arxiv: 2605.00381 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 🌀 gr-qc · hep-th

Recognition: unknown

Generalized First Law and Smarr Formula: Beyond Additivity and Extensivity

Usman Zafar , Krishnakanta Bhattacharya , Kazuharu Bamba

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 19:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc hep-th

keywords black hole thermodynamicsgeneralized entropyRuppeiner geometryfirst lawSmarr relationAbé composition ruleReissner-Nordström black holethermodynamic curvature

0 comments

The pith

Generalized black hole entropies consistent with the Abé composition rule produce vanishing thermodynamic curvature, while violations lead to divergences.

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

The paper builds a framework that derives the first law and Smarr relation for spherically symmetric black holes when the entropy is replaced by any generalized function that need not be additive or extensive. It then constructs the associated Ruppeiner geometry from this entropy and evaluates the curvature scalar explicitly for the Reissner-Nordström family. Only those entropy models that obey the Abé-type composition rule yield a zero curvature scalar; all others produce divergences precisely where phase transitions occur. A reader would care because the result supplies a coordinate-independent geometric criterion for deciding which proposed entropy modifications remain compatible with ordinary black-hole thermodynamics.

Core claim

For generic spherically symmetric solutions the first law takes the form dM = T dS + Φ dQ with the generalized entropy S, and the Smarr relation is obtained by Euler scaling without assuming extensivity. The generalized Ruppeiner metric is built from the Hessian of S with respect to the independent thermodynamic variables. Its scalar curvature vanishes identically whenever S satisfies the Abé composition rule and diverges otherwise, as verified by direct calculation for both extremal and non-extremal Reissner-Nordström black holes.

What carries the argument

Generalized Ruppeiner metric obtained from the Hessian of the arbitrary entropy function on the space of black-hole parameters.

If this is right

The first law and Smarr formula remain valid for any entropy function once the appropriate differential is written.
Thermodynamic phase transitions appear as curvature singularities precisely when the entropy violates the Abé rule.
Entropy models obeying the Abé rule produce a flat thermodynamic geometry with no curvature singularities.
The framework applies uniformly to both extremal and non-extremal regimes of the Reissner-Nordström family.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same curvature test could be applied to Kerr or other axisymmetric solutions to further restrict viable entropy models.
Divergences in curvature may mark the boundary between thermodynamically stable and unstable regimes for a given entropy proposal.
The construction offers a way to compare Tsallis, Rényi, and other non-extensive entropies on equal geometric footing without choosing coordinates in advance.

Load-bearing premise

The generalized entropy can be treated as a state function on the manifold of spherically symmetric solutions with temperature identified directly with surface gravity.

What would settle it

Compute the Ruppeiner curvature scalar for the Tsallis entropy on the Reissner-Nordström solution and verify whether it diverges at the known phase-transition points.

read the original abstract

The study of black hole thermodynamics becomes a central topic in gravitational physics, where the first law and the Smarr relation establish a deep connection between spacetime geometry and thermodynamic laws. As we know, these relations depend on the entropy; any modification to the entropy arising from quantum gravity or generalized statistical mechanics may impact the basic thermodynamic framework of black holes. In this work, we develop a general framework for deriving the first law of black hole thermodynamics and the associated Smarr relation for generic spherically symmetric spacetime under a wide class of generalized entropy models. In addition, a generalized Ruppeiner thermodynamic geometry is developed to utilize the generalized entropy model, from which the curvature scalar is determined in a general form. To demonstrate this framework, we assume the Resinser-Nordstr\"{o}m black hole and investigate the corresponding extremal and non-extremal phase transition. Interestingly, our analysis reveals that entropy models consistent with the Ab\`{e}-type composition rule result in a vanishing thermodynamic curvature, whereas violations of this rule exhibit curvature divergences, suggesting a geometric test for the consistency of generalized entropy models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper offers a reusable algebraic framework for the first law with generalized entropies and a curvature-based test for their composition rules, though it inherits the usual temperature assumption without modification.

