Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 108 references

Perturbation theory around flat spacetime in self-gravitating scalar collapse breaks down before black hole formation, once the peak luminosity reaches about 10^-2 times the Planck luminosity; near criticality the scalar spectrum flattens t

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 08:59 UTC pith:ZMCPI3PH

load-bearing objection Solid, carefully done NR paper with a new breakdown scale for flat-space perturbation theory; the DSS-based 1/ω explanation is elegant but currently verified only along a central geodesic, not at I+, so the headline claim needs another step. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.27343 v1 pith:ZMCPI3PH submitted 2026-07-29 gr-qc hep-th

Nonlinear Dynamics near the Threshold of Gravitational Collapse

Jaime Redondo-Yuste , Josu C. Aurrekoetxea This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-th
keywords critical collapsescalar fieldperturbation theorydiscrete self-similarityspectral flatteningPlanck luminositynumerical relativityblack 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 uses numerical relativity simulations of a self-gravitating scalar pulse to map where weak-field perturbation theory stops being valid on the way to black hole formation. It shows that an expansion in the pulse amplitude ε around flat spacetime, carried to third order, accurately predicts the driving harmonic, the third harmonic, and the frequency redshift only while the peak luminosity stays below roughly 10^-2 L_Planck; beyond that, all diagnostics deviate before any horizon forms. In the near-critical limit ε→1, the outgoing scalar spectrum changes from discrete peaks to a continuous one that decays as 1/ω, and the paper shows this flattening follows from the approximate discrete self-similarity of the critical solution. If right, the result supplies a quantitative boundary for perturbative methods in strong gravity and identifies the peak luminosity in Planck units as a natural measure of nonlinearity.

Core claim

The central discovery is that an O(ε³) expansion around flat spacetime loses predictive power before any black hole forms: for initial amplitudes ε sufficiently close to the critical value, the predicted scalings of the driving harmonic (∝ε), the third harmonic (∝ε³), and the frequency shift (∝ε²) all deviate by more than 5%, and this happens when the peak luminosity reaches roughly 10^-2 L_Planck. Simultaneously, the spectrum of the outgoing scalar field changes from discrete peaks to a continuous distribution that decays as 1/ω. By assuming the near-critical solution is approximately discretely self-similar with period Δ≈3.44 and Fourier-transforming in the proper time at the origin, the p

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two workhorses. First, a second-order perturbative expansion of the scalar field and metric around flat spacetime, carried to O(ε³), which yields analytic predictions for the amplitude of the driving harmonic (∝ε), the third harmonic (∝ε³), and the frequency shift (∝ε²); these scalings are the baselines against which nonlinearity is measured. Second, the approximate discrete self-similarity of the near-critical solution, expressed as X(τ+Δ)≈X(τ) with Δ≈3.44, which through a Fourier-transform identity implies a |ω|^{-1} spectral tail. The luminosity, defined from the conserved flux associated with spherical symmetry, provides the physical scale that localizes the breakdo

Load-bearing premise

The predicted 1/ω spectral flattening rests on the assumption, taken from previous studies and only checked here for a single run, that near-critical solutions are approximately discretely self-similar with period Δ≈3.44; if that property does not hold for other initial-data families, the power-law prediction fails.

What would settle it

Run a near-critical scalar collapse with a different initial-data family (e.g., a Gaussian without the cos(ω₀r) oscillation, or a different width) and extract the Fourier spectrum along a null geodesic that bounces at the origin; if a run with |ε−1| ≤ 10^{-3} does not show a spectral amplitude decaying as |ω|^{-1} over roughly a decade in frequency, the claimed link between discrete self-similarity and spectral flattening is refuted.

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

If this is right

  • Flat-space perturbation theory fails before any horizon forms, so strongly nonlinear features are present outside black holes; because higher harmonics decay faster than 1/r, only observers near the strong-field region can detect them, while asymptotic observers may see an almost linear signal.
  • The peak luminosity in Planck units acts as a perturbative parameter: deviations from weak-field predictions appear once L_peak ≳ 10^-2 L_Planck, and this scale lies well below the conjectured maximum luminosity.
  • Near-critical scalar collapse produces a continuous 1/ω spectrum, and the same flattening should appear in any near-critical evolution that is approximately discretely self-similar.
  • After a black hole forms, the late-time relaxation is accurately described by the quasinormal modes of the static black hole, so the problem has distinct perturbative regimes around flat spacetime (before collapse) and around the black hole (after).

