Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Mapping Schwarzschild Spacetime: From Kruskal to Diamond and Golden Representations

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that two logarithmic coordinates, built from the eigenvalues of a Fibonacci metric, generate a (1+1)-dimensional representation whose kinematics exactly reproduce the (1+3)-dimensional Schwarzschild dynamics.

desk verdict A well-executed but modest paper with a nice new coordinate chart; the equivalence claim in Section 5 is overstated and should be fixed before acceptance. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07909 v1 pith:54PGLHLE submitted 2026-08-08 gr-qc math-phmath.MP

Edgar Alejandro León This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcmath-phmath.MP MSC 83A0583C1583C57
keywords SchwarzschildblackholeKruskalcoordinatesGoldenrepresentationratioFibonacciQ-metrictortoisedimensionalreductionredshiftfactor
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

This paper sets out to show that the Schwarzschild spacetime can be represented by two logarithmic coordinates, $q_1=\ln(r/r_s)$ and $q_2=\ln\sqrt{1-r_s/r}$, in a way that reproduces the full four-dimensional dynamics from a two-dimensional kinematical model. The construction centers on the Fibonacci Q-metric, a $2\times2$ matrix whose eigenvalues are the two golden ratios, $\phi_+$ and $\phi_-$, and whose diagonalization generates what the paper calls the Golden representation. Geodesics of the induced Golden metric integrate exactly to the Schwarzschild radial and redshift factors, which the author summarizes as Golden (1+1) kinematics equivalent to (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics. The paper matters to a curious reader because it ties together the Kruskal, Tortoise, Flamm, and Diamond descriptions and offers a flat two-dimensional arena in which features like the horizon, photon sphere, and ISCO can be read directly from the coordinates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Q-Fibonacci metric, a symmetric $2\times2$ matrix with components $Q_{11}=1$, $Q_{12}=Q_{21}=1$, and $Q_{22}=0$, whose eigenvalues are the golden ratios $\phi_+=(1+\sqrt5)/2$ and $\phi_-=(1-\sqrt5)/2$. It enters through the radial Lagrangian produced by dimensional reduction, and diagonalizing it to $\mathrm{diag}(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ yields the Golden coordinates and the complex spiral representation. The machinery is completed by the Golden metric $\Phi_{ab}=M^2Q_{ab}$ with $M=e^{q_1+q_2}$; its geodesic equations (5.6)-(5.7) integrate to $q_1=\ln(r/r_s)$ and $q_2=\ln\sqrt{1-r_s/r}$. The null combination $q_1+2q_2=(r_* - r)/r_s$ is what connects the Golden representation to Tortoise, Kruskal, and Diamond coordinates.

