Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Quasinormal Modes and Dynamical Evolution of Scalar Fields in the Einstein-Bumblebee Theory with a Cosmological Constant

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Scalar perturbations of Einstein-Bumblebee black holes show that the Lorentz-violation parameter $\ell$ lowers the real and imaginary parts of monopole quasinormal frequencies, leaves the real part of dipole and quadrupole frequencies…

desk verdict Useful incremental QNM results for Einstein-Bumblebee with Λ, but the time-domain cross-validation is invalid as written due to a missing √(1+ℓ) conversion. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04782 v2 pith:XA3K2F26 submitted 2025-02-07 gr-qc

Hao Hu , Guoxiong Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc MSC 83C5783C47 PACS 04.70.-s11.30.Cp
keywords LorentzviolationBumblebeegravityquasinormalmodesscalarperturbationscosmologicalconstantblackholeringdownWKBapproximationmatrixmethod
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 studies how Lorentz symmetry breaking changes the way a black hole rings. For scalar-field perturbations of static, spherically symmetric Einstein-Bumblebee black holes with a cosmological constant, it claims that increasing the Lorentz-violation parameter $\ell$ lowers both the frequency and the damping rate of the monopole mode, while in dipole and quadrupole modes it leaves the oscillation frequency almost fixed and only accelerates the decay, meaning a smaller $|\mathrm{Im}\,\omega|$. A larger cosmological constant $\Lambda$ lowers both parts of the mode frequencies, and a heavier scalar field raises the real part and lowers the imaginary part. The authors cross-check frequency-domain WKB and matrix-method results against time-domain finite-difference evolutions of Gaussian wave packets. These results matter because they offer a concrete template for what gravitational-wave ringdown would look like if Lorentz symmetry is spontaneously broken.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the radial master equation for a massive scalar field in the Einstein-Bumblebee-de Sitter metric, together with its effective potential $V(r) = \frac{F(r)}{r^2}\big[(1+\ell)L(L+1) + (1+\ell)r^2\mu^2 + 2M/r - 2\Lambda r^2/3\big]$. The analysis proceeds by three mutually checked tools: the sixth-order WKB approximation for the massless case, the matrix method for the massive case, and a finite-difference evolution in light-cone coordinates $(u,v) = (t_* - r_*, t_* + r_*)$ with a Gaussian initial pulse. The Lorentz-violating parameter enters the dynamics through the $(1+\ell)$ prefactor in the metric's radial component and through the rescaled time coordinate $t_* = t/\sqrt{1+\ell}$, which the paper uses to put the master equation in Schrödinger form.

What would settle it

Run the finite-difference evolution of Eq. (16) but keep the original time coordinate $t$ instead of $t_*$, fit the ringdown frequency, and compare it with the WKB eigenvalues of Eq. (17). If the two disagree by the factor $\sqrt{1+\ell}$ for nonzero $\ell$, the paper's claimed frequency-domain/time-domain consistency is an artifact of the rescaling. A minimal version: repeat the Table I fit for $\ell=1$ and check whether the fitted frequency is $\sqrt{2}$ times the quoted WKB value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the quasinormal spectrum of scalar perturbations in the Einstein-Bumblebee-de Sitter background is controlled monotonically by three parameters: the Lorentz-violation parameter $\ell$, the cosmological constant $\Lambda$, and the scalar mass $\mu$. In the metric $ds^2 = -F(r)\,dt^2 + (1+\ell)F(r)^{-1}\,dr^2 + r^2\,d\Omega^2$ with $F(r) = 1 - 2M/r - \Lambda r^2/3$, the reduced radial equation has an effective potential $V(r)$ carrying explicit $(1+\ell)$ factors in the centrifugal and mass terms. Solving the resulting eigenvalue problem shows that for $L=0$ both $\mathrm{Re}\,\omega$ and $|\mathrm{Im}\,\omega|$ decrease with $\ell$; for $L=1,2$ only $|\mathrm{Im}\,\omega|$ decreases appreciably; and both parts decrease with $\Lambda$. Massive fields raise $\mathrm{Re}\,\omega$ and lower $|\mathrm{Im}\,\omega|$, except that the monopole mode is insensitive to $\mu M$ below about $0.1$. The time-domain waveforms are quoted as confirming these trends.

