Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 66 references

The birth of a ghost star

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper constructs an explicit general-relativity model in which a heat-conducting fluid sphere evolves asymptotically into a ghost star: a static configuration with zero total mass and negative energy density in part of its interior.

desk verdict A clean exact-solution construction of a ghost-star endpoint, but the astrophysical 'birth' claim is conditional on negative-energy microphysics the paper explicitly leaves open. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.02871 v1 pith:5NOF47KB submitted 2025-05-04 gr-qc

L. Herrera , A. Di Prisco , J.Ospino This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc PACS 04.20.-q04.40.Dg
keywords ghoststarsnegativeenergydensitydissipativeself-gravitatingfluidssphericallysymmetricexactsolutionsquasi-homologousevolutioncomplexityfactorcavityjunctionconditions
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 claims that a ghost star—a static, spherically symmetric fluid configuration with zero total mass and negative energy density in part of its interior—can be the asymptotic end state of an explicit dissipative evolution. Starting from a 'primeval' solution obeying three simplifying conditions (a vanishing complexity factor, a scalar measuring departure from the simplest fluid structure; quasi-homologous evolution, a generalization of the usual homologous velocity law; and fixed proper separation of neighboring fluid elements), the authors modify it so that the end state has $m(t\to\infty, r_{\Sigma(e)})=0$, matches Minkowski spacetime on the outer boundary, and has energy density $8\pi\mu r_{\Sigma(e)}^2 = \frac{4(1-2x^2)}{x^4}$, which is negative for $x>1/\sqrt{2}$. The model therefore shows, within general relativity, that the ghost-star concept is not merely a static curiosity but a reachable endpoint of a dynamical process. A sympathetic reader would care because it turns an exotic static solution into a concrete scenario for how such an object might form and be observed.

What carries the argument

The key mechanism is a modified version of the 'primeval' solution obtained from three conditions: vanishing complexity factor $Y_{TF}=0$, quasi-homologous evolution $U=\tilde{a}(t)R$, and $B=1$ (the infinitesimal proper radial distance between neighboring fluid elements does not change in time). These conditions force the shear to depend only on $t$ and produce a solution whose static limit is ill-defined ($A\to 0$). The paper then replaces $\sigma(t)$ by an arbitrary $f(t)$ with the asymptotic behavior $F(t)\to\gamma>0$, $f(t)\to 0$, and $f'(t)/f(t)^2\to\mathrm{constant}$, preserving the metric's functional form while relaxing the two structural conditions except in the limit. The remaining free functions are fixed by enforcing asymptotic Darmois matching on the outer boundary ($g=c_3 r$, $r_{\Sigma(e)}=1/(2\gamma c_3\beta)$) and by choosing $F=\gamma e^{-r_{\Sigma(e)}/t}$, $f=-1/t$. This yields the explicit metric $A=1-x^2/(2t_*^2)$, $R=(r_{\Sigma(e)}/2)e^{-1/t_*}x^2 e^{x^2/(4t_*^2)}$, from which the physical variables, the mass, and the ghost-star limit are computed.

