Echoes of bimodal axial gravitational perturbations in a uniform-density star in Einstein-{\AE}ther gravity

Alan B. Pavan; Amilcar Rabelo de Queiroz; Elcio Abdalla; Kai Lin; Wei-Liang Qian

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Echoes of bimodal axial gravitational perturbations in a uniform-density star in Einstein-{\AE}ther gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that axial gravitational perturbations of a uniform-density star in scalar-Einstein-Æther gravity form a coupled bimodal vector–tensor system whose evolution produces echoes from either an interior potential well or the…

desk verdict Solid, workmanlike extension of echo studies to Einstein-Æther stars; the surface-echo claims need a proper junction-condition derivation before they are trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21321 v2 pith:GJKQUTOQ submitted 2025-07-28 gr-qc

Kai Lin , Wei-Liang Qian , Alan B. Pavan , Amilcar Rabelo de Queiroz , Elcio Abdalla This is my paper

classification gr-qc MSC 83C3583D0583C25 PACS 04.30.-w04.50.Kd04.40.Dg

keywords gravitational-waveechoesEinstein-Æthergravityaxialgravitationalperturbationsuniform-densitystarscalarhairbimodalwavepropagationRegge-WheelermasterequationLorentzviolation

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 studies what happens to the ripples of spacetime around a star of constant density when gravity is described by scalar-Einstein-Æther theory, a modified theory containing an extra timelike vector field. It claims that a minimally coupled scalar field cannot form nontrivial hair on such a star: any nontrivial profile would diverge at the center, so the exterior is Schwarzschild-like and the interior must be constructed numerically. For axial perturbations, the equations cannot be split into independent channels whenever the combined æther parameter $c_{14}=c_1+c_4$ is nonzero; instead they form a coupled pair of wave equations, one tensor-like and one vector-like, with distinct speeds $c_T$ and $c_V$. The paper shows numerically that this bimodal system produces echoes in two regimes: a compact star whose radius lies inside the vacuum potential peak traps waves in an interior well and rings repeatedly, while a larger star produces more attenuated echoes seeded by the density jump at the surface. The authors conclude that these effects are unlikely to be observed, because the vector field couples to ordinary matter only through very small coefficients.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coupled pair of master equations, Eqs. (3.3), obtained from the Regge-Wheeler gauge for axial perturbations, together with the effective potentials $V_T$, $V_V$ and the coupling potentials $U_T$, $U_V$ listed in Appendix B. The decisive feature is the second, vector channel with speed $c_V$: it is forced by $c_{14}\neq 0$ and cannot be gauged away. The tortoise coordinate $r_* = \int^r dr/\sqrt{fh}$ puts the wave operator into one-dimensional form, and the shape of the combined effective potential decides the echo mechanism: an interior well when the stellar radius $r_s$ lies below the vacuum potential maximum, or a surface-dominated barrier when it does not. The background on which these potentials sit is built numerically because no closed-form interior solution exists.

