Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 89 references

Bifurcations in Bosonic Stars: chains and rings from spherical solutions

T0 review · 4 major / 6 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 Spherical bosonic stars have perturbative zero modes at the exact points where chain-like, ring-like, and gyroscope-like axisymmetric families branch off.

desk verdict Solid numerical work explaining known bosonic-star bifurcations as zero-modes; the l=4 gyroscope family is genuinely new, and the ansatz-consistency gap is technical and addressable. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05342 v3 pith:DYCIPX4J submitted 2025-01-09 gr-qc hep-th

Chen Liang , Carlos A. R. Herdeiro , Eugen Radu This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-th
keywords bosonicstarsaxisymmetricperturbationszeromodesbifurcationchain-likeconfigurationsring-likeProcagyroscope-like
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 aims to explain previously observed bifurcations of spherical bosonic stars into axisymmetric chain and ring configurations as the zero modes of a specific class of axisymmetric linear perturbations. The authors solve the first-order perturbation equations on scalar and Proca spherical bosonic-star backgrounds and find that at the same frequencies where the axisymmetric families attach, the perturbation functions can be made to vanish at infinity, the signature of a marginal mode. At l=2, the sign of the perturbation parameter selects whether matter collects along the axis, forming chains, or in the equatorial plane, forming rings, for excited scalar stars with one, two, and three nodes and for the first excited Proca star. At l=4, a scalar star with three nodes has a second zero mode, and the paper constructs the corresponding family, whose matter distribution mixes chain and ring features and is called gyroscope-like. If correct, this gives a perturbation-theoretic explanation for the branching of the reported axisymmetric bosonic star families from spherical solutions, and it extends the scalar chain family to seven constituents.

What carries the argument

The central object is the linearized, time-independent axisymmetric perturbation ansatz of Eq. (4.2): the spherical metric functions get perturbations $H(r)P_\ell(\cos\theta)$ and $K(r)P_\ell(\cos\theta)$ on the diagonal, with $P_\ell$ the Legendre polynomial, together with matter perturbations $\psi_1(r)P_\ell(\cos\theta)$ for scalar stars and $A_0,A_1,A_2$ for Proca stars. Substituting into the Einstein-matter equations, keeping first order in the small parameter $\epsilon$, and using three Einstein equations to eliminate $K(r)$ and its derivatives reduces the system to two coupled second-order linear ODEs for the scalar case and three for the Proca case, Eqs. (4.3)-(4.4). The zero modes are found by a multi-parameter shooting method that requires all perturbation functions to vanish at infinity; the spherical backgrounds at which such solutions exist are exactly the bifurcation points. The sign of $\epsilon$ in the perturbed metric and matter fields acts as the branching selector, with opposite signs corresponding to the two distinct axisymmetric branches.

