Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Theory of superlensing with complex frequency illuminations

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Abstract promises a superlensing theory; the body lacks it

desk verdict The abstract promises a superlensing theory but the full text is an unrelated neutron-star paper; the submission is unassessable and should be returned. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.10742 v5 pith:A3XPVCJX submitted 2025-08-14 physics.optics physics.class-ph

Philippe Lalanne , Tong Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsphysics.class-ph
keywords superlensingcomplexfrequencyilluminationpulseresolutionlimitnegativepermittivityslabevanescentwaveamplificationmanuscriptmismatch
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

The abstract announces a theoretical framework for superlensing with complex-frequency and pulse illuminations. It says the framework clarifies what resolution can be expected and tempers the high expectations raised by recent electromagnetic experiments. The full text of the submission, however, is a different manuscript on rotating neutron stars, with no equations or discussion related to superlensing. As submitted, the only superlensing content is the abstract itself.

What carries the argument

The abstract points to a theoretical framework in which the illumination's complex frequency controls the amplification of evanescent waves in a negative-permittivity superlensing slab; pulse illumination enters as a superposition of complex frequencies. The full text contains no such machinery. Its actual machinery is the leptodermic effective-surface expansion applied to rotating neutron stars in the Kerr metric, which is unrelated to the abstract's claim.

What would settle it

The decisive check is already available: search the full text for any equation, term, or discussion of superlensing, complex frequency, pulse illumination, evanescent waves, or resolving power; none appears. A second check would be to obtain the promised framework and compare its predicted resolution against a controlled experiment varying the illumination's complex-frequency or pulse bandwidth; in this submission that comparison is impossible because the framework is absent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery would be that a tractable model of evanescent-wave amplification in a negative-permittivity slab can predict the resolution of a superlensing slab under complex-frequency or pulse illumination, and that this resolution is bounded in a way that tempers recent experimental claims. The supplied text does not present that model: it contains no mention of superlensing, complex frequencies, pulses, evanescent waves, or resolution. The stated discovery exists only in the abstract, with no derivation in the body.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the manuscript actually contains the theoretical framework promised in the abstract; here the full text is a different paper on rotating neutron stars, so that premise is not met.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The abstract contends that complex-frequency illumination should yield a predictable, bounded resolution for a superlensing slab.
  • It asserts that pulse illumination, viewed as a band of complex frequencies, should be analyzable within the same framework.
  • It asserts that the framework reveals inherent resolution limitations.
  • It asserts that high expectations raised by recent electromagnetic superlensing experiments should be tempered.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A reader cannot validate the abstract's claim from this submission; the body is a different manuscript, so any test must start from a document that actually contains the promised model.
  • One concrete check would be to measure the resolution of a negative-permittivity slab under complex-frequency or chirped-pulse illumination and compare the curve with the bound the abstract promises; this submission supplies no such curve.
  • The mismatch itself is the substantive fact: whatever the merits of the neutron-star calculation, it cannot serve as evidence for the superlensing claim.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The abstract announces a new theoretical framework for superlensing under complex-frequency illumination, claiming it clarifies achievable resolution and tempers expectations raised by recent electromagnetic experiments. The full text, however, is a completely different manuscript: it is titled "Macroscopic approaches to rotating neutron stars" and develops an effective-surface model for rotating neutron stars, deriving moments of inertia, mass–radius relations, and rotational periods within the Kerr-metric approximation. There is no equation, section, figure, table, or reference in the body that addresses superlensing, complex frequencies, evanescent waves, or pulse illumination. The central claim of the abstract is therefore entirely unsupported by the submitted text.