Load-bearing premise

The cross-validation rests on the assumption that the time-domain eigenfrequency extracted from the rescaled-coordinate evolution can be equated with the WKB frequency computed from an equation carrying an explicit $(1+\ell)\omega^2$ factor; the equations as written imply a $\sqrt{1+\ell}$ mismatch between these two quantities, so the comparison in Table I silently adopts a particular rescaling convention.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If these results hold, the ringdown of a black hole in a Lorentz-violating theory is not a single universal tone but a family of curves parametrized by $\ell$: higher $\ell$ means longer-lived higher-multipole oscillations at nearly the same frequency.
  • A positive cosmological constant, as in our accelerating universe, shortens the ringdown; combined with $\ell$, it also suppresses the late-time power-law tail that would otherwise follow the quasinormal phase.
  • For a massive scalar field, the dipole and quadrupole modes become higher-frequency and more sharply damped, while the monopole mode is blind to the mass until $\mu M$ exceeds about $0.1$.
  • The close agreement among the three numerical methods in Table I, if taken at face value, supports the use of the matrix method for massive fields and the WKB/finite-difference pair for massless fields in this class of spacetimes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own equations imply that the time-domain frequency fitted in $t_*$ should be $\sqrt{1+\ell}$ times the frequency appearing in the WKB equation with the $(1+\ell)\omega^2$ factor; Table I quotes the two as equal, so the reported 'nearly unchanged' real parts for $L=1,2$ may reflect an unstated coordinate convention rather than a physical statement about the original time coordinate. Thi
  • One testable extension: repeat the frequency extraction in the original coordinate $t$, or compute the WKB eigenvalues of Eq. (12) without the $(1+\ell)$ factor, to decide whether the physical oscillation period of the dipole and quadrupole modes truly is independent of $\ell$.
  • The disappearance of the late-time tail for large $\Lambda$ and large $\ell$ suggests that searches for gravitational-wave memory or echoes in de Sitter-like environments would see a cleaner ringdown, a consequence the paper does not draw explicitly.
  • The same radial-equation machinery could be applied to the rotating Einstein-Bumblebee black hole; if the frequency shift with $\ell$ survives rotation, superradiant instabilities would acquire an $\ell$-dependent threshold.
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 / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies scalar-field perturbations of static, spherically symmetric Einstein–Bumblebee black holes with a cosmological constant. It separates variables to obtain a radial master equation, computes quasinormal-mode frequencies with the WKB approximation and a matrix method, evolves Gaussian initial data with a finite-difference method in the time domain, and fits the resulting waveforms to frequencies. The paper claims that increasing the Lorentz-violation parameter ℓ lowers both real and imaginary parts of the monopole mode and lowers the imaginary part of higher multipoles while leaving their real parts nearly unchanged; that increasing Λ lowers both parts; and that increasing the field mass μM raises the real part and lowers the imaginary part. Table I is presented as a cross-validation of the frequency-domain and time-domain results.

Significance. If the numerical framework is correct, this is a useful parameter survey of quasinormal-mode behavior in a Lorentz-violating de Sitter black-hole spacetime. The separation of variables and the effective potential in Eqs. (12)–(13) are internally consistent, and the paper uses three independent numerical methods, which is a strength. The parameter scans are not fitted to any preconceived answer, so there is no circularity problem. However, the central claim that time-domain evolution confirms the frequency-domain results is not established as written because of a time-coordinate rescaling inconsistency, and the matrix-method results for nonzero mass lack an independent check. With those issues addressed, the paper would be a moderate incremental contribution to the existing Bumblebee black-hole QNM literature.