What would settle it

A direct check would be to solve the full linearized Einstein-matter equations for axisymmetric perturbations without imposing the restricted diagonal ansatz of Eq. (4.2), allowing for example an off-diagonal $g_{r\theta}$ perturbation, and ask whether a zero mode with all fields regular and decaying at infinity still occurs at the same frequencies reported here (about $\omega=0.8583$, $0.8553$, $0.8634$ for scalar stars with NS=1,2,3; $\omega=0.8713$ for the Proca star; and the l=4 scalar NS=3 zero mode of Section 5.2). If the unrestricted problem has no such mode at those frequencies, the bifurcating branches would not be explained; if it has modes at different frequencies, additional ABS families should exist there. A complementary nonlinear test is to start from the spherical solution and follow the l=4 perturbation branch numerically to confirm that the gyroscope-like family persists away from linear order.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that spherical bosonic stars of the complex scalar and Proca fields, in excited states, possess static axisymmetric zero modes at discrete frequencies, and that each such zero mode is the tangent direction of a branch of static axisymmetric bosonic stars that splits off from the spherical trunk. For l=2 perturbations, each studied spherical background, scalar with node number NS=1,2,3 and Proca with NS=1, admits exactly one zero mode; the two signs of the perturbation amplitude reproduce the two known bifurcation branches, the chain-like ABSs with NA=2NS+1 constituents, where matter is concentrated on the axis, and the ring-like ABSs, where matter is concentrated near the equatorial plane. For l=4, the scalar NS=3 background admits another zero mode, and the paper constructs the corresponding new family of ABSs, called gyroscope-like, whose constant-energy-density surfaces simultaneously exhibit chain-like and ring-like features. The paper also constructs, for the first time, scalar bosonic-star chains with seven constituents and their ring counterparts. The physical quantities of the spherical and axisymmetric solutions coincide at the bifurcation points, and the quadrupole moment changes sign according to whether matter is drawn toward the axis or the equator.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the simple perturbation pattern the authors write down, two parts of the spherical gravitational field deformed by a single angular function plus matching changes in the matter field, catches every possible even, symmetric way the star can start to become axisymmetric; if some other independent pattern exists that this ansatz misses, the computed bifurcation points could be wrong or incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every reported static axisymmetric bosonic star family can be traced to a spherical bosonic star through a zero mode: at l=2, the sign of the perturbation parameter chooses chains versus rings, verified for scalar stars with one, two, and three nodes and for the first excited Proca star.
  • A single spherical background can host more than one bifurcation: the three-node scalar star has both the l=2 zero mode, giving chains and rings, and an l=4 zero mode, giving the new gyroscope-like family with mixed chain and ring morphology.
  • The empirical relation between the scalar star's node number NS and the chain constituent number NA, $N_S=(N_A-1)/2$, directly connects higher excited spherical states to longer chains, so constructing larger chains should correspond to probing higher excited spherical backgrounds.
  • The quadrupole moment acts as a clean order parameter for these bifurcations: it vanishes at the spherical background, becomes positive for scalar chain-like branches and negative for scalar ring-like branches, and is always negative for the gyroscope-like family, reflecting its equatorial dominance.
  • If a sufficiently strong quartic self-interaction is added, the zero modes may be removed at a threshold coupling, which would eliminate the bifurcations; the paper explicitly speculates that such a threshold exists.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the restricted ansatz is complete, the same method should predict an infinite sequence of higher-multipole bifurcations: scalar stars with more nodes should have l=4, l=6, and higher zero modes at distinct frequencies, so searching for zero modes on NS>=4 backgrounds would test the ladder structure beyond the single l=4 example.
  • The gyroscope-like morphology is likely the l=4 member of a broader pattern of mixed multipole matter distributions; extrapolating from l=2, which separates chains and rings, l=6 modes might create matter accumulation at intermediate angular locations, giving a sequence of increasingly complex ABS matter configurations.
  • The sign reversal between the scalar and Proca cases suggests that the branch morphology is fixed by the angular profile of the background energy density rather than by the sign of the perturbation parameter alone, so a more model-independent criterion could be derived by studying which sign of $\epsilon$ lowers the energy for a given field spin.
  • The zero-mode technique could be exported to other soliton-gravity systems, such as Q-balls in flat spacetime or hairy black holes, as a way to locate bifurcation points from perturbation equations before constructing full nonlinear solutions.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies bifurcations of spherical bosonic stars (SBSs) into axisymmetric bosonic stars (ABSs). It constructs scalar and Proca SBSs, then solves linearized axisymmetric perturbation equations (4.3)-(4.4) by a multi-parameter shooting method, looking for zero-modes under \ell=2 and \ell=4 perturbations. It claims that the resulting zero-mode frequencies coincide with the bifurcation points of previously constructed chain-like and ring-like ABS families, that this identifies those bifurcation points with the critical points of stability against \ell=2 (and, for one case, \ell=4) axisymmetric perturbations, and that the \ell=4 zero-mode leads to a new 'gyroscope-like' ABS family. It also reports the construction of scalar chains with up to seven constituents and their associated ring-like counterparts, as well as the empirical relation N_S=(N_A-1)/2 between the SBS node number and the ABS constituent number.