Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 73 references

Observational Signatures of Janis-Newman-Winicour Strongly Naked Singularity

T0 review · 4 major / 3 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 Light reflected by a photon-sphere-free JNW naked singularity produces paired images and extra Einstein rings, signatures that could distinguish it from a black hole.

desk verdict The qualitative reflection phenomenology is probably right, but a concrete typo in the effective potential and no convergence tests mean the quantitative hot-spot predictions need revision before they carry weight. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13214 v1 pith:7LRU2S2T submitted 2025-05-19 gr-qc

Zeqian Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc
keywords Janis-Newman-Winicourspacetimenakedsingularitygravitationallensingraytracingaccretiondiskhotspotphotonspherecosmiccensorship
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 claims that a Janis-Newman-Winicour (JNW) strongly naked singularity, a spherically symmetric, horizonless spacetime with a massless scalar field and no photon sphere, should leave image signatures that a Schwarzschild black hole does not produce. Because the photon effective potential diverges at the singularity for $0\le\gamma\le0.5$, light rays that approach closely are reflected instead of captured, so a single source can appear twice: once by ordinary bending and once after a turn-around. In ray-traced images this produces paired hot-spot tracks, an extra Einstein ring on a background celestial sphere, and additional faint rings in an accretion disk, with the pair structure depending on the observer's inclination. The paper argues that these reflection-induced signatures could distinguish a JNW naked singularity from a black hole in future high-resolution observations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the JNW metric, $ds^2=-(1-r_c/r)^\gamma dt^2+(1-r_c/r)^{-\gamma}dr^2+(1-r_c/r)^{1-\gamma}r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta\,d\phi^2)$, together with the photon effective potential $V_{\rm eff}=\frac{L^2}{r^2}(1-r_c/r)^{1-2\gamma}$. The regime $0\le\gamma\le0.5$, called the JNW strongly naked singularity, has an effective potential with no local maximum that diverges at $r=r_c$; photons that reach their turning point reverse direction, which is the mechanism the paper calls reflection. The parameter $\gamma$ controls the maximum deflection angle $\alpha(b_m)$, which fixes where the additional Einstein ring appears and how strongly images are inverted. Stable circular orbits around the singularity supply the disk and hot-spot radii, with marginally stable orbits $r_\pm=\frac{r_c}{2}\left(1+3\gamma\pm\sqrt{5\gamma^2-1}\right)$.

What would settle it

A convergence test would settle it: re-run the $\gamma=0.4$ hot spot simulation at twice and four times the linear resolution, for example $2000\times2000$ and $4000\times4000$ pixels with smaller integration steps, and check that the $n_R$ track, the two Einstein rings, and the disappearance of the secondary peak at $50^\circ$ persist with stable brightness and position; if the faint features shift, merge, or vanish, the reflection signatures are numerical artifacts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the absence of a photon sphere does not make the JNW singularity invisible; instead, the divergent effective potential $V_{\rm eff}=\frac{L^2}{r^2}\left(1-\frac{r_c}{r}\right)^{1-2\gamma}$ acts as a reflective wall for photons with small impact parameter. Photons that would fall into a black hole instead turn around, so a source's images split into a non-reflected family $n_N$ and a reflected family $n_R$, with $n_N$ always lying outside $n_R$ when both are visible. The paper demonstrates this in three models: the celestial sphere shows two Einstein rings instead of one; the thin accretion disk gains extra ring-shaped and dim compressed images; and an orbiting hot spot produces paired tracks whose secondary image can overlap or disappear as the inclination drops. For $\gamma=0.4$ at a viewing angle of $50^\circ$, reflection is strong enough that the secondary image vanishes and the temporal magnitude curve loses its secondary peak, a signature the paper proposes as a potential black-hole-versus-singularity discriminator.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the numerical ray tracer resolves photon paths that turn around extremely close to the singularity, where the bending grows enormous, so the faint reflected images, paired tracks, and missing peaks are physical rather than artifacts of finite pixel resolution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A background celestial sphere shows two Einstein rings for $\gamma=0.45$ and $\gamma=0.4$, compared with one for Schwarzschild, and the extra ring moves outward as $\gamma$ decreases.
  • A thin accretion disk around the singularity shows extra ring-shaped images and a dim, compressed image made by reflected rays; for $\gamma=0.45$ the full image has four rings with an empty band between the inner and outer disk.
  • An orbiting hot spot appears as paired image tracks $n_N$ and $n_R$, with $n_N$ always outside $n_R$ when reflection occurs; the pair can merge or vanish at lower inclination.
  • The temporal magnitude of a hot spot has two peaks for $\gamma=0.45$, but for $\gamma=0.4$ reflection suppresses the secondary peak, leaving a single peak at both $80^\circ$ and $50^\circ$ inclination.
  • If such paired images are seen in future high-resolution observations, they can serve as a discriminator between a JNW strongly naked singularity and a Schwarzschild black hole.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same reflection mechanism should operate in any horizonless compact object whose photon effective potential diverges at the center, so the paired-image test may not uniquely identify JNW spacetimes; comparing the inclination dependence of the pair separation would sharpen the distinction.
  • The disappearance of the secondary magnitude peak at low inclination suggests that time-resolved light curves alone, without resolved images, might already carry evidence of reflection, a testable extension the paper does not develop.
  • Polarimetric or multi-frequency imaging of the paired tracks could separate reflected from non-reflected rays, since the two families sample different disk radii and should show different orbital-phase behaviour.
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