What would settle it

Run a numerical evolution of the same physical initial data without imposing the metric ansatz (82), but with the same boundary conditions and a causal heat flux; if the total mass $m(t,r_{\Sigma(e)})$ does not tend to zero while $8\pi\mu r_{\Sigma(e)}^2$ approaches $\frac{4(1-2x^2)}{x^4}$, then the ghost-star endpoint is an artifact of the chosen ansatz rather than a generic outcome.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an evolving, spherically symmetric, heat-conducting anisotropic fluid can be described analytically and tends asymptotically to a ghost star. In the limit $t\to\infty$ the Misner–Sharp mass at the outer boundary vanishes, $m(\infty, r_{\Sigma(e)})=0$; the outer surface satisfies Darmois matching to Minkowski spacetime; the four-acceleration $A'/A$ tends to zero; and the dimensionless energy-density profile satisfies $8\pi\mu r_{\Sigma(e)}^2 = \frac{4(1-2x^2)}{x^4}$, which is negative for $x>1/\sqrt{2}$, where $x=r/r_{\Sigma(e)}$. This negative-energy region is what cancels the total mass. The endpoint is static and in thermal equilibrium, with the temperature tending to a constant, and equilibrium is maintained by a balance between the radial pressure gradient and the anisotropic stress rather than by the active gravitational (Tolman) mass. The simplifying assumptions that generated the starting solution—vanishing complexity factor and quasi-homologous evolution—are not obeyed during the evolution; they are restored only asymptotically, when the fluid is static.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a fluid can physically contain regions of negative energy density; if such regions are forbidden by the microphysics of real matter, the ghost-star endpoint is not an astrophysical configuration even though the metric is an exact solution of Einstein's equations, and the paper itself notes (Section 5) that a microscopic theory accounting for negative energy density is still missing.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • As $t\to\infty$, the exterior of the configuration is Minkowski spacetime rather than Schwarzschild spacetime: the total gravitational mass of the object is exactly zero.
  • The endpoint contains a region with negative energy density for $x>1/\sqrt{2}$, and this negative region is what cancels the positive contributions to the total mass.
  • The outer boundary joins Minkowski spacetime smoothly only asymptotically, so a thin shell is present on the outer surface during the approach; on the inner cavity boundary, where the Darmois conditions are never satisfied, a thin shell persists.
  • In the static limit the four-acceleration and the Tolman mass vanish, so equilibrium is maintained by the pressure-gradient–anisotropy balance rather than by gravitational attraction.
  • Surface radiation from a ghost star would show no gravitational redshift, so a gradual disappearance of redshift during the approach could be the observational fingerprint of ghost-star formation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If ghost stars can form this way, they become a candidate reservoir of dark mass; the paper leaves open whether a microscopic theory of negative energy density could make them stable, so a natural next step is to ask whether quantum effects allow macroscopic regions with negative energy density.
  • The inner thin shell suggests the model is a limiting case; a numerical evolution with realistic microphysics and a full, non-truncated causal transport equation could test whether the asymptotic ghost-star state survives or is an artifact of the analytic ansatz.
  • The predicted zero gravitational redshift at the endpoint is testable in principle: monitoring a candidate compact object for a fading redshift over time would distinguish ghost-star formation from ordinary collapse.
  • The temperature profile is not fixed by the model because the solution of the transport equation contains an arbitrary integration function and an unknown relaxation time; only the asymptotic constancy of the temperature is established.
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 presents an explicit, spherically symmetric, comoving metric (Eq. (82)) for a dissipative anisotropic fluid with a central cavity, and computes the associated physical variables in closed form (Eqs. (83)-(87)). It then studies the limit t → ∞ and shows that the metric tends to a static configuration with A → 1, R → rΣ x^2/2, boundary mass mΣ → 0, and energy density 8πμ rΣ^2 → 4(1−2x^2)/x^4, which is negative for x > 1/√2 (Eq. (89)). The authors interpret this as the first analytical model of a fluid distribution that evolves asymptotically toward a ghost star, with asymptotic matching to Minkowski spacetime on the outer boundary.

