Scalaron-modified null focusing and radial monotonicity in static f(R) gravity

Francisco S. N. Lobo; Francisco Tello-Ortiz; Jean B\'aez Cuevas; Maickol Mu\~noz-Palma

Scalaron-modified null focusing and radial monotonicity in static f(R) gravity

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In static $f(R)$ gravity, the matter-plus-scalaron term $E_K$ exactly fixes the derivative of the metric ratio $Q=B/A$, so its sign governs radial monotonicity.

desk verdict A clean, modestly novel exact identity for static f(R), with honest scope limits; worth serious refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08818 v1 pith:KFOED2LU submitted 2026-08-09 gr-qc

Maickol Muñoz-Palma , Francisco S. N. Lobo , Jean Báez Cuevas , Francisco Tello-Ortiz This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qc

keywords f(R)gravitystaticsphericallysymmetricspacetimesscalaronnullfocusingradialmonotonicityKillinghorizonsexactsolutiondiagnosticsenergyconditions

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper establishes an exact radial identity in metric $f(R)$ gravity: on a static, spherically symmetric interval with $A>0$, $B>0$, and $F=f_R>0$, the derivative of $Q=B/A$ is fixed by an effective convergence numerator $E_K$ that combines the matter projection $8\pi(\rho+p_r)$ with the scalaron Hessian. The sign of $E_K$ therefore decides whether $B/A$ is monotone, with strict monotonicity whenever the sign is strict. At a regular nondegenerate Killing horizon the integrated identity keeps the finite endpoint ratio $q_i=B'(r_i)/A'(r_i)$, so a fixed-sign $E_K$ orders those ratios rather than excluding two horizons; equal endpoint values force $E_K\equiv 0$ and $Q$ constant. Saturation is equivalent to $Q=\text{const}$, and in vacuum forces the scalaron to be linear in the areal radius. This matters because it yields a model-independent static-sector diagnostic for metric $f(R)$ gravity and a precise boundary condition for future horizon-regular treatments of black-hole interiors.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the radial metric ratio $Q(r)=B(r)/A(r)$ and the effective radial-convergence numerator $E_K$, defined as the $K^\mu K^\nu$ projection of $8\pi T_{\mu\nu}+\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu F$ for the radial null vector $K=(A^{-1/2},B^{1/2},0,0)$. The exact identity $Q'(r)=-r(AF)^{-1}E_K$ is obtained by combining a purely geometric radial null-focusing relation for $R_{\mu\nu}K^\mu K^\nu$ with the $f(R)$ field equation $R_{\mu\nu}K^\mu K^\nu = E_K/F$. Because $r$, $A$, and $F$ are positive on the static interval, the sign of $E_K$ controls monotonicity; the boundary statements follow by taking one-sided limits of the same integrated relation, and the saturation statement follows from setting $Q'=0$.

What would settle it

Find a connected static interval with $A>0$, $B>0$ and $F>0$ throughout, on which $E_K$ is nonnegative or nonpositive and not identically zero, but $B/A$ is not strictly monotonic; that would contradict the master identity and Proposition 1. A direct numerical or analytic evaluation of $Q'$ and $E_K$ for any proposed solution is enough to check whether the relation $Q'=-r(AF)^{-1}E_K$ holds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is the exact master identity $$Q'(r) = - r\,(A(r)F(r))^{-1}E_K(r),$$ with $Q=B/A$, $F=f_R$, and $E_K = 8\pi(\rho+p_r) + B F'' + (1/2)(B' - B A'/A)F'$, valid on any connected static interval with $A>0$, $B>0$, $F>0$. Since the prefactor $r/(AF)$ is positive, the sign of $E_K$ fixes the monotonicity of $Q$. Integrated, the identity retains the finite one-sided limit of $Q$ at a regular nondegenerate Killing horizon, so the endpoint datum is the slope ratio $q_i=B'(r_i)/A'(r_i)$; a fixed-sign $E_K$ orders these ratios instead of ruling out two horizons. The equality case $E_K=0$ is equivalent to $B/A$ constant, and in vacuum forces $F=F_0+F_1 r$. The paper exhibits a complete non-saturated solution (the constant-density stellar interior) and applies the diagnostics to known static vacuum families, finding one family where $F$ vanishes inside the static patch and another whose displayed power-law exponents are inconsistent with the original radial equation.

