Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 111 references

A causal magnetic black hole with finite self-energy

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper builds a magnetically charged nonlinear-electrodynamics black hole with finite self-energy, a single horizon, and no inner Cauchy horizon, while keeping the center singular.

desk verdict Solid analytic construction of a magnetic NLED black hole; the one-horizon theorem holds, but the exponent-restriction claim is stronger than what is proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06639 v1 pith:ETGSIAFS submitted 2026-08-06 gr-qc astro-ph.HEhep-thmath-phmath.MP

Mohsen Fathi , Ariel Guzmán , J. R. Villanueva This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.HEhep-thmath-phmath.MP
keywords nonlinearelectrodynamicsmagneticblackholefiniteself-energycausalstructureblack-holethermodynamicsphotonpropagationshadowthinaccretiondisk
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper constructs a family of nonlinear-electrodynamics black holes that are magnetically charged, have finite electromagnetic self-energy, and keep a singular center rather than imposing a regular core. The authors show that a positive mixture of power-law Lagrangians automatically satisfies the Maxwell weak-field limit, causality of the photon cone, and the standard energy conditions, provided the exponent lies in the interval $1/4<\gamma\le 1/2$. For the minimal two-kernel representative $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)=(1/3,1/2)$, they obtain an exact static solution in incomplete $\beta$ functions and prove that, for nonnegative Schwarzschild mass parameter $M_0$, the metric function is strictly increasing, giving at most one horizon and no inner Cauchy horizon. The paper then derives the maximal extension, thermodynamics, photon propagation with ordinary and extraordinary branches, shadow sizes, and thin-disk images. A sympathetic reader would care because it offers a concrete, fully analytic example in which magnetic charge does not force a Reissner–Nordström-like inner structure, while the exterior remains causally well behaved and satisfies known sufficient stability conditions.

What carries the argument

The central object is the positive mixture of power kernels $\mathcal{L}_\mu(F)=\int \mathcal{L}_{\beta,\gamma}(F)\,d\mu(\beta,\gamma)$ with $\mathcal{L}_{\beta,\gamma}(F)=((1+\beta F)^{1-\gamma}-1)/[\beta(1-\gamma)]$, restricted to support $1/4<\gamma\le 1/2$. Positivity of the measure makes $\mathcal{L}_\mu$ a Bernstein function of $F$, so the inequalities $\mathcal{L}>0$, $\mathcal{L}_F>0$, $\Phi=\mathcal{L}_F+2F\mathcal{L}_{FF}>0$, and $0<\kappa_{\rm em}=\Phi/\mathcal{L}_F\le 1$ hold term by term; these encode the energy conditions and the subluminal extraordinary photon cone. The argument then runs through the mass equation $m'(r)=r^2\mathcal{L}(Q_m^2/2r^4)$, whose integral for the two-kernel model is evaluated exactly in lower incomplete $\beta$ functions, and through the identity $f'(r)=2D(r)/r^2$ with $D'(r)=2r^2(2F\mathcal{L}_F-\mathcal{L})>0$, which yields the strict monotonicity of $f$ and the one-horizon theorem. The same machinery produces the effective photon metrics for the ordinary and extraordinary branches and the thermodynamic first law with variable couplings.

What would settle it

Compute the coupled gravitational–electromagnetic quasinormal spectrum for the two-kernel solution (for example at the Table I parameter sets) and look for any mode with positive imaginary part; an unstable mode would show that the sufficient conditions used for the exterior do not cover this singular-center spacetime. Alternatively, scan the $M_0\ge 0$ parameter space numerically for any case with $f'(r)\le 0$ at some $r>0$ or with two positive roots of $f$, which would contradict Lemma 1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that requiring finite magnetic self-energy, a causal and subluminal electromagnetic cone, the standard energy conditions, and a Maxwell weak-field limit singles out the exponent window $1/4<\gamma\le 1/2$ for concave power kernels, and that the minimal positive mixture with $\gamma_1=1/3$, $\gamma_2=1/2$ yields an exact magnetic black hole solution with metric function $f(r)=1-2m(r)/r$ expressed through incomplete $\beta$ functions. The load-bearing result (Lemma 1) states that for $Q_m\neq 0$ and $M_0\ge 0$, $f'(r)>0$ for all $r>0$, so $f$ has at most one positive root. Hence the black-hole branch has exactly one event horizon, no inner Cauchy horizon, and no finite-radius extremal horizon; the center remains a curvature singularity, with spacelike, timelike, or null singularity depending on whether the solution is on the black-hole, horizonless, or critical branch. The same construction gives positive Hawking temperature, negative fixed-charge heat capacity for representative families, and a birefringent optical sector in which the extraordinary photon branch shifts the shadow critical curve outward, partly compensating the shadow reduction caused by magnetic charge.

