Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Dark Matter Effects on the Curvature of Neutron Stars within the new Quarkyonic Model Coupled with Relativistic Mean Field Theory

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Adding dark matter raises the central spacetime curvature of quarkyonic neutron stars.

desk verdict A competent curvature post-processing of a quarkyonic+DM EOS, but the central input is delegated to a companion paper and the printed equations raise a double-counting question that needs resolving before the trends can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11435 v1 pith:NYUJWI7T submitted 2025-01-20 astro-ph.HE nucl-th

Jeet Amrit Pattnaik , D. Dey , R. N. Panda , M. Bhuyan , S. K. Patra This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEnucl-th
keywords darkmatterneutronstarsquarkyonicspacetimecurvatureKretschmannscalarrelativisticmean-fieldtheoryTolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoffequationscompactness
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 paper argues that even a small admixture of dark matter changes how spacetime is curved inside a neutron star built from quarkyonic matter. It combines a baryonic relativistic mean-field description, a quarkyonic phase in which a quark Fermi sea coexists with nucleons near the Fermi surface, and a dark-matter component, solves the Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkoff equations, and then evaluates four curvature invariants—the Ricci scalar, the Ricci-tensor contraction, the Kretschmann scalar, and the Weyl tensor—as functions of radius. The central finding is that dark matter softens the equation of state and raises the central density and pressure, which pushes the central values of the Ricci scalar, the Ricci-tensor contraction, and the Kretschmann scalar upward; quarkyonic matter does the opposite by stiffening the equation of state. A reader should care because this gives a concrete, calculable signature through which curvature measurements could in principle reveal whether dark matter and deconfined quarks are present in the densest observable stars.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on two pieces: the hybrid equation of state and the curvature identities that turn it into geometry. The equation of state is assembled as $E=E_{\rm BM}+E_{\rm QM}+E_{\rm DM}$ and $P=P_{\rm BM}+P_{\rm QM}+P_{\rm DM}$, where the quarkyonic part is a phenomenological phase in which quarks occupy low-momentum states above a transition density $n_t$ with a QCD confinement scale $\Lambda_{\rm cs}$, and the dark-matter part is a non-annihilating fermion with Fermi momentum $k_f^{\rm DM}$ coupled through a scalar mediator. Solving the Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkoff equations gives the density, pressure, and enclosed-mass profiles, which then feed the four invariants: $R(r)=8\pi(E_{\rm tot}(r)-3P_{\rm tot}(r))$, $J(r)=\sqrt{(8\pi)^2(E_{\rm tot}^2(r)+3P_{\rm tot}^2(r))}$, $K(r)=\sqrt{(8\pi)^2(3E_{\rm tot}^2(r)+3P_{\rm tot}^2(r)+2P_{\rm tot}(r)E_{\rm tot}(r))-128E_{\rm tot}(r)m(r)/r^{3}+48m^{2}(r)/r^{6}}$, and $W(r)=\sqrt{\frac{4}{3}\left(6m(r)/r^{3}-8\pi E_{\rm tot}(r)\right)^2}$. These identities carry the conclusion: any change in the central density or pressure—dark matter raising them, quarkyonic matter lowering them—shows up directly in the central values of $R$, $J$, and $K$.