Significance. If accepted as a formal exact solution, the paper's central algebraic content is sound and checkable: the static limit of Eqs. (83)-(87) indeed reproduces Eq. (89), and the boundary mass mΣ tends to zero in the advertised limit. The construction of an explicit time-dependent solution whose endpoint is a zero-total-mass static fluid with negative energy-density regions is a genuine novelty, and the closed-form expressions (including the mass function and heat flux) are transparent enough to be verified directly. The strength of the paper is its concreteness. However, the physical claim implicit in the title and abstract, namely the 'birth' of a ghost star, is conditional on the physical admissibility and dynamical persistence of negative energy-density regions, which the paper does not establish and explicitly concedes is still missing a microscopic theory. The paper is best read as a formal exact GR model with a carefully demonstrated asymptotic limit, not as a demonstration of an astrophysical formation process.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5 (Discussion), Eq. (89)] The central interpretive claim that the model exhibits the viability of the formation of a ghost star rests on the physical realizability of a persistent negative energy-density region, which is precisely the step that the paper leaves open. Section 5 explicitly states that 'an important piece of theoretical evidence behind the concept of ghost star is still missing,' namely a microscopic theory accounting for negative energy-density, and no stability analysis of the endpoint is provided. Since the endpoint density (89) becomes negative for x > 1/√2, the physical 'birth' scenario is not established; what is established is that the explicit metric (82) is an exact solution of the Einstein equations with the advertised asymptotic limit. I recommend that the authors either temper the abstract/conclusion language to make clear that this is a formal exact solution whose astrophysical relevance is conditional on the existence of negative energy-density matter, or add a concrete discussion (or analysis) of stability and microscopic support for such a region.
  2. [Sections 4.3 and 4.4; junction conditions Eqs. (28)-(29)] The model contains thin shells, both on the inner boundary Σ(i) (persistently) and on the outer boundary Σ(e) (for finite times), but the surface stress-energy tensor and the Israel junction conditions are never computed. In particular, Section 4.3 states that the Darmois conditions are not satisfied on Σ(i) and that a thin shell is present, yet the paper does not verify that such a shell is realizable with a physical surface energy-momentum tensor. The zero-total-mass condition m(∞, rΣ(e)) = 0 is imposed on the fluid metric alone, but in a spacetime containing a shell at Σ(i) the total mass includes the shell's contribution; without analyzing the shell, the endpoint is not a completely specified spacetime. The asymptotic matching to Minkowski on Σ(e) is also only checked for m → 0 and Pr → 0, while the exterior metric during the evolution and the finite-time junction conditions are not specified. A complete treatment would require either an Israel analysis of both shells or an explicit statement that the model is only an interior solution with an asserted asymptotic outer matching.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5] There is a typographical error: 'radiation emitted from the surface of a a ghost star' should read 'radiation emitted from the surface of a ghost star.'
  2. [Section 7] The heading 'Ackowledgements' is misspelled; it should be 'Acknowledgements.'
  3. [Eq. (88)] The temperature integral in Eq. (88) writes the integration variable as dx without specifying the limits x_i to 1; adding the limits and a short explanation of the dimensionless variables would improve readability.
  4. [Eqs. (83)-(87)] These expressions are long and could benefit from a brief verification statement or a note that the static limit reproduces Eq. (89); this would help the reader confirm the asymptotic analysis.
  5. [Section 4.4] The sentence 'Suffice is to say that asymptotically the temperature tends to a constant' should be 'Suffice it to say...' for grammatical correctness.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Partial construction-around-target: the ghost-star endpoint is imposed via asymptotic and matching conditions, then re-derived; the algebra is exact and the construction is openly stated, so the circularity is mild rather than hidden.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4.2–4.4; Eqs. (66), (74)–(76), (78), (80), (89)]
    "We are looking for a model which asymptotically (as t → ∞), approaches the state of a static ghost star m(t → ∞, rΣ(e)) = 0. ... Using (66) in (73), the condition m(t → ∞, rΣ(e)) = 0 reads ... Using (66), (77) and (80) in (69) we obtain 8πµ(t → ∞, r) = 4/r²Σ(e)((1 − 2x²)/x⁴)."

    The target endpoint is not independently derived from the dynamics. Eq. (66) is assumed 'to obtain the expected asymptotic behavior'; Eq. (74) imposes m_∞ = 0; Eqs. (76)–(80) fix the constants and r_Σ so that m_∞ = 0 and P_r^∞ = 0. Equation (89), including the negative energy-density region, is then obtained by substituting these same imposed functions into (69). Thus the ghost-star endpoint and its negative-density profile are equivalent, by construction, to the asymptotic and matching conditions used to select the model. The algebra is exact and the construction is transparent, so this is a disclosed design feature rather than a concealed circular inference; the paper does not predict the birth from independent physics.