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the 1/ω flattening is a generic signature of discrete self-similarity, the spectral slope observed in near-critical collapse of other matter fields could serve as a probe of the self-similarity period, even where the critical solution is not known analytically.
  • The luminosity threshold may extend to binary black hole mergers: since a typical merger reaches L_peak ~ 10^-3 L_Planck, the smallness of nonlinear corrections in ringdown is consistent with the proposed scale, while ultra-relativistic encounters reaching ~0.1 L_Planck should show significant deviations from weak-field predictions.
  • The derivation leading to the 1/ω prediction implies that oscillations in the log-frequency spectrum (modulation by the DSS period) could provide an independent, observable measurement of the period Δ; extracting that modulation from numerical data is a direct test of the DSS hypothesis.
  • The breakdown of low-order flat-space perturbation theory need not signal the end of perturbative methods; an expansion in |ε−1| around the critical solution may remain valid and could explain the deviations seen in the scaling plots.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies the validity of flat-space perturbation theory for spherically symmetric scalar-field collapse. Using numerical relativity simulations of a quasi-monochromatic pulse, the authors vary the amplitude epsilon and compare diagnostics—the amplitudes of the omega0 and 3*omega0 harmonics and the frequency shift delta_omega—with an O(epsilon^3) perturbative expansion. They find that the predicted epsilon, epsilon^3, and epsilon^2 scalings hold for small epsilon but break down before collapse, when L_peak/L_Planck ~ 1e-2. Near criticality, the spectrum becomes continuous; for an observer on a null geodesic bouncing at the origin, the spectral amplitude follows a 1/omega power law, which the authors attribute to the approximate discrete self-similarity (DSS) of the critical solution. The paper also analyzes the ringdown for supercritical data and the peeling of higher harmonics.

Significance. If correct, the results provide a quantitative boundary for the validity of post-Minkowskian-like flat-space perturbation theory in a dynamical strong-gravity setting, and identify L_peak/L_Planck as a useful nonlinearity parameter. The 1/omega prediction is a parameter-free consequence of the assumed DSS period and is checked against a near-critical run. The numerical work is solid: fourth-order convergence of constraints, recovery of Choptuik scaling, careful luminosity extraction, and multiple independent diagnostics. The main weakness is that the DSS-derived 1/omega law is demonstrated for the central bouncing geodesic, while the headline spectral flattening in Fig. 2 is observed asymptotically; the connection between the two is not established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV.C, Eq. (43), Fig. 2, Sec. V] The 1/omega derivation applies to X = r*Phi along the bouncing null geodesic, Fourier-transformed in the central proper time T0. The flattening shown in Fig. 2, however, is for spectra extracted at r_ext = 150 and v = 400, i.e., in the asymptotic region. No calculation or fit connects Eq. (43) to these observables. Since higher harmonics peel as r^-2 (Eq. (26)) and the asymptotic signal includes tails and (for collapsing runs) QNM absorption, the asymptotic spectrum need not inherit the 1/omega law. The statement in Sec. V that 'a power law omega^{-1} scaling of the spectrum close to criticality ... follows from the approximate discrete self-similarity' is therefore unsupported for the asymptotic spectra. The authors should either fit A/omega to the near-critical curves in Fig. 2 or derive the propagation of the central spectrum to I+.
  2. [§III.A, Eqs. (28)–(29)] The frequency shift delta_omega = -4*pi*A^2 is obtained by discarding the log-divergent piece of S1 with the assertion that 'any regulator such as a small cosmological constant would eliminate the contribution from this piece.' This is not demonstrated: a regulator could leave finite, cutoff-dependent terms that shift the coefficient. The scaling delta_omega proportional to epsilon^2 is, however, robust from power counting and is confirmed in Fig. 4, so this does not affect the paper's main conclusion. I recommend presenting the coefficient as heuristically motivated.
  3. [§IV.A, Fig. 4] The breakdown criterion is an arbitrary 5% deviation, and the authors note that the threshold is arbitrary and that the breakdown value depends on the diagnostic and extraction surface. The quantitative claim that perturbation theory fails 'when L_peak/L_P >~ 10^-2' is thus an order-of-magnitude diagnostic rather than a precise boundary. This framing is acceptable, but the abstract and conclusions should avoid implying a sharp threshold.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract/Sec. V] Clarify that the 1/omega flattening is measured for the bouncing geodesic in the strong-field region, not for the asymptotic observers whose spectra are shown in Fig. 2. As written, the abstract may be read as claiming the asymptotic spectrum follows 1/omega.
  2. [Eq. (43)] Specify the integration limits and state that the integral is understood in the distributional sense; the |omega|^{-1} factor is a late-time/low-frequency asymptotics. Adding one sentence would prevent confusion.
  3. [Sec. IV.A] The sentence 'for all except for the third harmonic ... we show the results obtained both at constant r and constant v' is slightly misleading because the center panel of Fig. 4 shows only r = const; the subsequent parenthetical helps, but the main text could be more precise.
  4. [Sec. IV.C, Fig. 6] The 1/omega check is performed for a single near-critical run (epsilon = 0.999) using the literature value Delta ~ 3.44. The paper itself notes DSS is only approximate near criticality. Since universality across initial data is not tested, the generality of the explanation remains open; this is a limitation rather than an error given the 'consistent with' wording.
  5. [General] Several references are 2026 arXiv preprints (e.g., [22,23,43,56,98]). For a journal submission, the authors should confirm these have appeared or are still appropriate to cite as preprints.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the only mild issue is a non-load-bearing companion-paper self-citation.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. The perturbative scalings A_omega0 ~ epsilon, A_3omega0 ~ epsilon^3, and delta_omega ~ epsilon^2 are read off from the perturbative ordering in Eqs. (18), (21), and (25): the third harmonic is sourced by O(epsilon^2) metric coefficients multiplying the O(epsilon) scalar, so the epsilon^3 scaling is structural, not fitted. The numerical measurements are compared with these scalings, and the 5% breakdown threshold is a data-driven deviation, not an input. The omega^{-1} spectral law is a parameter-free consequence of the externally cited Choptuik DSS ansatz (Eq. (41), with Delta ~ 3.44 from Ref. [17]); Eq. (43) is a mathematical Fourier identity, and Fig. 6 tests it on a near-critical run without fitting the spectral slope. The authors explicitly state that DSS is only approximate and that universality across initial data is not tested; this is a limitation on validity, not a circularity. The one self-citation, Ref. [43], corroborates the r^{-2} peeling of higher harmonics, but Eq. (26) derives that decay analytically in this paper, so the citation is not load-bearing. The paper's own caveat that the far-field flattening of Fig. 2 and the central-geodesic spectrum of Fig. 6 are distinct observables is a possible logical gap, but it is an unsupported inference, not a reduction of the claim to its inputs. No step in the derivation is equivalent by construction to its conclusion.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard GR equations plus several inputs from the critical-collapse literature (Choptuik exponent, DSS period) and two paper-specific modeling choices: the regulator assumption for the log divergence and the arbitrary 5% breakdown definition. The A* calibration and luminosity extrapolation are standard fits to simulation data.

