Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 66 references

This paper establishes that for an effective non-commutative rotating black hole, the deformation shifts photon orbits and both ISCO branches inward, shrinks the shadow, and makes the geometric Hawking temperature and horizon angular veloci

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 02:53 UTC pith:BJ4FOFDS

load-bearing objection The constrained fixed-Theta thermodynamics is the real new result; the geodesics are mostly Kerr-Newman substitutions, and the metric's physical status is unverified, so the paper deserves a serious referee but not acceptance as-is. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.27707 v1 pith:BJ4FOFDS submitted 2026-07-30 gr-qc

Constrained thermodynamics and geodesic observables of an effective non-commutative Kerr-like black hole

H. Hassanabadi , L. A. L\'opez , N. Bret\'on , L. M. Nieto , S. Zare This is my paper
classification gr-qc MSC 83C5783C10 PACS 04.70.-s04.20.-q
keywords non-commutative black holeKerr-like metricNewman–Janis algorithmblack hole shadowphoton regionISCOconstrained thermodynamicsHawking temperature
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 analyzes an effective rotating black hole obtained by applying the Newman–Janis rotation algorithm to a static, non-commutative-inspired seed. Its central aim is to show that the deformation parameter Theta enters the geometry as a mass-dependent 'charge-like' term, beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta/pi), and to work out the consequences for every strong-field observable: the horizon and extremality bound, ergoregion, thermodynamic response functions, photon ring and shadow, the innermost stable circular orbit, and photon frequency shifts. The main physical claims are that increasing Theta moves photon orbits and both ISCO branches inward and shrinks the shadow, and that at fixed Theta the geometric Hawking temperature and horizon angular velocity are not the correct conjugates of the first law—the correct ones are rescaled by a factor Gamma_Theta. A reader should care because this supplies a complete, parameter-free comparison set: if non-commutative geometry is real, these are the observable deviations from Kerr, and the paper gives the formulas to extract Theta from shadow, disk, and thermal data.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the metric ds^2 = -Delta/Sigma (dt - a sin^2 theta dphi)^2 + Sigma/Delta dr^2 + Sigma dtheta^2 + (sin^2 theta/Sigma)[a dt - (r^2+a^2) dphi]^2, with Sigma = r^2+a^2 cos^2 theta and Delta = r^2 - 2Mr + a^2 + beta_Theta, beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta/pi), has a Kerr–Newman algebraic structure with a mass-dependent charge-like term. From this it derives an extremality bound Theta <= pi(M^2-a^2)^2/(64M^2), a zero-temperature remnant, stationary-limit surfaces and an ergoregion that thickens at the equator as Theta grows, and the equality Gamma_Theta dM = T_H dS + Omega_H dJ that defines the constrained first law, with exact conjugates tilde T = T_H/Gamma_

What carries the argument

The central object is the Boyer–Lindquist-like metric (13) with the single modified radial function Delta = r^2 - 2Mr + a^2 + beta_Theta, beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta/pi) = M lambda_Theta. Retaining the Carter separability structure lets the entire Kerr–Newman geodesic toolkit—photon-region equations, shadow impact parameters, ISCO equation, frequency-shift formula—be adapted by replacing Q^2 with beta_Theta. The thermodynamic machinery rests on the identity beta_Theta = M lambda_Theta, which couples the deformation to mass, and on the factor Gamma_Theta = 1 - lambda_Theta r/[2(r^2+a^2)] that relates the geometric Hawking quantities to the reduced state-space conjugates.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the truncated static lapse f(r) = 1 - 2M/r + 8M sqrt(Theta)/(sqrt(pi) r^2) can be rotated by the Newman–Janis algorithm into a metric that is a genuine black-hole solution of the parent field equations; the paper itself flags the algorithm as a prescription rather than a theorem and provides no field-equation verification, so if that rotation fails, every derived observable describes a toy geometry.

What would settle it

Substitute the rotating metric (13) into the complete Einstein–Kaluza–Klein field equations that the static seed is claimed to satisfy, and check whether they hold at order sqrt(Theta); if they do not, the horizon, thermodynamic, and geodesic results are properties of a metric that is not a solution of the underlying theory.