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper would provide a linearized explanation for the observed branching of chain/ring ABSs from spherical branches and would add a qualitatively new \ell=4 perturbation channel leading to gyroscope-like configurations. The internal agreement between the zero-mode calculation and known nonlinear bifurcation points is a genuine check rather than an input, and the construction of seven-constituent chains extends the known solution space. However, the load-bearing perturbation ansatz is not shown to be tangent to the nonlinear ABS families used for comparison, and the reduction to the simplified ODEs is not presented; these gaps currently prevent the results from being interpreted as a proof of the bifurcation mechanism.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eq. (4.2); Section 2.1, Eq. (2.7)] The perturbation ansatz (4.2) is not derived from, and is not the linearization of, the nonlinear ansatz (2.7) used to construct the ABS families. In (2.7) the three functions F0, F1, F2 are independent, so the tangent space around a spherical background contains \delta g_tt/g_tt = 2\delta F0, \delta g_rr/g_rr = \delta g_\theta\theta/g_\theta\theta = 2\delta F1, and \delta g_\phi\phi/g_\phi\phi = 2\delta F2 as independent perturbations. Equation (4.2), by contrast, identifies \delta g_tt/g_tt (up to sign) with \delta g_rr/g_rr through the single function H and identifies \delta g_\theta\theta/g_\theta\theta with \delta g_\phi\phi/g_\phi\phi through K. Linearizing (2.7) would impose H=K and would leave \delta F0 and \delta F2 independent, neither of which is justified in (4.2). The manuscript gives no gauge-fixing argument showing that every even-parity axisymmetric zero-mode of the full system can be brought to this form, nor does it show that off-diagonal perturbations such as \delta g_{r\theta} decouple. Without this, the zero-mode found by shooting may not be the tangent direction of the chain/ring/gyroscope branches, and the agreement with Table 1 is insufficient to establish the central claim of Section 5.1. A concrete check would be to linearize the full PDE system (2.10)-(2.13) around the spherical background at the claimed bifurcation frequency and compare the zero-mode subspace with the tangent direction obtained from the nonlinear ABS branches.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.3)-(4.5)] The reduction from the linearized Einstein-matter system to the simplified ODEs (4.3)-(4.4) is not shown. The text states that K, K', and K'' are eliminated using the (r,r), (r,\theta), and (\theta,\theta) Einstein equations, but it does not present the elimination, does not state which residual equations are used, and does not discuss possible degeneracies of the algebraic equation (4.6) at zeros of \omega^2-\mu^2\sigma^2 N. The coefficient functions in (4.7)-(4.8) are long and are written with \kappa=4\pi G set to 1 only after the equations; no derivation or code is provided. Since the zero-mode frequencies are the central quantitative output, the reduction should be made available, at least as supplementary material, so the reader can verify that no spurious modes are introduced by the elimination procedure.
  3. [Section 5.1, Table 1] The claimed quantitative agreement between the zero-mode frequencies and the nonlinear bifurcation points is never tabulated. Table 1 lists the background SBS parameters (\omega, M, Q) at the bifurcation points of the nonlinear families, and Figure 3 shows the zero-mode background profiles, but the paper does not list the independently obtained zero-mode frequencies, masses, or charges, nor their differences from the Table 1 values. The sentence 'After comparing the relevant parameters, we can confirm the consistency' is the only explicit statement. This agreement is the key evidence for the central claim in Section 5.1, so an explicit comparison table with numerical precision is required.
  4. [Section 5.2, Fig. 6 and Table 4] For the new \ell=4 gyroscope-like family, the evidence is only qualitative. The text reports one \ell=4 zero-mode in scalar SBSs with N_S=3 and shows the perturbation profiles in Figure 7, but it does not give the zero-mode frequency, nor a numerical comparison with the nonlinear branch point marked in Figure 6. Table 4 displays energy-density surfaces, but there is no quantitative match between the perturbation tangent and the constructed nonlinear solutions. Since the abstract elevates the \ell=4 gyroscope-like ABSs to a headline result, this case needs the same level of numerical evidence as the \ell=2 case.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (4.2)] The term for \bar H_2 appears to be written as A_2(r) P_\ell(\cos\theta)/d\theta, which is almost certainly intended to be A_2(r) dP_\ell(\cos\theta)/d\theta; please correct the notation.
  2. [Section 3.1, Eqs. (3.1)-(3.2)] The boundary conditions in (3.1) and (3.2) contain apparent typos: (3.2) repeats m(0)=0 and \sigma(r)=\sigma_0 from the origin conditions, whereas the intended conditions at infinity should presumably be m(\infty) finite and \sigma(\infty)=1.
  3. [Section 5.2 and Conclusions] There are several grammatical and typographical errors: 'red and pueple curves' should be 'red and purple curves', and 'We discovered that exhibit zero-modes' is missing a grammatical subject.
  4. [Figure 2 and surrounding text] The text mentions 'black dashed lines' in connection with Figure 2, but the figure caption and the visible markers refer to 'black points' for bifurcations; please reconcile the description.
  5. [Eq. (3.13)] In Eq. (3.13), the right-hand side depends on \theta through \cos^2\theta, while the left-hand side M_2 is a spacetime quadrupole moment and should be \theta-independent; please check the formula and the definitions of B_0 and \nu_2.
  6. [Section 4.1, Eq. (4.1)] The empirical relation N_S=(N_A-1)/2 is stated without derivation or a statement of its domain of validity; since it is used to select the constructed cases, a brief explanation or at least a caveat would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the zero-mode computation is self-contained and the agreement with known ABS bifurcation points is an independent check, not an input.