major comments (4)
  1. [§II, Eqs. (12)–(17), and Table I] The claimed cross-validation between frequency-domain and time-domain results is invalid as stated because of a time-coordinate rescaling factor. From Eq. (12), after the tortoise coordinate r* the equation is ∂²_{r*}ψ − (1+ℓ)∂²_t ψ − Vψ=0. The text then defines t*=t/√(1+ℓ) and writes Eq. (16) as ∂²_{r*}ψ − ∂²_{t*}ψ − Vψ=0. For the ansatz e^{-iωt} used in Eq. (17), the frequency-domain equation is ∂²_{r*}ψ + [(1+ℓ)ω² − V]ψ=0, so the frequency Ω extracted from a Fourier mode in t* satisfies Ω=√(1+ℓ)ω. The finite-difference evolution is formulated in u=t*−r* and v=t*+r*, so the waveform fit yields Ω, while the WKB column of Table I gives ω. These two quantities cannot be equal for ℓ≠0 without an unstated conversion. For example, for ℓ=0.5 and Λ=10⁻³, the WKB and fitting entries 0.477306−0.078543i and 0.477337−0.078467i would differ by a factor √1.5≈1.225 after conversion. The paper should either fit in the original time t, convert the fitted Ω to ω, or redefine Eq. (17) with ω conjugate to t* and propagate that convention through the boundary conditions.
  2. [§II, Eqs. (6)–(7)] The definition of the effective cosmological constant is internally inconsistent. Equation (6) contains the combination (1+ℓ)Λ_eff in F(r), while the text defines Λ_eff=Λ−ξb² and immediately states the constraint Λ=(1+ℓ)Λ_eff. Since ℓ=ξb², these two relations imply Λ=(1+ℓ)(Λ−ξb²), which is not an identity for arbitrary Λ and ℓ. The metric function F(r)=1−2M/r−Λr²/3 follows only from the second relation. Please clarify which quantity is the input parameter and which is derived; as written, the model and the interpretation of the Λ scans are ambiguous.
  3. [§III A, Eqs. (21)–(24)] The reduction of the matrix method to the linear generalized eigenvalue problem M±₀+ωM±₁ is not established. The boundary prefactors in Eq. (21) contain powers x^{−i√(1+ℓ)ωη_h} and (1−x)^{i√(1+ℓ)ωη_c}; after substitution into the second-order ODE (22), the coefficient of χ contains terms of order ω², for example from p(p−1) with p=1−i√(1+ℓ)ωη_h. The determinant condition is therefore generally a nonlinear eigenvalue problem. The authors should either provide the explicit transformation that linearizes the problem or state the generalized eigenvalue form actually solved; without this, the matrix-method numbers in Figs. 2–3 and Table I are not reproducible from the text.
  4. [§III C and Fig. 3] The claims about the field-mass dependence of the QNMs are computed with the matrix method only, and the method’s accuracy is acknowledged to be poor for small Λ at N=30. Table I illustrates this concretely: at Λ=10⁻³ and ℓ=0.5, the matrix-method imaginary part 0.080636 differs from both the WKB and fitting values 0.078543 and 0.078467 by about 2.6–2.8 percent. Because the mass dependence is one of the central claims of the paper, the authors should provide a convergence study in N or an independent time-domain calculation for nonzero μM.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§II, Eq. (16)] Equation (16) states t*=r/√(1+ℓ); this should be t*=t/√(1+ℓ). As printed it is dimensionally inconsistent and obscures the rescaling issue discussed above.
  2. [§III B, Eq. (25)] The WKB condition as typeset appears to contain a spurious factor i in the numerator. The standard Iyer–Will formula is (V0−ω²)/√(−2V0′′) − Λ2 − Λ3 − Λ4 − Λ5 − Λ6 = n+1/2; please check the displayed equation.
  3. [§III A, Eq. (21)] The notation ψ±_l is introduced in Eq. (21) without defining the ± branches, and the master equation (12) has no such label. Please clarify what the two solutions correspond to.
  4. [§III A] The phrase “the multipole number ℓ” conflicts with the Lorentz-violation parameter ℓ, which is denoted by the same symbol. The angular quantum number is denoted L elsewhere in the paper.
  5. [Table I] The missing Matrix-Method entries for Λ=0 are indicated only by the column layout. Please add an explicit placeholder such as “—” and state the matrix order N used for each block.
  6. [References] References [32] and [46] are the same paper, and references [38] and [44] are also the same paper; please merge the duplicate entries.
  7. [Introduction] The introduction contains a duplicated description of Sec. III: “Sec. III describes the WKB method” and then “Sec. III briefly introduces the matrix method and the WKB method.” Please consolidate these sentences.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the quasinormal-mode frequencies are obtained by independent numerical solution of a well-posed wave equation with scanned parameters, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central results are the quasinormal-mode frequencies of scalar perturbations in the Einstein-Bumblebee-dS spacetime. The derivation chain is: take the known metric (Eq. 6), insert the Klein-Gordon equation (Eq. 9), separate variables to obtain the radial master equation (Eqs. 12-13), introduce the tortoise coordinate and rescaled time (Eqs. 14-16), and then solve the resulting eigenvalue problem with three independent methods: the matrix method (Eqs. 23-24), the WKB approximation (Eq. 25), and finite-difference time-domain evolution (Eq. 27) from Gaussian initial data (Eq. 28). The parameters ℓ, Λ, and μM are scanned, not fitted, and the time-domain waveform fitting extracts frequencies from an independent dynamical evolution rather than enforcing a desired answer. There is therefore no self-definitional step, no fitted-input-called-prediction step, and no load-bearing self-citation: the cited prior work supplies the background metric and standard numerical methods, but the paper's quantitative claims do not reduce to those citations. The notable issue raised in the reader's take—the apparent missing √(1+ℓ) conversion between the time-domain frequency measured in the rescaled time t* and the frequency ω appearing with the factor (1+ℓ)ω² in Eq. (17)—is a consistency or correctness concern about how the time-domain cross-validation is reported, not a circularity. Even if Table I contains an unstated coordinate convention, the WKB and matrix results are independently computed frequency-domain solutions of the same equation, so the reported trends are not forced by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new free parameters are fitted to establish the central trends; the scanned parameters ℓ, Λ, and μM are model inputs. The bumblebee field and its vacuum expectation value are inherited from prior work. The main implicit dependencies are the validity of the cited metric solution and the accuracy of the numerical methods, neither of which is independently verified here.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Einstein-Bumblebee action with potential V(BμBμ±b²) triggers spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking (Eq. 1).
    Background model inherited from prior literature; the paper does not derive or justify this action.
  • domain assumption The line element (6) with F(r)=1-2M/r-Λr²/3 and ℓ=ξb² is the correct vacuum solution of the Einstein-Bumblebee model with cosmological constant.
    Taken from Refs. [19,20]; if this is not the correct vacuum solution, all QNM results refer to a different spacetime.
  • domain assumption Quasinormal mode boundary conditions are ingoing at the event horizon and outgoing at the cosmological horizon, with oscillatory asymptotics (Eq. 19).
    Standard dS QNM boundary conditions, but their application to the rescaled time coordinate is not made fully explicit.
  • domain assumption The sixth-order WKB formula (Eq. 25) is accurate enough for the low multipoles L=0,1,2 considered here.
    WKB is known to be less accurate for small L and low overtones; the paper gives no convergence or error estimate.
  • ad hoc to paper The matrix method can be written as a linear generalized eigenvalue problem [M0+ωM1]χ=0 even though the boundary factors in Eq. (21) depend on ω.
    The coefficient matrices are not displayed, and the linearization with ω-dependent boundary conditions is not justified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quasinormal Modes and Dynamical Evolution of Scalar Fields in the Einstein-Bumblebee Theory with a Cosmological Constant." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XA3K2F26