read the letter

The paper gives a general first-law derivation and Smarr formula that applies to any generalized entropy on spherically symmetric black holes, then uses Ruppeiner geometry to show that only Abé-type entropies produce zero curvature scalar while others diverge at certain points. They start with the definition of S_gen and the standard horizon identities to write the differential form δM = (κ/2π) δS_gen + Φ δQ, and integrate to the Smarr relation. The Ruppeiner metric is the Hessian of -S_gen with respect to the thermodynamic variables, and they find a closed expression for its scalar curvature. Applying this to the Reissner-Nordström family, the curvature vanishes for entropies obeying the Abé rule and blows up otherwise, which they present as a diagnostic for thermodynamic consistency. This is a solid piece of technical work. The generalization is algebraic and doesn't require choosing a particular entropy model upfront, which makes it reusable. The curvature calculation is explicit and the phase-transition examples are worked out clearly. It builds directly on existing methods without hidden fitting or post-hoc adjustments. The main limitation is that the temperature is identified with surface gravity without deriving any possible corrections that might arise from non-additive entropy. If the first law needs extra terms or if integrability fails for some S_gen, then both the coefficients and the curvature would shift. The paper treats the identification as given, so the geometric test is really a test of the composition rule under that assumption rather than a fully independent check. That said, within the standard setup the algebra holds up. This is aimed at researchers in modified black-hole thermodynamics who are proposing or testing new entropy expressions. It offers a practical filter they can apply early. The work is coherent and the derivations look reproducible from the algebra, so it deserves a serious referee. I would send it out for review.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a general framework for deriving the first law of black hole thermodynamics and the associated Smarr relation for generic spherically symmetric spacetimes under a broad class of generalized entropy models. It constructs a generalized Ruppeiner thermodynamic geometry from the Hessian of the generalized entropy S_gen and obtains a general expression for the scalar curvature. Applied to the Reissner-Nordström black hole, the analysis of extremal and non-extremal regimes shows that entropy models obeying the Abé-type composition rule produce vanishing curvature, while violations produce divergences, which the authors propose as a geometric test of thermodynamic consistency for generalized entropies.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies a concrete geometric diagnostic that links the algebraic structure of entropy composition rules directly to the vanishing or divergence of Ruppeiner curvature. This could serve as a falsifiable criterion for assessing which generalized entropies remain consistent with standard thermodynamic geometry in black-hole contexts, extending Ruppeiner geometry beyond additive cases and offering a potential bridge between non-extensive statistical mechanics and gravitational thermodynamics. The algebraic steps appear internally consistent with Killing-vector identities.

major comments (3)

[Framework for generalized first law] The generalized first law is stated in the form δM = T δS_gen + Φ δQ with the identification T = κ/2π retained without modification. No derivation is supplied from the Euclidean action, Killing-horizon periodicity, or explicit integrability check (d(δM) = 0) that accounts for possible non-additive corrections to the temperature; this assumption is load-bearing because any S_gen-dependent shift in T would rescale the Hessian and change the reported curvature vanishing/divergence diagnostic. (Framework section deriving the first law)
[Generalized Ruppeiner geometry] The curvature scalar is shown to vanish exactly when S_gen satisfies the Abé composition rule, but the manuscript does not verify that the differential form remains closed for arbitrary S_gen once the standard surface-gravity temperature is imposed. An explicit integrability test or counter-example for a non-Abé entropy would strengthen the claim that the curvature behavior constitutes an independent geometric test rather than an algebraic consequence of the chosen composition rule. (Section on generalized Ruppeiner geometry and curvature scalar)
[RN black hole application] In the RN black-hole application, the phase-transition analysis and curvature plots rely on the same T = κ/2π identification; if this temperature receives corrections (as occurs in some modified-gravity or non-extensive treatments), both the location of curvature divergences and the comparison between extremal and non-extremal regimes would shift. A brief consistency check against the standard Bekenstein-Hawking limit is present but insufficient to address the general case.

minor comments (3)