full rationale

The central claim that l=2 (and l=4) bifurcations of bosonic stars occur at zero modes of spherical bosonic stars is obtained by substituting the perturbation ansatz (4.2) into the field equations, reducing to the linear ODEs (4.3)-(4.4) whose coefficients are fixed by the spherical background, and shooting for backgrounds where all perturbation functions vanish asymptotically. No fitted parameter from the ABS data enters the ODEs: the shooting parameters are background frequency and perturbation amplitudes, and the bifurcation frequencies in Table 1 are compared only afterward ('we can confirm the consistency'). The empirical relation NS=(NA-1)/2 is presented as an observation and is not used in the zero-mode calculation. Self-citations [24-26] supply the comparison ABS data and are not load-bearing assumptions of the perturbation derivation. The possible incompleteness of the (4.2) metric perturbation relative to the full even-parity tangent space, e.g. relative to the nonlinear ansatz (2.7), is a correctness/truncation concern, not a circular reduction: the paper does not define the bifurcation points in terms of the zero modes, nor does it fit H,K to the ABS solutions. Thus no circular step is exhibited.

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

The central claim adds no new degrees of freedom, parameters, or entities to the existing Einstein-Klein-Gordon/Proca system. The main unproven input is the completeness of the perturbation ansatz, while the numerical accuracy of the solver is a practical assumption.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Einstein-complex scalar/Proca model with minimal coupling and no self-interactions is the correct arena for the claims.
    Action (2.1)-(2.2) defines the model; the central claims are bounded by this model and do not include self-interactions or additional fields.
  • ad hoc to paper The restricted perturbation ansatz (4.2) is complete enough to find all relevant even-parity axisymmetric zero-modes.
    Equation (4.2) introduces only H,K metric perturbations and Legendre modes; the reduction to (4.3)-(4.4) eliminates K using three Einstein equations, but no gauge-completeness proof or comparison with the full even-parity perturbation system is given. The l=4 result depends on this ansatz.
  • domain assumption The numerical shooting and fidisol/cadsol solutions are convergent to the stated accuracy.
    Section 3.3 reports relative error below 1e-3 from constraint checks, but no grid convergence or solver tolerance analysis is shown for the zero-mode equations specifically.
  • domain assumption Asymptotically flat, Z2-even boundary conditions delimit the solution families under study.
    Section 3.1 imposes these conditions; Section 6 explicitly uses them to argue SBSs cannot bifurcate into odd-chain or discrete-symmetry solutions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bifurcations in Bosonic Stars: chains and rings from spherical solutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DYCIPX4J

@misc{pith2026250105342,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bifurcations in Bosonic Stars: chains and rings from spherical solutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DYCIPX4J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05342}
}
abstract