What would settle it

A precise, model-independent mass–radius measurement of a heavy neutron star (from a future X-ray timing or gravitational-wave event) that falls outside the mass–radius band predicted by this paper's DM-admixed quarkyonic equation of state would falsify the input equation of state and with it the curvature shift; a direct sign check is equally decisive—if an independent calculation of the same hybrid model found that adding dark matter lowers rather than raises the central density, the central claim would reverse.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that the interior spacetime geometry of a neutron star responds oppositely to dark matter and quarkyonic matter. For a star built from the quarkyonic effective field theory with the effective relativistic mean-field model, the central Kretschmann scalar $K$, Ricci scalar $R$, and Ricci-tensor contraction $J$ all increase when dark matter is added at Fermi momenta $k_f^{\rm DM}=0.03$–$0.04$ GeV, because the dark-matter component softens the total equation of state and lifts the central density and pressure. Changing the quarkyonic parameters—the transition density $n_t$ and the QCD confinement scale $\Lambda_{\rm cs}$—toward a stiffer equation of state lowers these central curvature values. The same calculation shows that dark matter reduces compactness and central pressure, while higher transition densities raise compactness and central pressure, and the trends hold for both the G3 and IOPB-I nuclear parameter sets across canonical $1.4\,M_\odot$ and maximum-mass stars.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that the mixed baryonic–quarkyonic–dark-matter equation of state, with its chosen transition density, confinement scale, and dark-matter coupling, faithfully represents matter inside a real neutron star; if that matter model is unrepresentative, every curvature profile inherits the error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, neutron stars with more dark matter should show higher central values of the Ricci scalar, Ricci-tensor contraction, and Kretschmann scalar than purely baryonic stars of the same mass.
  • Quarkyonic matter, by contrast, lowers central curvature and makes the radial profile smoother, so the two exotic components pull curvature in distinguishable directions.
  • The effects are strongest at the maximum mass and nearly flat for canonical $1.4\,M_\odot$ stars, so the most massive neutron stars are the place to look for DM and quark-matter curvature signatures.
  • Higher transition densities make stars more compact with higher central pressure, while dark matter reduces compactness, so measurements of compactness alone can separate the two influences.
  • The surface ratio $K(R)/K_\odot$ rises with dark-matter content, linking a comparatively accessible surface quantity to the presence of dark matter inside the star.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same curvature machinery could be linked to tidal deformability and moment of inertia, turning gravitational-wave and pulsar-timing data into indirect constraints on the dark-matter fraction.
  • Applying the calculation to anisotropic pressure or to modified theories of gravity would add explicit terms beyond $E$ and $P$ in the curvature identities, providing a way to separate exotic-matter signals from gravity-model signals.
  • Since $R$ and $J$ vanish outside the star while $K$ and $W$ extend into the vacuum, matching external curvature proxies such as lensing and redshift to interior predictions could constrain the core equation of state without direct access to the core.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes, for the first time, the radial profiles of the Ricci scalar R, the contracted Ricci tensor J, the Kretschmann scalar K, and the Weyl scalar W for neutron stars described by a quarkyonic equation of state (EOS) with an admixture of non-annihilating WIMP dark matter. The EOS is built in a companion paper [3] by combining an E-RMF baryonic sector, a McLerran-Reddy/Zhao-Lattimer quarkyonic sector, and a Higgs-portal DM sector; the present work solves the TOV equations with that EOS and evaluates the standard curvature scalars of a static, spherically symmetric perfect-fluid star. The main reported findings are that adding DM softens the EOS, increases the central density, and thereby raises the central values of R, J, and K, while a larger quarkyonic contribution stiffens the EOS and lowers these central values; the compactness ratio and surface Kretschmann curvature also vary systematically with the DM Fermi momentum and transition density.

Significance. If the underlying quarkyonic+DM EOS is reliable, the paper offers a concrete and falsifiable diagnostic: the central and surface curvature scalars respond monotonically to the presence of DM and quark matter, which could in principle be used to constrain exotic-matter scenarios from future curvature-sensitive observations. The strength of the paper is that the curvature calculation itself is standard GR post-processing of TOV solutions (Eqs. 12-15), with no circular use of the target curvature observables. The significance is tempered, however, by the complete dependence of the results on the EOS of the companion paper [3], which is not reproduced or tabulated here, and by the ad hoc choice of DM parameters (k_f^DM = 0.03 and 0.04 GeV).