[Introduction] The notation S_gen is introduced without an explicit contrast to the standard Bekenstein-Hawking entropy in the opening paragraphs; a short clarifying sentence would improve readability.
[RN black hole application] Figure captions for the curvature plots should state the fixed charge value and the range of the mass parameter used, to allow direct reproduction of the divergence locations.
[Generalized Ruppeiner geometry] A reference to prior literature on Ruppeiner geometry for charged black holes (e.g., works applying the Hessian to RN thermodynamics) would help situate the generalized construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments raise important points about the foundations of the generalized first law and the robustness of the curvature diagnostic. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the derivations and checks.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The generalized first law is stated in the form δM = T δS_gen + Φ δQ with the identification T = κ/2π retained without modification. No derivation is supplied from the Euclidean action, Killing-horizon periodicity, or explicit integrability check (d(δM) = 0) that accounts for possible non-additive corrections to the temperature; this assumption is load-bearing because any S_gen-dependent shift in T would rescale the Hessian and change the reported curvature vanishing/divergence diagnostic. (Framework section deriving the first law)

Authors: The first law in the manuscript is obtained from the variation of the ADM mass using the Killing vector identity on the horizon, which directly yields T = κ/2π from the surface gravity without reference to the entropy functional. This geometric origin of the temperature is independent of whether S_gen is additive. We have verified by direct substitution that d(δM) = 0 holds under the assumed spherical symmetry. To meet the referee's request for an explicit derivation accounting for possible non-additive effects, we will add a dedicated subsection deriving the first law from the Euclidean action and performing the integrability check for general S_gen. revision: yes
Referee: The curvature scalar is shown to vanish exactly when S_gen satisfies the Abé composition rule, but the manuscript does not verify that the differential form remains closed for arbitrary S_gen once the standard surface-gravity temperature is imposed. An explicit integrability test or counter-example for a non-Abé entropy would strengthen the claim that the curvature behavior constitutes an independent geometric test rather than an algebraic consequence of the chosen composition rule. (Section on generalized Ruppeiner geometry and curvature scalar)

Authors: The vanishing of the Ruppeiner scalar for Abé-compliant entropies follows from the Hessian of S_gen under the composition rule, while the divergence for non-compliant cases arises when the second derivatives fail to satisfy the required symmetry. We will strengthen this by adding an explicit integrability test (closure of the one-form) together with a concrete counter-example using a non-Abé entropy (e.g., a Tsallis-type model) that demonstrates the curvature divergence occurs precisely when the differential form ceases to be closed. This will clarify that the diagnostic is geometric rather than purely algebraic. revision: yes
Referee: In the RN black-hole application, the phase-transition analysis and curvature plots rely on the same T = κ/2π identification; if this temperature receives corrections (as occurs in some modified-gravity or non-extensive treatments), both the location of curvature divergences and the comparison between extremal and non-extremal regimes would shift. A brief consistency check against the standard Bekenstein-Hawking limit is present but insufficient to address the general case.

Authors: We acknowledge that the RN analysis assumes the standard temperature identification. In the revised manuscript we will expand the consistency check with the Bekenstein-Hawking limit to include explicit limits of the curvature scalar and phase-transition loci. We will also add a brief discussion of how the diagnostic would be affected if temperature corrections appear in specific generalized models, while noting the regimes (standard Einstein gravity) where the assumption remains valid. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain.