free parameters (3)
  • A* (critical amplitude) = ≈ 8.11e-04
    Obtained by fitting BH masses from collapsing runs to Choptuik scaling log M_BH = C + γ log(A − A*) with γ=0.37 (Eq. 36). All ϵ values use this normalization, so the reported breakdown scalings depend on this fit.
  • c1, c2 (luminosity extrapolation coefficients) = per-run values
    Fitted to L_peak(r) at extraction radii r∈{80,...,200} via L_peak(r)=L∞_peak + c1/r + c2/r² (Eq. B4). These determine the quoted L_peak/LP threshold values.
  • 5% deviation threshold = 0.05
    Chosen by hand to define the 'breakdown' of perturbative scalings in Fig. 4. The paper states it is arbitrary; the exact ϵ at which deviations exceed 5% differs per diagnostic and extraction surface.
axioms (6)
  • standard math Einstein-Klein-Gordon equations (1) govern the system
    The physical model underlying all simulations and perturbative calculations.
  • domain assumption Choptuik critical collapse scaling M_BH ≈ C|A−A*|^γ with γ=0.37 applies to this initial-data family
    Used in Eq. (36) to fit A*; taken from Choptuik (1993), not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Near-critical solutions are approximately discretely self-similar with period Δ≈3.44, X(τ+Δ)≈X(τ) (Eq. 41)
    Input from the critical-collapse literature (Choptuik); used to derive the |ω|^{-1} spectral prediction (43). Not measured in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The log-divergence in the frequency-domain perturbation is unphysical and can be removed by a regulator without changing δω=−4πA² (Eq. 29 and following)
    The paper asserts any regulator such as a small cosmological constant eliminates the log term; no regulator is actually introduced, so the insensitivity of δω to the regulator is assumed.
  • domain assumption Kodama vector flux definition (B1)-(B3) provides the correct luminosity measure
    Taken from Cardoso et al. (2018) [53]; used to define L_peak.
  • domain assumption The two-timescale expansion ansatz (21)-(22) captures the leading nonlinear corrections
    Standard technique following [70,71]; applied here to Minkowski background.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 21309 in / 15191 out tokens · 137171 ms · 2026-08-01T08:59:14.715300+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Perturbation theory is an essential tool to model and interpret gravitational dynamics, for example, binary black hole mergers. Therefore it is also crucial to precisely understand its regimes of validity. The collapse of a scalar field under its own self-gravity provides a clean laboratory to study these questions. By varying the field's initial amplitude we can transition smoothly between a perturbative regime, where the field scatters in an approximately flat spacetime; and a nonperturbative regime, where a black hole forms in finite time. In this work, we use numerical relativity simulations of this set-up to investigate the accuracy of a perturbative expansion around flat spacetime, including next-to-next-to-leading order effects. Our simulations show deviations from these perturbative predictions before black hole formation, once the maximum luminosity of the process is sufficiently large, $L_{peak} \sim 10^{-2} L_{Planck}$. We characterize these nonlinear effects including a redshift of the driving frequency and a power-law spectral amplitude, which we show is consistent with approximate discrete self-similarity. These results provide a step forward towards understanding the limits of perturbative expansions in more realistic strong-gravity phenomena such as non-spherical collapse and high-velocity black hole mergers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27343 by Jaime Redondo-Yuste, Josu C. Aurrekoetxea.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Rescaled profile of the scalar field log10 |rΦ|/ϵ, as indicated by the colorbar, during the evolution in three different regimes: dispersive ϵ = 0.12 (left), near-critical ϵ = 0.999 (center), and collapsing ϵ = 1.21 (right). Overlaid we show the null rays obtained from integrating (37) at each point in the spacetime grid. The null rays accumulate in the strong-field region, as is visible in the near-critic… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Snapshots of the frequency-isolated radial pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Nonlinear diagnostics as a function of the normalized amplitude of the initial data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top: Scattered pulse from a supercritical evolution ϵ = 1.1 extracted at rext = 100. The red dashed line shows the fit of the late-time signal to a superposition of the scalar fundamental mode and the first overtone of a Schwarzschild BH. Bottom: Fourier transform of the full signal in the top panel (in black), and of the signal only after T > Tpeak + 5 ∼ 265 (red). Recall that T is the proper time experie… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Scalar field profile and spectrum along a “bouncing” null geodesic for the near-critical run with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Convergence test of the constraint violations (Eqs. (46-47) in [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Dimensionless luminosity for the near-critical run with ϵ = 0.999, as a function of time, for four different extraction radii (see legend). From each of these extraction radii, we extract a value of Lpeak, that we fit following [53] to extract the peak luminosity at infinity (see inset). Right: Peak luminosity at infinity in dimensionless units as a function of the initial data amplitude ϵ. The maxim… 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