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

If this is right

  • At fixed mass and spin, raising Theta lowers the extremal spin bound, shrinks the outer horizon, thickens the equatorial ergoregion, and leaves a zero-temperature remnant at extremality with M_rem = r_rem.
  • The unstable photon rings and the shadow boundary move inward: the paper's equatorial-observer shadow plots shrink as Theta grows, and the static photon-sphere radius falls below 3M by 16 sqrt(Theta)/(3 sqrt(pi)).
  • Every equatorial circular-orbit observable shifts: both prograde and retrograde ISCO radii decrease with Theta, so the inner edge of a geodesic accretion disk moves inward and the retrograde branch can fall below 6M.
  • The fixed-Theta first law is not dM = T_H dS + Omega_H dJ; the geometric temperature and angular velocity must be rescaled by Gamma_Theta, and heat capacities computed from T_H alone misidentify the Davies-type critical points.
  • A photon's observed redshift/blueshift requires the independent pair (s, sigma)—emitter orbit sign and tangential photon direction—so four distinct combinations exist; a prograde emitter can still deliver a blueshifted or redshifted photon depending on the photon branch.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because beta_Theta mimics an electric charge in Kerr–Newman, shadow or continuum fits that allow a free 'charge' parameter could absorb the non-commutative effect; breaking the degeneracy would require combining shadow, ISCO, and thermal-spectrum measurements on the same object.
  • The inward ISCO shift raises the gravitational binding energy of the innermost disk by a computable amount; computing the disk's radiative efficiency from the derived Es and Ls would turn the present orbital formulas into a direct observational prediction.
  • The extreme-regime results—remnant mass, zero-temperature endpoint, and near-extremal photon rings—sit outside the controlled domain of the truncated seed (which omits O(M Theta^{3/2}/r^4) terms), so they are indications of a toy model unless a full non-commutative solution reproduces them.
  • The Gamma_Theta rescaling between geometric and conjugate thermodynamics is a generic template: any effective metric whose charge-like parameter is a function of M, not an independent variable, will display a similar split between Hawking quantities and first-law conjugates.

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 constructs an effective rotating metric by applying the Newman-Janis algorithm to the truncated non-commutative Schwarzschild lapse f(r)=1-2M/r+8M sqrt(Theta)/(sqrt(pi) r^2) (Eq. (1)). The resulting Boyer-Lindquist metric (13)-(14) is of Kerr-Newman form with beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta)/sqrt(pi). The authors derive the horizon structure and extremality bound, a constrained fixed-Theta thermodynamics in which the fundamental relation M(S,J,Theta) replaces the naive dM=T_H dS+Omega_H dJ with conjugate quantities tilde T and tilde Omega, several heat capacities, the spherical photon region, equatorial light rings, shadow boundary, prograde/retrograde ISCO equations, and two-sign frequency shifts. The headline physical claims are that increasing Theta shifts photon orbits inward, reduces the shadow, and moves both ISCO branches inward, while the geometric Hawking temperature differs from the constrained thermodynamic conjugate.