full rationale

The paper constructs a general framework starting from the definition of generalized entropy as a state function on the space of spherically symmetric solutions, applies standard Killing-vector identities to identify surface gravity, and derives the first law and Smarr relation in that setting before defining the Ruppeiner metric from the Hessian of the generalized entropy. The curvature scalar is then computed explicitly and shown to vanish precisely when the entropy satisfies the Abé composition rule; this is a direct algebraic consequence of the second derivatives under the given functional equation rather than a fitted or self-referential result. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a self-citation, an ansatz smuggled from prior work, or a parameter renamed as a prediction; the central geometric diagnostic follows from the assumed form of S_gen and the spacetime geometry without circular reduction. The framework remains self-contained against external benchmarks of black-hole thermodynamics.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the standard identification of black-hole temperature with surface gravity and on the assumption that the generalized entropy is a differentiable function of the horizon area and other charges. No new free parameters are introduced beyond those already present in the chosen entropy model; no new particles or forces are postulated.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Temperature equals surface gravity (up to 2π factor) for any generalized entropy
Invoked when writing the first law; standard in black-hole thermodynamics but not re-derived here.
domain assumption Generalized entropy is a state function on the space of spherically symmetric solutions
Required to treat entropy as a thermodynamic potential whose differential yields the first law.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5498 in / 1477 out tokens · 29792 ms · 2026-05-09T19:37:59.648440+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references

[1]

( 14), which is given as T δS = δM− r 2 ∂f (re, M, ν i) ∂ν i ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ r=re δνi

and ( 16) into Eq. ( 14), which is given as T δS = δM− r 2 ∂f (re, M, ν i) ∂ν i ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ r=re δνi . (17) As we mentioned earlier, the variation in BH entropy is expressed sole ly through the changes in its parameters. In our analysis, we do not need to deﬁne any thermodynamic potential here. In addition, the expression for temperature is T = f ′/ 4π , whic...
[2]

based on conventional thermal quantum ﬁeld theory, and the BH entropy is one-fourth of the area of its event horizon, which is a wid ely accepted formula in literature as described in Ref. [ 44]. Notably, this approach allows us to establish FL without explicit deta ils about the source, unlike the two routes mentioned above. One can determine the thermod...
[3]

can be applied to any SSS without con- cerning any entropy framework. By following the same procedure t hat we have adopted above, one can deﬁne the thermodynamic FL for generalized entropy with ﬁve parameters pr esent in Eq, ( 19), which take the following shape δM = TGEδSGE(α ± , β, σ, ǫ )− r 2 ∂f (re, M, ν i) ∂ν i ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ r=re δνi . (22) Now, as we deﬁ...
[4]

( 18), and ( 19) B

in comparison to the entropies given in Eqs. ( 18), and ( 19) B. Generalized Smarr Formula As we mentioned earlier, by using Eq. ( 12) we deﬁned the BH’s mass and by applying Eq. ( 15), we substitute g(re, ν i) which yields M = 2 TS− r2 e 2 ∂g (re νi) ∂r e , (24) where the expressions for entropy and temperature are already described in Eq. ( 4). Furtherm...
[5]

( 29) and ( 32) due to the number of parameters

for RN BH, while it is complicated to analytically validate the generalized Smarr formulas giv en in Eqs. ( 29) and ( 32) due to the number of parameters. Another important aspect we aim to address is diﬀe rentiating the Hawking temperature from the thermodynamic conjugate temperature arising within generalized e ntropy frameworks (as highlighted in Ref. ...
[6]

S. W. Hawking, Nature 248, 30-31 (1974)

1974
[7]

J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333-2346 (1973)

1973
[8]

J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3292-3300 (1974)

1974
[9]

S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199-220 (1975)

1975
[10]

J. D. Bekenstein, Lett. Nuovo Cim. 4, 737-740 (1972)

1972
[11]

J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. P hys. 31, 161-170 (1973)

1973
[12]

R. H. Swendsen. An introduction to statistical mechanic s and thermodynamics. Oxford University Press (2020)

2020
[13]

M. P. D¸ abrowski, Entropy 26, no.10, 814 (2024)

2024
[14]

Nojiri, S

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and V. Faraoni, Phys. Rev. D 105, no.4, 044042 (2022)

2022
[15]

Nojiri, S

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and T. Paul, Phys. Lett. B 831, 137189 (2022)

2022
[16]

Nojiri, S

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and V. Faraoni, Int. J. Geom. Me th. Mod. Phys. 19, no.13, 2250210 (2022)

2022
[17]

Elizalde, S

E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Universe 11, no.2, 60 (2025)

2025
[18]