full rationale

The claimed end state is constructed rather than predicted: the free functions F, f, g and the constants c1, c3, r_Σ are chosen so that the asymptotic conditions (66) and the matching demands (74)–(75) hold, and the limiting density (89) is the same ansatz evaluated at t*→∞. If the paper claimed to derive the emergence of a ghost star from the field equations alone, that claim would reduce to its inputs. However, the paper explicitly says the primeval solution was modified 'to satisfy the conditions ensuring the formation of a ghost star' and that the functions are 'suggested by the asymptotic conditions,' so the construction is openly disclosed. The algebraic verification is self-contained and exact, and no load-bearing argument rests on an unverified self-citation or an imported uniqueness theorem. The admitted absence of a microscopic theory of negative energy-density and the arbitrariness of Φ(t) and τ in the temperature are physical-support and correctness gaps, not circularity. Hence a mild score of 3: partial construction-around-target, but not a hidden or derivationally forced circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on several hand-picked functions and constants chosen to enforce the ghost-star endpoint, plus the physical admissibility of negative energy density. There are no fitted data points; the constants are integration constants and scale choices. The central claim is an existence construction, so the ledger mainly documents how much of the endpoint is assumed rather than derived.

free parameters (7)
  • beta = not fitted (separation constant)
    Introduced in Equation (58) as the separation constant for X(r,t); its value is not determined by physics and is free.
  • c1 = 0
    Integration constant set to zero in Equation (77) to simplify the model.
  • c3 = not fitted (free dimensionless constant)
    Constant in g(r) = c3 r, chosen in Equation (77); only the product combination with beta and gamma enters the matching radius.
  • gamma = not fitted (free amplitude of F)
    Asymptotic amplitude of F(t) in Equation (66) and chosen in Equation (81); sets the overall scale together with r_Sigma(e).
  • r_Sigma(e) = 1/(2 gamma c3 beta) via Equation (78)
    Outer boundary coordinate; not free after matching, but sets the unit of length for t* and x.
  • r_Sigma(i) = free parameter
    Inner cavity boundary radius; explicitly stated as a free parameter in Section 4.3 because matching conditions are not imposed there.
  • t0 = not fitted (initial epoch)
    Lower limit of the t* interval, required positive and with t* > 1/sqrt(2) for A > 0; the initial time is arbitrary.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Einstein field equations with a stress-energy tensor of the form (2) accurately describe the fluid
    The whole construction is within classical general relativity; no alternative theory is considered.
  • domain assumption Negative energy-density regions are physically admissible
    Ghost stars require mu < 0 in some regions; the paper cites literature but concedes no microscopic theory exists in Section 5.
  • domain assumption Darmois junction conditions need hold only asymptotically on the outer boundary, and thin shells are allowed on inner and outer boundaries
    The model matches Minkowski only as t goes to infinity and has a thin shell on Sigma(i), as discussed in Sections 2.4 and 4.3.
  • ad hoc to paper The three imposed conditions (Y_TF = 0, quasi-homology, B = 1) may be relaxed to asymptotic limits in the final model
    The primeval solution satisfying all three conditions is incompatible with the static ghost-star limit; Section 4.2 replaces sigma by f(t) with prescribed asymptotic conditions.
  • ad hoc to paper Specific forms F = gamma e^(-r_Sigma(e)/t), f = -1/t, and g = c3 r are chosen
    These choices in Equations (77) and (81) are made to satisfy the target asymptotic and matching conditions, with no dynamical or microphysical motivation.
  • domain assumption B = 1 implies a central cavity with a thin-shell inner boundary
    Since the center cannot fill the fluid when B = 1, a void cavity is assumed, as explained in Section 3.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The birth of a ghost star." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5NOF47KB

@misc{pith2026250502871,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The birth of a ghost star},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5NOF47KB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.02871}
}
read the original abstract

