Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 38 references

The paper claims that pure vacuum Einstein evolution can dynamically create an apparent horizon from smooth asymptotically flat data that contain none, driven only by boundary geometry through Yau's boundary criterion.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-08-03 22:36 UTC pith:HGLLRIB4

load-bearing objection Genuinely new boundary-effect mechanism and an honest roadmap, but the factor-of-2 mismatch between the quoted Yau threshold and the window condition (44) breaks the 'initially no MOTS' premise; the main theorem as stated is not established. the 5 major comments →

arxiv 2511.09508 v5 pith:HGLLRIB4 submitted 2025-11-12 gr-qc math-phmath.APmath.DGmath.MP

Dynamical Formation of Black Holes due to Boundary Effect in Vacuum Gravity

Puskar Mondal , Shing-Tung Yau This is my paper
classification gr-qc math-phmath.APmath.DGmath.MP MSC 83C0583C5753C21 PACS 04.20.-q04.70.-s
keywords apparent horizonmarginally outer trapped surfacevacuum Einstein equationsYau boundary criteriongeneralized mean curvaturedouble-null foliationincoming gravitational shearblack hole formation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper sets out to prove that apparent horizons, surfaces where the outgoing null expansion vanishes and the incoming one is negative, can form in pure vacuum general relativity without any matter or collapse mechanism. The engine is Yau's boundary criterion: a spatial domain whose boundary has generalized mean curvature H−|κ| sufficiently large relative to its radius must contain a marginally outer trapped surface (MOTS). The authors prescribe smooth asymptotically flat Cauchy data with a large interior region that is strictly subcritical for this criterion, then show that a short period of vacuum evolution, fed by concentrated incoming gravitational shear, focuses the boundary curvature enough that the same domain in a future slice becomes supercritical. The payoff is a rigorously stated mechanism for dynamical horizon formation from global geometric effects, in a double-null framework where the initial slice contains no MOTS. A sympathetic reader would care because it turns a long-suspected idea, that horizons can be produced by the geometry of boundaries rather than by gravitational collapse, into a concrete theorem, pending the companion construction of the interior data.

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 3.1(b), is that if the characteristic data satisfy the window condition (44), large incoming shear |χ̂|² on the incoming null hypersurface H0 with the scale-invariant shear norm at least 100 times the other Ricci-coefficient norms and a compatible outgoing expansion, then the future domain J⁺(M_int) ∩ M_{t=−a+ε} must contain an apparent horizon, while the initial slice M_{t=−a} contains none. The mechanism is the transport of the null expansions along the double-null foliation: the shear term in the Raychaudhuri equation makes c = ½(trχ−trχ) − ½|trχ+trχ| increase as one moves from u=0 to u=ε, pushing the generalized boundary mean curvature above 3π/(2 Rad). Simulta

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is Yau's boundary criterion for the existence of a MOTS: for a domain Ω in a Cauchy slice, if min_∂Ω (H − |κ|) ≥ 3π/(2 Rad(Ω)), where H is the spacelike mean curvature of ∂Ω, κ is the trace of the slice's second fundamental form on ∂Ω, and Rad(Ω) is the Schoen–Yau radius, then Ω contains an apparent horizon. The argument is carried in a double-null frame with optical functions (u,u), where the criterion becomes a condition on the null expansions trχ and trχ, namely c = ½(trχ−trχ) − ½|trχ+trχ|, and the null structure equations control how c changes with u. The initial-data hierarchy, large incoming shear |χ̂| with scale-invariant norm ratio Γ0_χ̂,2 > 100 Γ0_2, is what

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Schoen–Yau radius of the future domain grows like ε^(1/2) (eq. 202); only the weaker 'radius plus O(ε)' estimate is derived, and for small epsilon a linear increment cannot lower the Yau threshold enough to open the window (44).

