REVIEW 3 cited by
Shapiro Delays at the Quadrupole Order for Tests of the No-Hair Theorem Using Pulsars around Spinning Black Holes
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
One avenue for testing the no-hair theorem is obtained through timing a pulsar orbiting close to a black hole and fitting for quadrupolar effects on the time-of-arrival of pulses. If deviations from the Kerr quadrupole are measured, then the no-hair theorem is invalidated. To this end, we derive an expression for the light travel time delay for a pulsar orbiting in a black-hole spacetime described by the Butterworth-Ipser metric, which has an arbitrary spin and quadrupole moment. We consider terms up to the quadrupole order in the black-hole metric and derive the time-delay expression in a closed analytic form. This allows for fast computations that are useful in fitting time-of-arrival observations of pulsars orbiting close to astrophysical black holes.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Pulsar timing in the Galactic Center
A fully relativistic (geodesic) pulsar timing model for the Galactic Center shows that 1PN-based timing formulas produce errors of up to seconds for tight orbits around Sgr A*.
-
Time Delay of Pulsar Signals in Astrophysical Black Hole Spacetimes
Pulsar time delays are computed for Kerr, deformed Kerr (Johannsen-Psaltis), and rotating Janis-Newman-Winicour spacetimes, producing model-dependent signatures of up to about 15 seconds.
-
Schwarzschild-like Black Holes Submerged in an Exponential Density Dark Matter Profile
An analytic Schwarzschild-like metric with an exponential dark matter halo is constructed and its shadows, quasi-normal modes, and greybody bounds are computed, though several derived expressions have sign errors.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.