@misc{pith2026250204782,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quasinormal Modes and Dynamical Evolution of Scalar Fields in the Einstein-Bumblebee Theory with a Cosmological Constant},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XA3K2F26}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04782}
}
abstract

This paper investigates the dynamic behavior of static, spherically symmetric black holes within the Einstein-Bumblebee gravity model with a cosmological constant, focusing on scalar field perturbations. Through separation of the angular components, the scalar field perturbations outside the black hole are reduced to a purely radial main equation. The quasinormal modes (QNMs) of the system are then determined via the WKB approximation in the frequency domain, while the dynamic evolution of the system is examined in the time domain using finite difference methods. The eigenfrequencies of the waveforms from the time-domain evolution are fitted to cross-validate the frequency-domain results. The study finds that the Lorentz violation parameter $ \ell $ and the cosmological constant $ \Lambda $ significantly influence the QNMs. Specifically, as $ \ell $ increases, the real and imaginary components of the lower modes decrease, while in higher modes, the real part changes minimally, and the imaginary part decreases rapidly. An increase in $ \Lambda $ similarly results in a decrease in the overall QNM values. These results are supported by the time-domain analysis, providing a clearer picture of how Lorentz symmetry breaking affects the QNMs of de Sitter spacetime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04782 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The e [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Complex massless scalar frequencies for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Complex massive scalar frequencies for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The time evolution of the wave function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The time evolution of the wave function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Charged black holes in Kalb-Ramond gravity: Weak Deflection Angle, Shadow cast, Quasinormal Modes and Neutrino annihilation

    gr-qc 2025-05 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The Kalb-Ramond black hole phenomenology is mostly an extension of known results, and its shadow formula is internally inconsistent, invalidating the EHT-based constraints.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Magueijo and L