What would settle it

Check eq. (202) against eq. (7): compute Rad(∂(J⁺(M1)∩M_{t=−a+ε})) along outgoing null generators for a fixed large a and a sequence ε→0. If the increment is proportional to ε rather than ε^(1/2), then the window condition (44) is empty for sufficiently small ε and no apparent horizon forms; this is a direct calculation from the paper's own first-variation formulas, and it would settle the claim.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Dynamical formation of a MOTS in vacuum is possible from smooth, asymptotically flat horizon-free data via a boundary effect rather than a collapse mechanism.
  • Yau's quasi-local boundary criterion can be used dynamically: a future Cauchy slice can satisfy it even when the initial slice does not.
  • The construction yields an open set of characteristic data with a large-shear hierarchy, broader than the short-pulse data used in earlier vacuum trapped-surface formation results.
  • Assuming the companion construction of the interior data succeeds, the proof supplies a concrete route to apparent-horizon formation from large-scale interior anisotropic geometry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The ε^(1/2) radius-growth step (202) is the first place to check: the preceding estimate (7) gives only Rad + Cε, so the square-root growth is doing essential work in opening the window (44).
  • The interior Cauchy data M1 are defined only implicitly via a prescribed Yau radius and deferred to the companion paper; until that construction is explicit, the theorem is conditional in that component.
  • The same threshold-crossing logic suggests a numerical test: in double-null evolution of data with large incoming shear, measure c on S_{−a,ε} and Rad of the future domain; the claimed ε^(1/2) growth should be visible at small ε.
  • A path to generalization is to replace the vacuum null structures by Einstein–Maxwell or Einstein–Yang–Mills, where the same Raychaudhuri and shear transport equations appear, though the authors make no such claim.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper claims to prove that apparent horizons can form dynamically in pure vacuum gravity from smooth asymptotically flat Cauchy data containing no initial MOTS, through a boundary effect rather than gravitational collapse. The strategy combines characteristic initial data with large incoming shear, a semi-global double-null development, gluing of Cauchy data on a slice t=-a, and a short evolution to t=-a+ε. The key mechanism is Yau's boundary criterion: the generalized boundary mean curvature H-|κ| is initially below the Yau threshold and later pushed above it, while the Yau radius of the interior domain is claimed to grow by ε^{1/2}. The main theorem, Theorem 3.1, is stated in two parts: semi-global existence for characteristic data and dynamical formation of an apparent horizon under a window condition (44). The paper explicitly defers the construction of the interior Cauchy data and the detailed gluing to a companion paper [28].

Significance. If fully established, this would be a significant conceptual contribution: a rigorous, symmetry-free mechanism for apparent-horizon formation driven by boundary geometry rather than matter collapse, using Yau's quasi-local criterion. The framework—combining a double-null Cauchy problem with scale-invariant norms, large shear on one null hypersurface, and a Yau-radius threshold crossing—is original and potentially fruitful. The paper also deserves credit for attempting an explicit, quantitative statement of the horizon-formation condition. However, as it stands the central claim is not established: the key radius-growth estimate is asserted, the data construction is deferred, and the quantitative threshold conditions contain internal inconsistencies. The result is therefore currently a research program description with a proof sketch, not a complete theorem.

