Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 63 references

The paper claims that strong-field lensing by a rotating black hole, when photon propagation is modified by a photon–Weyl coupling, can be captured in closed form to first order in the EFT coupling, with spin-dependent corrections to the de

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 19:47 UTC pith:NI7ACGDS

load-bearing objection The paper computes explicit spin/coupling expansions for Weyl-photon strong lensing in Kerr, but a factor-2.34 inconsistency in the final PPL deflection formula and missing derivations make the central results unreliable. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.16842 v1 pith:NI7ACGDS submitted 2026-07-18 gr-qc hep-th

Analytical Study of Deflection Angle and Time Delay in Kerr Spacetime with Modified Propagation

Takamasa Kanai This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-th MSC 83C5783C10 PACS 04.70.-s04.20.-q04.50.Kd
keywords gravitational lensingKerr black holestrong deflection limiteffective field theoryphoton-Weyl couplingmodified photon propagationtime delayrelativistic images
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 asks how gravitational lensing by a rotating black hole changes when photons obey a modified dispersion relation coming from a photon–Weyl-tensor coupling, as in higher-curvature effective field theory. It claims that, working to first order in the EFT coupling, the standard strong-deflection expansion keeps its logarithmic form, and every coefficient—photon-sphere radius, critical impact parameter, strong-deflection coefficients, and image time delays—picks up a computable O(alpha) correction that depends on spin and photon polarization. The payoff is a direct map from an EFT parameter to concrete lensing observables near the photon region, opening a route to probing ultraviolet corrections to gravity with strong-field lensing.

Core claim

The central claim is that two polarization-dependent effective optical metrics for equatorial Kerr photons—obtained from the two physical light-cone conditions for a Weyl-coupled photon—can be fed through the strong-deflection formalism to yield closed-form expansions in the spin parameter a and the coupling alpha. For both polarizations, in the large-spin (near-extremal) and small-spin regimes, the paper gives explicit expressions showing that spin amplifies the EFT corrections, that prograde and retrograde trajectories behave differently, and that the corrections cannot be mimicked by simply rescaling the Kerr mass or spin. If these formulas are right, relativistic image positions, separat

What carries the argument

The effective optical metric for the Weyl-coupled photon, restricted to the equatorial plane, with two polarization branches denoted PPL and PPM. These metrics make the non-geodesic photon motion in Kerr look like null geodesics in an effective stationary axisymmetric geometry, and the strong-deflection integral over that geometry is decomposed into divergent and regular parts. This machinery converts the modified propagation law into explicit, spin-dependent lensing coefficients.

Load-bearing premise

The argument stands only if, to first order in the EFT coupling, the spacetime geometry remains exactly Kerr while only the photon propagation law changes; otherwise every first-order coefficient in the paper is incomplete.

What would settle it

Compute the first-order metric correction by varying the action with respect to the metric and re-derive the photon-sphere radius and critical impact parameter; if the shift is of the same order as the propagation corrections, the formulas in Sections IV and V are incomplete. Direct numerical ray tracing of the full polarization system off the equatorial plane would also test the simplifying reduction used here.

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

If this is right

  • Relativistic image separations and time delays become functions of alpha and a, giving a concrete route from lensing observations to EFT coupling constraints.
  • Corrections grow near extremal spin, so high-spin black holes are the most promising targets for detecting them.
  • The spin-dependent structure of the corrections means they cannot be absorbed by rescaling the mass or spin of an ordinary Kerr lens.
  • The logarithmic form of the strong-deflection divergence is preserved, so existing observational analysis methods can be reused with modified coefficients.
  • The time-delay formula for image pairs (n,m) provides clean predictions that scale with winding-number difference plus an exponential term.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If one solves the linearized field equations from the action, the metric itself will generically receive O(alpha) corrections; checking whether those are negligible is the first thing a sceptic should do before using these coefficients.
  • The equatorial and retrograde restriction leaves the more astrophysically interesting non-equatorial photon-region trajectories uncomputed; extending the method there would yield polarization-dependent shadow shapes.
  • A direct numerical integration of the full polarization-dependent photon equations, avoiding the effective-metric shortcut, would test the accuracy of the imported optical metrics.
  • One could search for gravitational birefringence by measuring time delays between images formed by the two polarization modes, since PPL and PPM have different critical impact parameters and delay coefficients.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies strong gravitational lensing in Kerr spacetime for photons non-minimally coupled to the Weyl tensor. Starting from an effective optical metric (imported from Ref. [51]) for equatorial photon-polarization modes PPL and PPM, it derives first-order-in-alpha corrections to the photon sphere radius, critical impact parameter, strong-deflection coefficients, deflection angle, and time delay. Results are presented in two regimes: large spin (M=a=1) and small spin (2M=1). The central claim is that these are the first analytic expressions encoding both black-hole spin and effective-field-theory corrections to photon propagation.