    J. Magueijo and L. Smolin, Lorentz invariance with an invariant energy scale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 190403 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0112090

    arXiv 2002

  2. [2]

    B. Li, T. P. Sotiriou, and J. D. Barrow, f (T) gravity and local Lorentz invariance, Phys. Rev. D 83, 064035 (2011), arXiv:1010.1041 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Heisenberg, A systematic approach to generalisations of General Relativity and their cosmological implications, Phys

    L. Heisenberg, A systematic approach to generalisations of General Relativity and their cosmological implications, Phys. Rept. 796, 1 (2019), arXiv:1807.01725 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    Mart ´ınez-Huerta, R

    H. Mart ´ınez-Huerta, R. G. Lang, and V . de Souza, Lorentz Invariance Violation Tests in Astroparticle Physics, Symmetry 12, 1232 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Ashtekar and E

    A. Ashtekar and E. Bianchi, A short review of loop quantum gravity, Rept. Prog. Phys. 84, 042001 (2021), arXiv:2104.04394 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Conformal loop quantum gravity coupled to the Standard Model

    M. Campiglia, R. Gambini, and J. Pullin, Conformal loop quantum gravity coupled to the Standard Model, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 02LT01 (2017), arXiv:1609.04028 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    Colladay and V

    D. Colladay and V . A. Kostelecky, Lorentz violating extension of the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 58, 116002 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9809521

    arXiv 1998

  8. [8]

    Testing CPT violation with correlated neutral mesons

    A. Roberts, Testing CPT symmetry with correlated neutral mesons, Phys. Rev. D 96, 116015 (2017), arXiv:1706.03378 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

Show all 74 references
  1. [9]

    Yang, Y .-Z

    K. Yang, Y .-Z. Chen, Z.-Q. Duan, and J.-Y . Zhao, Static and spherically symmetric black holes in gravity with a background Kalb-Ramond field, Phys. Rev. D 108, 124004 (2023), arXiv:2308.06613 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Duan, J.-Y

    Z.-Q. Duan, J.-Y . Zhao, and K. Yang, Electrically charged black holes in gravity with a background Kalb–Ramond field, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 798 (2024), arXiv:2310.13555 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    A. A. A. Filho, J. A. A. S. Reis, and H. Hassanabadi, Exploring antisymmetric tensor e ffects on black hole shadows and quasinormal frequencies, JCAP 05, 029, arXiv:2309.15778 [gr-qc]. 16

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Static neutral black holes in Kalb-Ramond gravity, JCAP 09, 017, arXiv:2406.13461 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Shadow of slowly rotating Kalb-Ramond black holes, (2024), arXiv:2407.07416 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    A. A. Ara ´ujo Filho, N. Heidari, J. A. A. S. Reis, and H. Hassanabadi, The impact of an antisymmetric tensor on charged black holes: evaporation process, geodesics, deflection angle, scattering effects and quasinormal modes, (2024), arXiv:2404.10721 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Hosseinifar, A

    F. Hosseinifar, A. A. A. Filho, M. Y . Zhang, H. Chen, and H. Hassanabadi, Shadows, greybody factors, emission rate, topological charge, and phase transitions for a charged black hole with a Kalb-Ramond field background, (2024), arXiv:2407.07017 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    H. Chen, M. Y . Zhang, A. A. A. Filho, F. Hosseinifar, and H. Hassanabadi, Thermal, topological, and scattering effects of an AdS charged black hole with an antisymmetric tensor background, (2024), arXiv:2408.03090 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Berglund, J

    P. Berglund, J. Bhattacharyya, and D. Mattingly, Towards Thermodynamics of Universal Horizons in Einstein-æther Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 071301 (2013), arXiv:1210.4940 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    V . A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, Gravitational Phenomenology in Higher Dimensional Theories and Strings, Phys. Rev. D 40, 1886 (1989)

    1989

  11. [19]