major comments (5)
  1. [§3, Eqs. (6), (9), (35), (44)] There is a factor-of-two inconsistency between the initial no-MOTS condition and the window condition. Yau's criterion (Theorem 1.2) gives an apparent horizon when c ≥ 3π/(2 Rad), and Eq. (6) uses c < 3π/(2 Rad(ĉM_int)) to assert no initial MOTS. But the window condition (44) requires A := (H−|κ|)(−a,0) to satisfy 3π(Rad−ε^{1/2})/Rad^2 < A < 3π/Rad. For Rad > 2ε^{1/2}, the lower bound exceeds 3π/(2Rad), so the same boundary quantity A is simultaneously required to be subcritical (by (6)) and supercritical (by (44)). Equations (33) and (203) explicitly identify A with (H−|κ|)(−a,0). The paper does not impose Rad < 2ε^{1/2}, and its own description of the interior as "isotropically large" is inconsistent with such a small radius. Thus no data can satisfy both (6) and (44), unless an additional constraint is introduced.
  2. [§3, Eq. (6) and §7.8] Yau's theorem is a sufficient condition for the existence of an apparent horizon; its failure does not imply the absence of an apparent horizon. The text states that the strict inequality in (6) "ensures that ĉM_int contains no apparent horizon," but that is an invalid contrapositive. The initial no-MOTS premise is load-bearing for the main theorem, and it is not established by (6). The paper would need either a separate proof that no MOTS exists on the initial slice or an explicit hypothesis of initial MOTS-freeness proved by other means.
  3. [Theorem 3.1(b), §7.2, §7.14] The central Cauchy-data construction is deferred to the companion paper [28]. Section 7.2 prescribes interior data on M1 with a given Yau radius and boundary gap, and §7.14 states that "the compactly supported corrections never alter ∂Ω" and that the data will be constructed in [28]. Likewise the Corvino–Schoen gluing and constraint corrections are only sketched. Theorem 3.1(b) therefore proves a conditional statement: if such data exist and if the radius-growth estimate holds, then a horizon forms. The abstract's claim of proving formation from smooth asymptotically flat Cauchy data is not supported by the present manuscript. Moreover, condition (44) is expressed through Rad(ĉM_int), a quantity that the theorem says is "prescribed to construct its Cauchy data," making the window a tuning condition on assumed data rather than a demonstrated open set.
  4. [§3, Eqs. (7), (8), (202)] The estimate that the Yau radius grows by ε^{1/2} is asserted but not derived. Equation (7) gives Rad ≈ Rad(ĉM_int) + Cε, while Eq. (8) and Eq. (202) upgrade this to +ε^{1/2}. For small ε, ε^{1/2} is much larger than Cε, so the upgrade is not a consequence of the displayed integration. The text only says "integrating the first variation equation along the outgoing null generators," but no derivation or controlling estimate for the Yau radius of ∂(J^+(M1)∩M_{t=-a+ε}) is provided. This ε^{1/2} radius growth is precisely what opens the window in (44); without it, the threshold-crossing mechanism fails. This is a load-bearing missing proof.
  5. [§3, Eqs. (11) and (22)–(34)] The null-frame formula for H−|κ| loses a factor of 1/2. Equation (11) defines H−|κ| = ½(trχ−trχ) − ½|trχ+trχ|, but Eq. (22) and the subsequent expansions (23)–(34) omit the ½ factors. Since the quantity A in (33) is used to evaluate the window condition (44), this factor error affects the quantitative core of the theorem. The discrepancy must be corrected and the resulting threshold conditions rechecked.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2] The notation t := u + u is introduced, but the ranges u∞ ≤ u ≤ -a and 0 ≤ u ≤ ε make t range from u∞ to -a+ε; the paper sometimes refers to slices near t=-a without specifying the overlap with the double-null rectangle. A diagram is referenced but not included in the text.
  2. [§4.1–4.2] The gauge construction is standard but the text says "we make the gauge choice Ω≡1 along both initial hypersurfaces" after earlier allowing Ω to be extended continuously along H_{u∞}. This should be reconciled, since the lapse is later claimed to have nontrivial decay (15).
  3. [§4.5, Eq. (86)] The property s2(ϕ1·ϕ2) = s2(ϕ1) + s2(ϕ2) is called "signature conservation," but as written it is a dimensional bookkeeping rule. It might be clearer to call it additivity and to verify it for the specific products used later.
  4. [§5.5] Several estimates refer to "Remark ??" and "improvement mentioned in Remark ??" (e.g., Propositions 5.12, 5.15, 5.16). The remark is missing from the text, making the bootstrap arguments hard to follow.
  5. [Theorem 3.1(b)] The statement "the radius Rad(ĉM_int) ... is prescribed to construct its Cauchy data" is awkward and logically unclear. It should be rephrased as an explicit hypothesis on the data, or better, the data should be constructed with a prescribed radius as part of the theorem.
  6. [References] Reference [28] is "in prep." and is used for a load-bearing construction; this is acceptable only for a conditional result, but then the abstract should not claim a complete proof. Some references (e.g., [5]) appear to be on different topics and may be mis-cited.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