Load-bearing premise

The stability part of the central claim rests on applying the quoted sufficient stability conditions to a spacetime whose center is singular; if those conditions do not apply to a non-regular center with unusual boundary behavior, the exterior-stability statement has no independent support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Within the $M_0\ge 0$ sector, every solution in this family has at most one horizon: no inner Cauchy horizon and no finite-radius extremal horizon, so the causal structure is strictly one-horizon and the maximal extension has spacelike singular boundaries.
  • The electromagnetic sector is birefringent: photons split into ordinary and extraordinary branches, and for strong nonlinear coupling the extraordinary shadow diameter can be several percent larger than the ordinary one, partially offsetting the magnetic-charge reduction.
  • The representative black-hole families have positive temperature at every finite horizon radius and negative fixed-charge heat capacity, so they are locally unstable in the asymptotically flat canonical ensemble.
  • Finite electromagnetic self-energy fixes the lower bound $\gamma>1/4$ and causal propagation fixes the upper bound $\gamma\le 1/2$; any positive mixture of such kernels automatically satisfies the weak, dominant, and strong energy conditions and a causal photon cone.
  • The weak-field expansion recovers the Reissner–Nordström form $f(r)=1-2M/r+Q_m^2/r^2+\dots$, so the model is a controlled deformation of the charged black hole rather than a regularized alternative.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the proof of Lemma 1 uses only $\mathcal{L}>0$, $\mathcal{L}_F>0$, and $2F\mathcal{L}_F-\mathcal{L}>0$, the one-horizon conclusion may hold for any NLED Lagrangian obeying those inequalities, not only for the explicit power-mixture family; this would extend the no-Cauchy-horizon result to a broader class of theories.
  • Editorial inference: the illustrative shadow scan suggests a testable separation—if EHT-like critical-curve measurements are compared at fixed mass, a preference for the extraordinary branch would imply a larger magnetic charge than an ordinary-branch analysis would infer.
  • Editorial inference: a rotating counterpart, if constructed, would likely show polarization-dependent shadow edges because the extraordinary branch changes the effective angular metric; searching for such an edge could distinguish this model from single-metric NLED families.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an NLED model for a static, spherically symmetric magnetic black hole. The Lagrangian is a positive normalized mixture of power kernels; finite magnetic self-energy selects gamma > 1/4 and positivity of the characteristic factor Phi selects (the authors claim) gamma <= 1/2. For the two-kernel representative with gamma_1 = 1/3 and gamma_2 = 1/2, the mass function is obtained exactly in terms of incomplete beta functions. The central theorem (Lemma 1) proves f'(r) > 0 for Q_m != 0 and M_0 >= 0, hence at most one horizon, no inner Cauchy horizon, and no finite-radius extremal horizon; for the one-horizon branches the maximal extension is constructed in Kruskal and Penrose coordinates. The paper then derives thermodynamic quantities, ordinary and extraordinary photon metrics, shadow radii, an illustrative EHT band, and ISCO-truncated thin-disk images. The authors are transparent that the EHT comparison is illustrative and that stability is based on cited sufficient conditions.