Significance. If the promised superlensing framework were present, the paper could provide a useful theoretical bound on complex-frequency superlensing and a counterpoint to optimistic experimental reports. That potential cannot be evaluated because the required content is missing. The actual body is a neutron-star paper in nuclear astrophysics; even if that material is sound, it does not substantiate the abstract's claim and is outside the stated optics scope. No machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, or parameter-free derivations relevant to the superlensing claim are present. As submitted, the manuscript is internally inconsistent: the abstract describes one paper and the text contains another.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract vs. full text] The abstract states that the paper introduces a theoretical framework for superlensing with complex frequency illuminations and compares it with recent electromagnetic experiments. Section 1 through Section 4 contain no such framework: they develop an effective-surface model for rotating neutron stars, with Eqs. (14)–(20) and Figs. 1–4 all concerned with moments of inertia, masses, and periods of neutron stars. No equation or derivation in the manuscript involves a superlensing slab, complex frequency, evanescent-wave amplification, or pulse illumination. The central advertised claim is absent.
  2. [Abstract: experimental comparison] The abstract claims the framework 'tempers high expectations raised by the recent electromagnetic experiments.' The body cites no electromagnetic experiments on superlensing; the reference list contains only astrophysics and nuclear-physics papers. There is no data set, comparison, or discussion that could support this claim. This is a load-bearing component of the announced contribution and is missing entirely.
  3. [Abstract: '[accepted Optica]' note] The abstract block includes the annotation '[accepted Optica]'. This conflicts with the body, which is not the paper described by the abstract and which cites a competing submission (Ref. [91]) as 'submitted now to Reports on Progress in Physics.' The provenance of the accepted-paper claim is unexplained and inconsistent with the submitted content. At minimum this requires clarification; as it stands, it reinforces the mismatch between the advertised and actual manuscript.
  4. [Entire manuscript] Because the body contains none of the claimed derivations, there is no technical content to audit for the superlensing result. The mismatch is not a local error: it affects every section, equation, figure, and reference. This is not a revision-scale issue; the submission would need to be replaced by a different paper to address the abstract's claims.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Title and keywords] The title, keywords, and Ukrainian abstract all describe the neutron-star paper. None mention superlensing, complex frequency, or optics. The metadata are internally consistent with the body but inconsistent with the English abstract.
  2. [References] The reference list contains no entries on superlensing, complex-frequency illumination, or electromagnetic metamaterials. If the abstract's claim were legitimate, such references would be expected; their absence reinforces the mismatch.
  3. [Section headings] Section headings ('Basic theoretical points', 'Discussions', 'Conclusions') are generic and give no indication of the advertised superlensing content; they are consistent with the neutron-star text only.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found; the abstract's superlensing framework is absent from the body, but absence is not circularity.

full rationale

The claimed circularity in the abstract cannot be assessed because the body of the manuscript is a different paper: the abstract promises a novel theoretical framework for superlensing under complex-frequency illumination, whereas the full text is a macroscopic neutron-star model using the Kerr metric and effective-surface approximation. No equation or argument in the text addresses superlensing, evanescent waves, or complex frequencies, so there is no derivation chain to be circular. Within the neutron-star text that is actually present, the derivations are algebraic consequences of standard GRT and the effective-surface ansatz, with parameters chosen to match observational data rather than being fitted to the quantities that are then 'predicted'. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. 35, 37, 91) provide the prior ES framework but are not used to define the new result into existence. Therefore, no circular step satisfying the requirement of a quotable, specific reduction is present. The abstract-body mismatch is a serious completeness/correctness issue, but it is not circularity.

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

The full text does not contain the abstract's superlensing derivation, so no parameters, axioms, or invented entities for the claimed framework can be audited. The neutron-star content in the full text would require a separate review and is not the advertised claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Theory of superlensing with complex frequency illuminations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A3XPVCJX

@misc{pith2026250810742,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Theory of superlensing with complex frequency illuminations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A3XPVCJX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.10742}
}
read the original abstract

Recent experiments have demonstrated that the resolution of superlensing slabs can be significantly enhanced with complex frequency illuminations. In this study, we introduce a novel theoretical framework for analyzing superlensing. The framework offers new and transparent insights. It helps clarify what resolution can be expected with complex frequency, or more generally pulse illuminations, but it also highlights inherent limitations and tempers high expectations raised by the recent electromagnetic experiments. [accepted Optica]

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

  1. Revealing Sharp Spectral Features with Complex Frequency Excitations: Challenges and Opportunities

    physics.optics 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Physical complex-frequency probing robustly sharpens spectral features against noise, while post-detection synthesis shows limited gains under realistic noise and is often outperformed by simpler filtering.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    1.� R. C. Tolman. Static solutions of Einstein’s field equations for spheres of fluid. Phys. Rev. 55 (1939)

    work page 1939

  2. [10]

    DOI: 10.1140/epja/i2014-14010-5. 27.� H. Zheng, G. Giuliani, A. Bonasera. Coulomb corrections to the extraction of the density and temperature in non-relativistic heavy ion collisions. J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 41 (2014) 055109. DOI: 10.1088/0954-3899/41/5/055109. 28.� A. F. Fantina et al. Neutron star properties with unified equations of state of den...

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/i2014-14010-5 2014

  3. [12]

    DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1912.05705. 12.� M. C. Miller et al. The radius of PSR J0740+ 6620 from NICER and XMM -Newton data. Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2021) L28. DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ac089b. 13.� P. T. H. Pang et al., nuclear physics multimessenger astrophysics constraints on the neutron star equation of state: adding NICER’s PSR J0740+ 6620 measurement. Astro...