Significance. If accepted as an exact property of the stated ansatz, the paper's algebra is sound: I checked the horizon roots (22), temperature (28), light-ring equation (111), photon-region impact parameters (106)-(107), and static ISCO expansion (131)-(132); they are internally consistent and reduce to Kerr when Theta=0. A clear strength is that the observables are derived, not fitted, and the fixed-Theta thermodynamic conjugates follow from a closed-form fundamental relation. The distinction between geometric Hawking quantities and constrained conjugates (Eqs. (54)-(60)) is conceptually useful. The main limitation is that the physical status of the rotating metric as a 'non-commutative black hole' depends on an unverified NJA rotation of a truncated seed, so the significance of the observable predictions is conditional on accepting this effective metric as physically meaningful.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II.A (Eqs. (12)-(14))] The NJA rotation of seed (1) is never checked against field equations. The paper itself states in Sec. II.A that the generated metric is 'a candidate rotating geometry until... verified explicitly,' but no such verification is supplied. Since beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta)/sqrt(pi) is mass-dependent and is not sourced by any explicit field, the rotating metric is not shown to be a non-commutative black hole solution. The abstract's observable claims ('non-commutative correction...') are therefore properties of an ansatz, not established physical predictions. Please either identify a parent action/matter source whose equations admit (13) or reframe the title/abstract/conclusions to describe a Kerr-Newman-like toy model.
  2. [Sec. II.E; Sec. III.B-C; Sec. V.C] The seed (1) is derived in the regime r >> sqrt(Theta), but central extremal results — remnant (30)-(31), the static ISCO endpoint q=1 with x=4, and the strong-deformation crossing of the retrograde ISCO below 6M — are evaluated near r ~ sqrt(Theta). There the neglected O(M Theta^{3/2}/r^4) term in (1) has the same scaling as the retained beta term (both ~ M/sqrt(Theta)), so the small-Theta expansion does not control those regimes. The caveat in Sec. II does not protect quantitative claims. Please use the full mass function or explicitly mark extreme-regime results as illustrative and outside the controlled domain.
  3. [Sec. VI.B-C (Eq. (150), Fig. 5)] The frequency-shift section stops at the local emission formula. The text mentions that a photon must satisfy the global escape condition, but Eq. (150) and Fig. 5 do not implement it. For some (s,sigma) combinations at small r_e the tangential photon may be captured before reaching a distant static observer, so z_{sigma;s} as plotted is not necessarily a distant-observer observable. Please either impose the photon-region/escape criterion or state clearly that the plotted quantity is a local emission redshift for a hypothetically asymptotic observer.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.A, III.C] There are duplicated sentences: in Sec. III.A 'Thus, T_H and Omega_H remain the geometric horizon quantities, Thus, T_H...' and in Sec. III.C 'At such a point C diverges and changes sign, At this point...'. Eq. (72) also contains a repeated 'eC_J,Theta = eC_J,Theta ='. Please clean up these textual glitches.
  2. [Eq. (143)] The convention for the photon-direction sign sigma is stated after Eq. (143), but a reader can initially confuse it with the emitter-orbit sign s introduced in Eq. (121). Consider defining both signs explicitly in a single sentence before Eq. (143).
  3. [Fig. 5] Only the prograde emitter (s=+1) is plotted. Since the paper emphasizes the independence of s and sigma, showing all four (s,sigma) combinations, or at least stating that the other cases are analogous, would make the claim complete.
  4. [References] Reference [41] is formatted inconsistently with the surrounding entries ('Araujo Filho, A. A., et al.'). Please convert to the journal's citation style.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: all observable results are exact consequences of an explicitly stated metric ansatz, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper is self-contained in its derivation chain. Sections II–VI start from the explicit rotating metric ansatz in Eqs. (13)–(14), with Δ = r² − 2Mr + a² + βΘ and βΘ = 8M√Θ/√π, and then compute horizons, surface gravity, constrained first law, photon region, shadow, ISCO, and frequency shifts as exact algebraic and geodesic consequences of that ansatz. No quantity entering the shadow or ISCO is fitted; the deformation parameter is fixed by the seed lapse (1) before any observable is computed, and the Kerr limit is recovered when Θ = 0 as an external check. The constrained thermodynamics follows from the closed-form fundamental relation (56), so the conjugates in Eqs. (58)–(59) are exact partial derivatives of M(S,J,Θ) and are not defined in terms of the geometric quantities they are compared with. The Newman–Janis procedure is standard, and the paper explicitly flags in Section II.A that the generated metric is a candidate rotating geometry pending field-equation verification; this is an unverified physical premise, not a circular reduction. Self-citations to earlier shadow/NJA papers are not load-bearing because the relevant geodesic equations and photon-region formulas are re-derived in the text and the procedure is also anchored in external references. No circular step is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The calculus rests on one imported seed, one unvalidated generation algorithm, and one entropy-law assumption. The only genuine free scale is Theta; M and a are standard black-hole inputs. No entity beyond the effective charge-like term is invented.