Significance. If correct, the paper would extend the Bozza strong-deflection formalism to a birefringent, rotation-dependent photon propagation law and provide concrete O(alpha) predictions for relativistic image separation and time delay. A clear strength is that the calculation is a forward expansion from an explicit action with a single coupling alpha and no fitted parameters. However, the paper currently contains a concrete algebraic inconsistency in its headline deflection-angle formula, and the time-delay coefficients are asserted rather than derived. These issues undermine the quantitative claims until repaired.

major comments (3)
  1. [IV.D.1, Eq. (89) vs Eqs. (75), (81), (82), (85)] The logarithmic prefactor in the final large-spin PPL deflection angle is inconsistent with the strong-deflection coefficients derived from the same metric. From Eq. (81), R(0,r_ph)=32/(3*sqrt(35)); from the small-z limit of Eq. (82), q(r_ph)=48/35. Equation (75) then gives \bar a = R/(2 sqrt(q)) = 4/(3 sqrt(3)). Thus the coefficient of log(theta DOL/u_ph - 1) in Eq. (89) should be 4/(3 sqrt(3)) - 3728999 alpha/(4536000 sqrt(3)), not 32/(3 sqrt(35)) - 3728999 alpha/(4536000 sqrt(3)). The leading term differs by the factor 2 sqrt(q) = 8 sqrt(3)/sqrt(35) ~ 2.34. Since this prefactor controls the logarithmic divergence and the separation of relativistic images, Eq. (89) does not follow from the paper's own derivation. This must be corrected and the calculation reconciled with Eq. (85).
  2. [V.D, Eqs. (145)-(149)] The time-delay results are not derived. Equation (145) depends on \tilde a and \tilde b, but these coefficients are never computed or even displayed numerically for any of the four cases. The final formulas (146)-(149) are simply stated. In particular, Eq. (146), with first coefficient 2 pi (7 + 667 alpha/192)(n-m), cannot be checked against Eq. (87), where u_ph = 7 + 662 alpha/192, because the relation of the time-delay coefficient to u_ph is not given. The authors must provide the derivation of \tilde a and \tilde b, or at minimum explicit intermediate expressions, for the time-delay section to be verifiable.
  3. [IV.B, Eqs. (63), (65), (66), (75)] There is a factor-two inconsistency in the strong-deflection derivation. Equation (63) gives I_D with prefactor R(0,r_ph)/(2 sqrt(q(r0))), which implies the logarithmic coefficient in Eq. (64) is a = R(0,r_ph)/(2 sqrt(q(r_ph))). However, Eq. (65) defines a = R(0,r_ph)/sqrt(q(r_ph)), and Eq. (66) defines b_D with the same extra factor 2. Later, Eq. (75) rescales \bar a = a/2, which restores the standard coefficient for \bar a, but Eq. (66)'s b_D remains twice the value implied by Eq. (63). Since b_D enters \bar b through Eqs. (70) and (76), the derivation shown does not produce the quoted coefficients. This needs to be fixed or explained; otherwise the reader cannot trust the regular-part coefficients in Eqs. (83)-(88).
minor comments (4)
  1. [IV, opening paragraph] The text says 'In the previous section, we analyzed gravitational lensing in the weak-field regime,' but Section III is a review of the photon-Weyl coupling and the effective metric; no weak-field lensing analysis appears there. This sentence should be corrected.
  2. [IV.D.1 and IV.E.1] The statement 'the horizon radius is normalized to r_ph = 1' is confusing: in the large-spin Kerr setup the photon sphere is not at the horizon. Presumably the horizon radius r_+ is normalized; please clarify the notation.
  3. [III.A and abstract] The paper is framed as 'higher-curvature effective field theory corrections,' but the action (4) contains only a nonminimal photon-Weyl coupling, not pure-gravity higher-curvature operators. Using an exactly Kerr background is internally consistent for this action, but the wording should make clear that background deformations are outside the model; otherwise the claim that the results capture 'higher-curvature EFT corrections' is overstated.
  4. [IV.D.1, Eq. (89)] Even after correcting the leading logarithmic coefficient, the finite part of Eq. (89) is an extremely long combination of arctangents, logarithms, and complex square-root arguments with no intermediate steps. A consistency check against the known Schwarzschild limit (a=0, alpha=0) or against Ref. [51] would greatly increase confidence in this formula and should be included.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the lensing results are forward algebraic consequences of an assumed action and an externally imported effective metric, with no fitted parameters renamed as predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a forward sequence: action (4) -> light-cone conditions (29)-(30) -> effective optical metric (33)-(35) and its large/small-spin specializations (77)-(80), (90)-(93) -> Bozza strong-deflection variables (53)-(56) -> coefficients (65), (75), (76) -> final deflection and time-delay formulas. No quantity appearing as a prediction is fitted; the coupling alpha and spin a are free parameters of the assumed action/metric, and the photon-sphere radius, critical impact parameter, and strong-deflection coefficients are obtained by solving the stated orbit conditions. The paper does rely on Ref. [51] for the effective optical metric, but that is an external input with stated assumptions, not a self-citation, and it is not equivalent to the output. The apparent algebraic mismatch between the logarithmic coefficient in Eq. (89) and the strong-deflection coefficient in Eq. (85) is an internal consistency or correctness concern, not a circularity; likewise, the assumption that the Kerr background receives no O(alpha) metric deformation is an EFT-completeness caveat, not a logical circle. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no load-bearing uniqueness claim is imported from the author's own prior work, and no known result is merely renamed. Therefore no significant circularity is found.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