108 extracted references · 79 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Batterman,The Devil in the Details: Asymptotic Reasoning in Explanation, Reduction, and Emergence(Oxford University Press, 2001)

    Robert W. Batterman,The Devil in the Details: Asymptotic Reasoning in Explanation, Reduction, and Emergence(Oxford University Press, 2001)

    2001

  2. [2]

    Divergence of perturbation theory in quantum electrodynamics,

    F. J. Dyson, “Divergence of perturbation theory in quantum electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev.85, 631–632 (1952)

    1952

  3. [3]

    A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,

    Gerard ’t Hooft, “A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,” Nucl. Phys. B72, 461 (1974)

    1974

  4. [4]

    Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics,

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour, “Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D59, 084006 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9811091

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  5. [5]

    Inspiral, merger and ring-down of equal- mass black-hole binaries,

    Alessandra Buonanno, Gregory B. Cook, and Frans Pretorius, “Inspiral, merger and ring-down of equal- mass black-hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D75, 124018 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0610122

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  6. [6]

    Inter- mediate mass-ratio black hole binaries: Applicability of small mass-ratio perturbation theory,

    Maarten van de Meent and Harald P. Pfeiffer, “Inter- mediate mass-ratio black hole binaries: Applicability of small mass-ratio perturbation theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 181101 (2020), arXiv:2006.12036 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Radiative gravi- tational fields in general relativity I. general structure of the field outside the source,

    Luc Blanchet and Thibault Damour, “Radiative gravi- tational fields in general relativity I. general structure of the field outside the source,” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A320, 379–430 (1986)

    1986

  8. [8]

    On the unreasonable effectiveness of the post-Newtonian approximation in gravitational physics,

    Clifford M. Will, “On the unreasonable effectiveness of the post-Newtonian approximation in gravitational physics,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.108, 5938 (2011), arXiv:1102.5192 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  9. [9]

    Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravi- tational Waves,

    Luc Blanchet, “Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravi- tational Waves,” Living Rev. Rel.17, 2 (2014), arXiv:1310.1528 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Gravitational scattering, post- Minkowskian approximation and Effective One- Body theory,

    Thibault Damour, “Gravitational scattering, post- Minkowskian approximation and Effective One- Body theory,” Phys. Rev. D94, 104015 (2016), arXiv:1609.00354 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  11. [11]

    High-energygravitationalscattering and the general relativistic two-body problem,

    ThibaultDamour,“High-energygravitationalscattering and the general relativistic two-body problem,” Phys. Rev. D97, 044038 (2018), arXiv:1710.10599 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    ScatteringAm- plitudes and the Conservative Hamiltonian for Binary Systems at Third Post-Minkowskian Order,