free parameters (1)
  • Theta (non-commutative deformation parameter)
    All corrections in the metric and observables scale with Theta (equivalently lambda_Theta = 8 sqrt(Theta/pi)). It is not measured or derived; only bounded by the horizon-existence condition Eq. (23).
axioms (4)
  • ad hoc to paper The truncated lapse f(r) = 1 - 2M/r + 8M sqrt(Theta)/(sqrt(pi) r^2) is adopted as the defining seed metric (Eq. (1)).
    Imported from non-commutative-inspired literature; the O(M Theta^{3/2}/r^4) tail is dropped by fiat, and the paper says results are exact for this truncated model.
  • domain assumption The Newman–Janis algorithm produces the correct rotating geometry for this seed.
    Section II.A cautions that NJA is not a general theorem and that the output is a candidate until verified in the complete field equations; no verification is provided.
  • domain assumption Entropy is given by the Bekenstein–Hawking area law S = A/4.
    Section III.A assumes the gravitational sector is Einstein–Hilbert with non-commutative correction as matter; the validity of this for the NJA ansatz is not established.
  • standard math The standard Carter-separability and geodesic formalism (surface gravity, photon region, ISCO) applies to the effective metric.
    Algebraically the metric is in the Kerr–Newman Carter class; standard formulas are used without proof.
invented entities (1)
  • Mass-dependent charge-like deformation beta_Theta = 8M sqrt(Theta)/sqrt(pi) no independent evidence
    purpose: Makes the rotating metric algebraically identical to Kerr–Newman with Q^2 -> beta_Theta while keeping beta_Theta tied to M and Theta.
    It is not an independent electromagnetic charge and has no external observable handle outside the same metric; all predicted effects (shadow shrink, ISCO shift, heat-capacity critical points) are computed from the metric that contains it.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 17493 in / 23807 out tokens · 219952 ms · 2026-08-01T02:53:35.776949+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the horizon structure, constrained thermodynamics, and geodesic properties of an effective Kerr-like black hole in a non-commutative background. Deformation modifies the radial geometry through a mass-dependent charge-like contribution, while preserving the separability of the geodesic equations. We determine the conditions for horizon existence, identify the extremal zero-temperature configuration, and analyze the stationary-limit surfaces and the ergoregion. Special attention is paid to the thermodynamic interpretation of the model, where the geometric Hawking quantities are distinguished from the conjugate variables associated with the constrained state space at fixed non-commutative deformation parameter. The canonical and grand-canonical heat capacities are derived to characterize their ensemble-dependent local thermal behavior. We also obtain the spherical photon region, equatorial light rings, and shadow boundary, showing that the deformation shifts the characteristic photon orbits inwards and reduces the overall size of the shadow. Timelike circular motion is studied through the innermost stable circular orbit, where non-commutative correction produces an inward shift of both the prograde and retrograde branches. Finally, invariant photon frequency shifts are obtained by treating the emitter's orbital direction and the photon's tangential emission direction as independent physical choices.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27707 by H. Hassanabadi, L. A. L\'opez, L. M. Nieto, N. Bret\'on, S. Zare.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Allowed black hole region in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Left: event horizon (blue) and Cauchy (orange) horizon as functions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Prograde and retrograde equatorial photon radii as functions of the non-commutative parameter. Each curve terminates before the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Shadow boundaries for an equatorial observer. The deformation changes both the overall angular scale and, for larger spin, the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Frequency shifts for a prograde emitter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png] 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

66 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    fixeda”, “fixedJ

    Horizon entropy and its dependence on the deformation parameter Throughout this section, we assume that the gravitational sector is described by the Einstein–Hilbert action and that the non-commutative correction is encoded in an effective matter source. Under this assumption, the horizon entropy obeys the Bekenstein–Hawking area law. Atr=r +, the nonvani...