What would settle it

Integrate Eqs. (A.1) inward with surface boundary data and evaluate $\sqrt{-g}\,g^{rr}\partial_r\Psi$ at successive grid points approaching $r=0$; a nonzero limit would overturn the scalar no-hair claim, while a vanishing limit supports it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a uniform-density star in scalar-Einstein-Æther gravity does not admit nontrivial scalar hair, and that its axial gravitational perturbations are inherently bimodal: when $c_{14}\neq 0$, the vector and tensor channels cannot be decoupled, and the dynamics reduces to two coupled master equations, Eqs. (3.3), with propagation speeds $c_V^2 = [2c_1-c_+(2c_1-c_+)]/[2c_{14}(1-c_+)]$ and $c_T^2=1/(1-c_+)$. Solving these equations by finite differences, the paper finds two echo mechanisms. If the stellar radius is smaller than the radius where the vacuum Schwarzschild-type effective potential peaks, an effective potential well forms inside the star and waves bounce repeatedly between the center and the potential maximum, producing persistent echoes with a half-wave phase loss at the center. If the radius is larger, the effective potentials decrease monotonically and the main reflection source is the discontinuity at the star's surface, yielding weaker and shorter-lived echoes. The bimodal medium does not develop shock fronts in the explored parameter space, and any distinguishing signature from the vector channel is suppressed by the tiny æther couplings, so the model effectively falls back to general relativity observationally.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that the scalar field equation holds all the way into a regular stellar center, so that $\sqrt{-g}\,g^{rr}\partial_r\Psi$ must vanish there and the scalar is forced to be constant; if the numerically built interior develops a cusp at the center, the no-hair conclusion and the echo calculation built on it would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any uniform-density star in this theory with $c_{14}\neq 0$, axial gravitational waves are predicted to arrive as two coupled modes travelling at different speeds, so a single echo train is replaced by a two-velocity family of echoes.
A sufficiently compact star, with radius below the effective-potential maximum, should ring with long-lived echoes caused by trapping between the stellar center and the potential peak.
A less compact star should also produce echoes, but these are seeded by the surface discontinuity and are attenuated more quickly, making them harder to distinguish from quasinormal ringdown.
The echo interval in both regimes is set by the ratio of the characteristic length scale to the relevant wave speed, so measuring two different intervals would in principle probe the ratio $c_V/c_T$.
Because the vector field couples to matter only through tiny coefficients, any imprint of the second speed is suppressed far below detectability, and observational constraints on $c_{14}$ from this channel are not expected.

Reading between the lines

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

The no-scalar-hair reasoning appears to extend to any spherically symmetric star with a regular center and a minimally coupled scalar: it uses only the Klein-Gordon equation and the junction condition, so a cusp-like center is the one place the conclusion could break.
The surface-discontinuity echo mechanism is not specific to modified gravity; if the central claim holds, ordinary neutron-star-like density jumps would also be expected to imprint weaker echo trains, with modified gravity mainly changing their attenuation and spacing.
A direct numerical test would be to excite only the fast channel with large amplitude and look for energy transfer to the slow channel; the paper reports no shock in its samples, but a scan over amplitude and equation of state could settle whether that absence is generic.
If echo trains from a compact object were ever observed with two distinct periodicities, the ratio would give $c_V/c_T$; the paper's observability argument says such a detection is unlikely, but the prediction is a concrete target for future searches.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

First thing to know: this is a solid, workmanlike extension of the echo program to a uniform-density star in scalar-Einstein-Æther gravity. The genuinely new piece is the coupled vector-tensor axial perturbation system, Eq. (3.3), with the explicit demonstration that the axial channel does not decouple for c14≠0, and the numerical evolutions showing two echo mechanisms. The no-hair argument in Appendix A is clean and analytic, and I think the reader's worry about it is overblown: given the standard regularity assumptions at the center, the conclusion ∂rΨ=0 inside and (by continuity) outside is fine. The paper also deserves credit for the explicit caveat in Appendix C that the bimodal signature is not observable—that is the kind of honesty that keeps the field healthy.

The main soft spot is the surface matching. Eq. (3.8) is not a derived junction condition; it is a finite-difference averaging that forces the second radial derivative to vanish at r_s. For the potential-well echo mechanism, that may be a harmless numerical convention, but the second mechanism—echoes from the surface discontinuity—is carried by exactly that surface. If the correct linearized Israel junction conditions (including any surface layer terms) produce a jump in the radial derivative of the perturbation variables, the waveforms in Figs. 5–9 and their attenuation rates could change materially. The paper needs to either derive the matching from the action or show that the averaging is equivalent to it.

Other soft spots are smaller: the potentials in Appendix B are not re-derived in the main text, no code or convergence tests are reported, the parameter choices are few, and the blanket 'cannot be decoupled' should be read as 'cannot be decoupled in this gauge/truncation.' The circularity concern raised in the reader report does not land—the potentials are outputs of the model, not constraints imposed by hand.