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II.B, Eqs. (1)-(3) and (8)-(9)] The text states that nucleons occupy a finite Fermi shell with a minimum Fermi momentum k_{f0} and an upper momentum k_{fn,p}, but the displayed nucleon integral in Eq. (1) still runs from k=0 to k_{fi}, while the quark integral in Eq. (3) also runs from k=0 to k_{fj}. If the total EOS is literally the sum (8)-(9), the low-momentum states are double-counted between the baryonic and quark sectors. The authors must either provide the correct shell-modified integrals actually used in the calculation, or explicitly state that Eqs. (1)-(3) are only schematic building blocks and that the full momentum-space partitioning is given in [3]. As written, the construction is not self-consistent and the curvature results cannot be reproduced from this manuscript alone.
  2. [Section II.C, Eqs. (5)-(7)] The mean-field value h_0 of the Higgs field enters the DM energy density (6) and pressure (7), but no field equation or extremum condition is given for h_0. Since the DM sector couples to nucleons and quarks through the same Higgs field (via the coupling f in Eq. 5), h_0 must be obtained self-consistently from the total effective potential; otherwise the thermodynamic consistency of E_DM and P_DM with the baryonic and quark sectors is not established. The authors should provide the equation for h_0 (or state the value used) and show how it is determined together with the meson fields of the E-RMF model.
  3. [Section II.D and Results (Figs. 1-5)] The central quantitative claim — that DM raises the central Kretschmann, Ricci-scalar, and Ricci-tensor values while quarkyonic matter lowers them — is inherited entirely from the EOS constructed in the companion paper [3], including the beta-equilibrium and Gibbs construction. This manuscript does not present the EOS tables, the quark-nucleon momentum partitioning, or the parameter values of the quarkyonic transition beyond the three free parameters n_t, Λ_cs, and k_f^DM. Because the curvature scalars are deterministic functions of E_tot, P_tot, and m(r) from the TOV solution, the reader cannot independently verify the trends without access to [3] or the EOS data. The authors should include the actual EOS tables (or a public repository link) and a summary of the Gibbs construction sufficient to reproduce the input to Eqs. (10)-(11).
  4. [Section III, Fig. 4 and accompanying text] The discussion surrounding Fig. 4 states that the addition of quarkyonic matter stiffens the EOS and produces a 'drastic fall of curvature at the core', while adding DM 'further increases' the curvature, attributing this to softening of the EOS and increased central density. This sentence is internally confusing: the first half correctly relates stiffness to lower central density and lower curvature, but the second half says the fall 'further increases' with DM, which reads as a contradiction. The authors should clarify whether they mean that the curvature increase due to DM reverses the quarkyonic-induced decrease, and should state the central density ordering explicitly. This is a presentation issue, but it affects the interpretation of the main result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV, Conclusions] The conclusion states that the Kretschmann scalar (K(r)) and Weyl tensor (W) are 'significant as they only exist inside the neutron star', which directly contradicts Section II.F where K and W are correctly stated to be non-zero in the exterior vacuum (e.g., the Schwarzschild Kretschmann scalar is 48M^2/r^6). This should be corrected.
  2. [Section II.F, Eqs. (12)-(15)] The paper should state the metric signature and units (G=c=1) assumed in the curvature formulas. The expressions are standard for a signature (+,−,−,−) perfect-fluid spacetime, but this convention is not stated, which may confuse readers.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 1 caption] The caption lists panels (a), (b), (c) but the figure is organized by parameter sets G3 and IOPB-I and by maximum/canonical mass; the caption is unclear about which panel corresponds to which case. Please clarify the panel layout.
  4. [Throughout] The DM Fermi momenta k_f^DM = 0.03 and 0.04 GeV are introduced as ad hoc values without a physical justification or a relation to the DM abundance inside the star. A sentence motivating this range (e.g., from DM capture or self-interaction constraints) would improve the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: curvature profiles are obtained by standard GR post-processing of a prior EOS, with no curvature data used to fit or define the model inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: build the hybrid EOS (Eqs. 1-9, with the quarkyonic and DM construction delegated to the authors' companion paper [3]), integrate the TOV equations (Eqs. 10-11), and then evaluate the curvature scalars R, J, K, and W from E_tot, P_tot, and m(r) via Eqs. (12)-(15). The curvature quantities are thus outputs of standard general-relativistic identities applied to the TOV solution; they are not used to adjust any parameter, and no curvature datum enters the EOS. The central trends (DM softens the EOS, quarkyonic matter stiffens it) are inherited from the model, but that is a normal input-output chain, not a self-definitional reduction. The manuscript explicitly relies on the companion work for the detailed EOS construction ('A full detailed procedure is present in our previous work [3]'), and this citation is load-bearing for the EOS; however, it is not circular in the sense defined here because [3] is a separate prior work constrained by external nuclear and astrophysical data (finite nuclei, GW170817, NICER, massive pulsars), and the present curvature calculation does not feed back into that EOS. The concern that Eqs. (1) and (3) may double-count low-momentum states is a physics-consistency or correctness issue, not a circularity of the argument. The paper is not fully self-contained because the EOS tables and the Gibbs construction are not reproduced, but reproducibility gaps are distinct from circular reasoning. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is merely relabeled as curvature. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests entirely on a hybrid EOS assembled from prior literature: E-RMF nuclear parameters, Zhao-Lattimer quarkyonic matter, and a Higgs-portal WIMP DM model. The paper introduces no new physics or new entity. The free parameters n_t, Lambda_cs, and k_f^DM are varied by hand, while the DM mass and couplings are assumed from literature. The curvature output is a post-processing of TOV solutions, so the evidentiary weight of the paper depends on the validity and representativeness of the prior EOS.