The window condition (44) makes the initial boundary already supercritical by Yau's own criterion: the assumed 'initially no MOTS' data would already contain an apparent horizon, so the future horizon is an input rather than a dynamical prediction.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Theorem 3.1(b), Eq. (44); combined with Eqs. (6), (33)/(203) and Theorem 1.2]
    "c∂ ĉMint := min∂ĉMint [H−|κ|] < 3π/(2Rad(ĉMint)) (6) ... 3π(Rad(ĉMint)−ϵ^{1/2})/[Rad(ĉMint)]^2 + C/a^2 < −2|u∞|trχ(u∞,0)/a + (2/a)∫_{u∞}^{−a}|u′||ˆχ|^2(u′,0)du′ < 3π/Rad(ĉMint) + C/a^2 (44) ... (H−|trΣK|)(−a,0) = −2|u∞|trχ(u∞,0)/a + (2/a)∫_{u∞}^{−a}|u′||ˆχ(u′,0)|^2du′ − C(I0)/a^2 (203)."

    By (203)/(33), the middle expression in (44) is exactly c = H−|κ| on the initial boundary sphere S_{−a,0}. Theorem 1.2 says an apparent horizon exists once c ≥ 3π/(2Rad(ĉMint)); for the large-radius regime used in the construction, the lower bound in (44) is ≈ 3π/Rad(ĉMint) > 3π/(2Rad(ĉMint)). Hence any data satisfying (44) already satisfy Yau's sufficient condition on the initial slice, contradicting (6) and the abstract's claim of data that initially contain no MOTS. The future apparent horizon is not produced by Einstein evolution; the supercritical value of the same boundary quantity is inserted as an initial-data hypothesis, so the claimed dynamical formation reduces to assuming the conclusion at t = −a.

full rationale

Part (a) of Theorem 3.1 — the semi-global characteristic development with its bootstrap and energy estimates — is a substantive analytic result and is not itself circular. The circularity is concentrated in part (b): the theorem's window condition (44) is stated as a hypothesis on characteristic data, but via (33)/(203) its middle term is exactly the initial generalized boundary mean curvature c∂ that condition (6) needed to be subcritical in order to exclude a MOTS on t=−a. Since the lower bound in (44) already exceeds the Yau threshold 3π/(2Rad) used in (6), the ``initially no MOTS'' premise is incompatible with the very condition used to predict the future horizon; the future apparent horizon is therefore an input, not an output of the evolution. I did not count the unsupported upgrade from Rad+Cε to Rad+ε^{1/2} in (7)–(8)/(202) as circularity: that is a missing derivation, not a self-reference. Likewise, the deferral of the explicit interior-data construction to the authors' companion paper [28] is an omitted proof rather than a self-citation circularity by itself. The score 8 reflects that the central dynamical claim is forced by constructed boundary data: the theorem's conclusion is effectively already present in its stated hypothesis through the same quantity A = H−|κ| on the initial boundary.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on Yau's boundary criterion [38] (quoted with an inconsistent constant), on the existence of interior data whose construction is deferred to the sequel, on an asserted ε^{1/2} radius-growth estimate, on the Corvino–Schoen gluing machinery, and on the An-style scale-invariant bootstrap machinery.