Who is this for? Specialists in modified-gravity stellar perturbations and echo phenomenology. It will likely be useful as a reference for the non-decoupling result and the no-hair argument, even if the unobservability caveat limits its phenomenological reach. I would send it to a serious referee—the derivation deserves checking—but I would insist on a substantive response on the junction-condition issue before accepting the surface-echo claims. Net: send to review, expect major revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper considers a static, spherically symmetric uniform-density star in Einstein-Æther theory with a minimally coupled scalar field. It argues that the scalar field cannot be nontrivial because of the Israel junction conditions and regularity at the center, and constructs numerical background solutions for representative parameters. For axial gravitational perturbations with c14 ≠ 0, the authors show that the equations do not decouple and reduce to two coupled master equations, Eqs. (3.3), for tensor and vector channels with speeds cT and cV. Their numerical evolutions exhibit two classes of echoes: one produced by a potential well between the center and the vacuum potential maximum, and one attributed to the discontinuity at the stellar surface. The paper concludes that these bimodal effects are unlikely to be observationally accessible.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a worked example of gravitational-wave echoes in a Lorentz-violating stellar model: a concrete bimodal system where two channels have different propagation speeds and where both potential-well and surface-discontinuity echo mechanisms appear. The analytic no-hair result in Appendix A is a clean, numerics-independent strength, and the authors are explicit about the observational inaccessibility of the effect, which is an appropriate statement of the paper's scope. I do not regard the construction of the potentials from the same background as circular; that is the standard way effective potentials are defined. The main obstacles are technical: the background æther normalization in Eq. (2.6) appears inconsistent as printed, and the perturbed junction conditions at the stellar surface are never derived. Because both issues affect the quantitative waveforms, the central numerical claims are not yet fully supported.

major comments (3)

[Section II, Eq. (2.6)] The ansatz u^μ = sqrt(h(r)) δ_t^μ is not unit timelike for the metric ds^2 = -h(r) dt^2 + ...; one obtains u^μ u_μ = -h^2, which equals -1 only when h = 1. The correct unit timelike vector is u^μ = (1/sqrt(h)) δ_t^μ, equivalently u_μ = sqrt(h) δ_t^μ. The field equations and the numerical backgrounds in Figs. 1–2 depend on this normalization through the Lagrange multiplier λ in Eq. (2.5). The authors should correct the displayed ansatz and state which normalization was actually used in the numerical code; as printed, the background equations are internally inconsistent.
[Section III, Eq. (3.8)] The surface connection condition in Eq. (3.8) is an un-derived finite-difference averaging prescription, not a consequence of the linearized Israel junction conditions. The background has a jump in f' at r_s, the transformation in Eq. (3.2) involves ρ and P and therefore has a discontinuous derivative at the surface, and no perturbed surface energy-momentum tensor is introduced. Since the second echo mechanism is explicitly attributed to the surface discontinuity, the waveforms in Figs. 5–9 are not established unless the matching of h1 and δu^φ (or equivalently of R_B and R_C) is derived from the action and the background shell. This is the central missing step for one of the two main claims.
[Appendix B] After the no-hair result of Appendix A, the background has Ψ' = 0 everywhere, but the effective potentials in Eqs. (B.1) still contain terms with r^2 Ψ' (for example, the last term in V_V). The paper should state explicitly whether those terms were set to zero in the numerical evolutions and, ideally, provide the simplified potentials. As written, a reader cannot reproduce Figs. 3–9 without reverse-engineering the algebraic reduction, which is a reproducibility gap in the central numerical claim.

minor comments (3)