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.05705 1912

  4. [14]

    DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ac19ab. 14.� V. Doroshenko at al. A strangely light neutron star. Nature Astronomy 6 (2022)

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac19ab 2022

  5. [16]

    DOI: 10.1140/epja/s10050-023-00973-1. 34.� B. Sun, S. Bhattiprolu, J. M. Lattimer. Compiled properties of nucleonic matter and nuclear and neutron star models from nonrelativistic and relativistic interactions. Phys. Rev. C 109 (2024) 055801. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.109.055801. 35.� A. G. Magner et al. Symmetry energy and neutron skin from surface propertie...

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-023-00973-1 2024

  6. [22]

    Astrophys

    Equation of State and Structure. Astrophys. Space Sci. Libr., vol. 326 (Springer, New York, 2007). 44.� Y. Lim, J.W. Holt. Bayesian modeling of the nuclear equation of state for neutron star tidal deformabilities and GW170817. Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (2019)

    work page 2007

  7. [27]

    DOI: 10.1140/epja/i2014-14027-8. 75.� J. Piekarewicz, M. Centelles. Relativistic mean -field models and the neutron skin thickness of 208Pb. Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 054311. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.79.054311. 76.� T. Nikšić, D. Vretenar, P. Ring. Relativistic nuclear energy density functionals: Mean -field and beyond. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 66 (2011)

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/i2014-14027-8 2009

  8. [33]

    DOI: 10.1007/BF02746870. 85.� A. Krasiński. Ellipsoidal space-times, sources for the Kerr metric. Ann. Phys. 112 (1978)

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02746870 1978

Show all 52 references
  1. [44]

    DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2008-10. 78.� B. T. Reed et al. Implications of PREX-2 on the equation of state of neutron-rich matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 172503. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.172503. 79.� R. P. Kerr. Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an example of algebraic...

    2008 doi

  2. [50]

    DOI: 10.1016/0003-4916(78)90079-9. 86.� J. L. Friedman, J. R. Ipser, L. Parker. Rapidly rotating neutron star models. Astrophys. J. 304 (1986) 115 (ISSN 0004-637X). 87.� N. Stergioulas. Rotating stars in relativity. Living Rev. Relativity (Max Planck Institute for Gravitationa...

    1986 doi

  3. [78]

    31.� A.F

    DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/78. 31.� A.F. Fantina et al. Stellar electron -capture rates on nucl ei based on Skyrme functiona ls. EPJ Web of Conferences. Vol

    doi

  4. [92]

    DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad17ba. 18.� D. Sen and A. Guha. Estimating the dark matter halo velocity and surface temperature of some known pulsars due to dark matter capture. arXiv:2402.13795 [hep-ph] (2024). 19.� A. J. Dittmann et al. A more precise measurement of the radius of P...

    2024 arXiv

  5. [113]

    DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2008.04.005. 25.� H. Zheng, A. Bonasera. Non-Abelian behavior of α bosons in cold symmetric nuclear matter. Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 057602. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.83.057602. 26.� S. Gandolfi et al. The equa tion of state of neutron matter, symmetry energy ...

    2008 doi

  6. [149]

    50.� A.G

    DOI: 10.1007/BF01412028. 50.� A.G. Magner, A.I. Sanzhur, A.M. Gzhebinsky. Asymmetry and spin-orbit effects… Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 18 (2009)

    2009 doi

  7. [153]

    DOI: 10.1016/0003-4916(79)90132-4, 10.1016/0003-4916(80)90209-8. 65.� H. Krivine, J. Treiner, O. Bohigas. Derivation of a fluid -dynamical Lagrangian and electric giant resonances. Nucl. Phys. A 336 (1980)

    1980 doi

  8. [155]

    DOI: 10.1016/0375-9474(80)90206-8. 66.� E. Chabanat, et al. A Skyrme parametrization from subnuclear to neutron star densities. Nucl. Phys. A 627 (1997)

    1997 doi

  9. [156]

    English translation in Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 16 (1984)

    1984

  10. [159]

    DOI: 10.3390/universe10040159. 82.� J. B. Hartle. Slowly rotating relativistic stars. I. Equations of structure. The Astrophys. J. 150 (1967)

    1967 doi

  11. [170]

    DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89. 22.� G. Baym, H. A. Bethe, C. J. Pethick. Neutron star matter. Nucl. Phys. A 175 (1971)

    1971 doi

  12. [171]

    DOI: 10.1016/0370-1573(80)90001-0. 64.� B. Grammaticos, A. Voros. Semiclassical approximations for nuclear giant resonances. Ann. Phys. 123 (1979) 359; 127 (1980)