Load-bearing premise

The proof divides by $F=f_R$, so the result only holds on intervals where this scalar coupling stays strictly positive; the paper itself finds one exact solution with $F=0$ inside its static patch, so that zero is a real obstruction, not a technicality.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In the General-Relativity limit ($F=1$) the identity reduces to a known null-energy-condition monotonicity result for static spherical spacetimes, so the paper's statement is a strict generalization, not a parallel construction.
For any proposed static $f(R)$ solution, Eq. (20), or the equivalent undivided radial equation, supplies a cheap consistency check; the power-law vacuum family examined in the paper fails this check as displayed, so it should be treated as unresolved until the exponents are clarified.
For a static patch bounded by two regular nondegenerate Killing horizons, a sign-definite $E_K$ yields a strict ordering of the slope ratios $q_i$, and equality $q_1=q_2$ with fixed sign forces $E_K\equiv 0$ and $Q$ constant.
Crossing $F=0$ inside a static interval invalidates the divided identity and the monotonicity theorem there, even though the undivided field equations may still hold algebraically; one constant-$X$ solution indeed has $F(3M)=0$ inside its two-horizon patch.
Saturation ($B/A$ constant) in vacuum implies $F=F_0+F_1 r$; this includes constant-curvature solutions but does not itself ensure regularity, since one saturation-class solution is singular at $r\to 0$.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper does not build a rotating analogue, but the same logic suggests replacing $Q$ by an invariant constructed from the two null expansions in axisymmetric $f(R)$ spacetimes and testing whether a fixed-sign modified convergence still forces monotonicity; this remains an open check.
Although the stellar benchmark is incompressible, the theorem directly implies a test for any static anisotropic star: as long as $F>0$, the sign of $8\pi(\rho+p_r)$ plus the scalaron Hessian determines whether $B/A$ increases or decreases across the interior, so an empirical inversion could flag a loss of positive effective coupling.
Equation (31) can be read as a matching condition: specify $q_i$ at the outer horizon, evolve a horizon-regular double-null formulation through the nonstatic interior, and require its static reduction to recover the same boundary ordering; the paper leaves that program explicitly incomplete.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: Eq. (20) is the real thing, the boundary treatment is the actual contribution, and the paper is unusually disciplined about what it does not prove. If you work on static f(R) solutions, this is a handy diagnostic to have.

The central identity, Q' = - r/(A F) E_K, follows from the metric f(R) field equations plus the geometric Raychaudhuri identity. I checked the steps: Eq. (16) is purely geometric, Eq. (17) is the correct Hessian contraction, and combining them with the null-projected field equations gives Eq. (20) directly. The authors are upfront that the radial null projection itself is not new; the new part is the covariant interpretation of E_K as the combined matter-plus-scalaron convergence and, more importantly, the systematic boundary analysis. Proposition 2 and Corollary 2 clarify that a fixed-sign E_K orders the finite horizon endpoint ratios q_i rather than excluding two horizons. That correction is a genuine service, because the earlier GR literature sometimes slides from radial monotonicity into horizon-counting. The saturation result—E_K=0 iff B/A=const, which in vacuum forces F linear in r—is a clean geometric repackaging of the Multamäki–Vilja constant-X condition.

The constant-density stellar benchmark is a complete non-saturated example, and the GR limit matches Wang–Battista under the dictionary Q ↔ 1/Q. The MV solution (I) example is a nice cautionary tale: F=0 at r=3M inside the two-horizon static patch, so the divided identity doesn't hold across the patch. They say this clearly; it doesn't sink the theorem because the theorem is stated only on intervals with F>0 and A,B>0.

Soft spots: the monotonicity propositions are immediate corollaries of (20), so the paper's conceptual novelty is modest. The power-law exponent mismatch claim in Appendix A is the one thing I would want independently verified before relying on it; the algebra is simple but it depends on the fidelity of the quoted MV radial equation. The continuity assumption on E_K is slightly stronger than needed but is stated transparently. These are minor.