[Section III, Eq. (3.9)] The initial condition for φ at the first time step reads φ^1_j = ψ^0_j + Δt Rdot_R_C(...); this appears to be a typo and should read φ^0_j + Δt Rdot_R_C(...).
[Figure 3 caption] The caption for the bottom-left and bottom-right panels states 'c_T = 1, c_V = 1.3, where c_T > c_V' and 'c_T = 1, c_V = 0.8, where c_T < c_V'; the inequalities are reversed and are inconsistent with the parameter values shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
[Section III] The finite-difference evolutions do not state the grid sizes, the CFL condition, or any convergence checks; a brief resolution study would make the numerical echo trains more convincing.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the coupled master equations, background solutions, and echo waveforms are derived from the stated action and numerically evolved, not fitted or renamed inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained from the action (2.1) to the background equations (2.7), the axial perturbation ansatz (3.1), the transformation (3.2), and the coupled master equations (3.3) with effective potentials given in Appendix B. The potentials are explicit outputs of the model, not parameters fitted to the echo waveforms, and the speeds c_V and c_T are fixed by the Einstein-Æther coefficients through Eq. (3.4). No quantity is defined in terms of the echo signal it is later said to predict, and no fit to external data is performed. The scalar-hair argument in Appendix A is a standard regularity and continuity argument applied to ∇^μ∇_μ Ψ = 0, not a self-citation. References [33,34] are used as context for the existence of two echo types, but the numerical evolutions in Figs. 4-9 are independently computed from the coupled system, so even if [34] involves overlapping authors, that citation is not load-bearing. The surface discretization at Eq. (3.8) is an un-derived numerical convention rather than a derived Israel matching condition; this is a correctness risk for the surface-echo mechanism, but it is not circular because it does not secretly presuppose the echo outcome. Similarly, the assumed separation-of-variables ansatz (3.1) is an assumption, not a self-referential reduction. Overall, no circular step can be exhibited with a quote and an explicit equation identity, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particle, field, or conserved quantity: the æther vector field and the scalar field are pre-existing elements of the theory under study. The ledger is dominated by hand-chosen parameters (rho, Pc, c14, cV) that set the background configurations and the two echo regimes, plus three structural assumptions about junction conditions, separability, and regularity at the center. The no-hair argument is the one piece that does not depend on these choices.

free parameters (4)

c14 = c1 + c4 = 0.1 in Figs. 1-7; effectively set by Eq. (3.10) in Figs. 8-9
The æther coupling combination that enters the background metric and the potential shapes. Chosen by hand to give representative configurations; no observational constraint used.
rho (uniform density) = 0.25 or 1.2 in the figures
Matter density input chosen ad hoc to realize the two regimes (compact star with potential well versus larger star with monotonic potential).
Pc (central pressure) = 1.2 or 0.3 in the figures
Determines star radius and compactness together with rho; chosen by hand to place the star on either side of the vacuum potential maximum.
cV = 1.0, 0.8, or 1.3 in the figures; 0.894427 for Eq. (3.10)
Vector propagation speed entering the coupled master equations; set by choosing c1..c4 via Eq. (3.4). In Figs. 8-9 the parameters are engineered to produce cV^2 = c1/c14 = 0.8.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The scalar field obeys the Klein-Gordon equation and must be regular at r = 0, with sqrt(-g) g^rr ∂rΨ = 0 in the interior and exterior (Appendix A, Eq. A.6).
Load-bearing premise of the no-scalar-hair result. Requires that the metric stays non-degenerate and the PDE description survives to the center of a numerically integrated background.
domain assumption Separation of variables with the Regge-Wheeler gauge form of Eq. (3.1) is valid for both coupled channels, giving a finite set of ordinary differential equations.
The paper states the derivation of Eq. (3.3) is based on the feasibility of separating variables. If the gauge fixing or the harmonic decomposition fails for the coupled system, the master equations are not the correct description.
domain assumption Israel junction conditions of the first kind, continuity of f, h, and P at the surface, are sufficient to glue the interior and exterior (Eq. 2.8), with the second-kind condition on h' continuity invoked later.
The background and subsequent potentials depend on this matching. The text notes the jump in rho induces a discontinuity in f' and a surface energy-momentum tensor that is never explicitly constructed, leaving the thin-shell content of the model implicit.
standard math The dimensionless rescaling G_ae = (1 - c14/2) G_N and the parameter constraints from the Cherenkov bound of [48] are accepted as background constraints.
The paper relies on prior results for the post-Newtonian and Cherenkov constraints to argue that the ci are tiny, which is the basis for the unobservability conclusion.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Echoes of bimodal axial gravitational perturbations in a uniform-density star in Einstein-{\AE}ther gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GJKQUTOQ