free parameters (5)
  • Transition density n_t = 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 fm^-3
    Sets the onset of the quarkyonic phase; varied by hand and central to the EOS; carried from prior work [3].
  • QCD confinement scale Lambda_cs = 800 MeV
    Momentum cutoff separating quark and nucleon Fermi surfaces; fixed to 800 MeV; a free parameter of the quarkyonic model.
  • DM Fermi momentum k_f^DM = 0.00, 0.03, 0.04 GeV
    Controls the dark matter fraction; chosen ad hoc and directly drives the DM-induced curvature changes.
  • DM particle mass M_chi = 200 GeV
    Neutralino mass assumed from SUSY parameter space; chosen, not measured, and used in the DM EOS.
  • DM-Higgs couplings y and f = y = 0.07, f = 0.35
    Chosen based on literature constraints [62]; these couplings set the DM mean-field energy and pressure.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Static, spherically symmetric perfect-fluid spacetime described by the TOV equations.
    Used to solve mass-radius and pressure profiles via Eqs. 10-11, which feed all curvature calculations.
  • domain assumption Quarkyonic matter follows the Zhao-Lattimer extension with beta equilibrium and charge neutrality.
    Invoked in Section II.B and prior work [3,14]; not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption The nucleonic to quarkyonic phase transition is continuous via Gibbs construction.
    Mentioned in Section II.D; determines the sharpness of the EOS and affects curvature profiles.
  • domain assumption Dark matter is a non-annihilating Higgs-portal WIMP in the mean-field approximation.
    Defines E_DM and P_DM in Section II.C; no direct detection evidence is presented.
  • domain assumption E-RMF parameter sets G3 and IOPB-I, calibrated to nuclear data, reproduce neutron star constraints.
    Taken from literature [30,31] and used as the baryonic baseline for all configurations.
  • standard math Curvature invariant formulas in Eqs. 12-15 are correct for the TOV metric.
    Standard GR identities from Refs. [29,35,38]; accepted without independent verification in this paper.
invented entities (1)
  • Non-annihilating WIMP neutralino dark matter (200 GeV) with Higgs-portal coupling
    purpose: Adds pressure and energy density to the EOS, softening it and increasing central curvature.
    The paper assumes this DM candidate with parameters from [62]; no direct detection or independent observable is provided in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dark Matter Effects on the Curvature of Neutron Stars within the new Quarkyonic Model Coupled with Relativistic Mean Field Theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NYUJWI7T

@misc{pith2026250111435,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dark Matter Effects on the Curvature of Neutron Stars within the new Quarkyonic Model Coupled with Relativistic Mean Field Theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NYUJWI7T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11435}
}
abstract