    Zvi Bern, Clifford Cheung, Radu Roiban, Chia-Hsien Shen, MikhailP.Solon, andMaoZeng,“ScatteringAm- plitudes and the Conservative Hamiltonian for Binary Systems at Third Post-Minkowskian Order,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 201603 (2019), arXiv:1901.04424 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment,

    Emanuele Bertiet al., “Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment,” (2025), arXiv:2505.23895 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Black hole pertur- bation theory and gravitational self-force,

    Adam Pound and Barry Wardell, “Black hole pertur- bation theory and gravitational self-force,” (2021), 10.1007/978-981-15-4702-7_38-1, arXiv:2101.04592 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    Gravi- tational Waveforms for Compact Binaries from Second- Order Self-Force Theory,

    Barry Wardell, Adam Pound, Niels Warburton, Jeremy Miller, Leanne Durkan, and Alexandre Le Tiec, “Gravi- tational Waveforms for Compact Binaries from Second- Order Self-Force Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 241402 (2023), arXiv:2112.12265 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an effective one-body approach,

    Thibault Damour, “Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an effective one-body approach,” Phys. Rev. D 64, 124013 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0103018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  17. [17]

    Universality and scaling in gravitational collapse of a massless scalar field,

    Matthew W. Choptuik, “Universality and scaling in gravitational collapse of a massless scalar field,” Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 9–12 (1993)

    1993

  18. [18]

    Black Hole Superradiance in Dynami- cal Spacetime,

    William E. East, Fethi M. Ramazanoğlu, and Frans Pretorius, “Black Hole Superradiance in Dynami- cal Spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D89, 061503 (2014), arXiv:1312.4529 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [19]

    Turbulent Black Holes,

    Huan Yang, Aaron Zimmerman, and Luis Lehner, “Turbulent Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 081101 (2015), arXiv:1402.4859 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Ultrarelativis- tic black hole formation,

    William E. East and Frans Pretorius, “Ultrarelativis- tic black hole formation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 101101 (2013), arXiv:1210.0443 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  21. [21]

    Black-hole head-on collisions in higher dimensions,

    William G. Cook, Ulrich Sperhake, Emanuele Berti, and Vitor Cardoso, “Black-hole head-on collisions in higher dimensions,” Phys. Rev. D96, 124006 (2017), arXiv:1709.10514 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Trapping, Irregular Waveforms, and Efficient Ra- diation in Ultra-relativistic Black Hole Encounters,

    Hengrui Zhu, Frans Pretorius, and James M. Stone, “Trapping, Irregular Waveforms, and Efficient Ra- diation in Ultra-relativistic Black Hole Encounters,” (2026), arXiv:2604.26253 [gr-qc]. 12

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    The weight of light: colliding pulses of radiation in General Relativity,

    Jorge Expósito Patiño, Vitor Cardoso, and Hannes R. Rüter, “The weight of light: colliding pulses of radiation in General Relativity,” (2026), arXiv:2607.15761 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  24. [24]

    Emergent Turbulence in Nonlinear Gravity,

    Sizheng Ma, Luis Lehner, Huan Yang, Lawrence E. Kid- der, Harald P. Pfeiffer, and Mark A. Scheel, “Emergent Turbulence in Nonlinear Gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 061401 (2026), arXiv:2508.13294 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    The Problem of a Selfgravitating Scalar Field,

    D. Christodoulou, “The Problem of a Selfgravitating Scalar Field,” Commun. Math. Phys.105, 337–361 (1986)

    1986

  26. [26]

    Choptuik scaling in null coordi- nates,

    David Garfinkle, “Choptuik scaling in null coordi- nates,” Phys. Rev. D51, 5558–5561 (1995), arXiv:gr- qc/9412008

    arXiv 1995

  27. [27]

    Observation of critical phenomena and selfsimilarity in the gravita- tional collapse of radiation fluid,

    Charles R. Evans and Jason S. Coleman, “Observation of critical phenomena and selfsimilarity in the gravita- tional collapse of radiation fluid,” Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 1782–1785 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9402041

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  28. [28]

    Critical behavior and scaling in vacuum axisymmetric gravitational col- lapse,

    A. M. Abrahams and C. R. Evans, “Critical behavior and scaling in vacuum axisymmetric gravitational col- lapse,” Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 2980–2983 (1993)

    1993

  29. [29]

    Universality in ax- isymmetric vacuum collapse,

    A. M. Abrahams and C. R. Evans, “Universality in ax- isymmetric vacuum collapse,” Phys. Rev. D49, 3998– 4003 (1994)

    1994

  30. [30]

    The Choptuik space-time as an eigenvalue problem,

    Carsten Gundlach, “The Choptuik space-time as an eigenvalue problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 3214–3217 (1995), arXiv:gr-qc/9507054

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  31. [31]

    Critical behavior in gravitational collapse of a Yang-Mills field,

    Matthew W. Choptuik, Tadeusz Chmaj, and Piotr Bizon, “Critical behavior in gravitational collapse of a Yang-Mills field,” Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 424–427 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9603051