S. D. Odintsov, S. D’Onofrio and T. Paul, Phys. Dark Univ . 42, 101277 (2023)

2023
[19]

S. D. Odintsov and T. Paul, Phys. Dark Univ. 39, 101159 (2023)

2023
[20]

Nojiri, S

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and T. Paul, Universe 10, no.9, 352 (2024)

2024
[21]

Tsallis, J

C. Tsallis, J. Statist. Phys. 52, 479-487 (1988)

1988
[22]

J. D. Barrow, Phys. Lett. B 808, 135643 (2020)

2020
[23]

R´ enyi, On measures of information and entropy

A. R´ enyi, On measures of information and entropy. In Pr oceedings of the 4th Berkeley symposium on mathematics, statistics and probability (Vol. 1, No. 547) (1961, June)

1961
[24]

Sayahian Jahromi, S

A. Sayahian Jahromi, S. A. Moosavi, H. Moradpour, J. P. M orais Gra¸ ca, I. P. Lobo, I. G. Salako and A. Jawad, Phys. Lett. B 780, 21-24 (2018)

2018
[25]

Majhi, Phys

A. Majhi, Phys. Lett. B 775, 32-36 (2017)

2017
[26]

Chatterjee and A

A. Chatterjee and A. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, no.4, 041302 (2020)

2020
[27]

P. C. W. Davies, Class. Quant. Grav. 6, 1909 (1989)

1909
[28]

C. O. Lousto, Phys. Rev. D 51, 1733-1740 (1995)

1995
[29]

J. P. Muniain and D. D. Piriz, Phys. Rev. D 53, 816-823 (1996)

1996
[30]

S. W. Hawking and D. N. Page, Commun. Math. Phys. 87, 577 (1983)

1983
[31]

Kastor, S

D. Kastor, S. Ray and J. Traschen, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 195011 (2009)

2009
[32]

B. P. Dolan, Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 125020 (2011)

2011
[33]

B. P. Dolan, Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 235017 (2011)

2011
[34]

B. P. Dolan, Phys. Rev. D 84, 127503 (2011)

2011
[35]

B. P. Dolan, Where is the PdV in the ﬁrst law of black hole t hermodynamics?. Open Questions in Cosmology, 291-315 (2012)

2012
[36]

Bhattacharya, B

K. Bhattacharya, B. R. Majhi and S. Samanta, Phys. Rev. D 96, no.8, 084037 (2017)

2017
[37]

Kubiznak, R

D. Kubiznak, R. B. Mann and M. Teo, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, no.6, 063001 (2017)

2017
[38]

Pavon and J

D. Pavon and J. M. Rubi, Phys. Rev. D 37, 2052-2058 (1988)

2052
[39]

Pavon, Phys

D. Pavon, Phys. Rev. D 43, 2495-2497 (1991)

1991
[40]

R. G. Cai, Z. J. Lu and Y. Z. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 55, 853-860 (1997)

1997
[41]

R. G. Cai and J. H. Cho, Phys. Rev. D 60, 067502 (1999)

1999
[42]

Y. H. Wei, Phys. Rev. D 80, 024029 (2009)

2009
[43]

Bhattacharya, S

K. Bhattacharya, S. Dey, B. R. Majhi and S. Samanta, Phys . Rev. D 99, no.12, 124047 (2019)

2019
[44]

Weinhold, J

F. Weinhold, J. Chem. Phys. 63, no.6, 2479 (1975)

1975
[45]

Ruppeiner, Phys

G. Ruppeiner, Phys. Rev. A 20, no.4, 1608 (1979)

1979
[46]

Ruppeiner, Rev

G. Ruppeiner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 67, 605-659 (1995)

1995
[47]

Ruppeiner, Phys

G. Ruppeiner, Phys. Rev. D 78, 024016 (2008)

2008
[48]

Ruppeiner, Springer Proc

G. Ruppeiner, Springer Proc. Phys. 153, 179-203 (2014)

2014
[49]

Bhattacharya, Nucl

K. Bhattacharya, Nucl. Phys. B 989, 116130 (2023)

2023
[50]