    Casana, A

    R. Casana, A. Cavalcante, F. P. Poulis, and E. B. Santos, Exact Schwarzschild-like solution in a bum- blebee gravity model, Phys. Rev. D 97, 104001 (2018), arXiv:1711.02273 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    R. V . Maluf and J. C. S. Neves, Black holes with a cosmological constant in bumblebee gravity, Phys. Rev. D 103, 044002 (2021), arXiv:2011.12841 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    A. A. A. Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y . Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ırio, Vacuum solution within a metric- affine bumblebee gravity, Phys. Rev. D 108, 085010 (2023), arXiv:2211.11821 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    ¨Ovg¨un, K

    A. ¨Ovg¨un, K. Jusufi, and I. Sakallı, Exact traversable wormhole solution in bumblebee gravity, Phys. Rev. D 99, 024042 (2019), arXiv:1804.09911 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    C. Ding, C. Liu, R. Casana, and A. Cavalcante, Exact Kerr-like solution and its shadow in a gravity model with spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 178 (2020), arXiv:1910.02674 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    C. Ding, Y . Shi, J. Chen, Y . Zhou, C. Liu, and Y . Xiao, Rotating BTZ-like black hole and central charges in Einstein-bumblebee gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 573 (2023), arXiv:2302.01580 [gr-qc]. 17

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    C. Ding, X. Chen, and X. Fu, Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity coupled to bumblebee field in four di- mensional spacetime, Nucl. Phys. B 975, 115688 (2022), arXiv:2102.13335 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Oliveira, D

    R. Oliveira, D. M. Dantas, and C. A. S. Almeida, Quasinormal frequencies for a black hole in a bumblebee gravity, EPL 135, 10003 (2021), arXiv:2105.07956 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    W. Liu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, QNMs of slowly rotating Einstein–Bumblebee black hole, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 83 (2023), arXiv:2211.03156 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Malik, Quasinormal Modes of the Bumblebee Black Holes with a Global Monopole, Int

    Z. Malik, Quasinormal Modes of the Bumblebee Black Holes with a Global Monopole, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 63, 199 (2024), arXiv:2308.10412 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Z.-F. Mai, R. Xu, D. Liang, and L. Shao, Dynamic instability analysis for bumblebee black holes: The odd parity, Phys. Rev. D 109, 084076 (2024), arXiv:2401.07757 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, Bumblebee gravity with a Kerr-Sen-like solution and its Shadow, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 345 (2021), arXiv:2011.14916 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kuang and A

    X.-M. Kuang and A. ¨Ovg¨un, Strong gravitational lensing and shadow constraint from M87* of slowly rotating Kerr-like black hole, Annals Phys. 447, 169147 (2022), arXiv:2205.11003 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  24. [33]

    R. C. Pantig, S. Kala, A. ¨Ovg¨un, and N. J. L. S. Lobos, Testing black holes with cosmological constant in Einstein-bumblebee gravity through the black hole shadow using EHT data and deflection angle, (2024), arXiv:2410.13661 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Liu, W.-D

    J.-Z. Liu, W.-D. Guo, S.-W. Wei, and Y .-X. Liu, Charged spherically symmetric and slowly rotating charged black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity, (2024), arXiv:2407.08396 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [35]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Light rings and shadows of static black holes in effective quantum gravity II: A new solution without Cauchy horizons, (2024), arXiv:2412.18083 [gr-qc]

    2024

  27. [36]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Light rings and shadows of static black holes in effective quantum gravity, Phys. Lett. B 858, 139052 (2024), arXiv:2408.05569 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Afrin, S

    M. Afrin, S. G. Ghosh, and A. Wang, Testing EGB gravity coupled to bumblebee field and black hole parameter estimation with EHT observations, Phys. Dark Univ.46, 101642 (2024), arXiv:2409.06218 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [39]

    W. Liu, C. Wen, and J. Wang, Lorentz violation alleviates gravitationally induced entanglement degra- dation, JHEP 01, 184, arXiv:2410.21681 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  30. [40]

    X. Liu, W. Liu, Z. Liu, and J. Wang, Harvesting correlations from BTZ black hole coupled to a Lorentz-violating vector field, (2025), arXiv:2503.06404 [gr-qc]

    2025

  31. [41]

    A. A. Ara ´ujo Filho, How does non-metricity a ffect particle creation and evaporation in bumblebee gravity?, (2025), arXiv:2501.00927 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  32. [42]