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies observational signatures of the Janis-Newman-Winicour (JNW) naked singularity in the strongly naked regime 0 ≤ γ ≤ 0.5, where no photon sphere exists. Using numerical ray tracing, the author computes images of a celestial sphere, a thin accretion disk, and an orbiting hot spot, and compares them with the Schwarzschild black hole case. The central claims are that the divergent effective potential near r_c causes null geodesics to be reflected, producing paired image tracks (n_N and n_R) around hot spots, two Einstein rings on the celestial sphere, inversion of the secondary image, and a suppression of the secondary peak in the temporal magnitude for γ = 0.4. These features are proposed as observational discriminators between a JNW strongly naked singularity and a black hole for future high-resolution observations.

Significance. If the reported signatures are robust, the paper provides concrete, falsifiable predictions—paired hot-spot tracks, additional Einstein rings, and inclination-dependent disappearance of a secondary light-curve peak—that could be tested with next-generation EHT observations. The work builds on established ray-tracing and hot-spot frameworks, and the qualitative mechanism (divergent photon effective potential at r_c for γ < 1/2) is consistent with prior literature on JNW lensing. However, the paper's printed effective-potential equations contain an exponent error that contradicts its own classification, and the numerical results are presented without convergence tests or error estimates. Because the central signatures rely on photons turning extremely close to r_c, the current manuscript does not yet establish that the simulated features are physical rather than numerical artifacts.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II A, Eq. (8) and Sec. II B, Eq. (10)] The photon effective potential in Eq. (8) is printed as V_eff = (L^2/r^2)(1-r_c/r)^{1-2γ}, but the correct null radial equation derived from Eq. (3) gives V_eff = (L^2/r^2)(1-r_c/r)^{2γ-1}. For 0 ≤ γ ≤ 0.5 the printed form vanishes at r_c, whereas the correct form diverges; only the divergent barrier produces the 'reflection' on which every claimed signature rests. The same error appears in the timelike potential, Eq. (10), where the printed L^2 term gives A^{1-γ} instead of the correct A^{2γ-1}. The photon-sphere formula in Eq. (9) and the stable-orbit expressions in Eq. (12) are consistent with the corrected potentials, suggesting a typographical error; nevertheless, since no code is released, a reader cannot determine whether the simulations used the corrected but unstated potential. This must be fixed and the corrected equations used in the derivation.
  2. [Sec. III, all simulation setups] No convergence tests, no adaptive step-size description, and no error estimates are reported for the 2000×2000 or 1000×1000 ray-traced images. The claimed paired tracks, additional Einstein rings, and the disappearance of the secondary peak at γ = 0.4 are produced by photons that turn at minimum radii extremely close to r_c, where the metric functions (1-r_c/r)^{-γ} and the corrected potential diverge. With fixed grids and no integrator tolerance control, the faint compressed tracks and the missing secondary peak could be numerical artifacts. The manuscript should include convergence studies with varying pixel resolution and integration accuracy, and preferably a public release of the ray-tracing code, to support the central claims.
  3. [Sec. III C, hot spot radius for γ = 0.4] The choice r = 6M for γ = 0.4 is said to follow the criterion from [59] that hot spots should lie at r ≲ 0.3 r_c. But for γ = 0.4, r_c = 2M/γ = 5M, so 0.3 r_c = 1.5M, which is inside the singularity (r < r_c); the chosen orbit at r = 6M therefore violates the stated criterion. Since this particular orbit choice is exactly the case in which the secondary peak is suppressed, the physical motivation for the orbit must be re-evaluated or the criterion must be correctly stated and applied, otherwise the claimed peak suppression may be an artifact of an unjustified model parameter.
  4. [Sec. II A and Fig. 3] The classification that a photon sphere exists for 0.5 < γ ≤ 1 follows from the corrected potential, not from Eq. (8) as printed. Also, the deflection-angle discussion in Sec. III A and Fig. 3 relies on the existence of a maximum α(b) for γ = 0.4; the value and position of this maximum should be checked against the corrected radial equation, since the printed potential would not produce the claimed reflection geometry.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III B] The description of the γ = 0.4 accretion-disk image ('a large primary and a dim image as well, inside of which, there exists a small ring-shaped image') would be clearer with quantitative radii or emission-radius annotations in the figure.
  2. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption contains grammatical errors, e.g., 'Both image in this column displays three unique lensed hot spot image tracks'; these should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. II B, Eq. (15)] The derivation of the MSCO radii would benefit from explicitly substituting the corrected effective potential, since a reader following the printed Eq. (10) cannot reproduce Eq. (15) or the stability condition in Eq. (13).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the simulations are self-contained conditional computations; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper derives no quantity from a fit. Its inputs are the JNW metric (Eq. 3), conserved E and L (Eq. 6), effective potentials (Eqs. 8 and 10), and chosen parameters (gamma, hot-spot radius, observer inclination); its outputs are ray-traced images and light curves obtained by integrating null geodesics. The claimed paired n_N/n_R tracks and the disappearance of the secondary peak at gamma=0.4 are consequences of the geodesic integration for the chosen input parameters, not quantities used to determine those inputs. Citations to prior work (e.g., [50] for circular geodesics, [59,70-73] for the hot-spot framework) supply standard equations and numerical methods but do not fix the outcome; there is no self-citation chain that forces the conclusions. The incorrect exponent in Eq. (8) and the r=6M versus r less than or similar to 0.3 r_c mismatch are correctness and consistency concerns, not circularity: even if the printed potential is wrong or the hot-spot orbit is unjustified, the simulation output is not defined in terms of itself. The central claim is therefore a genuinely conditional numerical prediction, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on the choice of JNW spacetime as a physical model, the assumption that its naked singularity is not regularized away, and the adoption of standard emission models for the disk and hot spot. No new entities or forces are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • gamma (scalar field parameter of JNW spacetime) = 0.4 and 0.45 (representative strongly naked cases; gamma=1 is the Schwarzschild limit)
    The paper chooses these values by hand to illustrate the reflection effect; they are not fitted to data and the central qualitative claim is argued to hold for the whole range 0 <= gamma <= 0.5.
  • Hot spot orbital radius for gamma=0.4 = 6M
    Chosen at r=6M following [59]'s recommendation for compact regions near the central object, but the connection to the stated r < 0.3 r_c criterion is unclear (see red flag).
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The JNW metric is an exact solution of Einstein's equations coupled to a massless scalar field.
    Used as the starting point in Section II.A, Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption A naked singularity can exist as a physical object, i.e., cosmic censorship is not absolute.
    The entire paper assumes the spacetime is valid down to r=r_c and that the singularity is observable.
  • standard math Null geodesics in the JNW metric correctly describe light propagation.
    The ray tracing integrates the geodesic equations derived from the metric in Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption Stable circular orbits exist for massive particles as described in Section II.B, with the inner disk extending to r_- or r_c depending on gamma.
    The accretion disk and hot spot models rely on the existence of these orbits from [50].
  • domain assumption The accretion disk is geometrically thin, optically thick, and its specific intensity follows the prescription in [69].
    Adopted in Section III.B for the brightness assignment.
  • domain assumption The hot spot emits isotropically and follows the model of [59,70,71].
    Adopted in Section III.C for the hot spot simulations and observables.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observational Signatures of Janis-Newman-Winicour Strongly Naked Singularity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7LRU2S2T