Significance. The paper's main value is a rare exact NLED magnetic black hole that combines finite electromagnetic self-energy, causal photon propagation, standard energy conditions, and a strict one-horizon causal structure without imposing a regular center. Lemma 1 is sound, and its one-line proof is verifiable; the incomplete-beta mass function is a concrete new result. The optical analysis correctly treats the spacetime metric and the extraordinary effective metric as separate, and it gives a useful qualitative prediction that the extraordinary branch partially compensates the shadow reduction from magnetic charge. The manuscript ships code and clearly labels the EHT comparison as illustrative rather than as a fit. If the typographical inconsistencies in the boundary-branch formulas and the overstatement of the exponent restriction are corrected, the paper will be a solid contribution.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III, Eqs. (14)-(17); abstract; Section XIII] The paper states that causal magnetic propagation 'requires' gamma <= 1/2 and that the interval 1/4 < gamma <= 1/2 follows from finiteness plus causality. What Eq. (17) actually proves is a sufficient condition: every kernel with gamma <= 1/2 contributes a positive term to Phi, so a positive mixture of such kernels has Phi > 0. It does not prove necessity, because a kernel with gamma > 1/2 contributes a negative term that decays as F^{-gamma} at large F, while a kernel with gamma < 1/2 contributes a positive term that decays more slowly. For example, a measure 0.9 delta(gamma=0.4) + 0.1 delta(gamma=0.6) with equal beta gives Phi(0)=1 and positive Phi on a logarithmic grid at large F. The exact two-kernel model is unaffected because it uses only admissible kernels, but the abstract and Section XIII should be rephrased to say that the interval is a constructive/sufficient restriction on the chosen family, or a proof of necessity should be supplied.
  2. [Section VI, Eq. (47); Section VII E, Eq. (70)] The pure-boundary-branch formulas are mutually inconsistent and appear to contain typos. From Eq. (22) with xi=1 and F=Q_m^2/(2r^4), one finds L ~ sqrt(2)|Q_m|/(sqrt(sigma beta) r^2) as r -> 0, hence m' ~ sqrt(2)|Q_m|/sqrt(sigma beta) and f(0+) = 1 - 2 sqrt(2) lambda / sqrt(sigma). Eq. (47) instead writes f(0+) = 1 - 2/(sqrt(2) lambda sqrt(sigma)), and Eq. (70) writes f(0+) = 1 - (2/sqrt(2)) lambda sqrt(sigma). Neither expression vanishes at the stated critical value lambda_c = sqrt(sigma)/(2 sqrt(2)) except for special choices of sigma, although that vanishing is precisely what defines the threshold in Eq. (48). These formulas should be corrected, since the horizonless condition and the null-singularity threshold of the boundary branch depend on them.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section V, Eq. (41)] The stability claim in Section V is stronger than what is verified: the paper checks the algebraic conditions of Eq. (11) but does not verify the full hypotheses of the theorems in Refs. [57, 61], such as regularity assumptions that may be needed for the perturbation analysis. Since the authors already state in Section XIII that a direct coupled perturbation spectrum is needed, please add a short caveat directly after Eq. (41) and adjust the wording 'Thus the sufficient stability conditions... hold' to 'the algebraic sufficient conditions... are satisfied'.
  2. [Section III, Eq. (19)] The weak-field expansion is written as L(F) = F - (F^2/2) integral gamma beta dmu + O(F^3). It would be helpful to state explicitly that the linear coefficient is fixed by the normalization of the measure, since this is the reason the Maxwell weak-field limit holds for every positive mixture.
  3. [Section VI, Eq. (46)] The quantity lambda = |Q_m| sqrt(beta) has unusual dimensions in the conventions G=c=1; please state the chosen dimensions of Q_m and beta, or normalize lambda by a reference scale, so the boundary-branch conditions in Eqs. (47)-(48) are dimensionally transparent.
  4. [Figures 3-5] The text labels the three examples A_c, B_c, and C_c, while the figures use the shorter labels A, B, and C. Please add a sentence to each caption identifying the correspondence, or use the same labels in the text and figures.
  5. [Section XII, Eqs. (99)-(102)] The residual maps and the quantity Delta b_peak are described with care, but the radial bin-width limitation of Delta b_peak is mentioned only in the text. Please add one sentence in the caption of Fig. 12 noting that Delta b_peak is bin-limited and that Table II provides the continuous critical-impact-parameter measure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the construction is self-contained and the central claims do not reduce to fitted inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The NLED model is defined by the kernel in Eq. (12) and the positive mixture in Eq. (13); the derivatives (15)-(17) are computed directly, the energy conditions follow from Eqs. (37)-(39), and the exterior stability check uses the externally stated sufficient conditions in Eq. (11), verified through Eq. (41). The central one-horizon theorem (Lemma 1) is proved from the monotonicity of D(r), which uses only the field equations and the previously established positivity of 2F L_F - L. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the benchmark models in Table I are chosen by hand, and the EHT band in Eq. (92) is explicitly described as illustrative and not a likelihood analysis. The paper's only self-citation, Ref. [69], appears as contextual contrast and as an example of a direct perturbation calculation that the authors explicitly do not claim to perform; it is not load-bearing for the geometry, thermodynamics, or optical results. The abstract's statement that a positive mixture 'restricts' the exponent to 1/4 < gamma <= 1/2 is an overstatement, since Eq. (17) establishes a sufficient condition for each kernel rather than a necessary condition for arbitrary positive mixtures; however, this is a logical precision issue, not a circular reduction, and it does not affect the two-kernel model, whose inequalities are checked directly. The repeated caveats that the stability analysis relies on sufficient criteria and does not replace a direct coupled perturbation spectrum are limitations, not circular steps.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All quantitative results are derivable within the model once the Lagrangian and parameters are fixed. The free parameters are theory choices rather than fits; they determine the benchmark predictions. The axioms are standard GR/NLED ingredients and cited theorems: Einstein equations for L(F), the magnetic monopole ansatz, the effective photon metric, the sufficient stability conditions, and the first law with variable couplings. The model introduces no new particles or forces.

free parameters (7)
  • gamma_1 = 1/3
    Interior exponent of the two-kernel Lagrangian; chosen as a simple rational representative inside the allowed interval.
  • gamma_2 = 1/2
    Boundary exponent chosen to saturate the causal upper bound; this choice is not unique.
  • beta = Varies by example: 1, 9, and 16 in optical models; 1 in causal examples.
    Kernel scale with dimension length squared; chosen by hand, not determined by data.
  • sigma = 1, 2, or 4 in the examples.
    Relative scale of the second kernel; chosen by hand.
  • xi = 0.25, 0.50, or 1.00 in the examples.
    Mixture weight between the two kernels; chosen by hand.
  • Q_m = Q_m/M = 0.35, 0.60, and 0.80 for optical benchmarks; Q_m = 1 or 0.8 in causal examples.
    Magnetic charge of the solution; chosen relative to the ADM mass.
  • M_0 = 0 in causal examples; 0.445M, 0.420M, and 0.474M in optical benchmarks.
    Independent Schwarzschild mass parameter; restricted to M0 >= 0 for the one-horizon theorem.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The action is S = (1/16*pi) * integral(d^4x sqrt(-g)(R - 4 L(F))) with standard Einstein-NLED field equations.
    Adopted at the outset in Sec. II, Eqs. (2)-(5); the paper does not derive NLED from a more fundamental theory.
  • domain assumption The spacetime is static and spherically symmetric with line element (6), and the only electromagnetic field is a magnetic monopole with F = Q_m^2/(2 r^4), where the Bianchi identity fixes Q_m.
    This ansatz is the basis for the mass equation m' = r^2 L and for the optical effective metric; it restricts all claims to one-invariant magnetic configurations.
  • domain assumption The extraordinary photon branch is described by the effective metric (9) and the subluminality factor kappa_em = Phi/L_F, following Novello et al. and Schellstede et al.
    The two-branch shadow comparison depends on this geometric-optics description.
  • domain assumption The linear-stability conditions L > 0, L_F > 0, and 0 < f*kappa_em < 3 outside the horizon are sufficient for stability of a magnetic black hole, according to Moreno-Sarbach and Nomura-Yoshida-Soda.
    The paper checks these inequalities but does not recompute or verify the coupled gravitational-electromagnetic perturbation spectrum directly.
  • domain assumption Black hole thermodynamics uses the standard area law S = pi*r_+^2, the Hawking temperature from surface gravity, and a first law extended to variable NLED couplings.
    Used in Sec. VIII to derive heat capacity and the Smarr relation; these are standard but imported from prior literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A causal magnetic black hole with finite self-energy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ETGSIAFS