We present a model of an evolving spherically symmetric dissipative self-gravitating fluid distribution which tends asymptotically to a ghost star, meaning that the end state of such a system corresponds to a static fluid distribution with vanishing total mass, and energy-density distribution which is negative in some regions of the fluid. The model is inspired in a solution representing a fluid evolving quasi-homologously and with vanishing complexity factor. However in order to satisfy the asymptotic behavior mentioned above, the starting solution has to be modified, as a consequence of which the resulting model only satisfies the two previously mentioned conditions, asymptotically. Additionally a condition on the variation of the infinitesimal proper radial distance between two neighboring points per unit of proper time is imposed, which implies the presence of a cavity surrounding the center. Putting together all these conditions we are able to obtain an analytical model depicting the emergence of a ghost star. Some potential observational consequences of this phenomenon are briefly discussed at the last section.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.02871 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. 8πµr2 Σ(e) , evaluated at t ∗ → ∞, as function of x in the interval [ 1 2 , 1]; UΣ(e) and mΣ(e) as functions of t ∗ . 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. 8πµr2 Σ(e) , 8πPrr 2 Σ(e) and 8πP⊥r 2 Σ(e) as functions of x and t ∗ . 31 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 8πqr2 Σ(e) as function of x and t ∗ . 32 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ghost stars in general rela tivity

    Herrera, L.; Di Prisco, A.; Ospino, J. Ghost stars in general rela tivity. Symmetry 2024, 16, 562

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Relativistic Astrophysics

    Zeldovich, Ya.B.; Novikov, I.D. Relativistic Astrophysics. Vol I. Stars and Relativity ; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, Illinois. USA, 1971

    work page 1971

  3. [3]

    The Collapse of a Small Mass in the General Theory of Relativity

    Zeldovich, Ya.B. The Collapse of a Small Mass in the General Theory of Relativity. Sov. Phys. JETP 1962, 15, 446

    work page 1962

  4. [4]

    Confined gravitational fields prod uced by anisotropic spheres

    Herrera,L.; Ponce de Leon, J. Confined gravitational fields prod uced by anisotropic spheres. J. Math. Phys. 1985, 26, 2847–2849

    work page 1985

  5. [5]

    Non-static fluid spheres ad mitting a conformal Killing vector: Exact solutions

    Herrera, L.; Di Prisco, A.; Ospino, J. Non-static fluid spheres ad mitting a conformal Killing vector: Exact solutions. Universe 2022, 8, 296

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Possible existence of ghost st ars in the context of electromagnetic field

    Naseer, T.; Hassan, K.; Sharif, M. Possible existence of ghost st ars in the context of electromagnetic field. Chin. J. P. 2025, 94, 594

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Evolution of Self-Gravitatin g Fluid Spheres Involving Ghost Stars

    Herrera, L.; Di Prisco, A.; Ospino, J. Evolution of Self-Gravitatin g Fluid Spheres Involving Ghost Stars. Symmetry 2024, 16, 1422

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Ghost neutrinos in general relativity

    Davis, T; Ray, J. Ghost neutrinos in general relativity. Phys. Rev. D 1974, 9, 331

    work page 1974

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    Space-times admitting non-unique neu- trino fields

    Collinson, C.D.; Morris, P.B. Space-times admitting non-unique neu- trino fields. Il Nuovo Cimento B 1973, 16, 273–284

    1973

  2. [10]

    Space-times admitting neutrino fields with zero energy and momentum

    Collinson, C.D.; Morris, P.B. Space-times admitting neutrino fields with zero energy and momentum. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 1973, 6, 915–916

    1973

  3. [11]

    New definition of complexity for self–gravitating flu id dis- tributions: The spherically symmetric static case

    Herrera, L. New definition of complexity for self–gravitating flu id dis- tributions: The spherically symmetric static case. Phys. Rev. D 2018, 97, 044010

    2018

  4. [12]

    Definition of complexity for dy- namical spherically symmetric dissipative self–gravitating fluid distri- butions

    Herrera, L.; Di Prisco, A.; Ospino, J. Definition of complexity for dy- namical spherically symmetric dissipative self–gravitating fluid distri- butions. Phys. Rev. D 2018, 98, 104059. 24

    2018

  5. [13]

    Quasi–homologous evolutio n of self–gravitating systems with vanishing complexity factor

    Herrera, L.; Di Prisco , A.; Ospino, J. Quasi–homologous evolutio n of self–gravitating systems with vanishing complexity factor. Eur. Phys. J. C 2020, 80, 631,