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  32. [32]

    Critical phenomena in gravitational collapse,

    Carsten Gundlach, “Critical phenomena in gravitational collapse,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2, 1–49 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9712084

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  33. [33]

    Scaling of cur- vature in subcritical gravitational collapse,

    David Garfinkle and G. Comer Duncan, “Scaling of cur- vature in subcritical gravitational collapse,” Phys. Rev. D58, 064024 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9802061

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  34. [34]

    Critical collapse of the massless scalar field in axisymmetry,

    Matthew W. Choptuik, Eric W. Hirschmann, Steven L. Liebling, and Frans Pretorius, “Critical collapse of the massless scalar field in axisymmetry,” Phys. Rev. D68, 044007 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0305003

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  35. [35]

    Critical collapse of a complex scalar field with angular momentum,

    Matthew W. Choptuik, Eric W. Hirschmann, Steven L. Liebling, and Frans Pretorius, “Critical collapse of a complex scalar field with angular momentum,” Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 131101 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0405101

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  36. [36]

    Collapse of Nonlinear Gravi- tationalWavesinMoving-PunctureCoordinates,

    David Hilditch, Thomas W. Baumgarte, Andreas Wey- hausen, Tim Dietrich, Bernd Brügmann, Pedro J. Mon- tero, and Ewald Müller, “Collapse of Nonlinear Gravi- tationalWavesinMoving-PunctureCoordinates,” Phys. Rev. D88, 103009 (2013), arXiv:1309.5008 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  37. [37]

    Critical phenomena in the gravitational col- lapse of electromagnetic waves,

    Thomas W. Baumgarte, Carsten Gundlach, and David Hilditch, “Critical phenomena in the gravitational col- lapse of electromagnetic waves,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 171103 (2019), arXiv:1909.00850 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  38. [38]

    Critical Phenomena in the Col- lapse of Gravitational Waves,

    Thomas W. Baumgarte, Bernd Brügmann, Daniela Cors, Carsten Gundlach, David Hilditch, Anton Khirnov, Tomáš Ledvinka, Sarah Renkhoff, and Is- abel Suárez Fernández, “Critical Phenomena in the Col- lapse of Gravitational Waves,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 181401 (2023), arXiv:2305.17171 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    Twist-freeaxisym- metric critical collapse of a complex scalar field,

    Krinio Marouda, Daniela Cors, Hannes R. Rüter, Flo- rianAtteneder, andDavidHilditch,“Twist-freeaxisym- metric critical collapse of a complex scalar field,” Phys. Rev. D109, 124042 (2024), arXiv:2402.06724 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Criticalcollapseofvacuumspacetimes: Naka- mura wave initial data,

    Thomas W. Baumgarte, Carsten Gundlach, and David Hilditch,“Criticalcollapseofvacuumspacetimes: Naka- mura wave initial data,” (2026), arXiv:2606.27431 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    CriticalPhenomenainGravitationalCollapse,

    CarstenGundlach, DavidHilditch, andJoséM.Martín- García,“CriticalPhenomenainGravitationalCollapse,” (2025), arXiv:2507.07636 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    On choosing the start time of binary black hole ringdowns,

    SwethaBhagwat, MariaOkounkova, StefanW.Ballmer, Duncan A. Brown, Matthew Giesler, Mark A. Scheel, and Saul A. Teukolsky, “On choosing the start time of binary black hole ringdowns,” Phys. Rev. D97, 104065 (2018), arXiv:1711.00926 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  43. [43]

    Nonlinear Dynamics in General Relativity,

    Vitor Cardoso, Jaime Redondo-Yuste, Ulrich Sperhake, and Furkan Tuncer, “Nonlinear Dynamics in General Relativity,” (2026), arXiv:2603.04501 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

  44. [44]

    Nonlinear Effects in Black Hole Ringdown,

    Mark Ho-Yeuk Cheunget al., “Nonlinear Effects in Black Hole Ringdown,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 081401 (2023), arXiv:2208.07374 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Nonlinearities in Black Hole Ringdowns,

    Keefe Mitmanet al., “Nonlinearities in Black Hole Ringdowns,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 081402 (2023), arXiv:2208.07380 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Generation and propagation of nonlinear quasinormal modes of a Schwarzschild black hole,

    Macarena Lagos and Lam Hui, “Generation and propagation of nonlinear quasinormal modes of a Schwarzschild black hole,” Phys. Rev. D107, 044040 (2023), arXiv:2208.07379 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Deruelle and T

    N. Deruelle and T. Piran, eds.,GRA VITATIONAL RADIATION. PROCEEDINGS, SUMMER SCHOOL, NATO ADV ANCED STUDY INSTITUTE, LES HOUCHES, FRANCE, JUNE 2-21, 1982(1984)