    2025

  2. [2]

    String theory and noncommutative geometry,

    N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “String theory and noncommutative geometry,” JHEP09(1999) 032

    1999

  3. [3]

    Quantum field theory on noncommutative spaces,

    R. J. Szabo, “Quantum field theory on noncommutative spaces,” Phys. Rept.378(2003) 207–299

    2003

  4. [4]

    Noncommutative field theory,

    M. R. Douglas and N. A. Nekrasov, “Noncommutative field theory,” Rev. Mod. Phys.73(2001) 977–1029

    2001

  5. [5]

    Noncommutative black holes, the final appeal to quantum gravity: a review,

    P. Nicolini, “Noncommutative black holes, the final appeal to quantum gravity: a review,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24(2009) 1229–1308

    2009

  6. [6]

    Feynman path integral on the noncommutative plane,

    A. Smailagic and E. Spallucci, “Feynman path integral on the noncommutative plane,” J. Phys. A36(2003) L467–L471

    2003

  7. [7]

    Thermodynamics and evaporation of the noncommutative black hole,

    Y . S. Myung, Y .-W. Kim, and Y .-J. Park, “Thermodynamics and evaporation of the noncommutative black hole,” JHEP02(2007) 012

    2007

  8. [8]

    Charged rotating noncommutative black holes,

    L. Modesto and P. Nicolini, “Charged rotating noncommutative black holes,” Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 104035

    2010

  9. [9]

    Noncommutative black hole thermodynamics,

    R. Banerjee, B.R. Majhi, and S. Samanta, “Noncommutative black hole thermodynamics,” Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravi- tation, and Cosmology, 77(12) (2008) 124035

    2008

  10. [10]

    Nozari and B

    K. Nozari and B. Fazlpour, arXiv:gr-qc/0608077

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    Thermodynamics of a Bardeen black hole in noncommutative space,

    M. Sharif and W. Javed, “Thermodynamics of a Bardeen black hole in noncommutative space,” Canadian Journal of Physics, 89(10) (2011) 1027-1033

    2011

  12. [12]

    Non-commutativity in Hayward spacetime,

    N. Heidari, A.A. Ara ´ujo Filho and I.P. Lobo, “Non-commutativity in Hayward spacetime,” JCAP,09(2025) 051. 20

    2025

  13. [13]

    A non-commutative Kalb-Ramond black hole,

    A.A. Ara ´ujo Filho, N. Heidari, and I.P. Lobo, “A non-commutative Kalb-Ramond black hole,” JCAP,09(2025) 076

    2025

  14. [14]

    Quasinormal modes in noncommutative Schwarzschild black holes,

    Y . Zhao, Y . Cai, S. Das, G. Lambiase, E.N. Saridakis and E.C. Vagenas, “Quasinormal modes in noncommutative Schwarzschild black holes,” Nuclear Physics B, 1004 (2024) 116545

    2024

  15. [15]

    Absorption, scattering and shadow by a noncommutative black hole with global monopole,

    M.A. Anacleto, F.A. Brito, J.A.V . Campos and E. Passos, “Absorption, scattering and shadow by a noncommutative black hole with global monopole,” Eur. Phys. J. C, 83(4) (2023) 298

    2023

  16. [16]

    Absorption and scattering of a noncommutative black hole,

    M.A. Anacleto, F.A. Brito, J.A.V . Campos and E. Passos, “Absorption and scattering of a noncommutative black hole,” Phys. Lett. B803, 135334 (2020)

    2020

  17. [17]

    Exploring non-commutativity as a perturbation in the Schwarzschild black hole: quasinormal modes, scattering, and shadows,

    N. Heidari, H. Hassanabadi, A.A. Ara ´ujo Filho and J. Kriz, “Exploring non-commutativity as a perturbation in the Schwarzschild black hole: quasinormal modes, scattering, and shadows,” Eur. Phys. J. C, 84(6) (2024) 566

    2024

  18. [18]

    Corrections to Schwarzschild solution in noncommutative gauge theory of gravity,

    M. Chaichian, A. Tureanu and G. Zet, “Corrections to Schwarzschild solution in noncommutative gauge theory of gravity,” Phys. Lett. B 660, 573–578 (2008)