    2020

  6. [14]

    Herrera, G

    L. Herrera, G. Le Denmat and N.O. Santos. Cavity evolution in re l- ativistic self–gravitating fluids. Class. Quantum Grav. 27, 135017, (2010)

    2010

  7. [15]

    Structure and Evolution of the Stars ; Dover: New York, NY, USA, 1958

    Schwarzschild, M. Structure and Evolution of the Stars ; Dover: New York, NY, USA, 1958

    1958

  8. [16]

    Stellar Interiors: Physical Principles, Struc- ture and Evolution ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1994

    Hansen, C.; Kawaler, S. Stellar Interiors: Physical Principles, Struc- ture and Evolution ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1994

    1994

  9. [17]

    Stellar Structure and Evolution ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1990

    Kippenhahn , R.; Weigert, A. Stellar Structure and Evolution ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1990. 631

    1990

  10. [18]

    R.; Wands, D

    Liddle, A. R.; Wands, D. Microwave background constraints on e x- tended inflation voids. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1991, 253, 637

    1991

  11. [19]

    Peebles, P. J. E. The Void Phenomenon. Astrophys. J. 2001, 557, 445

    2001

  12. [20]

    Relativistic Equations for Adiabatic, Spher ically Symmetric Gravitational Collapse

    Misner, C.; Sharp, D. Relativistic Equations for Adiabatic, Spher ically Symmetric Gravitational Collapse. Phys. Rev. 1964, 136, B571

    1964

  13. [21]

    Spherical Symmetry and Mass-Energy in Ge n- eral Relativity

    Cahill, M.; McVittie, G. Spherical Symmetry and Mass-Energy in Ge n- eral Relativity. I. General Theory. J. Math. Phys. 1970, 11, 1382

    1970

  14. [22]

    Memorial des Sciences Mathematiques; Gauthier-V illars: Paris, France, (1927); p

    Darmois, G. Memorial des Sciences Mathematiques; Gauthier-V illars: Paris, France, (1927); p. 25

    1927

  15. [23]

    Collapse of a radiating star with shear

    Chan, R. Collapse of a radiating star with shear. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1997, 288, 589–595

    1997

  16. [24]

    Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in general relat ivity

    Israel,W. Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in general relat ivity. Il Nuovo Cimento B 1966, 10, 1

    1966

  17. [25]

    Nonstationary irreversible thermodynamic: A causa l rela- tivistic theory

    Israel, W. Nonstationary irreversible thermodynamic: A causa l rela- tivistic theory. Ann. Phys. (NY) 1976, 100, 310–331

    1976

  18. [26]

    Thermodynamic of nonstationary and t ransient effects in a relativistic gas

    Israel, W.; Stewart, J. Thermodynamic of nonstationary and t ransient effects in a relativistic gas. Phys. Lett. A 1976, 58, 213–215. 25

    1976

  19. [27]

    Transient relativistic thermodynamics a nd ki- netic theory

    Israel, W.; Stewart, J. Transient relativistic thermodynamics a nd ki- netic theory. Ann. Phys. (NY) 1979, 118, 341–372

    1979

  20. [28]

    The Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes

    Eckart, C. The Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes. I II. Rela- tivistic Theory of the Simple Fluid. Phys. Rev. 1940, 58, 919

    1940

  21. [29]

    Fluid Mechanics , Pergamon Press: London, U.K

    Landau, L.; Lifshitz, E. Fluid Mechanics , Pergamon Press: London, U.K. 1959

    1959

  22. [30]

    Sulla conduzione del calore

    Cattaneo, C. Sulla conduzione del calore . Atti Sem. Mat. Fiz. Univ. Modena 1948, 3, 83–101

    1948

  23. [31]

    Sur une forme de l’equation de la chaleur eliminant le paradoxe d’une propagation instantanee

    Cattaneo, C. Sur une forme de l’equation de la chaleur eliminant le paradoxe d’une propagation instantanee . Compt. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 1958, 247, 431–433

    1958

  24. [32]