One free model parameter (alpha), five axioms, and no invented entities. The calculations depend heavily on assumptions imported from prior work, especially the effective metric of Ref. [51] and the choice to keep the Kerr background unchanged at O(alpha).

free parameters (1)
  • alpha (Weyl-photon coupling)
    Dimensionful coupling in the action (4); treated as a small perturbative parameter. No value is fitted or predicted; all formulas are expanded to first order in alpha.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Action (4) with the C F F Weyl coupling is the correct leading EFT correction to photon propagation
    The paper's modified propagation law follows from this action; other higher-curvature operators of comparable dimension are assumed subleading by power counting (Sec. III.A).
  • domain assumption Background metric remains exactly Kerr to first order in alpha; the EFT corrects only the photon equation of motion
    Explicitly argued in Sec. III.A: 'it is sufficient to adopt the Kerr spacetime as the background geometry and account for modifications to photon propagation induced by this coupling.' This is load-bearing but not proven.
  • domain assumption Effective optical metric coefficients (33)-(36) from Ref. [51] are correct for equatorial PPL/PPM photons
    The paper reviews but does not re-derive these expressions; all later results depend on them.
  • standard math Bozza strong-deflection expansions (f ~ 1/sqrt(p z + q z^2)) are valid for the effective metrics
    Standard formalism from Ref. [8]; requires p(r_ph)=0 and an integrable regular part, which the paper asserts but does not verify in detail.
  • domain assumption Equatorial-plane restriction and retrograde photon choice suffice for the claimed observables
    The analysis is restricted to k_theta=0 and J<0 (retrograde); off-equatorial photon-region effects are not treated.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 28330 in / 23917 out tokens · 201964 ms · 2026-08-01T19:47:59.854148+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate gravitational lensing in Kerr spacetime in the presence of a modified photon propagation law arising from higher-curvature effective field theory corrections. Adopting a deformed dispersion relation, we analytically derive the deflection angle and the propagation time delay for null trajectories in a rotating background. We show that the modified propagation leads to explicit and calculable deviations from the standard Kerr predictions, affecting both the bending angle and the time delay. These corrections exhibit a nontrivial dependence on the black hole spin and are expected to become more relevant in the strong-field regime. In particular, near the photon region-where the spin-dependent geometry influences photon trajectories-such effects may play a role in shaping observable propagation features. Our results establish a concrete and systematic framework to quantify deviations from standard photon propagation in gravitational lensing. They further indicate that observables such as relativistic image separations and time delays provide a potential avenue to probe ultraviolet corrections to gravity in strong-field environments.