What would settle it

Solve the full Einstein equations for the static spherically symmetric ansatz (4.1) and compare the solution space with the Euler-Lagrange equations (4.11)-(4.13) derived from the reduced Lagrangian; any solution of one system that is not a solution of the other would falsify the dimensional-reduction equivalence on which the Golden representation rests.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the Einstein-Hilbert action for a static spherically symmetric metric reduces to a radial Lagrangian of relativistic-point-particle form, $L_r=\frac{\lambda^{-1}}{2}Q_{ab}\dot q^a\dot q^b+\frac{\lambda}{2}M^2$, where $Q_{ab}$ is the Fibonacci Q-metric. The geodesic equations of the conformally related Golden metric, $d\sigma^2=M^2Q_{ab}dq^adq^b$ with $M=e^{q_1+q_2}$, then give exactly $e^{q_1}=r$ and $e^{q_2}=\sqrt{1-r_s/r}$, recovering the Schwarzschild radial coordinate and redshift factor. The paper concludes that the kinematics of this (1+1) spacetime are equivalent to the dynamics of the (1+3) Schwarzschild solution, and it shows that the (1+1) Golden metric is flat, with all its curvature information moved into the coordinate transformation.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's argument rests on the premise that minimizing the dimensionally reduced radial Lagrangian (4.8) gives exactly the same dynamics as the full Einstein equations for the static spherically symmetric ansatz, with no field-equation content lost in the reduction; this equivalence is assumed rather than proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The event horizon is pushed to $(q_1,q_2)=(0,-\infty)$ and spatial infinity to $(\infty,0)$, so the Golden coordinates combine the horizon-pushing property of the Tortoise coordinate with a direct readout of the redshift factor.
  • The (1+1) Golden metric has zero Riemann tensor, so the Schwarzschild curvature is encoded entirely in the coordinate map rather than in the two-dimensional fiducial geometry.
  • The identity $q_1+2q_2=(r_*-r)/r_s$ makes the difference of the null coordinate between two radii proportional to the radial Shapiro time delay, $\Delta t_{\rm delay}=2r_s\,\Delta(q_1+2q_2)$.
  • At the Golden radius $r=\phi_+ r_s$, the Flamm proper distance and the Tortoise coordinate satisfy $3r_*+2\varrho=\phi_+^4 r_s$, marking a single distinguished point in the Flamm, Tortoise, Diamond, and Golden diagrams.
  • In the complex representation $Z=e^{q_2}e^{-i\phi_- q_1}$, the horizon maps to the origin and infinity to the unit circle, so the redshift factor is the radial distance $|Z|$ from the origin.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the Golden metric is explicitly Minkowski under the transformation $T=e^{q_1}(1-e^{2q_2})/2$, $X=e^{q_1}(1+e^{2q_2})/2$, one could use the construction as a template: deforming the conformal factor $M$ while keeping the two-dimensional geometry flat would generate new static metrics, offering a toy method for exploring spherically symmetric solutions.
  • The dimensional reduction is asserted without a symmetric-criticality proof; supplying one would turn the Golden equivalence into a theorem, while a counterexample showing a full Einstein solution missed by the reduced equations would relegate the representation to a formal curiosity.
  • The same $Q$-matrix idea may extend to other metallic-ratio matrices, such as $Q_{11}=m$, $Q_{12}=Q_{21}=1$, $Q_{22}=0$, and to other static spherically symmetric metrics like Reissner-Nordström, producing a family of 'metallic' representations; the paper does not explore this extension.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reviews standard coordinate representations of the Schwarzschild spacetime—near-horizon/Rindler, Flamm paraboloid, Tortoise, Kruskal-Szekeres, and the recent pulsating/Diamond coordinates—and introduces a new "Golden representation." The construction starts from a static spherically symmetric ansatz, dimensionally reduces the Einstein-Hilbert action to a radial Lagrangian, and identifies a 2D "Fibonacci Q-metric" whose eigenvalues are the golden ratios. The author then defines the Golden metric as a conformally rescaled version of this Q-metric and claims that the geodesic kinematics of this (1+1)-dimensional Golden spacetime are equivalent to the (1+3)-dimensional Schwarzschild dynamics, summarized as "Golden (1+1) kinematics ⇔ (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics." The paper concludes with visualizations, including a Golden curve and a complex Golden-Schwarzschild spiral, and with relations connecting the Golden radius r = φ_+ r_s to the other representations.