We study the bifurcation phenomena between spherical and axisymmetric bosonic stars. By numerically solving for the zero-modes of spherical bosonic stars under specific axially symmetric perturbations, we discover that excited state spherical bosonic stars bifurcate into two types of axisymmetric bosonic stars under $\ell=2$ perturbations, with matter distributions resembling chains and rings, respectively. Meanwhile, $\ell=4$ axisymmetric perturbations lead spherical scalar bosonic stars to bifurcate into a new type of axisymmetric bosonic stars, exhibiting a mixed chain-like and ring-like matter distribution, which we refer to as gyroscope-like. Additionally, for the first time, we have constructed chains of scalar bosonic stars with 7 constituents and their corresponding ring-like scalar bosonic stars. Our results provide an explanation for the bifurcations in bosonic stars from the perspective of perturbations, and by analyzing physical quantities such as quadrupoles and energy densities we systematically discuss the impact of axisymmetric perturbations on spherical bosonic stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.05342 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Noether charges of the ABSs and SBSs as functions of the frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The ADM masses of the ABSs and SBSs as functions of the frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The profiles in the left panel show one (red curve), two (green curve), and three (blue curve) nodes, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The profiles of perturbation functions ψ1(r), A0(r), A1(r), A2(r) (left column) and H(r) (right column) at the bifurcation points for scalar (top row) and Proca (bottom row) cases. NS Chains ϵ > 0 ←−−−−−−−−−−−−−− Spherical ϵ < 0 −−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ Rings 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAG…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The quadrupole moments of the ABSs as functions of the frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The ADM masses of the SBSs and ABSs associated with bifurcations under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The profiles of perturbation functions ψ1(r) and H(r) for ℓ = 4. The profiles of the perturbation functions are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The quadrupole moments of the ABSs as functions of the frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    W. Chin, E. Ott, H. E. Nusse, and C. Grebogi, Phys. Rev. E 50 (1994) no.6, 4427-4444 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.50.4427

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.50.4427 1994

  2. [2]

    H. R. Brand and R. J. Deissler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989), 2801-2804 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.63.2801

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.63.2801 1989

  3. [3]

    J. D. Crawford, Rev. Mod. Phys. 63 (1991), 991-1037 doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.63.991

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.63.991 1991

  4. [4]

    A. V. Chechkin, J. Klafter, V. Y. Gonchar, R. Metzler, and L. V. Tanatarov, Phys. Rev. E 67 (2003), 010102 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.67.010102

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.67.010102 2003

  5. [5]

    O. A. Basaran, L. E. Scriven, Phys. Fluids 1 (1989), 795-798 doi:10.1063/1.857551

    work page doi:10.1063/1.857551 1989

  6. [6]

    D. Duft, T. Achtzehn, R. M¨ uller, B. A. Huber, and T. Leisner, Nature 421 (2003), 128 doi:10.1038/421128a

    work page doi:10.1038/421128a 2003

  7. [7]

    J. C. Burton and P. Taborek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011), 144501 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.144501 18

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.144501 2011

  8. [8]

    Giudici, C

    M. Giudici, C. Green, G. Giacomelli, U. Nespolo, and J. R. Tredicce, Phys. Rev. E 55 (1997), 6414-6418 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.55.6414

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.55.6414 1997

Show all 89 references
  1. [9]

    Schleich, R

    W. Schleich, R. J. Horowicz, and S. Varro, Phys. Rev. A 40 (1989), 7405–7408 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.40.7405

    1989 doi

  2. [10]

    Hansen, T

    W. Hansen, T. P. Smith, K. Y. Lee, J. A. Brum, C. M. Knoedler, J. M. Hong, and D. P. Kern, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989), 2168-2171 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.2168

    1989 doi

  3. [11]

    Gregory and R

    R. Gregory and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993), 2837-2840 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2837 [arXiv:hep-th/9301052 [hep-th]]

    1993 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and E. Radu, Phys. Lett. B 729 (2014), 121-126 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.01.012 [arXiv:1310.8596 [gr-qc]]

    2014 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Wiseman, Class

    T. Wiseman, Class. Quant. Grav. 20 (2003), 1137-1176 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/20/6/308 [arXiv:hep-th/0209051 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Sorkin, Phys

    E. Sorkin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004), 031601 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.031601 [arXiv:hep-th/0402216 [hep- th]]

    2004 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Damour and G

    T. Damour and G. Esposito-Farese, Class. Quant. Grav. 9 (1992), 2093-2176 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/9/9/015

    1992 doi

  8. [16]

    Damour and G

    T. Damour and G. Esposito-Farese, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993), 2220-2223 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2220