@misc{pith2026260806639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A causal magnetic black hole with finite self-energy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ETGSIAFS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06639}
}
abstract

We construct a nonlinear electrodynamics (NLED) model for a static magnetic black hole. Rather than imposing a regular center, we require a Maxwell weak-field limit, finite magnetic self-energy, a positive and subluminal electromagnetic cone, the standard energy conditions, and a static exterior that satisfies known sufficient stability criteria. A positive mixture of power kernels restricts the exponent to $1/4<\gamma\leq1/2$. For the minimal two-kernel model, with $\gamma_1=1/3$ and $\gamma_2=1/2$, the field equations admit an exact solution in terms of incomplete beta functions. For the branches with nonnegative Schwarzschild mass parameter $M_0$, the metric function is strictly increasing, so there is at most one positive-radius horizon and no inner Cauchy horizon. We construct the maximal extension and show that the black-hole, horizonless, and critical branches have spacelike, timelike, and null singularities, respectively. The representative black-hole families have positive temperature and negative fixed-charge heat capacity. Electromagnetic waves split into ordinary and extraordinary optical branches. We calculate their photon spheres, shadow radii, instability rates, and illustrative Event Horizon Telescope size bands. We also construct ISCO-truncated thin-disk images. The full images remain close, but jointly normalized residual maps and radial profiles reveal a coherent branch-dependent shift near the lensed inner edge and the critical region. The extraordinary branch moves the critical curve outward and partly compensates the shadow reduction caused by magnetic charge.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06639 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Constitutive functions of the two-kernel model for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Examples of the static solution in dimensionless variables. The first two panels show the metric function for the mixed and boundary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Kruskal–Szekeres extensions for the causal examples [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Standard Carter–Penrose diagrams for the same three causal examples. The full null and timelike infinities are included. Green dotted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Regular compact Carter–Penrose representations. The causal structure is the same as in Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Thermodynamic functions for three fixed-coupling families with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Photon and circular-orbit observables. The upper-left panel shows the ordinary and extraordinary photon potentials for model C. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Simple shadow-size scan for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Equatorial photon trajectories for the diagnostic sets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. ISCO-truncated thin-disk images for the ordinary branch. Columns show models A–C, and rows show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Residual maps between the extraordinary and ordinary raw images, defined by Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Azimuthally averaged radial intensity profiles for the ordinary and extraordinary branches. Columns show models A–C and rows show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_12.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

111 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Born, Modified field equations with a finite radius of the electron, Nature132, 282 (1933)

    M. Born, Modified field equations with a finite radius of the electron, Nature132, 282 (1933)

    1933

  2. [2]

    1+ 𝑏4 𝑟4 1−𝛾 −1 # d𝑟= 𝑏3(1−𝛾) 3 𝐵 1 4,𝛾− 1 4 .(32) We prove this result in Appendix A. The two-kernel self-energy is 𝐸em=(𝑄2 𝑚/2)3/4 3𝛽1/4

    (14) The positive measure makesL𝜇 a Bernstein function ofF[85] and preserves the physical inequalities derived below. Direct differentiation gives LF = ∫ (1+𝛽F) −𝛾 d𝜇>0,(15) LFF =− ∫ 𝛾𝛽(1+𝛽F) −𝛾−1 d𝜇<0,(16) Φ= ∫ 1+(1−2𝛾)𝛽F (1+𝛽F) 𝛾+1 d𝜇>0.(17) SinceLFF <0, we also have0<Φ≤L F and therefore 0<𝜅 em≤1.(18) These inequalities hold at every magnetic field stre...

    2000

  3. [3]

    Born and L

    M. Born and L. Infeld, Foundations of the new field theory, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A144, 425 (1934)

    1934

  4. [4]

    Heisenberg and H

    W. Heisenberg and H. Euler, Folgerungen aus der Diracschen theorie des positrons, Z. Phys.98, 714 (1936)

    1936

  5. [5]

    Plebański,Lectures on Non-Linear Electrodynamics(NORDITA, Copenhagen, 1970)

    J. Plebański,Lectures on Non-Linear Electrodynamics(NORDITA, Copenhagen, 1970)

    1970

  6. [6]

    Białynicki-Birula and Z

    I. Białynicki-Birula and Z. Białynicka-Birula, Nonlinear effects in quantum electrodynamics, inQuantum Electrodynamics, edited by T. Kinoshita (World Scientific, 1990) pp. 226–310

    1990

  7. [7]

    G. W. Gibbons and D. A. Rasheed, Electric-magnetic duality rotations in nonlinear electrodynamics, Nucl. Phys. B454, 185 (1995), hep-th/9506035

    arXiv 1995

  8. [8]