Significance. The classical parts of the paper are competent and largely correct: the derivations of the Tortoise and Kruskal coordinates from a unified conformal transformation scheme are clear, and the Diamond representation is presented faithfully. The Golden construction is mathematically curious and produces some original visualizations, particularly the complex spiral, and it explicitly connects the golden ratio to Schwarzschild geometry. However, the central claim of the paper—the equivalence between Golden (1+1) kinematics and (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics—is not supported by the derivations. The paper itself acknowledges that the constants needed to reproduce Schwarzschild are selected after the fact, but it does not correct the summary claim accordingly. Because this equivalence is the main novelty, the contribution as it stands is an interesting formal observation rather than an established equivalence. The paper would be publishable if the claim were downgraded to a statement that the Schwarzschild exterior corresponds to a particular family of geodesics of the Golden metric, and if the precise sense of "representation" were clarified.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Eqs. (5.6)-(5.12)] The equivalence statement "Golden (1+1) kinematics ⇔ (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics" is false as stated. The geodesic equations (5.6)-(5.7) admit a four-parameter family of solutions, given by (5.8)-(5.11) with arbitrary constants A, B, D and the additive constant in q2. The Schwarzschild solution corresponds only to the special choice A=1, B=0, D=2, and the additive constant set to (1/2)ln(1/2). Since the Golden metric (5.3) is explicitly conformal to Minkowski, its geodesics in the T,X coordinates defined after Eq. (5.12) are straight lines (T,X)=(a s+b, c s+d). Imposing the Schwarzschild relation e^{2q2}=1-e^{-q1} forces T=-1/2, i.e., a=0 and b=-1/2, leaving only a two-parameter subfamily. Generic geodesics of the Golden metric therefore produce pairs (q1(s),q2(s)) that do not satisfy the reduced Einstein equations (4.11)-(4.13). Thus the paper only demonstrates that the Schwarzschild solution is a particular geodesic of the Golden metric, not that the two dynamical systems are equivalent. The double arrow should be replaced by a precise one-way statement, or additional constraints must be specified that select the Schwarzschild subfamily.
  2. [Section 4 to Section 5, Eqs. (4.7)-(4.9) and Eq. (5.2)] The passage from the reduced action (4.9) to the geodesic Lagrangian (5.2) is not justified as an equivalence of solution spaces. The Euler-Lagrange equations (4.11)-(4.13) treat λ as an independent auxiliary field, while (5.2) is obtained by substituting λ from the constraint (4.13) back into the action. This substitution can change the variational problem unless the constraint is handled by a systematic reduction (for example, via symmetric criticality plus a Dirac-type procedure). The paper does not provide such a derivation, and the counterfamily discussed in the previous comment shows that the solution spaces of the geodesic equations (5.6)-(5.7) and of the reduced Einstein equations (4.11)-(4.13) do not coincide. The paper should either prove the equivalence for the relevant subfamily or explicitly state that the Golden metric provides only a particular solution-generating map, not a full dynamical equivalence.
  3. [Sections 4-5, general framing] The "Golden representation" is not a full coordinate system on the Schwarzschild spacetime. The coordinates q1 = ln(r/r_s) and q2 = ln sqrt(1-r_s/r) depend only on the radial coordinate, so the Golden metric (5.3) describes the radial sector of the spacetime rather than the full (1+3)-dimensional metric. This is a legitimate object of study, but the text repeatedly claims that the Golden (1+1) kinematics reproduce the (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics. Without a precise statement of how the angular and temporal parts of the 4D metric are encoded, the claim conflates a 2D radial model with the full spacetime. The paper should clarify in the introduction and in Section 5 that the Golden representation concerns the radial reduction of Schwarzschild, and that the claimed equivalence applies to that sector only after fixing integration constants.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 6, first paragraph] The text says "Figure 5 shows the Golden curve of Eq. (5.13)", but Eq. (5.13) is the Legendre transform expression; the Golden curve is defined by the relation e^{2q2}=1-e^{-q1}, which is Eq. (5.12). Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Section 4, after Eq. (4.8)] The dimensional reduction of the Einstein-Hilbert action to the radial Lagrangian is standard for the static spherically symmetric ansatz, but the paper should cite the symmetric criticality principle (e.g., Palais) to justify that variations within the reduced ansatz produce the same equations as the full variations.
  3. [Section 3, Eq. (3.15)] The conformal factor ϖ for the Diamond representation involves a sign pattern that should be double-checked against the pulsating coordinate transformation (3.13). The intermediate algebra is omitted, and a sign error would propagate to the ellipse interpretation in Section 3.
  4. [Section 1 and abstract] The abstract and introduction describe the Diamond representation as one of "two novel representations" introduced here, but the Diamond representation was previously proposed in reference [15]. Only the Golden representation is novel in this paper; the Diamond representation is reviewed and extended. Please adjust the wording accordingly.
  5. [Section 4, Eq. (4.16)] The constants c1 and c2 in Eq. (4.16) are later set to c1=c2=1 by invoking the dimensionless scaling r_s=1, which is introduced only in prose at the start of Section 4. This scaling should be made explicit in the equations, for example by writing r/r_s, so that the reader can verify the constant choices without inferring the normalization.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The Section 5 equivalence 'Golden kinematics ⇔ Schwarzschild dynamics' is supported by choosing integration constants to match the Schwarzschild coordinate definition, making that prediction circular by construction.