    Les paradoxes de la theorie continue de l’equation de la chaleur

    Vernotte, P. Les paradoxes de la theorie continue de l’equation de la chaleur. Compt. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 1958, 246, 3154–3155

    1958

  25. [33]

    On the thermodynamics of tilted and collisio n- less gases in Friedmann–Robertson–Walker spacetimes

    Triginer, J.; Pavon, D. On the thermodynamics of tilted and collisio n- less gases in Friedmann–Robertson–Walker spacetimes. Class. Quan- tum Grav. 1995, 12, 199

    1995

  26. [34]

    Demianski, Relativistic Astrophysics ; Pergamon Press, Oxford, U.K

    M. Demianski, Relativistic Astrophysics ; Pergamon Press, Oxford, U.K. (1985)

    1985

  27. [35]

    On the weight of heat and thermal equilibrium in genera l relativity

    Tolman, R. On the weight of heat and thermal equilibrium in genera l relativity. Phys. Rev 1930, 35, 904

    1930

  28. [36]

    On the use of the energy-momentum principle in gener al relativity

    Tolman, R. On the use of the energy-momentum principle in gener al relativity. Phys. Rev 1930, 35, 875

    1930

  29. [37]

    Negative Mass in General Relativity

    Bondi, H. Negative Mass in General Relativity. Rev. Mod. Phys. 1957, 29, 423-428

    1957

  30. [38]

    A nonlinear gauge-invariant field t heory of leptons

    Cooperstock, F.I.; Rosen, N. A nonlinear gauge-invariant field t heory of leptons. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 1989, 28, 423–440

    1989

  31. [39]

    Does the electron contain neg ative mass? Phys

    Bonnor, W.B.; Cooperstock , F.I. Does the electron contain neg ative mass? Phys. Lett. A. 1989, 139, 442–444. 26

    1989

  32. [40]

    Lectures on General Relativity ; D

    Papapetrou, A. Lectures on General Relativity ; D. Reidel, Dordrecht- Holland: Boston. USA, 1974

    1974

  33. [41]

    Negative energy density and classical e lectron models

    Herrera, L.; Varela, V. Negative energy density and classical e lectron models. Physics Letters A , 1994, 189, 11–14

    1994

  34. [42]

    On Negative Mass Cosmology in General Relativity

    Najera, S.; Gamboa, A.; Aguilar-Nieto, A.; Escamilla-Rivera, C. On Negative Mass Cosmology in General Relativity. arXiv: 2105.110041v1 2021

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    A unifying theory of dark energy and dark matter : Nega- tive masses and matter creation within a modified λ cdm framework

    Farnes, J.S. A unifying theory of dark energy and dark matter : Nega- tive masses and matter creation within a modified λ cdm framework. Astron. Astrophys. 2018, 620, A92

    2018

  36. [44]

    New perspectives on the TOV equilibrium from a dual null approach

    Maciel, A.; Delliou, M.L.; Mimoso, J.P. New perspectives on the TOV equilibrium from a dual null approach. Class. Quantum Gravity 2020, 37,125005

    2020

  37. [45]

    Nonstatic hyperbolically symmetric fluids

    Herrera, L. Nonstatic hyperbolically symmetric fluids. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2022, 31, 2240001

    2022

  38. [46]

    Energy conditions in mod- ified gravity

    Capozziello, S.; Lobo, F.S.N.; Mimoso, J.P. Energy conditions in mod- ified gravity. Phys. Lett. B 2014, 730, 280–283

    2014

  39. [47]

    Generalized energy cond i- tions in extended theories of gravity

    Capozziello, S.; Lobo, F.S.N.; Mimoso, J.P. Generalized energy cond i- tions in extended theories of gravity. Phys. Rev. D 2015, 91, 124019

    2015

  40. [48]

    Twilight for the Energy Conditions? Int

    Barcelo, C.; Visser, M. Twilight for the Energy Conditions? Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2002, 11, 1553–1560

    2002

  41. [49]

    Energy conditions in general relativit y and quantum field theory

    Kontou, E.A.; Sanders, K. Energy conditions in general relativit y and quantum field theory. Class. Quantum Gravity 2020, 37, 193001