free parameters (4)
  • Rad(ĉM_int) (Schoen–Yau radius of interior domain) = R* with R* < 3π/(2c*) and satisfying window (44)
    Prescribed geometric quantity of the interior data; both the subcriticality (6) and the supercritical window (44) are stated in terms of it (Thm 3.1(b): 'prescribed to construct its Cauchy data').
  • A = −2|u∞|trχ(u∞,0)/a + (2/a)∫|u'||χ̂|²(u',0)du' = tuned into the O(ε^{1/2}) window of (44) ≈ 3π/Rad
    The incoming expansion at past null infinity trχ(u∞,0) and the shear profile χ̂ are chosen so A lands in the window; eq (32) '≈0, which is compatible with the data choice' is a tuning condition.
  • Γ0_{χ̂,2} vs Γ0_2 norm hierarchy = Γ0_{χ̂,2} > 100 Γ0_2
    Relative largeness condition (39)/(48) assumed to propagate; the constant 100 is chosen by hand.
  • Small-time parameter ε = ε = O(a^{−1/2}), chosen teleologically
    §3: 'chosen in a teleological manner depending on the prior data'; controls the slab width.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Yau boundary criterion (Thm 1.2): c ≥ 3π/(2 Rad(M)) ⇒ interior apparent horizon
    Quoted from [38] (co-authored by this paper's author). Used as the trigger at (9) and (44) but with the constant changed to 3π/Rad; used as if iff at (6).
  • ad hoc to paper Existence of smooth AF vacuum data on interior M1 with prescribed Yau radius R* and boundary gap c*>0
    Thm 3.1(b) and §7.2(a) assume it; §3.1 and §7 state the explicit construction is deferred to sequel [28].
  • ad hoc to paper Radius growth Rad(J+∩Mt=−a+ε) ≈ Rad + ε^{1/2} (eqs (8), (202))
    Asserted 'by the first variation equation'; no derivation given; the width of the tuning window in (44) is exactly O(ε^{1/2}).
  • domain assumption Corvino–Schoen gluing to Kerr exterior with Killing-data obstruction theory
    §7.13 relies on published results [20, 25, 26]; standard, but the specific splice is only sketched.
  • standard math Semi-global bootstrap machinery of An [3]/[1] (commutation formulae, scale-invariant norms, energy estimates)
    Props 5.1–5.17, 6.1–6.7 are sketched with several discharged by 'same as in [1]' or 'exactly similar to [11]'; accepted as standard for part (a).

reviewed 2026-08-03 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical Formation of Black Holes due to Boundary Effect in Vacuum Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HGLLRIB4

@misc{pith2026251109508,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical Formation of Black Holes due to Boundary Effect in Vacuum Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HGLLRIB4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.09508}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We prove the dynamical formation of a marginally outer trapped surface in pure vacuum spacetime from smooth asymptotically flat Cauchy data which initially contain no MOTS. The mechanism is a boundary effect rather than a collapse mechanism. We work in a Cauchy--double-null framework and use Yau's boundary criterion \cite{yau}, which gives the existence of an interior MOTS from a lower bound for the generalized boundary mean curvature relative to the Schoen--Yau radius of the domain. We construct an explicit class of vacuum initial data for which this criterion is strictly subcritical on the initial hypersurface, while the Einstein evolution drives the same domain into the supercritical regime. More precisely, a mild incoming gravitational radiation field increases the generalized boundary mean curvature of an isotropically large interior region sufficiently to force the formation of a MOTS in its future development. A characteristic feature of the initial data is a large interior anisotropic curvature component: the trace-free Ricci curvature is of larger order than the scalar curvature, which is balanced at the vacuum constraint scale. Thus the MOTS forms not from matter concentration or standard gravitational collapse, but from the interaction between boundary geometry, large-scale interior geometry, and the vacuum Einstein dynamics. This gives a rigorous realization of a long-suspected physical idea that apparent horizons may form from global geometric effects in vacuum general relativity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.09508 by Puskar Mondal, Shing-Tung Yau.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The schematics of the current framework: concentration of the generalized mean curvature H −|κ| while increasing the radius. The initial data is provided on the null hypersur￾faces u = u∞ and u = 0, and the interior Cauchy slice M1 = Mcint. The Cauchy data on the slice Mct=−a is prescribed by gluing data on M1, the induced data on M2 by the Characteristic development on the slab Da,ϵ := [u∞, −a]×[0, ϵ]×S 2… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    An,A scale-critical trapped surface formation criterion: A new proof via signature for decay rates, Annals of PDE Vol

    X. An,A scale-critical trapped surface formation criterion: A new proof via signature for decay rates, Annals of PDE Vol. 8 (1), 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    An.Emergence of apparent horizon in gravitational collapse, Annals of PDE Vol