  1. self definitional [Section 5, Eqs. (5.8)-(5.12); Section 6 coordinate definition]
    "Note how the constants have been selected: In (5.8) B=0 allows us to have the proper r^2 dΩ^2 association between (4.1) and (2.3). A=1 allows us to associate in the solutions that r→1 is equivalent to approaching the event horizon... Also, selecting D=2 and the last constant in (5.11) allows a factoring that also connects the coordinate q2 as (5.11) with the Schwarzschild solution. ... We have chosen, from the family of solutions, e^{2q2}=1-e^{-q1}."

    The geodesic equations (5.6)-(5.7) admit a four-parameter family of solutions. The paper then fixes A=1, B=0, D=2, and the additive constant in (5.11) so that e^{q1}=r and e^{q2}=sqrt(1-1/r). But Section 6 defines the Golden coordinates by exactly (q1,q2)=(ln(r/rs), ln sqrt(1-rs/r)), and (5.12) is the same Schwarzschild relation (4.16) with c1=c2=1. Thus the 'recovery' of Schwarzschild dynamics is not forced by the kinematics; it is imposed by choosing the integration constants to reproduce the coordinate definition. The summary 'Golden (1+1) kinematics ⇔ (1+3)-Schwarzschild dynamics' therefore reduces to 'one specially chosen geodesic equals the Schwarzschild relation,' which holds by construction but is not a derivation of the claimed equivalence.

full rationale

The core derivation up to Section 4 is self-contained and independent: the Einstein-Hilbert action is dimensionally reduced for the spherically symmetric ansatz, the Euler-Lagrange equations are written out, and the Schwarzschild factor e^{2q2}=1-e^{-q1} is obtained with integration constants. The self-citations [15]-[17] are disclosed and not load-bearing, since the relevant equations are re-derived in the text. However, Section 5's headline implication is partially circular: the geodesic equations of the Golden metric have a general solution space, and the paper selects the constants A=1, B=0, D=2, and the additive constant so that q1 and q2 equal the Golden coordinates defined later from the Schwarzschild metric. That is an explicit post hoc choice, not a dynamical prediction. The separate issue that generic Golden geodesics do not correspond to Schwarzschild is a correctness concern about the '⇔' claim, and it reinforces the circularity point: only the specially chosen solution matches the target. If the claim were weakened to 'there exists a Golden geodesic that reproduces Schwarzschild,' the construction would be legitimate and not circular. As written, the equivalence assertion reduces by construction to the chosen coordinate definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 5 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard dimensional reduction of the Einstein-Hilbert action for spherically symmetric metrics. The new 'Golden' constructs are definitions chosen to reproduce the known Schwarzschild solution; the golden ratio appears by construction, and the integration constants in Section 5 are selected post hoc to match the known metric.