    G. W. Gibbons and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Born–Infeld theory and stringy causality, Phys. Rev. D63, 064006 (2001), hep-th/0008052

    arXiv 2001

Show all 111 references
  1. [9]

    Bandos, K

    I. Bandos, K. Lechner, D. Sorokin, and P. K. Townsend, A non-linear duality-invariant conformal extension of Maxwell’s equations, Phys. Rev. D102, 121703 (2020), 2007.09092

    2020 arXiv

  2. [10]

    D. P. Sorokin, Introductory notes on non-linear electrodynamics and its applications, Fortschr. Phys.70, 2200092 (2022), 2112.12118

    2022 arXiv

  3. [11]

    J. G. Russo and P. K. Townsend, Causality and energy conditions in nonlinear electrodynamics, J. High Energy Phys.06(2024), 191, 2404.09994

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Boillat, Nonlinear electrodynamics: Lagrangians and equations of motion, J

    G. Boillat, Nonlinear electrodynamics: Lagrangians and equations of motion, J. Math. Phys.11, 941 (1970)

    1970

  5. [13]

    Novello, V

    M. Novello, V. A. De Lorenci, J. M. Salim, and R. Klippert, Geometrical aspects of light propagation in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D61, 045001 (2000), gr-qc/9911085

    2000 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Y. N. Obukhov and G. F. Rubilar, Fresnel analysis of wave propagation in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D66, 024042 (2002), gr-qc/0204028

    2002 arXiv

  7. [15]

    A. E. Shabad and V. V. Usov, Effective Lagrangian in nonlinear electrodynamics and its properties of causality and unitarity, Phys. Rev. D 83, 105006 (2011), 1101.2343

    2011 arXiv

  8. [16]

    G. O. Schellstede, V. Perlick, and C. Lämmerzahl, On causality in nonlinear vacuum electrodynamics of the Plebański class, Ann. Phys. (Berlin)528, 738 (2016), 1604.02545

    2016 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Bretón, Born–Infeld black hole in the isolated horizon framework, Phys

    N. Bretón, Born–Infeld black hole in the isolated horizon framework, Phys. Rev. D67, 124004 (2003), hep-th/0301254. 22

    2003 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Fernando and D

    S. Fernando and D. Krug, Charged black hole solutions in Einstein–Born–Infeld gravity with a cosmological constant, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.35, 129 (2003), hep-th/0306120

    2003 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Cai, D.-W

    R.-G. Cai, D.-W. Pang, and A. Wang, Born–Infeld black holes in (A)dS spaces, Phys. Rev. D70, 124034 (2004), hep-th/0410158

    2004 arXiv

  12. [20]

    T. K. Dey, Born–Infeld black holes in the presence of a cosmological constant, Phys. Lett. B595, 484 (2004), hep-th/0406169

    2004 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Fernando, Thermodynamics of Born–Infeld–anti-de Sitter black holes in the grand canonical ensemble, Phys

    S. Fernando, Thermodynamics of Born–Infeld–anti-de Sitter black holes in the grand canonical ensemble, Phys. Rev. D74, 104032 (2006), hep-th/0608040

    2006 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Ayón-Beato and A

    E. Ayón-Beato and A. García, Regular black hole in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 5056 (1998), gr-qc/9911046

    1998 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Ayón-Beato and A

    E. Ayón-Beato and A. García, New regular black hole solution from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B464, 25 (1999), hep-th/9911174

    1999 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ayón-Beato and A

    E. Ayón-Beato and A. García, The Bardeen model as a nonlinear magnetic monopole, Phys. Lett. B493, 149 (2000), gr-qc/0009077

    2000 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ayón-Beato and A

    E. Ayón-Beato and A. García, Four-parametric regular black hole solution, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.37, 635 (2005), hep-th/0403229

    2005 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Cataldo and A

    M. Cataldo and A. García, Regular (2+1)-dimensional black holes within nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D61, 084003 (2000)

    2000

  19. [27]

    Dymnikova, Regular electrically charged vacuum structures with de Sitter centre in nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to general relativity, Class

    I. Dymnikova, Regular electrically charged vacuum structures with de Sitter centre in nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to general relativity, Class. Quantum Grav.21, 4417 (2004), gr-qc/0407072

    2004 arXiv

  20. [28]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Regular magnetic black holes and monopoles from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D63, 044005 (2001), gr-qc/0006014

    2001 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ma, Magnetically charged regular black hole in a model of nonlinear electrodynamics, Ann

    M.-S. Ma, Magnetically charged regular black hole in a model of nonlinear electrodynamics, Ann. Phys.362, 529 (2015), 1509.05580

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Fan and X

    Z.-Y. Fan and X. Wang, Construction of regular black holes in general relativity, Phys. Rev. D94, 124027 (2016), 1610.02636

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    S. I. Kruglov, Born–Infeld-type electrodynamics and magnetic black holes, Ann. Phys.383, 550 (2017), 1707.04495

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    construction of regular black holes in general relativity

    K. A. Bronnikov, Comment on “construction of regular black holes in general relativity”, Phys. Rev. D96, 128501 (2017), 1712.04342

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    M. E. Rodrigues, M. V. d. S. Silva, and A. S. de Siqueira, Regular multihorizon black holes in general relativity, Phys. Rev. D102, 084038 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Regular black holes as an alternative to black bounce, Phys. Rev. D110, 024021 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Alencar, K