    1979 doi

  13. [185]

    DOI: 10.1016/0375-9474(85)90338-4. 70.� P. Danielewicz, J. Lee. Symmetry energy in nuclear surface. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 18 (2009)

    2009 doi

  14. [186]

    69.� W.D

    DOI: 10.1016/0003-4916(74)90292-8. 69.� W.D. Myers, W.J. Swiatecki, C.S. Wang. The surface energy of multi-component systems. Nucl. Phys. A 436 (1985)

    1985 doi

  15. [197]

    54.� J.S

    DOI: 10.1007/BF01011513. 54.� J.S. Rowlinson, B. Widom. Molecular Theory of Capillarity (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1982). 55.� M. Brack, C. Guet, H. -B. Håkansson. Selfconsistent semiclassical description of average nuclear properties a link between microscopic and macroscopic ...

    1982 doi

  16. [205]

    49.� V.M

    DOI: 10.1007/BF01415634. 49.� V.M. Strutinsky, A.G. Magner, V.Yu. Denisov. Density distributions in nuclei. Z. Phys. A 322 (1985)

    1985 doi

  17. [209]

    45.� S.L

    DOI: 10.1140/epja/i2019-12917-9. 45.� S.L. Shapiro, S.A. Teukolsky. Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact Objects (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004). DOI: 10.1002/9783527617661. 46.� N.N. Shchechilin et al. Unified equations of state for cold nonaccreti...

    2004 doi

  18. [225]

    DOI: 10.1016/0375-9474(71)90281-8. 23.� R. B. Wiringa, V. Fiks, A. Fabrocini. Equation of state for dense nucleon matter. Phys. Rev. C 38 (1988)

    1988 doi

  19. [231]

    68.� W.D

    DOI: 10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00180-8. 68.� W.D. Myers, W.J. Swiatecki. The nuclear droplet model for arbitrary shapes. Ann. Phys. 84 (1974)

    1974 doi

  20. [237]

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.11.237. 80.� S. A. Teukolsky. The Kerr metric. Class. Quantum Grav. 32 (2015) 124006. DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/12/124006. 81.� S. Schuster, M. Visser. Boyer –Lindquist space-times and beyond: metamaterial analogues for arbitrary space-times. Universe ...

    2015 doi

  21. [265]

    DOI: 10.1063/1.1705193. 84.� P. A. Hogan. An interior Kerr solution. Lett Nuovo Cim. 16 (1976)

    1976 doi

  22. [275]

    DOI: 10.1016/0370-1573(86)90078-5. 56.� M. Brack, R.K. Bhaduri. Semiclassical Physics (Addison-Wesley, 1997; 2nd ed. Westview Press, 2003). 57.� J. Lense, H. Thirring. Über den Einfluss der Eigenrotation der Zentralkörper auf die Bewegung der Planeten und Monde nach der Einste...

    1997 doi

  23. [292]

    DOI: 10.1140/epja/s10050-023-01199-x. 43.� P. Haensel, A.Y. Potekhin, D.G. Yakovlev. Neutron Stars

    doi

  24. [295]

    DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5f1e. 20.� Y. Kini et al. Constraining the properties of the thermonuclear burst oscillation source XTE J1814 -338 through pulse profile modelling. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron.Soc. 535 (2024)

    2024 doi

  25. [364]

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.55.364. 2.� J. R. Oppenheimer, G. M. Volkoff. On massive neutron cores. Phys. Rev. 55 (1939)

    1939 doi

  26. [374]

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.55.374. 3.� R.C. Tolman . Relativity, Thermodynamics, and Cosmology . (Dover Publications, New York, 1987; Oxford, the University Press, 1934, 1946, 1949, 1987). 4.� L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Theoretical Physics, v.2 Field theory (Butterworth -Heinema...

    1987 doi

  27. [390]

    DOI: 10.1086/589823. 89.� J. L. Friedman, N. Stergioulas. Rotating Relativistic Stars (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, 2013). DOI: 10.1007/s41114-017-0008-x. 90.� R. H. Boyer, R. W. Lindquist. A variational principle for a rotating relativistic fluid. Phys. Le...

    2013 doi

  28. [424]

    37.� A. G. Magner et al. Leptodermic corrections to the TOV equations and nuclear astrophysics within the effective surface approximation. arXiv:2409.04745 [nucl -th] (2024); accepted by the Nucl. Phys. A 1064 (2025) 123239. DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2025.123239. 38.� J.M. Latt...