    1982

  48. [48]

    Gravitational machines,

    Freeman J Dyson, “Gravitational machines,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10470 (2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    The Maximum tension principle in general relativity,

    G W Gibbons, “The Maximum tension principle in general relativity,” Found. Phys.32, 1891–1901 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0210109

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1901

  50. [50]

    Maximum Tension: with and without a cosmological constant,

    John D. Barrow and G. W. Gibbons, “Maximum Tension: with and without a cosmological constant,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.446, 3874–3877 (2015), arXiv:1408.1820 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  51. [51]

    Maximum mag- netic moment to angular momentum conjecture,

    John D. Barrow and G. W. Gibbons, “Maximum mag- netic moment to angular momentum conjecture,” Phys. Rev. D95, 064040 (2017), arXiv:1701.06343 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    Black hole bombs and explosions: from astrophysics to particle physics,

    Vitor Cardoso, “Black hole bombs and explosions: from astrophysics to particle physics,” Gen. Rel. Grav.45, 2079–2097 (2013), arXiv:1307.0038 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2079

  53. [53]

    Remarks on the maximum luminos- ity,

    Vitor Cardoso, Taishi Ikeda, Christopher J. Moore, and Chul-Moon Yoo, “Remarks on the maximum luminos- ity,” Phys. Rev. D97, 084013 (2018), arXiv:1803.03271 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  54. [54]

    Reconsidering maxi- mum luminosity,

    Aden Jowsey and Matt Visser, “Reconsidering maxi- mum luminosity,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D30, 2142026 (2021), arXiv:2105.06650 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  55. [55]

    Proper- ties of the Binary Black Hole Merger GW150914,

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “Proper- ties of the Binary Black Hole Merger GW150914,” Phys. Rev.Lett.116,241102(2016),arXiv:1602.03840[gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  56. [56]

    Discretely Self- similar Exterior-Naked Singularities for the Einstein- Scalar Field System,

    Serban Cicortas and Christoph Kehle, “Discretely Self- similar Exterior-Naked Singularities for the Einstein- Scalar Field System,” Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.250, 37 (2026), arXiv:2412.09540 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    New Horizons for Psi: Studying fun- damental fields with numerical relativity,

    Katy Clough, “New Horizons for Psi: Studying fun- damental fields with numerical relativity,” (2024) arXiv:2408.07617 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Evolution of three-dimensionalgravitationalwaves: Harmonicslicing case,

    Masaru Shibata and Takashi Nakamura, “Evolution of three-dimensionalgravitationalwaves: Harmonicslicing case,” Phys. Rev. D52, 5428–5444 (1995). 13

    1995

  59. [59]

    On the numerical integration of Einstein’s field equations,

    Thomas W. Baumgarte and Stuart L. Shapiro, “On the numerical integration of Einstein’s field equations,” Phys. Rev. D59, 024007 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9810065

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  60. [60]

    General Relativistic Collapse to Black Holes and Gravitational Waves from Black Holes,

    T. Nakamura, K. Oohara, and Y. Kojima, “General Relativistic Collapse to Black Holes and Gravitational Waves from Black Holes,” Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.90, 1–218 (1987)

    1987

  61. [61]

    Numerical Rela- tivity in Spherical Polar Coordinates: Evolution Calcu- lations with the BSSN Formulation,

    Thomas W. Baumgarte, Pedro J. Montero, Isabel Cordero-Carrion, and Ewald Muller, “Numerical Rela- tivity in Spherical Polar Coordinates: Evolution Calcu- lations with the BSSN Formulation,” Phys. Rev. D87, 044026 (2013), arXiv:1211.6632 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  62. [62]

    The Dynamics of general relativity,

    Richard L. Arnowitt, Stanley Deser, and Charles W. Misner, “The Dynamics of general relativity,” Gen. Rel. Grav.40, 1997–2027 (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/0405109

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  63. [63]

    SENR/NRPy+: Numerical Relativity in Singular Curvilinear Coordinate Systems,

    Ian Ruchlin, Zachariah B. Etienne, and Thomas W. Baumgarte, “SENR/NRPy+: Numerical Relativity in Singular Curvilinear Coordinate Systems,” Phys. Rev. D97, 064036 (2018), arXiv:1712.07658 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  64. [64]

    A New formalism for numerical relativity,

    Carles Bona, Joan Masso, Edward Seidel, and Joan Stela, “A New formalism for numerical relativity,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 600–603 (1995), arXiv:gr-qc/9412071

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  65. [65]

    Gravitational wave extraction from an inspiraling configuration of merg- ing black holes,

    John G. Baker, Joan Centrella, Dae-Il Choi, Michael Koppitz, and James van Meter, “Gravitational wave extraction from an inspiraling configuration of merg- ing black holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111102 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511103