free parameters (5)
  • Integration constant A in Eq. (5.8) = 1
    Chosen so that e^{q1}=r in the Golden coordinates.
  • Integration constant B in Eq. (5.8) = 0
    Chosen so that e^{q1}=r, matching the radial association.
  • Integration constant D in Eq. (5.10) = 2
    Chosen so that e^{2q2}=1-1/r.
  • Additive constant in q2 solution after Eq. (5.10) = (1/2) ln(1/2)
    Chosen to factor the solution into the redshift factor.
  • Constants c1 and c2 in Eq. (4.16) = 1, 1
    Selected to match asymptotic flatness and the Schwarzschild factor 1-r_s/r.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The Einstein field equations with a static spherically symmetric metric ansatz (4.1) are the governing equations.
    The paper assumes the Schwarzschild exterior is described by GR with the stated ansatz; this is standard.
  • standard math The dimensionally reduced radial Lagrangian (4.8) is dynamically equivalent to the full Einstein equations for the ansatz.
    The paper invokes this equivalence without proof or citation of the symmetric criticality principle; it is used to connect the 2D Golden kinematics to 4D Schwarzschild dynamics.
  • domain assumption Units with c=G=1 and, in Section 4, dimensionless coordinates scaled by r_s=1.
    Choice of units; does not affect the geometry.
invented entities (5)
  • Golden coordinates (q1, q2)
    purpose: New coordinate chart for the Schwarzschild exterior: q1=ln(r/r_s), q2=ln√(1-r_s/r).
    Defined by the paper; no independent observational handle.
  • Fibonacci Q-metric Q_ab
    purpose: Abstract metric whose eigenvalues are the golden ratios; used to classify the kinetic term in the reduced action.
    Defined in Eq. (4.10); it is a mathematical construct.
  • Golden metric Φ_ab = M^2 Q_ab
    purpose: Two-dimensional metric for the fictitious particle system.
    Defined in Eq. (5.3).
  • Golden radius r=φ_+ r_s
    purpose: A special radius where several representations agree.
    Introduced in the paper as a unifying numerical coincidence.
  • Golden-Schwarzschild spiral Z
    purpose: Complex compactified visualization of the exterior.
    Defined in Eq. (6.2).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mapping Schwarzschild Spacetime: From Kruskal to Diamond and Golden Representations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/54PGLHLE

@misc{pith2026260807909,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mapping Schwarzschild Spacetime: From Kruskal to Diamond and Golden Representations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/54PGLHLE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07909}
}
read the original abstract

We present several representations of the Schwarzschild spacetime. Some of these are classical, such as the embedding, Tortoise, and Kruskal representations. The latter two motivate the introduction of pulsating coordinates (or the Diamond representation), a compact approach recently proposed for spherically symmetric static metrics. We then introduce the Golden representation for the Schwarzschild spacetime, where what we call the Fibonacci metric, and the golden ratio, become ubiquitous. We conclude by offering some visual and physical interpretations of this approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07909 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flamm Paraboloid. Spatial Embedding of the Schwarzschild Geometry. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Maximally extended Schwarzschild spacetime, from the Kruskal representation. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Compactified Diamond representation of the Schwarzschild spacetime. Decreasing r yields horizontal ellipses that become progressively less elon￾gated. When r ∗/α = π/4—which in our selection corresponds to the sphere at r ≈ 1.5922 rs— the geometry is represented in the diagram by a circle. Continuing to lower values of r produces vertical ellipses that become in￾creasingly elongated until reaching the vertical degen… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SO(2) coordinate transformation from w a to q a . 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: shows the Golden representation of spatial sections of the Schwarzschild geometry. Note that in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The complex Golden Schwarzschild Spiral. Spatial infinity has been compact￾ified to |Z| = 1, while the event horizon is at the origin. The previous representative points of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler. Gravitation (W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco CA, 1973)

    work page 1973

  2. [2]

    Lema ˆ ıtre, L’Univers en expansion,Annales Soc

    G. Lema ˆ ıtre, L’Univers en expansion,Annales Soc. Sci. BruxellesA53 (1933) 51

    work page 1933

  3. [3]

    R. C. Tolman. Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1934)

    work page 1934

  4. [4]

    P. G. Bergmann, Conservation Laws in General Relativity as the Gen- erators of Coordinate Transformations,Phys. Rev.112(1958) 287

    work page 1958

  5. [5]