@misc{pith2026250721321,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Echoes of bimodal axial gravitational perturbations in a uniform-density star in Einstein-\AEther gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GJKQUTOQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21321}
}

abstract

This paper studies axial gravitational perturbations of a uniform-density star in scalar-Einstein-{\AE}ther theory. By applying the Israel junction conditions explicitly in the presence of a scalar field minimally coupled to the gravitational sector, it is shown that a nontrivial scalar profile cannot be sustained, as it induces a divergence at the stellar center. Since analytical solutions are unattainable, the background metric is determined through numerical integration for a few representative configurations. For axial gravitational perturbations, it is found that the system of equations of motion cannot be decoupled as long as the {\AE}ther parameter $c_i$ does not vanish. Subsequently, the dynamics of the system can be simplified to two coupled equations that describe vector and tensor perturbations with distinct wave velocities $c_V$ and $c_T$, giving rise to a bimodal system. It is shown that as the stellar radius is smaller than that of the maximum of the vacuum Schwarzschild-type effective potential, a potential well is formed, leading to the emergence of echo phenomenon for the axial gravitational perturbations. When the stellar radius exceeds the {\it could-have-been} maximum, the resulting effective potential decreases monotonically, and the wave propagation is primarily dictated by the discontinuity occurring at the star's surface, producing a type of more attenuated echo waves. In addition, we explore the specific properties of the resultant bimodal medium consisting of two degrees of freedom with distinct sound speeds. However, it is understood that such a characteristic does not lead to observational implications, and subsequently hardly offers a potential empirical means to constrain specific metric parameters of the Einstein-{\AE}ther. We present numerical calculations and discuss the potential implications of our findings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21321 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: The same as Fig. 1 but for the parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: The effective potentials [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (8 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: However, as the latter echoes are attenuated, the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Numerical results of the spacetime evolutions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: The same as Fig. 4, but for the parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: For both cases, two distinct modes are presented [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: The same as Fig. 4, but for the parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7: The same as Fig. 4, but for the parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8: Numerical results of the effective potentials (first c [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9: Numerical results of temporal evolutions of the vect [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Model-agnostic search of gravitational wave echoes in LVK data
gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A multi-detector phase-marginalized echo search finds no statistically significant long-lived quasinormal-mode echoes in GW150914, GW231226, and GW250114, and sets 90% upper limits on their network SNR and amplitude.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

work page 2016
[2]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241103 (2016)

work page 2016
[3]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221101 (2017)

work page 2017
[4]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Astrophys. J. 851, L35 (2017)

work page 2017
[5]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141101 (2017). 13

work page 2017
[6]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017)

work page 2017
[7]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. X 6, 041015 (2016)

work page 2016
[8]

Acernese et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 024001 (2015)

F. Acernese et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 024001 (2015)

2015

Show all 48 references

[9]

B. P. Abbott et al. (Virgo, Fermi-GBM, INTEGRAL, and LIGO Scientiﬁc Collaborations), Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L13 (2017)

2017
[10]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238

2019 arXiv
[11]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L2 (2019), arXiv:1906.11239

2019 arXiv
[12]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L3 (2019), arXiv:1906.11240

2019 arXiv
[13]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L4 (2019), arXiv:1906.11241

2019 arXiv
[14]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L5 (2019), arXiv:1906.11242

2019 arXiv
[15]

Akiyama, A

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, A. Alberdi, et al., Astrophys. J.Lett. 875, L6 (2019), arXiv:1906.11243

2019 arXiv
[16]

Akiyama, Astrophys

Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration and K. Akiyama, Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L17 (2022)

2022
[17]

Jacobson and D

T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, Phys. Rev. D 64, 024028 (2001)

2001
[18]

C. M. Will, Living Rev. Relativity 9, 3 (2006)

2006
[19]

B. Z. Foster and T. Jacobson, Phys. Rev. D 73, 064015 (2006)

2006
[20]

Mukohyama, Class

S. Mukohyama, Class. Quantum Grav. 27, 223101 (2010)

2010
[21]

Horava, Class

P. Horava, Class. Quantum Grav. 28, 114012 (2011)

2011
[22]