    G. Alencar, K. A. Bronnikov, M. E. Rodrigues, D. Sáez-Chillón Gómez, and M. V. d. S. Silva, On black bounce space-times in non-linear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 745 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Li and H

    Z.-C. Li and H. Lü, Regular electric black holes from Einstein–Maxwell–scalar gravity, Phys. Rev. D110, 104046 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Contreras, M

    E. Contreras, M. Carrasco-Hidalgo, P. Bargueño, and A. G. Suvorov, General framework for the spontaneous scalarization of regular black holes, Phys. Rev. D112, 124053 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Bokulić, E

    A. Bokulić, E. Franzin, T. Jurić, and I. Smolić, Lagrangian reverse engineering for regular black holes, Phys. Lett. B853, 138750 (2024), 2311.17151

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Bokulić, T

    A. Bokulić, T. Jurić, and I. Smolić, Conundrum of regular black holes with nonlinear electromagnetic fields, Phys. Rev. D113, 024044 (2026), 2510.23711

    2026

  32. [40]

    Tsuda, R

    R. Tsuda, R. Suzuki, and S. Tomizawa, Existence conditions of nonsingular dyonic black holes in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Scr. 101, 105005 (2026), 2308.02146

    2026

  33. [41]

    A. A. García-Díaz, AdS–dS stationary rotating black hole exact solution within Einstein–nonlinear electrodynamics, Ann. Phys.441, 168880 (2022), 2201.10682

    2022 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Ayón-Beato, Unveiling the electrodynamics of the first nonlinearly charged rotating black hole, Ann

    E. Ayón-Beato, Unveiling the electrodynamics of the first nonlinearly charged rotating black hole, Ann. Phys.469, 169771 (2024), 2203.12809

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Ayón-Beato, D

    E. Ayón-Beato, D. Flores-Alfonso, and M. Hassaine, Nonlinearly charging the conformally dressed black holes preserving duality and conformal invariance, Phys. Rev. D110, 064027 (2024), 2404.08753

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Y.Verbin,B.Puliçe,A.Övgün,andH.Huang,Newblackholesolutionsofsecondandfirstorderformulationsofnonlinearelectrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D111, 084061 (2025), 2412.20989

    2025 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Bokulić and C

    A. Bokulić and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Exact multiblack hole spacetimes in Einstein–ModMax theory, Phys. Rev. D111, 064046 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    Barrientos, A

    J. Barrientos, A. Cisterna, M. Hassaïne, and K. Pallikaris, Electromagnetized black holes and swirling backgrounds in nonlinear electrodynamics: The ModMax case, Phys. Lett. B860, 139214 (2025), 2409.12336

    2025 arXiv

  39. [47]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Regular black holes sourced by nonlinear electrodynamics, inRegular Black Holes: Towards a New Paradigm of Gravitational Collapse, Springer Series in Astrophysics and Cosmology, edited by C. Bambi (Springer, Singapore, 2023) pp. 37–67, 2211.00743

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    De Felice and S

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Nonsingular black holes and spherically symmetric objects in nonlinear electrodynamics with a scalar field, Phys. Rev. D111, 064051 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    De Felice and S

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Instability of nonsingular black holes in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 081401 (2025), 2410.00314

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    J. G. Russo and P. K. Townsend, Black holes and causal nonlinear electrodynamics, arXiv e-prints (2026), 2601.07789

    2026 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Y. Abe, M. Médevielle, T. Noumi, and K. Yoshimura, Causality constraints on black hole thermodynamics in nonlinear electrodynamics, J. High Energy Phys.06(2026), 007, 2505.23483

    2026 arXiv

  44. [52]

    C.-Y. Chen, A. De Felice, S. Tsujikawa, and T. Sano, Vector Horndeski black holes in nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D113, 024027 (2026)

    2026

  45. [53]

    T. Hale, R. A. Hennigar, and D. Kubizňák, Excising Cauchy horizons with nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D113, L061502 (2026), 2506.20802

    2026 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Y.-S. An, L. Li, and F.-G. Yang, No Cauchy horizon theorem for nonlinear electrodynamics black holes with charged scalar hairs, Phys. Rev. D104, 024040 (2021), 2106.01069

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Lee and Y

    W. Lee and Y. S. Myung, Anisotropic matter and nonlinear electromagnetics black holes, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 525 (2026). 23

    2026

  48. [56]

    Pinedo Soto and V

    J. Pinedo Soto and V. P. Frolov, Charged black holes in quasitopological gravity coupled to Born–Infeld nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D113, 124044 (2026)

    2026

  49. [57]

    Smarr, Mass formula for Kerr black holes, Phys

    L. Smarr, Mass formula for Kerr black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.30, 71 (1973)

    1973

  50. [58]

    Moreno and O

    C. Moreno and O. Sarbach, Stability properties of black holes in self-gravitating nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D67, 024028 (2003), gr-qc/0208090

    2003 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Zhang and S

    Y. Zhang and S. Gao, First law and Smarr formula of black hole mechanics in nonlinear gauge theories, Class. Quantum Grav.35, 145007 (2018), 1610.01237

    2018 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Bokulić, T

    A. Bokulić, T. Jurić, and I. Smolić, Black hole thermodynamics in the presence of nonlinear electromagnetic fields, Phys. Rev. D103, 124059 (2021), 2102.06213