Verdict: send it out. A competent referee can check the algebra quickly, and the paper provides practical checks for a crowded subfield. I would cite it if I were doing static f(R) reconstructions.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives an exact radial monotonicity law for static, spherically symmetric spacetimes in metric f(R) gravity. For ds^2=A(r)dt^2-dr^2/B(r)-r^2 dΩ^2, it defines an effective radial-convergence numerator E_K that combines the matter null projection with the scalaron Hessian, and proves the master identity Q'(r)=-(r/(A(r)F(r)))E_K(r) with Q=B/A. On any connected static interval satisfying A>0, B>0, and F=f_R>0, the sign of E_K therefore fixes the monotonicity of Q. The paper proves monotonicity, boundary-integral, horizon-endpoint-ordering, and saturation propositions, treats the General-Relativity limit, gives the constant-density stellar interior as a non-saturated benchmark, and applies the identity to the Multamäki–Vilja constant-X and power-law solutions. It is explicit throughout that the results are restricted to connected static intervals and that F>0 is necessary for division by F; it also identifies where one published constant-X solution crosses f_R=0 inside its two-horizon static patch. The central claim is that the identity provides a model-independent static-sector diagnostic that orders finite Killing-horizon endpoint ratios rather than excluding multiple horizons.

Significance. If the result holds, it supplies an exact, parameter-free diagnostic for the static sector of metric f(R) gravity, with a clean separation between bulk monotonicity and boundary data. The derivation is transparent and checkable: Eq. (16) follows from the non-affine Raychaudhuri equation, Eq. (17) is the correct Hessian contraction, and Eq. (20) is an algebraic consequence of the field equations. The General-Relativity limit reproduces the independent Wang–Battista result after the appropriate translation, and the constant-density benchmark gives a complete exact realization of the strict non-saturated branch. The manuscript is also honest about scope: the F>0 requirement is stated as a hypothesis, and the paper demonstrates its necessity by displaying a solution whose f_R vanishes inside the static patch. The power-law consistency check is a concrete, falsifiable diagnostic of a published solution family. These strengths justify publication even though the identity is derived rather than conjectured and the novelty lies in the interpretation and boundary treatment.

minor comments (4)

[Section III.B, Eq. (17)] The Hessian contraction in Eq. (17) is correct, but the derivation would be more readable if the two contributing Christoffel symbols were displayed explicitly, since the signs and factors of 1/2 in the connection term are easy to misread.
[Section VI.C] The exponent mismatch between Eq. (64) and the published relation (66) is correctly identified, but the authors should add one sentence stating explicitly that Eq. (A1) is quoted using the conventions of Ref. [17], so that a reader can distinguish a transcription artifact from a genuine error in the published family.
[Section IV, Proposition 2] The statement of Proposition 2 uses the notation Q(a) and Q(b) for one-sided limits even when the endpoints are not in the open interval; the proof clarifies this, and a brief parenthetical in the proposition statement would improve the presentation.
[Figure 1] The schematic panels would be easier to interpret with explicit axis labels and with the endpoint values q_1 and q_2 marked, particularly in panel (b), where the ordering statement is the main point.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central identity is a direct consequence of the f(R) field equations and a purely geometric Raychaudhuri identity, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The derivation of the master identity is self-contained. Eq. (7) is just the null-null contraction of the field equations (2); Eq. (16) is the Raychaudhuri equation for a radial null congruence in spherical symmetry and is explicitly independent of the field equations; Eq. (17) is the direct Hessian evaluation for a radial scalar. Combining these three algebraically gives Eq. (20), Q' = -(r/(AF)) E_K, on any interval with A>0, B>0, F>0, and the sign and monotonicity statements (Propositions 1-3 and Corollaries 1-3) follow by integration. No parameter is fitted and no output is fed back as an input. The saturation equivalence E_K=0 iff Q=constant is a derived consequence of Eq. (20), not a presupposition. The General-Relativity limit is checked against the independent Wang-Battista result (Ref. [28]) using the explicit dictionary Q=1/(A_WB B_WB), and the constant-density star is a complete exact solution on which Q'(r) is computed directly. The constant-X saturation class is openly traced to Multamaki-Vilja's earlier radial equation rather than presented as new or cited as authoritative. The power-law section is a consistency test of an external published family; it finds a mismatch, which is the opposite of circular. The only load-bearing premise, F>0, is explicitly stated in Eq. (4), and its necessity is demonstrated via solution (I) with F(3M)=0 at Eq. (58); this is a genuine scope restriction, not circularity. Self-citations [10,11] are contextual references on generalized energy conditions and do not carry the derivation. No circular step satisfying the quoting requirement was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation uses the standard metric f(R) field equations, the non-affine Raychaudhuri equation, and the static spherical ansatz. The only non-standard postulates are the positivity and regularity domain conditions (A > 0, B > 0, F > 0, E_K continuous) and the regular nondegenerate Killing-horizon endpoint assumptions. No free parameters are fitted to data and no new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Metric f(R) field equations, Eq. (2): F R_munu - (1/2) f g_munu - grad_mu grad_nu F + g_munu box F = 8 pi T_munu.
The entire analysis is conducted within metric f(R) gravity; Eq. (2) is the starting point for the contraction Eq. (5) that defines E_K.
domain assumption Static, spherically symmetric ansatz Eq. (3): ds^2 = A dt^2 - dr^2/B - r^2 dOmega^2 with r the areal radius.
All results hold only for this metric form on a connected static interval, as stated in Sec. II.
domain assumption Positivity conditions Eq. (4): A > 0, B > 0, F = f_R > 0.
Needed to keep t timelike, r spacelike, the null frame real, and to divide by F in Eq. (7). The paper emphasizes that a zero of F invalidates the divided identity and the positive-coupling monotonicity argument.
domain assumption E_K is continuous on compact subintervals of the static domain.
Stated at the start of Sec. IV to make the strict monotonicity alternatives unambiguous; the paper notes it is stronger than needed for the non-strict statements.
domain assumption Regular nondegenerate Killing horizon endpoints satisfy Eq. (28): A = B = 0 with A'B' > 0, simple zeros, and a finite positive F limit.
This defines the endpoint datum q_i = B'/A' and is required for Corollaries 2 and 3; extremal horizons are excluded from the boundary-ordering statements.
standard math Non-affine Raychaudhuri equation Eq. (14) for hypersurface-orthogonal null congruences.
Used to derive the purely geometric identity Eq. (16); this is standard textbook material in General Relativity.
domain assumption The Multamaki-Vilja radial equation Eq. (A1), as quoted, is the correct vacuum radial relation for their variables X = ps = A/B.
The exponent-mismatch diagnostic in Sec. VI.C and Appendix A depends on this transcription being faithful to Ref. [17]; a miscopy would invalidate the mismatch claim.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scalaron-modified null focusing and radial monotonicity in static f(R) gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KFOED2LU