Clifton, P

T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla and C. Skordis, Phys. Rep. 513, 1 (2012)

2012
[23]

Eling, T

C. Eling, T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, arXiv.gr- qc/0410001
[24]

Jacobson and D

T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, Phys. Rev. D 70, 024003(2004)

2004
[25]

Lin et al., Phys

K. Lin et al., Phys. Rev. D 99, 023010(2019)

2019
[26]

Lin et al., Phys

K. Lin et al., Phys. Rev. D 91, 044003(2015)

2015
[27]

Lin, V.H

K. Lin, V.H. Satheeshkumar and A. Wang. Phys. Rev. D 93, 124025(2016)

2016
[28]

K. Lin et. al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 23, 1443004(2014)

2014
[29]

Cardoso, et

V. Cardoso, et. al., Phys. Rev. D 94, 084031 (2016)

2016
[30]

Cardoso and P

V. Cardoso and P. Pani, Nature Astronomy 1: 586-591 (2017)

2017
[31]

Pani and V

P. Pani and V. Ferrari, Class. Quantum Grav. 35 15LT01 (2018)

2018
[32]

R. F. Rosato, S. Biswas, S. Chakraborty and P. Pani, Phys. Rev. D 111, 084051 (2025)

2025
[33]

H. Liu, et. al. Phys. Rev. D 104, 044012 (2021)

2021
[34]

Shen, et al., Phys

S.-F. Shen, et al., Phys. Rev. D 110, 084022 (2024)

2024
[35]

Lin and W.-L

K. Lin and W.-L. Qian, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 529 (2022)

2022
[36]

Y. H. Hsu, A. Lasenby, W. Barker, A. Durakovic and M. Hobson, arXiv:2411.02550 [gr-qc]
[37]

H. P. Nollert, Class. Quant. Grav. 16, R159-R216 (1999)

1999
[38]

Israel, Nuovo Cim

W. Israel, Nuovo Cim. B 44S10, 1 (1966)

1966
[39]

A Relativist’s Toolkit: The Mathematics of Black-Hole Mechanics,

E. Poisson, “A Relativist’s Toolkit: The Mathematics of Black-Hole Mechanics,” Cambridge University Press, 2009

2009
[40]

Avil´ es, H

L. Avil´ es, H. Maeda and C. Martinez, Class. Quant. Grav. 37, no.7, 075022 (2020)

2020
[41]

Gundlach, R

C. Gundlach, R. H. Price, and J. Pullin, Phys. Rev. D 49, 883 (1994)

1994
[42]

Gundlach, R

C. Gundlach, R. H. Price, and J. Pullin, Phys. Rev. D 49, 890 (1994)

1994
[43]

Cuadros-Melgar, J

B. Cuadros-Melgar, J. de Oliveira, and C. E. Pellicer, Phys. Rev. D 85, 024014 (2012)

2012
[44]

Abdalla, O

E. Abdalla, O. P. F. Piedra, F. S. Nunez, and J. de Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D 88, 064035 (2013)

2013
[45]

Cuadros-Melgar, J

B. Cuadros-Melgar, J. de Oliveira, and C. E. Pellicer, J . Phys. Conf. Ser. 453, 012025 (2013)

2013
[46]

Lin, PHYS

K. Lin, PHYS. REV. D 107, 124002 (2023)

2023
[47]

Lin and W.-L

K. Lin and W.-L. Qian, Chin. Phys. C47, 085101(2023)

2023
[48]

J. W. Elliott, G. D. Moore and H. Stoica, JHEP 08, 066 (2005)

2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

work page 2016

[2] [2]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241103 (2016)

work page 2016

[3] [3]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221101 (2017)

work page 2017

[4] [4]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Astrophys. J. 851, L35 (2017)

work page 2017

[5] [5]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141101 (2017). 13

work page 2017

[6] [6]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017)

work page 2017

[7] [7]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc and Virgo Collabo- rations), Phys. Rev. X 6, 041015 (2016)

work page 2016

[8] [8]

Acernese et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 024001 (2015)

F. Acernese et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 024001 (2015)

2015