    1993 doi

  9. [17]

    D. D. Doneva and S. S. Yazadjiev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) no.13, 131103 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.131103 [arXiv:1711.01187 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    H. O. Silva, J. Sakstein, L. Gualtieri, T. P. Sotiriou and E. Berti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) no.13, 131104 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.131104 [arXiv:1711.02080 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, E. Radu, N. Sanchis-Gual and J. A. Font, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) no.10, 101102 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.101102 [arXiv:1806.05190 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Hod, Phys

    S. Hod, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012), 104026 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012), 129902] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.129902 [arXiv:1211.3202 [gr-qc]]

    2012 arXiv

  13. [21]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014), 221101 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.221101 [arXiv:1403.2757 [gr-qc]]

    2014 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Y. Q. Wang, Y. X. Liu and S. W. Wei, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) no.6, 064036 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.064036 [arXiv:1811.08795 [gr-qc]]

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    J. C. Degollado, C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018), 651-655 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.04.052 [arXiv:1802.07266 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, J. Kunz, I. Perapechka, E. Radu and Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) no.6, 065009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.065009 [arXiv:2101.06442 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    S. X. Sun, L. Zhao and Y. Q. Wang, JHEP 08 (2023), 152 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)152 [arXiv:2210.09265 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, E. Radu, N. Sanchis-Gual, N. M. Santos and E. dos Santos Costa Filho, Phys. Lett. B 852 (2024), 138595 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138595 [arXiv:2311.14800 [gr-qc]]

    2024

  19. [27]

    D. J. Kaup, Phys. Rev. 172 (1968), 1331-1342 doi:10.1103/PhysRev.172.1331

    1968 doi

  20. [28]

    Brito, V

    R. Brito, V. Cardoso, C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Phys. Lett. B 752 (2016), 291-295 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.11.051 [arXiv:1508.05395 [gr-qc]]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Matos, F

    T. Matos, F. S. Guzman and L. A. Urena-Lopez, Class. Quant. Grav. 17 (2000), 1707-1712 doi:10.1088/0264- 9381/17/7/309 [arXiv:astro-ph/9908152 [astro-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Matos and L

    T. Matos and L. A. Urena-Lopez, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001), 063506 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.063506 [arXiv:astro- ph/0006024 [astro-ph]]

    2001

  23. [31]

    W. Hu, R. Barkana and A. Gruzinov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000), 1158-1161 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.1158 [arXiv:astro-ph/0003365 [astro-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  24. [32]

    L. Hui, J. P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine and E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) no.4, 043541 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.043541 [arXiv:1610.08297 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Cardoso and P

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, Living Rev. Rel. 22 (2019) no.1, 4 doi:10.1007/s41114-019-0020-4 [arXiv:1904.05363 [gr-qc]]. 19

    2019 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Glampedakis and G

    K. Glampedakis and G. Pappas, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.4, 041502 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.041502 [arXiv:1710.02136 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, A. M. Pombo, E. Radu, P. V. P. Cunha and N. Sanchis-Gual, JCAP 04 (2021), 051 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/04/051 [arXiv:2102.01703 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, J. Kunz, I. Perapechka, E. Radu and Y. Shnir, Phys. Lett. B 812 (2021), 136027 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.136027 [arXiv:2008.10608 [gr-qc]]

    2021

  29. [37]

    Gervalle, Phys

    R. Gervalle, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) no.12, 124052 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.124052 [arXiv:2206.03982 [gr- qc]]

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    S. X. Sun and Y. Q. Wang, [arXiv:2312.16921 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    Loiko, I

    V. Loiko, I. Perapechka and Y. Shnir, EPL 133 (2021) no.4, 41001 doi:10.1209/0295-5075/133/41001 [arXiv:2012.01052 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Krusch and P

    S. Krusch and P. Sutcliffe, J. Phys. A 37 (2004), 9037 doi:10.1088/0305-4470/37/38/008 [arXiv:hep-th/0407002 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Shnir and D

    Y. Shnir and D. H. Tchrakian, J. Phys. A 43 (2010), 025401 doi:10.1088/1751-8113/43/2/025401 [arXiv:0906.5583 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Shnir, Phys

    Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) no.8, 085039 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.085039 [arXiv:1508.06507 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Y. M. Shnir, Symmetry 13 (2021) no.2, 284 doi:10.3390/sym13020284 [arXiv:2101.07552 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and M. Leissner, Phys. Lett. B 663 (2008), 438-444 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.04.027 [arXiv:0802.3275 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Ibadov, B

    R. Ibadov, B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and M. Leissner, Phys. Lett. B 663 (2008), 136-140 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.03.055 [arXiv:0802.3335 [gr-qc]]

    2008 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Ibadov, B

    R. Ibadov, B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and M. Leissner, Phys. Lett. B 686 (2010), 298-306 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.02.058 [arXiv:1001.3027 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Ibadov, B

    R. Ibadov, B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and M. Leissner, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010), 125037 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.125037 [arXiv:1010.5158 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  40. [48]

    R. Teh, B. L. Ng and K. M. Wong, Annals Phys. 362 (2015), 170-195 doi:10.1016/j.aop.2015.07.025 [arXiv:1402.4222 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Kleihaus and J

    B. Kleihaus and J. Kunz, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000), 025003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.025003 [arXiv:hep- th/9909037 [hep-th]]

    2000

  42. [50]

    Kleihaus and J

    B. Kleihaus and J. Kunz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000), 2430-2433 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2430 [arXiv:hep- th/0006148 [hep-th]]

    2000

  43. [51]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and Y. Shnir, Phys. Lett. B 570 (2003), 237-243 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.07.059 [arXiv:hep-th/0307110 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003), 101701 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.101701 [arXiv:hep- th/0307215 [hep-th]]

    2003

  45. [53]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004), 065010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.065010 [arXiv:hep- th/0405169 [hep-th]]

    2004

  46. [54]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005), 024013 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.024013 [arXiv:gr- qc/0411106 [gr-qc]]

    2005

  47. [55]

    Teh and K

    R. Teh and K. M. Wong, J. Math. Phys. 46 (2005), 082301 doi:10.1063/1.1996832 [arXiv:hep-th/0406075 [hep- th]]

    2005 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Paturyan, E

    V. Paturyan, E. Radu and D. H. Tchrakian, Phys. Lett. B609 (2005), 360-366 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.02.001 [arXiv:hep-th/0412011 [hep-th]]

    2005 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz and U. Neemann, Phys. Lett. B 623 (2005), 171-178 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.07.043 [arXiv:gr-qc/0507047 [gr-qc]]

    2005 arXiv

  50. [58]

    J. Kunz, U. Neemann and Y. Shnir, Phys. Lett. B 640 (2006), 57-63 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.07.030 [arXiv:hep-th/0606176 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  51. [59]

    J. Kunz, U. Neemann and Y. Shnir, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007), 125008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.125008 [arXiv:hep-th/0703232 [hep-th]]. 20

    2007 arXiv

  52. [60]

    K. G. Lim, R. Teh and K. M. Wong, J. Phys. G 39 (2012), 025002 doi:10.1088/0954-3899/39/2/025002 [arXiv:1102.4058 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  53. [61]

    R. Teh, A. Soltanian and K. M. Wong, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) no.4, 045018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.045018

    2014 doi

  54. [62]

    Jaramillo and S

    V. Jaramillo and S. Y. Zhou, [arXiv:2411.08985 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    Gleiser, Phys

    M. Gleiser, Phys. Rev. D 38 (1988), 2376 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 39 (1989) no.4, 1257] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.38.2376

    1988 doi

  56. [64]

    Jetzer, Nucl

    P. Jetzer, Nucl. Phys. B 316 (1989), 411-428 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90038-2

    1989 doi

  57. [65]

    T. D. Lee and Y. Pang, Nucl. Phys. B 315 (1989), 477 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90365-9

    1989 doi

  58. [66]

    Gleiser and R

    M. Gleiser and R. Watkins, Nucl. Phys. B 319 (1989), 733-746 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90627-5

    1989 doi

  59. [67]

    Kojima, S

    Y. Kojima, S. Yoshida and T. Futamase, Prog. Theor. Phys. 86 (1991), 401-410 doi:10.1143/PTP.86.401

    1991 doi

  60. [68]