    Pooley, Background Independence, Diffeomorphism Invariance and the Meaning of Coordinates,Einst

    O. Pooley, Background Independence, Diffeomorphism Invariance and the Meaning of Coordinates,Einst. Stud.13(2017) 105

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    D. W. Sciama, The Physical Structure of General Relativity,Rev. Mod. Phys.36(1964) 1, 463

    work page 1964

  7. [7]

    Israel, Event horizons in static vacuum space-times,Phys

    W. Israel, Event horizons in static vacuum space-times,Phys. Rev.164 (1967) 1776

    work page 1967

  8. [8]

    Diek, Another Look at General Covariance and the Equivalence of Reference Systems,Stud

    D. Diek, Another Look at General Covariance and the Equivalence of Reference Systems,Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys.37(2003) 174

    work page 2003

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Fromholz, E

    P. Fromholz, E. Poisson, and C. M. Will, The Schwarzschild metric: It’s the coordinates, stupid!,Am. J. Phys.82(2014) 295

    2014

  2. [10]

    Giovanelli, Nothing but coincidences: the point-coincidence and Ein- stein’s struggle with the meaning of coordinates in physics,Euro

    M. Giovanelli, Nothing but coincidences: the point-coincidence and Ein- stein’s struggle with the meaning of coordinates in physics,Euro. Jnl. Phil. Sci.11(2021) 45

    2021

  3. [11]

    J. P. S. Lemos, D. L. F. G. Silva, Maximal extension of the Schwarzschild metric: From Painlev´ e-Gullstrand to Kruskal-Szekeres,Annals of Physics.430(2021) 168497

    2021

  4. [12]

    J. A. Nieto, E. A. Le´ on, and C. Garc ´ ıa-Quintero, Cosmological-static metric correspondence and Kruskal type solutions from symmetry trans- formations,Rev. Mex. F ´ ıs.68(2022) 040701. 27

    2022

  5. [13]

    A. V. Toporensky, and O.B. Zaslavskii, Regular Frames for Spherically Symmetric Black Holes Revisited,Symmetry14(2022) 40

    2022

  6. [14]

    Visser, Efficient Computation of Null Affine Parameters,Universe9 (2023) 521

    M. Visser, Efficient Computation of Null Affine Parameters,Universe9 (2023) 521

    2023

  7. [15]

    E. A. Le´ on, J. A. Nieto, A. Sandoval-Rodr ´ ıguez and B. Mart ´ ınez-Olivas, Beyond Schwarzschild: new pulsating coordinates for spherically sym- metric metrics,Gen. Rel. Grav.56(2024) 35

    2024

  8. [16]

    J. A. Nieto,A Link Between Black Holes and the Golden Ratio; arXiv:1106.1600 [physics.gen-ph]

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    J. A. Nieto, E. A. Leon and V.M. Villanueva, Higher dimensional black holes as constrained systems,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D22(2013) 1350047

    2013

  10. [18]

    N. Cruz, M. Olivares and J. R. Villanueva, The golden ratio in Schwarzschild–Kottler black holes, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 123

    2017

  11. [19]

    S. M. Carroll, Spacetime and geometry: An introduction to general relativity (Addison-Wesley, San Francisco CA, 2004)

    2004

  12. [20]

    Ayon-Beato and Alberto Garcia, Regular black hole in general rela- tivity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics,Phys

    E. Ayon-Beato and Alberto Garcia, Regular black hole in general rela- tivity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics,Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 5056

    1998

  13. [21]

    Jacobson, When is gtt grr = -1?Class

    T. Jacobson, When is gtt grr = -1?Class. Quant. Grav.24(2007) 5717

    2007

  14. [22]

    Mitra, When can an ”Expanding Universe” look ”Static” and vice versa: A comprehensive study,Int

    A. Mitra, When can an ”Expanding Universe” look ”Static” and vice versa: A comprehensive study,Int. J. Mod. Phys D24(2015)

    2015

  15. [23]