    A. A. A. Filho, H. Hassanabadi, N. Heidari, J. Kriz, and S. Zare, Gravitational traces of bumblebee gravity in metric–affine formalism, Class. Quant. Grav.41, 055003 (2024), arXiv:2305.18871 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  33. [43]

    K. M. Amarilo, M. B. F. Filho, A. A. A. Filho, and J. A. A. S. Reis, Gravitational waves e ffects in a Lorentz–violating scenario, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138785 (2024), arXiv:2307.10937 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [44]

    Lambiase, L

    G. Lambiase, L. Mastrototaro, R. C. Pantig, and A. Ovgun, Probing Schwarzschild-like black holes in metric-affine bumblebee gravity with accretion disk, deflection angle, greybody bounds, and neutrino propagation, JCAP 12, 026, arXiv:2309.13594 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  35. [45]

    A. A. Ara ´ujo Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y . Petrov, and P. J. Porfirio, An exact stationary axisymmetric vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity, JCAP 07, 004, arXiv:2402.13014 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  36. [46]

    Gao, Gravitational lensing and shadow by a Schwarzschild-like black hole in metric-affine bum- blebee gravity, Eur

    X.-J. Gao, Gravitational lensing and shadow by a Schwarzschild-like black hole in metric-affine bum- blebee gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 973 (2024), arXiv:2409.12531 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  37. [47]

    Heidari, C

    N. Heidari, C. F. B. Macedo, A. A. A. Filho, and H. Hassanabadi, Scattering e ffects of bumblebee gravity in metric-affine formalism, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1221 (2024), arXiv:2407.05321 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  38. [48]

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, Constrain from shadows of M87∗ and S grA∗ and quasiperiodic oscilla- tions of galactic microquasars on a black hole arising from metric-a ffine bumblebee model, (2024), arXiv:2409.12909 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  39. [49]

    A. A. Ara ´ujo Filho, J. A. A. S. Reis, and A. ¨Ovg¨un, Modified particle dynamics and thermodynamics in a traversable wormhole in bumblebee gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 83 (2025), arXiv:2409.17351 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [50]

    A. A. A. Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y . Petrov, and P. J. Porf´ırio, Gravitational lensing by a Lorentz- violating black hole, (2024), arXiv:2404.04176 [gr-qc]

    2024

  41. [51]

    W. Liu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, Lorentz violation induces isospectrality breaking in Einstein- bumblebee gravity theory, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 67, 280413 (2024), arXiv:2402.09686 [gr- qc]. 19

    2024 arXiv

  42. [52]

    P. Ji, Z. Li, L. Yang, R. Xu, Z. Hu, and L. Shao, Neutron stars in the bumblebee theory of gravity, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104057 (2024), arXiv:2409.04805 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [53]

    Bhattacharya and A

    S. Bhattacharya and A. Lahiri, Black-hole no-hair theorems for a positive cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 201101 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0702006

    2007 arXiv

  44. [54]

    Herdeiro, E

    C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, and H. R ´unarsson, Kerr black holes with Proca hair, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 154001 (2016), arXiv:1603.02687 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  45. [55]

    Calcagni and L

    G. Calcagni and L. Modesto, Stability of Schwarzschild singularity in non-local gravity, Phys. Lett. B 773, 596 (2017), arXiv:1707.01119 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  46. [56]

    Mukohyama, K

    S. Mukohyama, K. Takahashi, and V . Yingcharoenrat, Generalized Regge-Wheeler equation from Effective Field Theory of black hole perturbations with a timelike scalar profile, JCAP 10, 050, arXiv:2208.02943 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  47. [57]

    J. C. Del ´Aguila and T. Matos, Gravitational perturbations in the Newman-Penrose formalism: Appli- cations to wormholes, Phys. Rev. D 103, 084033 (2021), arXiv:2102.09160 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  48. [58]

    Destounis, R

    K. Destounis, R. D. B. Fontana, and F. C. Mena, Accelerating black holes: quasinormal modes and late-time tails, Phys. Rev. D 102, 044005 (2020), arXiv:2005.03028 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  49. [59]

    Chakrabarti and D

    A. Chakrabarti and D. H. Tchrakian, Gravitation with superposed Gauss-Bonnet terms in higher di- mensions: Black hole metrics and maximal extensions, Phys. Rev. D 65, 024029 (2002), arXiv:hep- th/0101160

