Black hole shadows, photon rings, and lensing rings, Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 024018 [1906.00873]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  43. [43]

    Gralla, A

    S.E. Gralla, A. Lupsasca and D.P. Marrone,The shape of the black hole photon ring: A precise test of strong-field general relativity,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 124004 [2008.03879]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  44. [44]

    Cardoso, A.S

    V. Cardoso, A.S. Miranda, E. Berti, H. Witek and V.T. Zanchin,Geodesic stability, Lyapunov exponents, and quasinormal modes,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 064016 [0812.1806]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  45. [45]

    Johnson et al.,Universal interferometric signatures of a black hole’s photon ring,Sci

    M.D. Johnson et al.,Universal interferometric signatures of a black hole’s photon ring,Sci. Adv.6(2020) eaaz1310 [1907.04329]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration,First m87 event horizon telescope results. vi. the shadow and mass of the central black hole,Astrophys. J. Lett.875(2019) L6 [1906.11243]. [47]Event Horizon Telescope Collaborationcollaboration,Constraints on black-hole charges with the 2017 eht observations of m87*,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 104047 [2105.09343]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  47. [47]

    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. Quantum Grav.40(2023) 165007 [2205.07787]. – 19 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023