@misc{pith2026260808818,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scalaron-modified null focusing and radial monotonicity in static f(R) gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KFOED2LU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08818}
}

abstract

We derive an exact radial monotonicity law for static, spherically symmetric spacetimes in metric $f(R)$ gravity. For $ds^2=A(r)dt^2-dr^2/B(r)-r^2d\Omega^2$, the matter contribution and the scalaron Hessian combine into an effective radial-convergence numerator that fixes the derivative of $\Q=B/A$. On every connected static interval with $A>0$, $B>0$, and $f_R\equiv df/dR>0$, its sign therefore determines the monotonicity of $\Q$. The integrated identity retains the finite, generally nonzero value of $B/A$ at a regular nondegenerate Killing horizon; consequently, a fixed-sign convergence condition orders the horizon endpoint ratios rather than excluding two horizons. A zero-integral obstruction arises for equal endpoint values, including boundaries where $B\to0$ while $A$ remains finite and nonzero. Saturation is equivalent to $B/A=\mathrm{const}$, and in vacuum requires a scalaron profile linear in the areal radius. We illustrate the strict non-saturated branch, within the General-Relativity sector, using the exact constant-density stellar interior, and apply the equality and consistency diagnostics to the constant-$X$ and power-law solutions of Multam\"aki and Vilja. In particular, in the Schwarzschild--de Sitter two-horizon parameter range, one constant-$X$ solution crosses $f_R=0$ inside the complete static patch, while a direct substitution into the original radial equation exposes an unresolved exponent mismatch in the displayed power-law family. The results provide a model-independent static-sector diagnostic and a precise starting point for a future horizon-regular treatment of black-hole interiors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08818 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1. Schematic summary of the radial monotonicity and boundary results. Panel (a) illustrates the master identity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Horizon-regular cross-focusing and inner-horizon obstructions in spherical f(R) gravity
gr-qc 2026-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

In spherical f(R) gravity, a regular outer horizon followed by an ingoing segment with mixed matter-scalaron source at or below F/r^2 cannot be followed by a second regular inner marginal horizon on the same generator.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Relativistic cosmology. I,

A. K. Raychaudhuri, “Relativistic cosmology. I,” Phys. Rev.98, 1123–1126 (1955)

work page 1955
[2]

The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,

S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose, “The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A314, 529–548 (1970)

work page 1970
[3]

R. M. Wald,General Relativity(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984)

1984
[4]

The Raychaudhuri equation in inhomogeneous FLR W space- time: Af(R)-gravity model,