    Yoshida, Y

    S. Yoshida, Y. Eriguchi and T. Futamase, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994), 6235-6246 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.50.6235

    1994 doi

  61. [69]

    C. F. B. Macedo, P. Pani, V. Cardoso and L. C. B. Crispino, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) no.6, 064046 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.064046 [arXiv:1307.4812 [gr-qc]]

    2013 arXiv

  62. [70]

    N. M. Santos, C. L. Benone and C. A. R. Herdeiro, JCAP 06 (2024), 068 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/06/068 [arXiv:2404.07257 [gr-qc]]

    2024 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Seidel and W

    E. Seidel and W. M. Suen, Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990), 384-403 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.42.384

    1990 doi

  64. [72]

    Balakrishna, E

    J. Balakrishna, E. Seidel and W. M. Suen, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998), 104004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.104004 [arXiv:gr-qc/9712064 [gr-qc]]

    1998 arXiv

  65. [73]

    F. S. Guzman, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004), 044033 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.044033 [arXiv:gr-qc/0407054 [gr-qc]]

    2004 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Kain, Phys

    B. Kain, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) no.12, 123003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.123003 [arXiv:2106.01740 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Sanchis-Gual, C

    N. Sanchis-Gual, C. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Class. Quant. Grav. 39 (2022) no.6, 064001 doi:10.1088/1361- 6382/ac4b9b [arXiv:2110.03000 [gr-qc]]

    2022 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Brito, C

    M. Brito, C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, N. Sanchis-Gual and M. Zilh˜ ao, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) no.8, 084022 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.084022 [arXiv:2302.08900 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Siemonsen and W

    N. Siemonsen and W. E. East, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) no.4, 044022 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.044022 [arXiv:2011.08247 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Sanchis-Gual, C

    N. Sanchis-Gual, C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, J. C. Degollado and J. A. Font, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) no.10, 104028 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.104028 [arXiv:1702.04532 [gr-qc]]

    2017 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Herdeiro and E

    C. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) no.14, 144001 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/14/144001 [arXiv:1501.04319 [gr-qc]]

    2015 arXiv

  72. [80]

    R. P. Geroch, J. Math. Phys. 11 (1970), 2580-2588 doi:10.1063/1.1665427

    1970 doi

  73. [81]

    R. O. Hansen, J. Math. Phys. 15 (1974), 46-52 doi:10.1063/1.1666501

    1974 doi

  74. [82]

    Sch¨ onauer and R

    W. Sch¨ onauer and R. Weiβ, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 27 (1989) no.1-2, 279-297 doi:10.1016/0377-0427(89)90371- 3

    1989 doi

  75. [83]

    Efficient vectorizable pde solvers,

    W. Sch¨ onauer and R. Weiβ, “Efficient vectorizable pde solvers,” in Parallel Algorithms for Numerical Linear Algebra (H. A. van der Vorst and P. van Dooren, eds.), vol. 1 of Advances in Parallel Computing, pp. 279 – 297, North-Holland, 1990

    1990

  76. [84]

    Sch¨ onauer and T

    W. Sch¨ onauer and T. Adolph, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 131 (2001) no.1, 473-492 doi:10.1016/0377- 0427(89)90371-3

    2001 doi

  77. [85]

    C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) no.5, 390 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7976-9 [arXiv:2004.00336 [gr-qc]]

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    J. P. Hong, M. Suzuki and M. Yamada, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) no.11, 111104 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.111104 [arXiv:2004.03148 [gr-qc]]

    2020 arXiv

  79. [87]

    H. A. Buchdahl, Phys. Rev. 116 (1959), 1027 doi:10.1103/PhysRev.116.1027

    1959 doi

  80. [88]

    Andreasson, J

    H. Andreasson, J. Diff. Eq. 245 (2008), 2243-2266 doi:10.1016/j.jde.2008.05.010 [arXiv:gr-qc/0702137 [gr-qc]]

    2008 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Andreasson and G

    H. Andreasson and G. Rein, Class. Quant. Grav. 24 (2007), 1809-1832 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/24/7/008 [arXiv:gr-qc/0611053 [gr-qc]]. 21

    2007 arXiv

Pith tools

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