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

63 extracted references · 34 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    In this regime, the frame-dragging effect is significantly enhanced, leading to substantial modifications in photon trajectories, particularly in the vicinity of the photon region

    Large Angular Momentum Regime We now consider the regime in which the spin parameteraof the Kerr spacetime becomes large, approaching the extremal limita→M. In this regime, the frame-dragging effect is significantly enhanced, leading to substantial modifications in photon trajectories, particularly in the vicinity of the photon region. 13 Asaincreases, th...

  2. [2]

    − 8z√ 3(1 + 2z) + 64α −23 + 82z+ 130z 2 −102z 3 + 18z4 + 12z5 81 √ 3(1 + 2z)2 # 16 +a 2

    Small Angular Momentum Regime (PPL) We next consider the regime in which the spin parameterais small compared to the mass scale,a≪M. In this limit, the Kerr spacetime can be regarded as a perturbation around the Schwarzschild geometry, and rotational effects enter as subleading corrections. To leading order ina, the spacetime remains nearly spherically sy...

    2080

  3. [3]

    arctanh 1p 3 + 2i √ 7 153328 q 7(3 + 2i √ 7) + 755059 log 2 729 + 1 7237503252000 5740428919694544 √ 3−57640509827964 √ 7 arctan q 3 7 −1277511810750i q 37(3 + 2i √

  4. [4]

    arctan 1q −1 + 2i √ 7 3 + 115579122750 q 259(3 + 2i √

  5. [5]

    arctan 1q −1 + 2i √ 7 3 −14992433382584000 arctanh 1√ 3 + 1277511810750i q 37(−3 + 2i √

  6. [6]

    arctanh 1q 1 + 2i √ 7 3 + 115579122750 q 259(−3 + 2i √

  7. [7]

    arctan 1p −3 + 2i √ 7 153328 q 7(−3 + 2i √ 7) − 3728999 arctanh 1√ 3 1134000 √ 3 + (−634179i+ 1001381 √

  8. [8]

    (83) We next determine the strong deflection limit coefficients and the photon sphere quantities

    arctanh 1q 1 + 2i √ 7 3 + 3966584713287 √ 3 log 2 + 3966584713287 √ 3 log 3 ! . (83) We next determine the strong deflection limit coefficients and the photon sphere quantities. The corresponding expressions are given by βph = 45 35 − 294093α 857500 ,(84) ¯a=− 4 3 √ 3 + 3728999α 4536000 √ 3 ,(85) bD =− 8 log 2 3 √ 3 + (23184360 + 26102993 log 2)α 15876000...

  9. [9]

    arctan 1p −3 + 2i √ 7 153328 q 7(−3 + 2i √ 7) − 1510118 729 arctanh 1√ 3 − 3728999 arctanh 1√ 3 1134000 √ 3 + 90597 r −3 + 2i √ 7 259 arctanh 1q 1 + 2i √ 7 3 21904 + 1001381i r −3 + 2i √ 7 37 arctanh 1q 1 + 2i √ 7 3 153328 + (−634179i+ 1001381 √

  10. [10]

    In this limit, the deflection angle exhibits a logarithmic divergence, which can be systematically analyzed using the formalism developed in the previous subsection

    arctanh 1p 3 + 2i √ 7 153328 q 7(3 + 2i √ 7) + 3728999 log 8 7 4536000 √ 3 + 755059 log 2 729 + 3728999 log 2 2268000 √ 3 + 23184360 + 26102993 log 2 15876000 √ 3 + 3728999 log 3 2268000 √ 3 ! −π.(89) The strong deflection limit corresponds to the case in which the closest approachr 0 approaches the radius of the photon spherer ph. In this limit, the defl...