For the first time, we analyze the impact of dark matter (DM) on the curvature properties of quarkyonic neutron stars (NS) using a hybrid model based on quarkyonic-effective field theory within the relativistic mean-field (E-RMF) framework. This study examines the radial variation of curvature components, including the Ricci scalar ($\cal{R}$), Ricci tensor ($\cal{J}$), Kretschmann scalar ($\cal{K}$), and Weyl tensor ($\cal{W}$), under different DM admixtures. These components offer critical insights into the spacetime geometry and gravitational field strength within the star. The analysis spans canonical mass (1.4 $M_{\odot}$) and maximum mass configurations, varying key parameters such as the transition density ($n_t$) and QCD confinement scale ($\Lambda_{\rm cs}$), which influence matter transitions and quark confinement. Our results reveal that DM and quarkyonic matter (QM) significantly affect the star's curvature. Central curvature values, particularly $\cal{R}$, $\cal{J}$, and $\cal{K}$, increase with DM due to higher central densities but decrease with stronger QM effects. Stiffer EOSs yield smoother curvature profiles, while softer EOSs influenced by DM redistribute curvature more dynamically. DM softens the EOS, reducing central pressure and compactness, whereas higher $n_t$ values enhance compactness and central pressures. These findings show that dark matter plays a key role in shaping the curvature of quarkyonic neutron stars, offering new insights into compact objects with exotic matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11435 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Different types of curvatures such as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The radial variation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5. The ratio of the Kretschmann scalar surface curvature of NS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Core or Halo? Two-Fluid Analysis of Dark Matter-Admixed Quarkyonic Stars in the Multi-Messenger Era

    astro-ph.HE 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Dark matter admixed quarkyonic stars in a two-fluid model can reproduce the GW190814 secondary mass with either DM cores or DM halos, but the candidate configurations are selected by tuning free parameters.

  2. Exploring the Structural Properties of Anisotropic Dark Matter-Admixed Quark Stars

    gr-qc 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Integrating two-fluid TOV equations with MIT bag quark matter and BEC dark matter shows that admixed configurations are generally more compact and less massive than pure quark stars, with the effect depending on the s...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [3]

    D. Dey, J. A. Pattnaik, H. C. Das, A. Kumar, R. N. Panda, and S. K. Patra, Dark matter influence on quarkyonic stars: A rel- ativistic mean field analysis (2024), arXiv:2401.02190 [astro- ph.HE, (Accepted in JCAP)]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    However, the Weyl tensor reached negative values

    All the curvatures have the maximum value at the core of the star for each scenario. However, the Weyl tensor reached negative values. We noticed a larger gap in all curvatures for quarkyonic stars than baryonic, ones due to their stiffer equa- tion of state and high compactness. After adding the dark matter, the curvature values little increases, but the...

    work page

  3. [2]

    J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Phys. Reports 442, 109 (2007), the Hans Bethe Centennial V olume 1906-2006

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    Shapiro and S

    S. Shapiro and S. Teukolsky, Black holes, white dwarfs, and neutron stars: The physics of compact objects (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1983)

    work page 1983

  5. [5]

    S. De, D. Finstad, J. M. Lattimer, D. A. Brown, E. Berger, and C. M. Biwer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 091102 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, et al. (The LIGO Sci- entific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 161101 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    T. E. Riley, A. L. Watts, S. Bogdanov, P. S. Ray, R. M. Lud- lam, S. Guillot, Z. Arzoumanian, C. L. Baker, A. V . Bilous, D. Chakrabarty, K. C. Gendreau, A. K. Harding, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, S. M. Morsink, and T. E. Strohmayer, APJ 887, L21 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    M. C. Miller, F. K. Lamb, A. J. Dittmann, and other, The Astro- physical Journal Letters 887, L24 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    C. D. Capano, I. Tews, S. M. Brown, B. Margalit, S. De, S. Ku- mar, D. A. Brown, B. Krishnan, and S. Reddy, Nature Astron- omy 4, 625 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    ¨Ozel and P

    F. ¨Ozel and P. Freire, araa 54, 401 (2016), arXiv:1603.02698

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    R. W. Romani, D. Kandel, A. V . Filippenko, T. G. Brink, and W. Zheng, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 934, L17 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    J. M. Lattimer, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 62, 485 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Zhao and J

    T. Zhao and J. M. Lattimer, Phys. Rev. D 102, 023021 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Abbott, T

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, M. Agathos, and all, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 896, L44 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    H. T. Cromartie, E. Fonseca, S. M. Ransom, P. B. Demorest, Z. Arzoumanian, et al., Nature Astronomy 4, 72–76 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    De Lavallaz and M