    2020

  42. [50]

    On negative energies, strings, branes, and branew orlds: A review of novel approaches

    Pavsic, M. On negative energies, strings, branes, and branew orlds: A review of novel approaches. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 2020, 35, 2030020

    2020

  43. [51]

    Emergence of negative mass in general rela tivity

    Chen-Hao Hao etal. Emergence of negative mass in general rela tivity. Eur. Phys. J. C 2024, 84, 878

    2024

  44. [52]

    The effect of negative mass in gravitating sys tems

    Bormashenko, E. The effect of negative mass in gravitating sys tems. Pramana J. P. 2023, 97, 199. 27

    2023

  45. [53]

    Akiyama, K. et al. (Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration). Firs t M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermass ive Black Hole. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2019, 875, L1

    2019

  46. [54]

    Akiyama, K. et al. (Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration). Firs t Sagittarius A Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of th e Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2022, 930, L12

    2022

  47. [55]

    Testing general relativity with the Event Horizon Tele scope

    Psaltis, D. Testing general relativity with the Event Horizon Tele scope. Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 2019, 51, 137

    2019

  48. [56]

    Gralla, S. E. Can the EHT M87 results be used to test general re lativ- ity?. Phys. Rev. D 2021, 103, 024023

    2021

  49. [57]

    Herrera complexity and shadows of spheri- cally symmetric compact objects

    Nalui, S.; Bhattacharya, S. Herrera complexity and shadows of spheri- cally symmetric compact objects. Phys. Lettt. B 2025, 861, 139261

    2025

  50. [58]

    Repository for extended dark ma tter object constraints

    Croon, D.; Sevillano Munoz., S. Repository for extended dark ma tter object constraints. Eur.Phys J. C 2025, 85, 8

    2025

  51. [59]

    Thirukkanesh, S; Maharaj, S. D. Radiating relativistic matter in geodesic motion. J. Math. Phys. 2009, 50, 022502

    2009

  52. [60]

    Thirukkanesh, S.; Maharaj, S. D. Mixed potentials in radiative st ellar collapse. J. Math. Phys. 2010, 51, 072502

    2010

  53. [61]

    All solutions for geodesic anisotropic spherical colla pse with shear and heat radiation

    Ivanov, B. All solutions for geodesic anisotropic spherical colla pse with shear and heat radiation. Astrophys. Space Sci. 2016, 361, 18

    2016

  54. [62]

    A different approach to anisotropic spherical collap se with shear and heat radiation

    Ivanov, B. A different approach to anisotropic spherical collap se with shear and heat radiation. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2016, 25, 1650049

    2016

  55. [63]

    Yousra, A.; Bhatti, M

    Sheikh, U. ; Yousra, A.; Bhatti, M. Z.; Pincak, R. On evolution of compact stars from string fluid in Rastall gravity. Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 2023, 20, 2350058

    2023

  56. [64]

    Z.; Turki, N.; Hanif, S.; Malik, A

    Bhatti, M. Z.; Turki, N.; Hanif, S.; Malik, A. Energy density inho- mogeneities with self-gravitating charged fluid in modified teleparallel gravity. Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 2024, 21, 2450171. 28

    2024

  57. [65]

    Z.; Shrahili, M.; Khan, S.; Khan, A

    Yousaf, Z.; Bhatti, M. Z.; Shrahili, M.; Khan, S.; Khan, A. S. Con- struction of complexity–free anisotropic dark energy stars. Phys. Dark Univ. 2025, 47, 101811

    2025

  58. [66]

    Extended theories of gravity

    Capozziello, S.; Laurentis, M.D. Extended theories of gravity. Phys. Rep. 2011, 509, 167. 29 Figure 1: 8 πµr 2 Σ (e), evaluated at t∗ → ∞ , as function of x in the interval [ 1 2, 1]; UΣ (e) and mΣ (e) as functions of t∗. 30 Figure 2: 8 πµr 2 Σ (e), 8πP rr2 Σ (e) and 8πP ⊥r2 Σ...

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.