    X. An.Emergence of apparent horizon in gravitational collapse, Annals of PDE Vol. 6 (10), 2020

    2020

  3. [3]

    An,Formation of trapped surfaces from past null infinity, arXiv:1207.5271

    X. An,Formation of trapped surfaces from past null infinity, arXiv:1207.5271

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    X. An, N. Athanasiou,A scale critical trapped surface formation criterion for the Einstein-Maxwell, Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées Vol. 167 (2022), 294-409

    2022

  5. [5]

    X. An, T. He, D. Shen,Stability of Big Bang singularity for the Einstein-Maxwell-scalar field-Vlasov system in the full strong sub-critical regime, arXiv:2507.18585, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    X. An, J. Luk.Trapped surfaces in vacuum arising dynamically from mild incoming radiation. Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 21 (2017), 1-120

    2017

  7. [7]

    Andréasson, M

    H. Andréasson, M. Kunze, G. Rein, The formation of black holes in spherically symmetric gravitational collapse,Math. Ann., vol. 350, 683-705, 2011

    2011

  8. [8]

    Andréasson, Black hole formation from a complete regular past for collisionless matter,Ann

    H. Andréasson, Black hole formation from a complete regular past for collisionless matter,Ann. Hen. Poincare, vol. 13, 1511-1536

  9. [9]

    Andréasson, G

    H. Andréasson, G. Rein, Oppenheimer–Snyder Type Collapse for a Collisionless Gas,Comm. Math. Phys., 406 (2025). Paper No. 284

    2025

  10. [10]

    Athanasiou, M

    N. Athanasiou, M. Lesourd, Construction of Cauchy data for the dynamical formation of apparent horizons and the Penrose Inequality,Adv. Theo. Math. Phys., arXiv:2009.03704, 2020 40

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  11. [11]

    Athanasiou, P

    N. Athanasiou, P. Mondal, S-T. Yau,Formation of trapped surfaces in the Einstein-Yang-Mills system, Journal de Mathé- matiques Pures et Appliquées, vol. 194, 2025

    2025

  12. [12]

    Athanasiou, P

    N. Athanasiou, P. Mondal, S-T. Yau,Semi-Global Existence and Trapped Surface Formation for the Einstein-Vlasov System, 2025

    2025

  13. [13]

    X. Chen, S. Klainerman, Formation of trapped surfaces in geodesic foliation, arXiv:2409.14582, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Christodoulou,Bounded variation solutions of the spherically symmetric Einstein-scalar field equations, Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics 46 (1993), 1131-1220

    D. Christodoulou,Bounded variation solutions of the spherically symmetric Einstein-scalar field equations, Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics 46 (1993), 1131-1220

    1993

  15. [15]

    Christodoulou,Examples of naked singularity formation in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field, Annals of Mathe- matics 140, no

    D. Christodoulou,Examples of naked singularity formation in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field, Annals of Mathe- matics 140, no. 3 (1994), 607-653

    1994

  16. [16]

    Christodoulou,The formation of black holes and singularities in spherically symmetric gravitational collapse

    D. Christodoulou,The formation of black holes and singularities in spherically symmetric gravitational collapse. Communi- cations in Pure and Applied Mathematics 44, 339-373 (1991)

    1991

  17. [17]

    Christodoulou,The formation of black holes in general relativity

    D. Christodoulou,The formation of black holes in general relativity. Monographs in Mathematics, European Mathematical Society (2009)

    2009

  18. [18]

    Christodoulou,The instability of naked singularities in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field

    D. Christodoulou,The instability of naked singularities in the gravitational collapse of a scalar field. Annals of Mathematics 149, 183-217 (1999)

    1999

  19. [19]

    Christodoulou, S

    D. Christodoulou, S. Klainerman,The global nonlinear stability of the Minkowski space, Princeton University Press (1993)

    1993

  20. [20]

    Corvino, R.M

    J. Corvino, R.M. Schoen, On the asymptotics for the vacuum Einstein constraint equations,J. Diff. Geom., vol. 73, 185-217, 2006

    2006

  21. [21]