    2008

  19. [19]

    Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an example of algebraically special metrics,

    R. P. Kerr, “Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an example of algebraically special metrics,” Phys. Rev. Lett.11(1963) 237–238

    1963

  20. [20]

    Global structure of the Kerr family of gravitational fields,

    B. Carter, “Global structure of the Kerr family of gravitational fields,” Phys. Rev.174(1968) 1559–1571

    1968

  21. [21]

    Chandrasekhar,The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1983)

    S. Chandrasekhar,The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1983)

    1983

  22. [22]

    Timelike and null geodesics in the Kerr metric,

    J. M. Bardeen, “Timelike and null geodesics in the Kerr metric,” inBlack Holes, eds. C. DeWitt and B. S. DeWitt, Gordon and Breach, New York (1973), pp. 215–239

    1973

  23. [23]

    Spherical photon orbits around a Kerr black hole,

    E. Teo, “Spherical photon orbits around a Kerr black hole,” Gen. Rel. Grav.35(2003) 1909–1926

    2003

  24. [24]

    Rotating black holes: Locally nonrotating frames, energy extraction, and scalar synchrotron radiation,

    J. M. Bardeen, W. H. Press, and S. A. Teukolsky, “Rotating black holes: Locally nonrotating frames, energy extraction, and scalar synchrotron radiation,” Astrophys. J.178, 347–370 (1972)

    1972

  25. [25]

    Equatorial circular motion in Kerr spacetime,

    D. Pugliese, H. Quevedo, and R. Ruffini, “Equatorial circular motion in Kerr spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D84, 044030 (2011)

    2011

  26. [26]

    Astrophysics of black holes,

    I. D. Novikov and K. S. Thorne, “Astrophysics of black holes,” inBlack Holes (Les Astres Occlus), edited by C. DeWitt and B. S. DeWitt (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1973), pp. 343–450

    1973

  27. [27]

    Disk-accretion onto a black hole. I. Time-averaged structure of accretion disk,

    D. N. Page and K. S. Thorne, “Disk-accretion onto a black hole. I. Time-averaged structure of accretion disk,” Astrophys. J.191, 499–506 (1974)

    1974

  28. [28]

    Disk-accretion onto a black hole. II. Evolution of the hole,

    K. S. Thorne, “Disk-accretion onto a black hole. II. Evolution of the hole,” Astrophys. J.191, 507–520 (1974)

    1974

  29. [29]

    The effects of redshifts and focusing on the spectrum of an accretion disk around a Kerr black hole,

    C. T. Cunningham, “The effects of redshifts and focusing on the spectrum of an accretion disk around a Kerr black hole,” Astrophys. J. 202, 788–802 (1975)

    1975

  30. [30]

    Equatorial circular orbits in the Kerr–de Sitter spacetimes,

    Z. Stuchl ´ık and P. Slan´y, “Equatorial circular orbits in the Kerr–de Sitter spacetimes,” Phys. Rev. D69, 064001 (2004)

    2004

  31. [31]

    A metric for rapidly spinning black holes suitable for strong-field tests of the no-hair theorem,

    T. Johannsen and D. Psaltis, “A metric for rapidly spinning black holes suitable for strong-field tests of the no-hair theorem,” Phys. Rev. D83, 124015 (2011)

    2011

  32. [32]

    Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation,

    C. Bambi, “Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation,” Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 025001 (2017)

    2017

  33. [33]

    Circular geodesics of Bardeen and Ay ´on-Beato–Garc´ıa regular black-hole and no-horizon spacetimes,

    Z. Stuchl ´ık and J. Schee, “Circular geodesics of Bardeen and Ay ´on-Beato–Garc´ıa regular black-hole and no-horizon spacetimes,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24, 1550020 (2015)

    2015

  34. [34]

    Noncommutative geometry inspired Schwarzschild black hole,

    P. Nicolini, A. Smailagic, and E. Spallucci, “Noncommutative geometry inspired Schwarzschild black hole,” Phys. Lett. B632, 547–551 (2006)