    2021 arXiv

  53. [61]

    P. Wang, H. Wu, and H. Yang, Thermodynamics of nonlinear electrodynamics black holes and the validity of weak cosmic censorship at charged particle absorption, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 572 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    Nomura, D

    K. Nomura, D. Yoshida, and J. Soda, Stability of magnetic black holes in general nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D101, 124026 (2020), 2004.07560

    2020 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Nomura and D

    K. Nomura and D. Yoshida, Quasinormal modes of charged black holes with corrections from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 105, 044006 (2022), 2111.06273

    2022 arXiv

  56. [64]

    R. G. Daghigh, M. D. Green, G. Morey, and G. Kunstatter, Gravitational and electromagnetic radiation from an electrically charged black hole in general nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D105, 024055 (2022), 2106.04038

    2022 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Balart and S

    L. Balart and S. Fernando, Thermodynamics and heat engines of black holes with Born–Infeld-type electrodynamics, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 36, 2150102 (2021), 2103.15040

    2021 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Cai and Y.-G

    X.-C. Cai and Y.-G. Miao, Quasinormal modes and shadows of a new family of Ayón-Beato–García black holes, Phys. Rev. D103, 124050 (2021), 2104.09725

    2021 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Hegde, A

    K. Hegde, A. N. Kumara, C. L. A. Rizwan, M. S. Ali, and K. M. Ajith, Thermodynamics, photon sphere and thermodynamic geometry of Ayón-Beato–García spacetime, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A40, 2550115 (2025), 2104.08091

    2025

  60. [68]

    Croney, R

    L. Croney, R. Gregory, and C. J. Ramírez-Valdez, Thermodynamics of dyonic black holes in non-linear electrodynamics, J. High Energy Phys.10(2025), 013, 2506.06437

    2025

  61. [69]

    Liang, D

    J. Liang, D. Liu, and Z.-W. Long, Quasinormal modes and greybody factors of black holes corrected by nonlinear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 17 (2026)

    2026

  62. [70]

    Fathi, A

    M. Fathi, A. Guzmán, and J. R. Villanueva, Quasinormal modes of a static black hole in nonlinear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 587 (2026)

    2026

  63. [71]

    Perlick, O

    V. Perlick, O. Y. Tsupko, and G. S. Bisnovatyi-Kogan, Influence of a plasma on the shadow of a spherically symmetric black hole, Phys. Rev. D92, 104031 (2015), 1507.04217

    2015 arXiv

  64. [72]

    M. A. A. de Paula, H. C. D. Lima Junior, P. V. P. Cunha, and L. C. B. Crispino, Electrically charged regular black holes in nonlinear electrodynamics: Light rings, shadows, and gravitational lensing, Phys. Rev. D108, 084029 (2023), 2305.04776

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    M. A. A. de Paula, H. C. D. Lima, P. V. P. Cunha, C. A. R. Herdeiro, and L. C. B. Crispino, Two shadows of a single black hole: Vacuum birefringence phenomena within Einstein–nonlinear-electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D114, 024043 (2026), 2603.17007

    2026 arXiv

  66. [74]

    C. A. Escobar, Effective-metric formulation of Casimir energies in nonlinear scalar and electromagnetic theories, Phys. Rev. D114, 025010 (2026), 2606.17221

    2026 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Okyay and A

    M. Okyay and A. Övgün, Nonlinear electrodynamics effects on the black hole shadow, deflection angle, quasinormal modes and greybody factors, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.01(2022), 009, 2108.07766

    2022 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Uniyal, R

    A. Uniyal, R. C. Pantig, and A. Övgün, Probing a nonlinear electrodynamics black hole with thin accretion disk, shadow, and deflection angle with M87* and Sgr A* from EHT, Phys. Dark Univ.40, 101178 (2023), 2205.11072

    2023 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Uniyal, S

    A. Uniyal, S. Chakrabarti, M. Fathi, and A. Övgün, Observational signatures: Shadow cast by the effective metric of photons for black holes with rational non-linear electrodynamics, Ann. Phys.462, 169614 (2024), 2309.13680

    2024 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Uniyal, S

    A. Uniyal, S. Chakrabarti, R. C. Pantig, and A. Övgün, Nonlinearly charged black holes: Shadow and thin-accretion disk, New Astron. 111, 102249 (2024), 2303.07174

    2024 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Lambiase, D

    G. Lambiase, D. J. Gogoi, R. C. Pantig, and A. Övgün, Shadow and quasinormal modes of the rotating Einstein–Euler–Heisenberg black holes, Phys. Dark Univ.48, 101886 (2025), 2406.18300

    2025 arXiv

  72. [80]

    I. I. Çimdiker, A. Övgün, and Y. Verbin, Optical and orbital characterization of spherically symmetric static black holes of self-gravitating new nonlinear electrodynamics model, Phys. Rev. D114, 024032 (2026), 2603.10097

    2026 arXiv

  73. [81]

    U.Uktamov, A.Övgün, R.C.Pantig,andB.Ahmedov,Horizon-brightenedaccelerationradiationandopticalsignaturesofgenericregular black holes from nonlinear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 631 (2026), 2602.15077

    2026

  74. [82]