M. Chakraborty, A. Bose, and S. Chakraborty, “The Raychaudhuri equation in inhomogeneous FLR W space- time: Af(R)-gravity model,” Phys. Scr.98, 025007 (2023)

work page 2023
[5]

Constraining the number of horizons with energy conditions,

R.-Q. Yang, R.-G. Cai, and L. Li, “Constraining the number of horizons with energy conditions,” Class. Quantum Grav.39, 035005 (2022)

work page 2022
[6]

No inner-horizon the- orem for black holes with charged scalar hairs,

R.-G. Cai, L. Li, and R.-Q. Yang, “No inner-horizon the- orem for black holes with charged scalar hairs,” JHEP 03, 263 (2021)

work page 2021
[7]

No Cauchy horizon theorem for nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with charged scalar hairs,

Y.-S. An, L. Li, and F.-G. Yang, “No Cauchy horizon theorem for nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with charged scalar hairs,” Phys. Rev. D104, 024040 (2021)

work page 2021
[8]

No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in Einstein–Maxwell–Horndeski theories,

D. O. Devecio˘ glu and M.-I. Park, “No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in Einstein–Maxwell–Horndeski theories,” Phys. Lett. B829, 137107 (2022)

work page 2022

Show all 31 references

[9]

No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in charged Gauss–Bonnet black holes,

D. O. Devecio˘ glu and M.-I. Park, “No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in charged Gauss–Bonnet black holes,” Eur. Phys. J. C84, 168 (2024)

2024
[10]

Energy conditions in modified gravity,

S. Capozziello, F. S. N. Lobo, and J. P. Mimoso, “Energy conditions in modified gravity,” Phys. Lett. B730, 280– 283 (2014), [arXiv:1312.0784 [gr-qc]]

2014 arXiv
[11]

Gener- alized energy conditions in extended theories of gravity,

S. Capozziello, F. S. N. Lobo, and J. P. Mimoso, “Gener- alized energy conditions in extended theories of gravity,” Phys. Rev. D91, 124019 (2015), [arXiv:1407.7293 [gr- qc]]

2015 arXiv
[12]

f(R) theories of gravity,

T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, “f(R) theories of gravity,” Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 451–497 (2010)

2010
[13]

f(R) theories,

A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, “f(R) theories,” Living Rev. Relativ.13, 3 (2010)

2010
[14]

Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: fromF(R) theory to Lorentz non- invariant models,

S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, “Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: fromF(R) theory to Lorentz non- invariant models,” Phys. Rep.505, 59–144 (2011)

2011
[15]

Extended theories of gravity,

S. Capozziello and M. De Laurentis, “Extended theories of gravity,” Phys. Rep.509, 167–321 (2011)

2011
[16]

F(R) gravity and in- flation,

L. Sebastiani and R. Myrzakulov, “F(R) gravity and in- flation,” Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys.12, 1530003 (2015)

2015
[17]

Spherically symmetric so- lutions of modified field equations inf(R) theories of gravity,

T. Multam¨ aki and I. Vilja, “Spherically symmetric so- lutions of modified field equations inf(R) theories of gravity,” Phys. Rev. D74, 064022 (2006), [arXiv:astro- ph/0606373]

2006
[18]

Consistency condition of spherically symmetric solutions inf(R) gravity,

R. Saffari and S. Rahvar, “Consistency condition of spherically symmetric solutions inf(R) gravity,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A24, 305–309 (2009), [arXiv:0710.5635 [astro-ph]]

2009 arXiv
[19]

Static spherically symmet- ric solutions inF(R) gravity,

L. Sebastiani and S. Zerbini, “Static spherically symmet- ric solutions inF(R) gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1591 (2011)

2011
[20]

Exact black hole solutions with a conformally coupled scalar field and dynamic Ricci curvature inf(R) gravity theories,

T. Karakasis, E. Papantonopoulos, Z.-Y. Tang, and B. Wang, “Exact black hole solutions with a conformally coupled scalar field and dynamic Ricci curvature inf(R) gravity theories,” Eur. Phys. J. C81, 897 (2021)

2021
[21]

Exact rotating black hole solutions forf(R) gravity by the modified Newman–Janis algorithm,

P. Chaturvedi, U. Kumar, U. Thattarampilly, and V. Kakkat, “Exact rotating black hole solutions forf(R) gravity by the modified Newman–Janis algorithm,” Eur. Phys. J. C83, 1124 (2023)

2023
[22]

Exact solutions off(R) gravity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics,