    Dafermos, A.D

    M. Dafermos, A.D. Rendall,An extension principle for the Einstein-Vlasov system in spherical symmetry, Annales Henri. Poincare, vol. 6, 1137-1155, 2005

    2005

  22. [22]

    Klainerman, I

    S. Klainerman, I. Rodnianski.On the formation of trapped surfaces.Acta Mathematica Vol. 208 (2012), 211-333

    2012

  23. [23]

    J. Li, P. Yu, Construction of Cauchy data of vacuum Einstein field equations evolving to black holes,Ann. Math., 699-768, 2015

    2015

  24. [24]

    Luk, On the local existence for the characteristic initial value problem in general relativity,International Mathematics Research Notices, vol

    J. Luk, On the local existence for the characteristic initial value problem in general relativity,International Mathematics Research Notices, vol. 2012, 4625-4678, 2012

    2012

  25. [25]

    Moncrief, Spacetime symmetries and linearization stability of the Einstein equations

    V. Moncrief, Spacetime symmetries and linearization stability of the Einstein equations. I,J. Math. Phys., vol. 16, 493-498, 1975

    1975

  26. [26]

    Moncrief, Spacetime symmetries and linearization stability of the Einstein equations

    V. Moncrief, Spacetime symmetries and linearization stability of the Einstein equations. II,J. Math. Phys., vol. 16, 1893-1902, 1976

    1902

  27. [27]

    Mondal, S-T

    P. Mondal, S-T. Yau,Einstein-Yang-Mills equations in the double null framework, to appear inComm. Anal. Geom., arXiv:2205.01101

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [28]

    Mondal, S-T

    P. Mondal, S-T. Yau, Construction of Cauchy data for dynamical formation of apparent horizons, in prep

  29. [29]

    Penrose.Naked singularities

    R. Penrose.Naked singularities. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 224 (1973), 125–134

    1973

  30. [30]

    Rein, A.D

    G. Rein, A.D. Rendall,Global existence of solutions of the spherically symmetric Vlasov-Einstein system with small initial data, Comm. Math. Phys., vol. 150, 561-583, 1992

    1992

  31. [31]

    Rein, A.D

    G. Rein, A.D. Rendall,Erratum: Global existence of solutions of the spherically symmetric Vlasov-Einstein system with small initial data”, Comm. Math. Phys, vol. 176, 475-478, 1996

    1996

  32. [32]

    Sbierski,TheC 0-inextendibility of the Schwarzschild spacetime and the spacelike diameter in Lorentzian geometry, Journal of Differential Geometry 108 (2018), 319-378

    J. Sbierski,TheC 0-inextendibility of the Schwarzschild spacetime and the spacelike diameter in Lorentzian geometry, Journal of Differential Geometry 108 (2018), 319-378

    2018

  33. [33]

    Schoen, S.T

    R. Schoen, S.T. Yau, On the proof of the positive mass conjecture in general relativity,Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 65, 45-76, 1979

    1979

  34. [34]

    Schoen, S.T

    R. Schoen, S.T. Yau, Proof of the positive mass theorem. II,Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 79, 231-260, 1981

    1981

  35. [35]

    Schoen, S.T

    R. Schoen, S.T. Yau, Positive Scalar Curvature and Minimal Hypersurface Singularities,Surveys in Differential Geometry, XXIV, 2019

    2019

  36. [36]

    Taylor, The global nonlinear stability of Minkowski space for the massless Einstein–Vlasov system, An

    M. Taylor, The global nonlinear stability of Minkowski space for the massless Einstein–Vlasov system, An. PDE, vol. 3, 2017

    2017

  37. [37]

    Schoen, S.T

    R. Schoen, S.T. Yau.The existence of a black hole due to condensation of matter.Comm. Math. Phys, 90 no. 4 (1983), 575–579

    1983

  38. [38]

    Yau,Geometry of three manifolds and existence of black hole due to boundary effect, Adv

    S.T. Yau,Geometry of three manifolds and existence of black hole due to boundary effect, Adv. Theo. Math. Phys., 2001 41

    2001

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 3, 2026.