    2024

  29. [479]

    39.� C.J

    DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.01.014. 39.� C.J. Horowitz, J. Piekarewicz. Neutron star structure and the neutron radius of 208Pb. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001)

    2005 doi

  30. [504]

    91.� A.G

    DOI: 10.1016/0031-9163(66)90975-9. 91.� A.G. Magner et al . Rotating neutron stars within the macroscopic effective surface approximation. arXiv:2509.13129v1 [gr-qc] 2025, submitted now to the Reports on Progress in Physics (2026). A. A. Улеєв1, О. Г. Магнер1, С. П. Майданюк2,...

    2025

  31. [519]

    DOI: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2011.01.055. 77.� N. Chamel, P. Haensel. Physics of neutron star crusts. Living Rev. in Relativity 11 (2008)

    2011 doi

  32. [626]

    60.� T.H.R

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.5.626. 60.� T.H.R. Skyrme. CVII. The nuclear surface. Philos. Mag. 1 (1956)

    1956 doi

  33. [664]

    48.� V.M

    DOI: 10.1142/9789812815941_0018. 48.� V.M. Strutinsky, A.G. Magner, M. Brack. The nuclear surface as a collective variable. Z. Phys. A 319 (1984)

    1984 doi

  34. [710]

    DOI: 10.1016/S0375-9474(97)00596-4. 67.� E. Chabanat, et al. A Skyrme parametrization from subnuclear to neutron star densities. II. Nuclei far from stability. Nucl. Phys. A 635 (1998)

    1998 doi

  35. [727]

    DOI: 10.1007/BF00762913. 58.� A. Bohr, B. R. Mottelson. Nuclear Structure. Vol. II: Nuclear Deformations (W.A. Benjamin, New York, 1975). DOI: 10.1063/1.3037453. 59.� D. Vautherin, D.M. Brink. Hartree–Fock calculations with Skyrme’s interaction. I. Spherical nuclei. Phys. Rev....

    1975 doi

  36. [885]

    The thermodynamik theory of capillarity under the hypothesis of a continuous variation of density

    DOI: 10.1142/S0218301309013002. 51.� J.P. Blocki et al. Nuclear asymmetry energy and isovector stiffness within the effective surface approximation. Phys. Rev. C 87 (2013) 044304. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.87.044304. 52.� J.P. Blocki, A.G. Magner, P. Ring. Slope -dependent nuclear...

    2013 doi

  37. [892]

    DOI: 10.1142/S0218301309012857. 71.� M. Centelles, X., et al. Nuclear symmetry energy probed by neutron skin thickness of nuclei. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 122502. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.122502. 72.� M. Centelles, et al. Origin of the neutron skin thickness of 208Pb in...

    2009 doi

  38. [1005]

    DOI: 10.1119/1.1783900. 83.� R. H. Boyer, R. W. Lindquist. Maximal analytic extension of the Kerr metric. J. Math . Phys. 8 (1967)

    1967 doi

  39. [1010]

    24.� B.-A

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.38.1010. 24.� B.-A. Li, L.-W. Chen, C. M. Ko. Recent progress and new challenges in isospin physics with heavy -ion reactions. Phys. Rep. 464 (2008)

    2008 doi

  40. [1043]

    61.� R.C

    DOI: 10.1080/14786435608238186. 61.� R.C. Barrett, D.F. Jackson. Nuclear Sizes and Structure (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977). 62.� P. Ring, P. Schuck. The Nuclear Many-Body Problem (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1980). DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-61885-4. 63.� J.P....

    1977 doi

  41. [1444]

    15.� G.G.L

    DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1509469/v1. 15.� G.G.L. Nashed. Confront ( , )f R T T ������� modified gravity with the massive pulsar PSRJ0740+6620. arXiv:2308.08565 [gr-qc] (2023). 16.� R. Kumar et al. Observational constraint from the heaviest pulsar PS R J0952-0607 on the equation o...

    2023 arXiv

  42. [1507]

    DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stae2398. 21.� T. M. Tauris et al. Formation of double neutron star systems. Astrophys. J. 846 (2017)

    2017 doi

  43. [2014]

    DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/20146602035. 32.� G. Baym et al. From hadrons to quarks in neutron stars: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 81 (2018) 056902. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6633/aaaea6. 33.� S. Goriely. Nuclear properties for nuclear astrophysics studies. Eur. Phys. J. A 59 (2023)

    2018

  44. [5647]

    40.� C.J

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.5647. 40.� C.J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz. Neutron radii of 208Pb and neutron stars. Phys. Rev. C 64 (2001) 062802. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.64.062802. 41.� A.F. Fantina, F. Gulminelli. Nuclear physics inputs for dense-matter modelling in neutron sta...

    2001 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.