    A. De Lavallaz and M. Fairbairn, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123521 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    Kouvaris and P

    C. Kouvaris and P. Tinyakov, Phys. Rev. D82, 063531 (2010)

    2010

  11. [19]

    Sandin and P

    F. Sandin and P. Ciarcelluti, Astroparticle Phys. 32, 278–284 (2009)

    2009

  12. [20]

    Leung, M.-C

    S.-C. Leung, M.-C. Chu, and L.-M. Lin, Phys. Rev. D 84, 107301 (2011)

    2011

  13. [21]

    A. Li, F. Huang, and R.-X. Xu, Astroparticle Phys. 37, 70–74 (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Ciarcelluti and F

    P. Ciarcelluti and F. Sandin, Phys. Lett. B 695, 19–21 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    Ellis, G

    J. Ellis, G. H ¨utsi, K. Kannike, et al., Phys. Rev. D 97, 123007 (2018). 8

    2018

  16. [24]

    S. A. Bhat and A. Paul, The European Physical Journal C 80, 544 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    Panotopoulos and I

    G. Panotopoulos and I. Lopes, Phys. Rev. D 96, 083004 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    A. Das, T. Malik, and A. C. Nayak, Phys. Rev. D 99, 043016 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Quddus, G

    A. Quddus, G. Panotopoulos, B. Kumar, S. Ahmad, and S. K. Patra, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 47, 095202 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Ivanytskyi, V

    O. Ivanytskyi, V . Sagun, and I. Lopes, Neutron stars: new con- straints on asymmetric dark matter (2019), arXiv:1910.09925 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    A similar kind of trend is observed here

    that the density becomes diffused while moving from the core to the surface, resulting in W reaching its maximum. A similar kind of trend is observed here. Further, we notice the radial variation of curvature is significant in quarkyonic and 5 2 4 6 8 10 Baryonic Baryonic + QM...

  22. [30]

    and IOPB-I [31] parameter sets. These parameters have the merit of reproducing most of the known properties of fi- nite nuclei, such as binding energy, root mean square charge radius etc, not only for beta-stable nuclei but also for nuclei that are away from the stability line...

  23. [31]

    H. C. Das, A. Kumar, B. Kumar, S. K. Biswal, T. Nakatsukasa, A. Li, and S. K. Patra, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronom- ical Society 495, 4893 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    H. Das, A. Kumar, B. Kumar, S. Biswal, and S. Patra, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2021 (01), 007

    2021

  25. [33]

    Kumar, S

    B. Kumar, S. Singh, B. Agrawal, and S. Patra, Nuclear Physics A 966, 197 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    Kumar, S

    B. Kumar, S. K. Patra, and B. K. Agrawal, Phys. Rev. C 97, 045806 (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    J. A. Pattnaik, M. Bhuyan, R. N. Panda, and S. K. Patra, Physica Scripta 96, 125319 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    J. A. Pattnaik, R. N. Panda, M. Bhuyan, and S. K. Patra, Chi- nese Physics C 46, 094103 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Psaltis, Living Rev

    D. Psaltis, Living Rev. Relativ. 11, 9 (2008)

    2008

  30. [38]

    X.-T. He, F. J. Fattoyev, B.-A. Li, and W. G. Newton, Phys. Rev. C 91, 015810 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    G. Rosi, L. Cacciapuoti, F. Sorrentino, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 013001 (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    S. M. Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity (Cambridge University Press, 2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    K. Y . Eks ¸i, C. G¨ung¨or, and M. M. T ¨urko˘glu, Phys. Rev. D 89, 063003 (2014)

    2014

  34. [42]

    H. C. Das, J. A. Pattnaik, and S. K. Patra, Phys. Rev. D 107, 083007 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    J. A. Pattnaik, J. T. Majekodunmi, A. Kumar, M. Bhuyan, and S. K. Patra, Phys. Rev. C 105, 014318 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    J. A. Pattnaik, K. C. Naik, R. N. Panda, M. Bhuyan, and S. K. Patra, Pramana 97, 136 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    G. A. Lalazissis, J. K ¨onig, and P. Ring, Phys. Rev. C 55, 540 (1997)