  11. [11]

    Large Angular Momentum Regime Following the analysis for the PPL case, we extend our study to the PPM case in the regime of large angular momentum, focusing on the extremal Kerr limit,a→M. We consider null geodesics in a stationary and axisymmetric spacetime described by the metric, adopting the unit systemM=a= 1 A(r) = 1− 2 r + 8α(12 + 10r−13r 2 + 26r3 −...

  12. [12]

    − 8z√ 3(1 + 2z) + 64α 4−7z−15z 2 −21z 3 + 12z5 27 √ 3(1 + 2z)2 # +a 2

    Small Angular Momentum Regime (PPM) Following the analysis for the PPL case, we extend our study to the PPM case in the regime of small angular momentum. We consider null geodesics in a stationary and axisymmetric spacetime described by the metric, adopting the unit system 2M= 1 A(r) = 1− 1 r +α 4(r−1) r4 + 12a2(r2 +r−1) r7 ,(116) B(r) = 1 1− 1 r − 1 r2 1...

  13. [13]

    K. S. Virbhadra and G. F. R. Ellis, Schwarzschild black hole lensing, Phys. Rev. D62, 084003 (2000), arXiv:astro- ph/9904193

    arXiv 2000

  14. [14]

    Claudel, K

    C.-M. Claudel, K. S. Virbhadra, and G. F. R. Ellis, The Geometry of photon surfaces, J. Math. Phys.42, 818 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0005050

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  15. [15]

    Falcke, F

    H. Falcke, F. Melia, and E. Agol, Viewing the shadow of the black hole at the galactic center, Astrophys. J. Lett.528, L13 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9912263

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  16. [16]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Super- massive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett.875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way, Astrophys. J. Lett.930, L12 (2022), arXiv:2311.08680 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    Vagnozziet al., Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A, Class

    S. Vagnozziet al., Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 165007 (2023), arXiv:2205.07787 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Bozza, S

    V. Bozza, S. Capozziello, G. Iovane, and G. Scarpetta, Strong field limit of black hole gravitational lensing, Gen. Rel. Grav.33, 1535 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0102068

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  20. [20]

    Bozza, Gravitational lensing in the strong field limit, Phys

    V. Bozza, Gravitational lensing in the strong field limit, Phys. Rev. D66, 103001 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0208075

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  21. [21]

    G. W. Gibbons and M. C. Werner, Applications of the Gauss-Bonnet theorem to gravitational lensing, Class. Quant. Grav. 25, 235009 (2008), arXiv:0807.0854 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  22. [22]

    Igata, Deflection angle in the strong deflection limit: A perspective from local geometrical invariants and matter distributions, Phys

    T. Igata, Deflection angle in the strong deflection limit: A perspective from local geometrical invariants and matter distributions, Phys. Rev. D113, 044042 (2026), arXiv:2503.02320 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    Igata, Deflection Angle in the Strong Deflection Limit and Quasinormal Modes in Stationary Axisymmetric Spacetimes, (2025), arXiv:2505.01848 [gr-qc]

    T. Igata, Deflection Angle in the Strong Deflection Limit and Quasinormal Modes in Stationary Axisymmetric Spacetimes, (2025), arXiv:2505.01848 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Igata and Y

    T. Igata and Y. Takamori, Strong deflection of massive particles via the geodesic deviation equation, Phys. Rev. D113, 124083 (2026), arXiv:2603.09946 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    Bozza, Quasiequatorial gravitational lensing by spinning black holes in the strong field limit, Phys

    V. Bozza, Quasiequatorial gravitational lensing by spinning black holes in the strong field limit, Phys. Rev. D67, 103006 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0210109

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  26. [26]