    M. A. Raza, J. Rayimbaev, F. Sarikulov, M. Zubair, B. Ahmedov, and Z. Stuchlík, Shadow of novel rotating black hole in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics and constraints from EHT results, Phys. Dark Univ.44, 101488 (2024), 2311.15784

    2024 arXiv

  75. [83]

    M. A. A. de Paula, L. C. S. Leite, S. R. Dolan, and L. C. B. Crispino, Absorption and unbounded superradiance in a static regular black hole spacetime, Phys. Rev. D109, 064053 (2024), 2401.01767

    2024 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Sarkar, N

    S. Sarkar, N. Sarkar, H. H. Shah, P. Balo, and F. Rahaman, Deflection angle of regular black holes in nonlinear electrodynamics: Gauss–Bonnet theorem, time delay, shadow, and greybody bound, Phys. Lett. B870, 139905 (2025)

    2025

  77. [85]

    Saleem, B

    A. Saleem, B. Majeed, Z. Ali, A. Ditta, A. Alimova, P. Channuie, and F. Atamurotov, Impact of nonlinear electrodynamics on particle motion around a charged black hole with matter coupling, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 7 (2026)

    2026

  78. [86]

    R. L. Schilling, R. Song, and Z. Vondraček,Bernstein Functions: Theory and Applications, 2nd ed. (De Gruyter, Berlin, 2012)

    2012

  79. [87]

    8.17: Incomplete beta functions,https://dlmf.nist.gov/8.17 (2026), accessed 29 July 2026

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions, Sec. 8.17: Incomplete beta functions,https://dlmf.nist.gov/8.17 (2026), accessed 29 July 2026

    2026

  80. [88]

    I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik,Table of Integrals, Series, and Products, 8th ed. (Academic Press, 2015)

    2015

  81. [89]

    Barriola and A

    M. Barriola and A. Vilenkin, Gravitational field of a global monopole, Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 341 (1989). 24

    1989

  82. [90]

    A. S. Eddington, A comparison of Whitehead’s and Einstein’s formulae, Nature113, 192 (1924)

    1924

  83. [91]

    Finkelstein, Past-future asymmetry of the gravitational field of a point particle, Phys

    D. Finkelstein, Past-future asymmetry of the gravitational field of a point particle, Phys. Rev.110, 965 (1958)

    1958

  84. [92]

    M. D. Kruskal, Maximal extension of Schwarzschild metric, Phys. Rev.119, 1743 (1960)

    1960

  85. [93]

    Szekeres, On the singularities of a Riemannian manifold, Publ

    G. Szekeres, On the singularities of a Riemannian manifold, Publ. Math. Debrecen7, 285 (1960)

    1960

  86. [94]

    Penrose, Gravitational collapse and space-time singularities, Phys

    R. Penrose, Gravitational collapse and space-time singularities, Phys. Rev. Lett.14, 57 (1965)

    1965

  87. [95]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973)

    1973

  88. [96]

    R. M. Wald,General Relativity(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984)

    1984

  89. [97]

    V. P. Frolov and I. D. Novikov,Black Hole Physics: Basic Concepts and New Developments(Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1998)

    1998

  90. [98]

    J. D. Bekenstein, Black holes and entropy, Phys. Rev. D7, 2333 (1973)

    1973

  91. [99]

    S. W. Hawking, Particle creation by black holes, Commun. Math. Phys.43, 199 (1975)

    1975

  92. [100]

    R. M. Wald, Black hole entropy is the Noether charge, Phys. Rev. D48, R3427 (1993), gr-qc/9307038

    1993 arXiv

  93. [101]

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

    1974

  94. [102]

    Luminet, Image of a spherical black hole with thin accretion disk, Astron

    J.-P. Luminet, Image of a spherical black hole with thin accretion disk, Astron. Astrophys.75, 228 (1979)

    1979

  95. [103]

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, First M87 Event Horizon Telescope results. VI. The shadow and mass of the central black hole, Astrophys. J. Lett.875, L6 (2019), 1906.11243

    2019 arXiv

  96. [104]

    EventHorizonTelescopeCollaboration,FirstSagittariusA*EventHorizonTelescoperesults.VI.Testingtheblackholemetric,Astrophys. J. Lett.930, L17 (2022)

    2022

  97. [105]

    S. E. Gralla, D. E. Holz, and R. M. Wald, Black hole shadows, photon rings, and lensing rings, Phys. Rev. D100, 024018 (2019), 1906.00873

    2019 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Cheng and P

    L. Cheng and P. Wang, Rotating black holes in Einstein–Born–Infeld theory, arXiv e-prints (2025), 2507.00879

    2025 arXiv

  99. [107]

    T. Hale, R. A. Hennigar, and D. Kubizňák, Rotating extremal black holes in Einstein–Born–Infeld theory, J. High Energy Phys.01(2026), 155, 2509.13099

    2026

  100. [108]

    Meurer, C

    A. Meurer, C. P. Smith, M. Paprocki,et al., SymPy: symbolic computing in Python, PeerJ Comput. Sci.3, e103 (2017)

    2017

  101. [109]

    C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt,et al., Array programming with NumPy, Nature585, 357 (2020)

    2020

  102. [110]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant,et al., SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nat. Methods17, 261 (2020)

    2020

  103. [111]

    J. D. Hunter, Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment, Comput. Sci. Eng.9, 90 (2007)

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.