    1997

  38. [46]

    Rashdan, Phys

    M. Rashdan, Phys. Rev. C 63, 044303 (2001)

    2001

  39. [47]

    Sulaksono and T

    A. Sulaksono and T. Mart, Phys. Rev. C 74, 045806 (2006)

    2006

  40. [48]

    D. P. Menezes and C. Provid ˆencia, Phys. Rev. C 70, 058801 (2004)

    2004

  41. [49]

    Lalazissis, S

    G. Lalazissis, S. Karatzikos, R. Fossion, D. P. Arteaga, A. Afanasjev, and P. Ring, Physics Letters B671, 36 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    F. J. Fattoyev, C. J. Horowitz, J. Piekarewicz, and G. Shen, Phys. Rev. C 82, 055803 (2010)

    2010

  43. [51]

    A. b. A. Dadi, Phys. Rev. C 82, 025203 (2010)

    2010

  44. [52]

    Roca-Maza, X

    X. Roca-Maza, X. Vi ˜nas, M. Centelles, P. Ring, and P. Schuck, Phys. Rev. C 84, 054309 (2011)

    2011

  45. [53]

    Cai and L.-W

    B.-J. Cai and L.-W. Chen, Phys. Rev. C 85, 024302 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    F. J. Fattoyev, C. J. Horowitz, J. Piekarewicz, and B. Reed, Phys. Rev. C 102, 065805 (2020)

    2020

  47. [55]

    S. K. Patra, M. Centelles, X. Vi ˜nas, and M. Del Estal, Phys. Rev. C 65, 044304 (2002)

    2002

  48. [56]

    M ¨uller and B

    H. M ¨uller and B. D. Serot, Nuclear Physics A 606, 508 (1996)

    1996

  49. [57]

    Wang, Phys

    P. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 61, 054904 (2000)

    2000

  50. [58]

    Kumar, H

    A. Kumar, H. C. Das, S. K. Biswal, B. Kumar, and S. K. Patra, The European Physical Journal C 80, 775 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    L. D. Miller and A. E. S. Green, Phys. Rev. C 5, 241 (1972)

    1972

  52. [60]

    B. D. Serot and J. D. Walecka, Relativistic nuclear many-body theory, in Recent Progress in Many-Body Theories: V olume 3, edited by T. L. Ainsworth, C. E. Campbell, B. E. Clements, and E. Krotscheck (Springer US, Boston, MA, 1992) pp. 49–92

    1992

  53. [61]

    R. J. Furnstahl, C. E. Price, and G. E. Walker, Phys. Rev. C 36, 2590 (1987)

    1987

  54. [62]

    Reinhard, Zeitschrift f ¨ur Physik A Atomic Nuclei 329, 257 (1988)

    P.-G. Reinhard, Zeitschrift f ¨ur Physik A Atomic Nuclei 329, 257 (1988)

    1988

  55. [63]

    Furnstahl, B

    R. Furnstahl, B. D. Serot, and H.-B. Tang, Nuclear Physics A 615, 441 (1997)

    1997

  56. [64]

    McLerran and S

    L. McLerran and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 122701 (2019)

    2019

  57. [65]

    J. M. Cline, P. Scott, K. Kainulainen, and C. Weniger, Phys. Rev. D 88, 055025 (2013)

    2013

  58. [66]

    H. C. Das, A. Kumar, and S. K. Patra, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 507, 4053 (2021)

    2021

  59. [67]

    H. C. Das, A. Kumar, B. Kumar, and S. K. Patra, Galaxies 10, 10.3390/galaxies10010014 (2022)

    2022 doi

  60. [68]

    H. C. Das, A. Kumar, S. K. Biswal, and S. K. Patra, Phys. Rev. D 104, 123006 (2021)

    2021

  61. [69]

    B. K. Sharma, P. K. Panda, and S. K. Patra, Phys. Rev. C 75, 035808 (2007)

    2007

  62. [70]

    R. C. Tolman, Phys. Rev. 55, 364 (1939)

    1939

  63. [71]

    J. R. Oppenheimer and G. M. V olkoff, Phys. Rev. 55, 374 (1939)

    1939

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.