    Bozza and L

    V. Bozza and L. Mancini, Time delay in black hole gravitational lensing as a distance estimator, Gen. Rel. Grav.36, 435 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0305007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  27. [27]

    Weinberg, Phenomenological Lagrangians, Physica A96, 327 (1979)

    S. Weinberg, Phenomenological Lagrangians, Physica A96, 327 (1979)

    1979

  28. [28]

    J. F. Donoghue, Leading quantum correction to the Newtonian potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 2996 (1994), arXiv:gr- qc/9310024

    arXiv 1994

  29. [29]

    J. F. Donoghue, General relativity as an effective field theory: The leading quantum corrections, Phys. Rev. D50, 3874 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9405057

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  30. [30]

    C. P. Burgess, Quantum gravity in everyday life: General relativity as an effective field theory, Living Rev. Rel.7, 5 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0311082

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  31. [31]

    Scharnhorst, On propagation of light in the vacuum between plates, Phys

    K. Scharnhorst, On propagation of light in the vacuum between plates, Phys. Lett. B236, 354 (1990), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 787, 204–204 (2018)]

    1990

  32. [32]

    Barton, Faster ThancLight Between Parallel Mirrors: The Scharnhorst Effect Rederived, Phys

    G. Barton, Faster ThancLight Between Parallel Mirrors: The Scharnhorst Effect Rederived, Phys. Lett. B237, 559 (1990)

    1990

  33. [33]

    Barton and K

    G. Barton and K. Scharnhorst, QED between parallel mirrors: Light signals faster than c, or amplified by the vacuum, J. Phys. A26, 2037 (1993)

    2037

  34. [34]

    J. I. Latorre, P. Pascual, and R. Tarrach, Speed of light in nontrivial vacua, Nucl. Phys. B437, 60 (1995), arXiv:hep- th/9408016

    arXiv 1995

  35. [35]

    Dittrich and H

    W. Dittrich and H. Gies, Light propagation in nontrivial QED vacua, Phys. Rev. D58, 025004 (1998), arXiv:hep- ph/9804375. 25

    arXiv 1998

  36. [36]

    V. A. De Lorenci, R. Klippert, M. Novello, and J. M. Salim, Light propagation in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B482, 134 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0005049

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  37. [37]

    I. T. Drummond and S. J. Hathrell, QED Vacuum Polarization in a Background Gravitational Field and Its Effect on the Velocity of Photons, Phys. Rev. D22, 343 (1980)

    1980

  38. [38]

    R. D. Daniels and G. M. Shore, ’Faster than light’ photons and charged black holes, Nucl. Phys. B425, 634 (1994), arXiv:hep-th/9310114

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  39. [39]

    G. M. Shore, ’Faster than light’ photons in gravitational fields: Causality, anomalies and horizons, Nucl. Phys. B460, 379 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9504041

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  40. [40]

    R. D. Daniels and G. M. Shore, ’Faster than light’ photons and rotating black holes, Phys. Lett. B367, 75 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9508048

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  41. [41]

    G. M. Shore, Superluminality and UV completion, Nucl. Phys. B778, 219 (2007), arXiv:hep-th/0701185

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  42. [42]

    H. T. Cho, ’Faster than light’ photons in dilaton black hole space-times, Phys. Rev. D56, 6416 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9704014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  43. [43]

    Izumi, Causal Structures in Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys

    K. Izumi, Causal Structures in Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys. Rev. D90, 044037 (2014), arXiv:1406.0677 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  44. [44]

    Reall, N

    H. Reall, N. Tanahashi, and B. Way, Causality and Hyperbolicity of Lovelock Theories, Class. Quant. Grav.31, 205005 (2014), arXiv:1406.3379 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  45. [45]

    Allahyari, M

    A. Allahyari, M. Khodadi, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, Magnetically charged black holes from non-linear electrodynamics and the Event Horizon Telescope, JCAP02, 003, arXiv:1912.08231 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1912

  46. [46]