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  66. [66]

    Accurate evolutions of orbiting black- hole binaries without excision,

    Manuela Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlochower, “Accurate evolutions of orbiting black- hole binaries without excision,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111101 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511048

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  67. [67]

    How to move a black hole without excision: Gauge conditions for the numerical evolution of a moving puncture,

    James R. van Meter, John G. Baker, Michael Koppitz, and Dae-Il Choi, “How to move a black hole without excision: Gauge conditions for the numerical evolution of a moving puncture,” Phys. Rev. D73, 124011 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0605030

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  68. [68]

    Gauge conditions for long term nu- merical black hole evolutions without excision,

    Miguel Alcubierre, Bernd Bruegmann, Peter Diener, Michael Koppitz, Denis Pollney, Edward Seidel, and Ryoji Takahashi, “Gauge conditions for long term nu- merical black hole evolutions without excision,” Phys. Rev. D67, 084023 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0206072

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  69. [69]

    A Fast apparent horizon finder for three- dimensional Cartesian grids in numerical relativity,

    J. Thornburg, “A Fast apparent horizon finder for three- dimensional Cartesian grids in numerical relativity,” Class. Quant. Grav.21, 743–766 (2004), gr-qc/0306056

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  70. [70]

    Holo- graphic Thermalization, Stability of Anti–de Sitter Space, and the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam Paradox,

    Venkat Balasubramanian, Alex Buchel, Stephen R. Green, Luis Lehner, and Steven L. Liebling, “Holo- graphic Thermalization, Stability of Anti–de Sitter Space, and the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam Paradox,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 071601 (2014), arXiv:1403.6471 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  71. [71]

    Resonant Dynamics and the Instability of Anti–deSitterSpacetime,

    Piotr Bizoń, Maciej Maliborski, and Andrzej Rost- worowski, “Resonant Dynamics and the Instability of Anti–deSitterSpacetime,” Phys.Rev.Lett.115,081103 (2015), arXiv:1506.03519 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  72. [72]

    Greybody factors imprinted on black hole ringdowns: An alternative to superposed quasi- normal modes,

    Naritaka Oshita, “Greybody factors imprinted on black hole ringdowns: An alternative to superposed quasi- normal modes,” Phys. Rev. D109, 104028 (2024), arXiv:2309.05725 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  73. [73]

    Greybody factors imprinted on black hole ringdowns. II. Merging binary black holes,

    Kazumasa Okabayashi and Naritaka Oshita, “Greybody factors imprinted on black hole ringdowns. II. Merging binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D110, 064086 (2024), arXiv:2403.17487 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [74]

    Ringdown stability: Graybody factors as sta- ble gravitational-wave observables,

    Romeo Felice Rosato, Kyriakos Destounis, and Paolo Pani, “Ringdown stability: Graybody factors as sta- ble gravitational-wave observables,” Phys. Rev. D110, L121501 (2024), arXiv:2406.01692 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [75]

    Modeling the frequency-domain ring- down amplitude of comparable-mass mergers with grey- body factors,

    Romeo Felice Rosato, Sophia Yi, Emanuele Berti, and Paolo Pani, “Modeling the frequency-domain ring- down amplitude of comparable-mass mergers with grey- body factors,” Phys. Rev. D113, 064060 (2026), arXiv:2512.15877 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  76. [76]

    Novel ringdown tests of general relativity with black hole greybody fac- tors,

    Romeo Felice Rosato, Francesco Crescimbeni, Sophia Yi, Emanuele Berti, and Paolo Pani, “Novel ringdown tests of general relativity with black hole greybody fac- tors,” (2026), arXiv:2604.11895 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  77. [77]

    Beyond quasinormal modes: a complete mode decomposition of black hole perturbations,

    Paolo Arnaudo, Javier Carballo, and Benjamin With- ers, “Beyond quasinormal modes: a complete mode decomposition of black hole perturbations,” (2025), arXiv:2510.18956 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    Bouncing sin- gularities in Schwarzschild: a geometric origin of the QNM convergence region,

    Paolo Arnaudo and Benjamin Withers, “Bouncing sin- gularities in Schwarzschild: a geometric origin of the QNM convergence region,” (2026), arXiv:2605.16489 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  79. [79]

    Dynamical quasinormal mode excitation,

    Marina De Amicis, Enrico Cannizzaro, Gregorio Carullo, and Laura Sberna, “Dynamical quasinormal mode excitation,” Phys. Rev. D113, 024048 (2026), arXiv:2506.21668 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

  80. [80]

    Post- Minkowskian expansion of the Prompt Response in a Schwarzschild background,

    Marina De Amicis and Enrico Cannizzaro, “Post- Minkowskian expansion of the Prompt Response in a Schwarzschild background,” (2026), arXiv:2601.11706 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

Showing first 80 references.