Bhattacharya, K

K. Bhattacharya, K. Bamba and D. Singleton, Phys. Lett. B 854, 138722 (2024)

2024
[51]

Gunasekaran, R

S. Gunasekaran, R. B. Mann and D. Kubiznak, JHEP 11, 110 (2012)

2012
[52]

S. H. Hendi and M. H. Vahidinia, Phys. Rev. D 88, no.8, 084045 (2013)

2013
[53]

B. P. Dolan, D. Kastor, D. Kubiznak, R. B. Mann and J. Tras chen, Phys. Rev. D 87, no.10, 104017 (2013)

2013
[54]

Altamirano, D

N. Altamirano, D. Kubiznak and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D 88, no.10, 101502 (2013)

2013
[55]

Chamblin, R

A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C. V. Johnson and R. C. Myers, Ph ys. Rev. D 60, 064018 (1999)

1999
[56]

Cvetic and S

M. Cvetic and S. S. Gubser, JHEP 07, 010 (1999)

1999
[57]

S. W. Wei, B. Liang and Y. X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 96, no.12, 124018 (2017)

2017
[58]

Banerjee and D

R. Banerjee and D. Roychowdhury, JHEP 11, 004 (2011)

2011
[59]

Jawad, Class

A. Jawad, Class. Quant. Grav. 37, no.18, 185020 (2020)

2020
[60]

Y. S. Myung, Phys. Lett. B 645, 369-376 (2007). 15

2007
[61]

Surya, K

S. Surya, K. Schleich and D. M. Witt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5231-5234 (2001)

2001
[62]

X. Y. Guo, H. F. Li, L. C. Zhang and R. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D 100, no.6, 064036 (2019)

2019
[63]

Smarr, Phys

L. Smarr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 71-73 (1973)

1973
[64]

S. Rani, A. Jawad, H. Moradpour and A. Tanveer, Eur. Phys . J. C 82, no.8, 713 (2022)

2022
[65]

S. W. Wei and Y. X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 87, no.4, 044014 (2013)

2013
[66]

J. E. Aman and N. Pidokrajt, Phys. Rev. D 73, 024017 (2006)

2006
[67]

Soroushfar and S

S. Soroushfar and S. Upadhyay, Phys. Lett. B 804, 135360 (2020)

2020
[68]

Z. M. Xu, B. Wu and W. L. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 101, no.2, 024018 (2020)

2020
[69]

Chaudhary, A

S. Chaudhary, A. Jawad and M. Yasir, Phys. Rev. D 105, no.2, 024032 (2022)

2022
[70]

J. L. Zhang, R. G. Cai and H. Yu, JHEP 02, 143 (2015)

2015
[71]

Bravetti and F

A. Bravetti and F. Nettel, Phys. Rev. D 90, no.4, 044064 (2014)

2014
[72]

Mirza and M

B. Mirza and M. Zamani-Nasab, JHEP 06, 059 (2007)

2007
[73]

Jawad and S

A. Jawad and S. R. Fatima, Nucl. Phys. B 976, 115697 (2022)

2022
[74]

Zafar, K

U. Zafar, K. Bamba, A. Jawad, T. Rasheed and S. Shaymatov , PTEP 2026, 023

2026
[75]

Padmanabhan, Class

T. Padmanabhan, Class. Quant. Grav. 19, 5387-5408 (2002)

2002
[76]

Padmanabhan, Phys

T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rept. 406, 49-125 (2005)

2005
[77]

Paranjape, S

A. Paranjape, S. Sarkar and T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rev. D 74, 104015 (2006)

2006
[78]

Kothawala, S

D. Kothawala, S. Sarkar and T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Lett. B 652, 338-342 (2007)

2007
[79]

S. A. Hayward, Class. Quant. Grav. 15, 3147-3162 (1998)

1998
[80]

Bhattacharya and B

K. Bhattacharya and B. R. Majhi, Phys. Rev. D 94, no.2, 024033 (2016)

2016

Showing first 80 references.