    E. A. Le´ on and A. Sandoval-Rodr ´ ıguez, Symmetry Transformations in Cosmological and Black Hole Analytical Solutions,Symmetry16(2024) 394

    2024

  16. [24]

    Susskind, and J

    L. Susskind, and J. Lindesay, Introduction To Black Holes, Informa- tion And The String Theory Revolution, An: The Holographic Universe (2004, World Scientific)

    2004

  17. [25]

    Rindler, Kruskal Space and the Uniformly Accelerated Frame,Am

    W. Rindler, Kruskal Space and the Uniformly Accelerated Frame,Am. J. Phys.34(1966) 1174. 28

    1966

  18. [26]

    Dray, Differential forms and the geometry of general relativity (CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, 2014)

    T. Dray, Differential forms and the geometry of general relativity (CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, 2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Ø Grøn, S Hervik, Einstein’s general theory of relativity: with modern applications in cosmology, (Springer, New York USA, 2007)

    2007

  20. [28]

    Fronsdal, Completion and Embedding of the Schwarzschild Solution, Phys

    C. Fronsdal, Completion and Embedding of the Schwarzschild Solution, Phys. Rev.119(1959) 778

    1959

  21. [29]

    M. D. Kruskal, Maximal Extension of Schwarzschild Metric,Phys. Rev. 119(1960) 1743

    1960

  22. [30]

    Szekeres, On the Singularities of a Riemannian Manifold,Publ

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

    1960

  23. [31]

    P¨ ossel, Black holes, Achilles and the original tortoise coordinate, Eur

    M. P¨ ossel, Black holes, Achilles and the original tortoise coordinate, Eur. J. Phys.45(2024) 065602

    2024

  24. [32]

    S. R. Valluri, D. J. Jeffrey and R. M. Corless, Some applications of the Lambert W function to physics,Can. J. Phys.78(2000) 823

    2000

  25. [33]

    Bravo-Gaete, S

    M. Bravo-Gaete, S. Gomez and M. Hassaine, Black holes with Lambert W function horizons,Eur. Phys. J. C.79(2019) 200

    2019

  26. [34]

    W. G. Unruh,Universal coordinates for Schwarzschild black holes; arXiv:1401.3393 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    E. A. Le´ on,The Spherical-Rindler Framework: From Causal Diamonds to Black-Hole and Cosmological Solutions; arXiv:2601.20971 [gr-qc]

  28. [36]

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity,Phys. Rev. D15(1977) 2752

    1977

  29. [37]

    Anatriello and Giovanni Vincenzi, Logarithmic spirals and continue triangles,J

    G. Anatriello and Giovanni Vincenzi, Logarithmic spirals and continue triangles,J. Comput. Appl. Math.296(2016) 127

    2016

  30. [38]

    I. I. Shapiro, Fourth Test of General Relativity,Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 789

    1964

  31. [39]

    P. G. Bergmann, Observables in General Relativity,Rev. Mod. Phys.33 (1961) 510. 29

    1961

  32. [40]

    Gron and E

    O. Gron and E. Eriksen, Equivalence in two-dimensional, three- dimensional and four-dimensional space-times, Int. J. Theor. Phys.31 (1992) 1421

    1992

  33. [41]

    Boersma and T

    S. Boersma and T. Dray, Parametric manifolds. 1. Extrinsic approach, J. Math. Phys.36(1995) 1378

    1995

  34. [42]

    Amelino-Camelia, L

    G. Amelino-Camelia, L. Freidel, J. Kowalski-Glikman and L. Smolin, The principle of relative locality,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 084010

    2011

  35. [43]

    S. L. Basin and V. E. Hoggat Jr., A primer on the Fibonacci sequence: Part I,Fibonacci Quart.1(1963) 1, 65

    1963

  36. [44]

    S. L. Basin and V. E. Hoggat Jr., A primer on the Fibonacci sequence: Part II,Fibonacci Quart.1(1963) 2, 61. 30

    1963

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.