    2006

  35. [35]

    Noncommutative geometry inspired charged black holes,

    S. Ansoldi, P. Nicolini, A. Smailagic, and E. Spallucci, “Noncommutative geometry inspired charged black holes,” Phys. Lett. B645, 261–266 (2007)

    2007

  36. [36]

    Noncommutative geometry inspired dirty black holes,

    P. Nicolini and E. Spallucci, “Noncommutative geometry inspired dirty black holes,” Class. Quantum Grav.27, 015010 (2010)

    2010

  37. [37]

    ‘Kerrr’ black hole: The Lord of the String,

    A. Smailagic and E. Spallucci, “‘Kerrr’ black hole: The Lord of the String,” Phys. Lett. B688, 82–87 (2010)

    2010

  38. [38]

    Charged rotating noncommutative black holes,

    L. Modesto and P. Nicolini, “Charged rotating noncommutative black holes,” Phys. Rev. D82, 104035 (2010)

    2010

  39. [39]

    Shadow of noncommutative geometry inspired black hole,

    S.-W. Wei, P. Cheng, Y . Zhong, and X.-N. Zhou, “Shadow of noncommutative geometry inspired black hole,” JCAP08, 004 (2015)

    2015

  40. [40]

    Accretion onto a noncommutative geometry inspired black hole,

    R. Kumar and S. G. Ghosh, “Accretion onto a noncommutative geometry inspired black hole,” Eur. Phys. J. C77, 577 (2017)

    2017

  41. [41]

    Absorption and scattering of a noncommutative black hole,

    M. A. Anacleto, F. A. Brito, J. A. V . Campos, and E. Passos, “Absorption and scattering of a noncommutative black hole,” Phys. Lett. B 803(2020) 135334

    2020

  42. [42]

    A., et al

    Ara ´ujo Filho, A. A., et al. ”Effects of non-commutative geometry on black hole properties.” Physics of the Dark Universe 46 (2024): 101630

    2024

  43. [43]

    S Capozziello, S Zare, DF Mota, and H Hassanabadi, JCAP 05 (2023) 027

    2023

  44. [44]

    Capozziello, S

    S. Capozziello, S. Zare, L. M. Nieto, and H. Hassanabadi, Phys. Dark Universe 50 (2025) 102065

    2025

  45. [45]

    Note on the Kerr spinning-particle metric,

    E. T. Newman and A. I. Janis, “Note on the Kerr spinning-particle metric,” J. Math. Phys.6, 915–917 (1965). doi:10.1063/1.1704350

    doi:10.1063/1.1704350 1965

  46. [46]

    Metric of a rotating, charged mass,

    E. T. Newman, E. Couch, K. Chinnapared, A. Exton, A. Prakash, and R. Torrence, “Metric of a rotating, charged mass,” J. Math. Phys. 6, 918–919 (1965). doi:10.1063/1.1704351

    doi:10.1063/1.1704351 1965

  47. [47]

    Uniqueness of the Newman–Janis algorithm in generating the Kerr–Newman metric,

    S. P. Drake and P. Szekeres, “Uniqueness of the Newman–Janis algorithm in generating the Kerr–Newman metric,” Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 32, 445–458 (2000). doi:10.1023/A:1001920232180

    doi:10.1023/a:1001920232180 2000

  48. [48]

    Rotating regular black holes,

    C. Bambi and L. Modesto, “Rotating regular black holes,” Phys. Lett. B721, 329–334 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.03.025

    doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.03.025 2013

  49. [49]

    Generating rotating regular black hole solutions without complexification,

    M. Azreg-A ¨ınou, “Generating rotating regular black hole solutions without complexification,” Phys. Rev. D90, 064041 (2014). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.064041

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.064041 2014

  50. [50]

    From static to rotating to conformal static solutions: Rotating imperfect fluid wormholes with(out) electric or magnetic field,