L. Hollenstein and F. S. N. Lobo, “Exact solutions off(R) gravity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. D78, 124007 (2008), [arXiv:0807.2325 [gr- qc]]

2008 arXiv
[23]

Spherically symmetric and static solutions inf(R) gravity coupled with electro- magnetic fields,

R. A. Hurtado and J. R. Arenas, “Spherically symmetric and static solutions inf(R) gravity coupled with electro- magnetic fields,” Phys. Rev. D102, 104019 (2020)

2020
[24]

Exact charged black hole solutions inDdimensions inf(R) gravity,

Z.-Y. Tang, B. Wang, and E. Papantonopoulos, “Exact charged black hole solutions inDdimensions inf(R) gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C81, 346 (2021)

2021
[25]

Ther- modynamics of topological black holes inR 2 gravity,

G. Cognola, M. Rinaldi, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini, “Ther- modynamics of topological black holes inR 2 gravity,” Phys. Rev. D91(2015), 104004 [arXiv:1503.05151 [gr- qc]]

2015 arXiv
[26]

Topological phantom AdS black holes inF(R) gravity,

B. Eslam Panah and M. E. Rodrigues, “Topological phantom AdS black holes inF(R) gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C83, 237 (2023)

2023
[27]

Cor- rected thermodynamics of black holes inf(R) gravity with electrodynamic field and cosmological constant,

M. Xu, Y. Zhang, L. Yang, S. Yang, and J. Lu, “Cor- rected thermodynamics of black holes inf(R) gravity with electrodynamic field and cosmological constant,” Entropy26, 868 (2024)

2024
[28]

Energy conditions in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes and effective geome- tries,

Z.-L. Wang and E. Battista, “Energy conditions in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes and effective geome- tries,” JCAP07, 106 (2026), [arXiv:2604.16545 [gr-qc]]

2026 arXiv
[29]

Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,

M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, “Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,” Am. J. Phys.56, 395–412 (1988)

1988
[30]

Modified-gravity wormholes without exotic matter,

T. Harko, F. S. N. Lobo, M. K. Mak, and S. V. Sushkov, “Modified-gravity wormholes without exotic matter,” Phys. Rev. D87, 067504 (2013), [arXiv:1301.6878 [gr- qc]]

2013 arXiv
[31]

¨Uber das Gravitationsfeld einer Kugel aus inkompressibler Fl¨ ussigkeit nach der Einsteinschen Theorie,

K. Schwarzschild, “ ¨Uber das Gravitationsfeld einer Kugel aus inkompressibler Fl¨ ussigkeit nach der Einsteinschen Theorie,” Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys.) 424–434 (1916), [arXiv:physics/9912033]

1916 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Relativistic cosmology. I,

A. K. Raychaudhuri, “Relativistic cosmology. I,” Phys. Rev.98, 1123–1126 (1955)

work page 1955

[2] [2]

The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,

S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose, “The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A314, 529–548 (1970)

work page 1970

[3] [3]

R. M. Wald,General Relativity(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984)

1984

[4] [4]

The Raychaudhuri equation in inhomogeneous FLR W space- time: Af(R)-gravity model,

M. Chakraborty, A. Bose, and S. Chakraborty, “The Raychaudhuri equation in inhomogeneous FLR W space- time: Af(R)-gravity model,” Phys. Scr.98, 025007 (2023)

work page 2023

[5] [5]

Constraining the number of horizons with energy conditions,

R.-Q. Yang, R.-G. Cai, and L. Li, “Constraining the number of horizons with energy conditions,” Class. Quantum Grav.39, 035005 (2022)

work page 2022

[6] [6]

No inner-horizon the- orem for black holes with charged scalar hairs,

R.-G. Cai, L. Li, and R.-Q. Yang, “No inner-horizon the- orem for black holes with charged scalar hairs,” JHEP 03, 263 (2021)

work page 2021

[7] [7]

No Cauchy horizon theorem for nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with charged scalar hairs,

Y.-S. An, L. Li, and F.-G. Yang, “No Cauchy horizon theorem for nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with charged scalar hairs,” Phys. Rev. D104, 024040 (2021)

work page 2021

[8] [8]

No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in Einstein–Maxwell–Horndeski theories,

D. O. Devecio˘ glu and M.-I. Park, “No scalar-haired Cauchy horizon theorem in Einstein–Maxwell–Horndeski theories,” Phys. Lett. B829, 137107 (2022)

work page 2022