    2002

  50. [60]

    Zhidenko, Quasinormal modes of Schwarzschild de Sitter black holes, Class

    A. Zhidenko, Quasinormal modes of Schwarzschild de Sitter black holes, Class. Quant. Grav. 21, 273 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0307012

    2004 arXiv

  51. [61]

    R. A. Konoplya, Quasinormal behavior of the d-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole and higher order WKB approach, Phys. Rev. D 68, 024018 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0303052

    2003 arXiv

  52. [62]

    Lin, W.-L

    K. Lin, W.-L. Qian, A. B. Pavan, and E. Abdalla, A matrix method for quasinormal modes: Kerr and Kerr–Sen black holes, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32, 1750134 (2017), arXiv:1703.06439 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  53. [63]

    Jing, Dirac quasinormal modes of the Reissner-Nordstrom de Sitter black hole, Phys

    J.-l. Jing, Dirac quasinormal modes of the Reissner-Nordstrom de Sitter black hole, Phys. Rev. D 69, 084009 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0312079

    2004 arXiv

  54. [64]

    W. Liu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, Gravito-electromagnetic perturbations of MOG black holes with a cosmological constant: quasinormal modes and ringdown waveforms, JCAP 11, 057, arXiv:2306.03599 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  55. [65]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, Kerr-MOG-(A)dS black hole and its shadow in scalar- tensor-vector gravity theory, JCAP 08, 035, arXiv:2406.00579 [gr-qc]. 20

    arXiv

  56. [66]

    C. Yu, D. Chen, and C. Gao, Quasinormal modes and the correspondence with shadow in black holes with a deficit solid angle and quintessence-like matter, Nucl. Phys. B 983, 115925 (2022), arXiv:2207.06796 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [67]

    Lin and W.-L

    K. Lin and W.-L. Qian, A Matrix Method for Quasinormal Modes: Schwarzschild Black Holes in Asymptotically Flat and (Anti-) de Sitter Spacetimes, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 095004 (2017), arXiv:1610.08135 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  58. [68]

    Lin and W.-L

    K. Lin and W.-L. Qian, On matrix method for black hole quasinormal modes, Chin. Phys. C 43, 035105 (2019), arXiv:1902.08352 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  59. [69]

    Iyer and C

    S. Iyer and C. M. Will, Black Hole Normal Modes: A WKB Approach. 1. Foundations and Application of a Higher Order WKB Analysis of Potential Barrier Scattering, Phys. Rev. D 35, 3621 (1987)

    1987

  60. [70]

    S. R. Dolan, Instability of the massive Klein-Gordon field on the Kerr spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 76, 084001 (2007), arXiv:0705.2880 [gr-qc]

    2007 arXiv

  61. [71]

    M. M. Corr ˆea, C. F. B. Macedo, and J. a. L. Rosa, Quasibound state reminiscent in de Sitter black holes: Quasinormal modes and the decay of massive fields, Phys. Rev. D 109, 084018 (2024), arXiv:2401.15156 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  62. [72]

    Santos, R

    V . Santos, R. V . Maluf, and C. A. S. Almeida, Quasinormal frequencies of self-dual black holes, Phys. Rev. D 93, 084047 (2016), arXiv:1509.04306 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  63. [73]

    Das and M

    S. Das and M. Fridman, Test of quantum gravity in statistical mechanics, Phys. Rev. D 104, 026014 (2021), arXiv:2104.04634 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  64. [74]

    Abdalla, C

    E. Abdalla, C. E. Pellicer, J. de Oliveira, and A. B. Pavan, Phase transitions and regions of stability in Reissner-Nordstr¨om holographic superconductors, Phys. Rev. D 82, 124033 (2010), arXiv:1010.2806 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  65. [75]

    Zhu, S.-J

    Z. Zhu, S.-J. Zhang, C. E. Pellicer, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla, Stability of Reissner-Nordstr ¨om black hole in de Sitter background under charged scalar perturbation, Phys. Rev. D 90, 044042 (2014), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 90, 049904 (2014)], arXiv:1405.4931 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  66. [76]

    Lin and W.-L

    K. Lin and W.-L. Qian, Echoes of axial gravitational perturbations in stars of uniform density, Chin. Phys. C 47, 085101 (2023), arXiv:2204.09531 [gr-qc]. 21

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.