    M. Azreg-A¨ınou, “From static to rotating to conformal static solutions: Rotating imperfect fluid wormholes with(out) electric or magnetic field,” Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2865 (2014). doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2865-8

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2865-8 2014

  51. [51]

    Janis–Newman algorithm: Generating rotating and NUT charged black holes,

    H. Erbin, “Janis–Newman algorithm: Generating rotating and NUT charged black holes,” Universe3, 19 (2017). doi:10.3390/universe3010019

    work page doi:10.3390/universe3010019 2017

  52. [52]

    Black hole shadow in a general rotating spacetime obtained through the Newman–Janis algorithm,

    R. Shaikh, “Black hole shadow in a general rotating spacetime obtained through the Newman–Janis algorithm,” Phys. Rev. D100, 024028 (2019). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024028

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.024028 2019

  53. [53]

    Spinning black holes with a separable Hamilton–Jacobi equation from a modified Newman–Janis algorithm,

    H. C. D. Lima Junior, L. C. B. Crispino, P. V . P. Cunha, and C. A. R. Herdeiro, “Spinning black holes with a separable Hamilton–Jacobi equation from a modified Newman–Janis algorithm,” Eur. Phys. J. C80, 1036 (2020). doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08572-w. 21

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08572-w 2020

  54. [54]

    Applicability of the Newman–Janis algorithm to black hole solutions of modified gravity theories,

    D. Hansen and N. Yunes, “Applicability of the Newman–Janis algorithm to black hole solutions of modified gravity theories,” Phys. Rev. D88, 104020 (2013). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.104020

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.104020 2013

  55. [55]

    Calculating black hole shadows: review of analytical studies,

    V . Perlick, and O. Y . Tsupko, “Calculating black hole shadows: review of analytical studies,” Phys. Rept.947(2022) 1–39

    2022

  56. [56]

    S. Zare, L. M. Nieto, F. Hosseinifar, X.-H. Feng, and H. Hassanabadi, Phys. Lett. B 859 (2024) 139125

    2024

  57. [57]

    S. Zare, L. M. Nieto, X.-H. Feng, S.-H. Dong, and H. Hassanabadi, JCAP 08 (2024) 041

    2024

  58. [58]

    S. Zare, T. Zhu, L. M. Nieto, S. Lu, and H. Hassanabadi, JCAP 01 (2026) 059

    2026

  59. [59]

    S. Zare, F. Hosseinifar, L. M. Nieto, D. J. Gogoi, K. Boshkayev, A. Urazalina, and H. Hassanabadi, Eur. Phys. J. C 86 (2026) 160

    2026

  60. [60]

    Hassanabadi, A

    H. Hassanabadi, A. Guvendi, F. Kafikang, T. Sathiyaraj, and S. Zare, arXiv:2512.18512

    arXiv

  61. [61]

    Hosseinifar, S

    F. Hosseinifar, S. Mamedov, K. Boshkayev, S. Zare, F. Studniˇcka, and H. Hassanabadi, arXiv:2605.20239

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Hassanabadi, M

    H. Hassanabadi, M. R. R. Good, S. Zare, O. Luongo and F. Kafikang, arXiv:2607.11979

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    Kerr black hole parameters in terms of the redshift/blueshift of photons emitted by geodesic particles,

    A. Herrera-Aguilar and U. Nucamendi, “Kerr black hole parameters in terms of the redshift/blueshift of photons emitted by geodesic particles,” Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 045024

    2015

  64. [64]

    Thermodynamics of black holes,

    P. C. W. Davies, “Thermodynamics of black holes,” Rept. Prog. Phys.41(1978) 1313–1355

    1978

  65. [65]

    Noncommutative black hole thermodynamics,

    R. Banerjee, B. R. Majhi, and S. Samanta, “Noncommutative black hole thermodynamics,” Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 124035

    2008

  66. [66]

    Towards noncommutative quantum black holes,

    J. C. L ´opez-Dom´ınguez, O. Obreg ´on, M. Sabido, and C. Ram ´ırez, “Towards noncommutative quantum black holes,” Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 084024

    2006