    Cao and L.-B

    L.-M. Cao and L.-B. Wu, Hyperbolicity and Causality of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity in Warped Product Spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D103, 064054 (2021), arXiv:2101.02461 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    H. S. Reall, Causality in gravitational theories with second order equations of motion, Phys. Rev. D103, 084027 (2021), arXiv:2101.11623 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Davies and H

    I. Davies and H. S. Reall, Well-posed formulation of Einstein-Maxwell effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D106, 104019 (2022), arXiv:2112.05603 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    L. Fu, K. Izumi, and D. Yoshida, Consistency between bulk and boundary causalities in asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetimes, JHEP10, 184, arXiv:2504.15910 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  50. [50]

    Teo, Spherical Photon Orbits Around a Kerr Black Hole, Gen

    E. Teo, Spherical Photon Orbits Around a Kerr Black Hole, Gen. Rel. Grav.35, 1909 (2003)

    1909

  51. [51]

    Perlick, Gravitational lensing from a spacetime perspective, Living Rev

    V. Perlick, Gravitational lensing from a spacetime perspective, Living Rev. Rel.7, 9 (2004)

    2004

  52. [52]

    Grenzebach, V

    A. Grenzebach, V. Perlick, and C. L¨ ammerzahl, Photon Regions and Shadows of Kerr-Newman-NUT Black Holes with a Cosmological Constant, Phys. Rev. D89, 124004 (2014), arXiv:1403.5234 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  53. [53]

    Cederbaum, Uniqueness of photon spheres in static vacuum asymptotically flat spacetimes, (2014), arXiv:1406.5475 [math.DG]

    C. Cederbaum, Uniqueness of photon spheres in static vacuum asymptotically flat spacetimes, (2014), arXiv:1406.5475 [math.DG]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  54. [54]

    Cederbaum and G

    C. Cederbaum and G. J. Galloway, Uniqueness of photon spheres in electro-vacuum spacetimes, Class. Quant. Grav.33, 075006 (2016), arXiv:1508.00355 [math.DG]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  55. [55]

    Yoshino, Uniqueness of static photon surfaces: Perturbative approach, Phys

    H. Yoshino, Uniqueness of static photon surfaces: Perturbative approach, Phys. Rev. D95, 044047 (2017), arXiv:1607.07133 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  56. [56]

    Einstein, Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the Gravitational Field, Science84, 506 (1936)

    A. Einstein, Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the Gravitational Field, Science84, 506 (1936)

    1936

  57. [57]

    Ni, Equivalence Principles and Electromagnetism, Phys

    W.-T. Ni, Equivalence Principles and Electromagnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.38, 301 (1977)

    1977

  58. [58]

    S. K. Solanki, O. Preuss, M. P. Haugan, A. Gandorfer, H. P. Povel, P. Steiner, K. Stucki, P. N. Bernasconi, and D. Soltau, Solar constraints on new couplings between electromagnetism and gravity, Phys. Rev. D69, 062001 (2004), arXiv:gr- qc/0402055

    arXiv 2004

  59. [59]

    Dereli and O

    T. Dereli and O. Sert, Non-minimal ln(R)F 2 Couplings of Electromagnetic Fields to Gravity: Static, Spherically Symmetric Solutions, Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1589 (2011), arXiv:1102.3863 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  60. [60]

    Ritz and J

    A. Ritz and J. Ward, Weyl corrections to holographic conductivity, Phys. Rev. D79, 066003 (2009), arXiv:0811.4195 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  61. [61]

    Chen and J

    S. Chen and J. Jing, Strong gravitational lensing for the photons coupled to Weyl tensor in a Schwarzschild black hole spacetime, JCAP10, 002, arXiv:1502.01088 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Lu, F.-W

    X. Lu, F.-W. Yang, and Y. Xie, Strong gravitational field time delay for photons coupled to Weyl tensor in a Schwarzschild black hole, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 357 (2016), arXiv:1606.02932 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  63. [63]

    S. Chen, S. Wang, Y. Huang, J. Jing, and S. Wang, Strong gravitational lensing for the photons coupled to a Weyl tensor in a Kerr black hole spacetime, Phys. Rev. D95, 104017 (2017), arXiv:1611.08783 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017