@misc{pith2026250513214,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observational Signatures of Janis-Newman-Winicour Strongly Naked Singularity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7LRU2S2T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13214}
}
read the original abstract

This paper explores the unique observational signatures of accretion onto a Janis-Newman-Winicour (JNW) strongly naked singularity, particularly in the absence of a photon sphere. The surrounding spacetime of such a singularity exhibits pronounced reflective properties, causing light rays traveling in its vicinity to undergo reflection and produce paired imaging trajectories in both accretion disk and hot spot models. Our simulations reveal that this reflection effect generates additional images in the gravitational lensing patterns and significantly alters the temporal brightness profiles of the lensed images. These reflection-induced paired images, together with their inclination-dependent behavior, offer distinct observational signatures that could potentially distinguish a JNW strongly naked singularity from a black hole based on future high-resolution observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.13214 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The radius of MSCOs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Images of a celestial sphere located at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The deflection angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Images of an accretion disk fill all stable circular orbits in JNW spacetime with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Separated images of the outer ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Time integrated images of a full orbit of the hot spot generated from an inclination angle of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Temporal magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Temporal magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [59]

    Hamaus, T

    N. Hamaus, T. Paumard, T. Muller, S. Gillessen, F. Eisenhauer, S. Trippe, and R. Genzel. Prospects for testing the nature of Sgr A*’s NIR flares on the basis of current VLT- and future VLTI-observations. Astrophys. J., 692:902–916, 2009.arXiv:0810.4947,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/902. I, III C, III C, III C, III C

    arXiv 2009

  2. [1]

    K. S. Virbhadra and G. F. R. Ellis. Gravitational lensing by naked singularities.Phys. Rev. D, 65:103004, 2002.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.103004. I

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.103004 2002

  3. [2]

    K. S. Virbhadra and C. R. Keeton. Time delay and magnification centroid due to gravitational lensing by black holes and naked singularities.Phys. Rev. D, 77:124014, 2008.arXiv:0710.2333,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.77.124014

    arXiv 2008

  4. [3]

    Gyulchev and Stoytcho S

    Galin N. Gyulchev and Stoytcho S. Yazadjiev. Gravitational Lensing by Rotating Naked Singularities. Phys. Rev. D, 78:083004, 2008.arXiv:0806.3289,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.083004

    arXiv 2008

  5. [4]

    Narasimha, and Pankaj S

    Satyabrata Sahu, Mandar Patil, D. Narasimha, and Pankaj S. Joshi. Can strong gravitational lensing 19 distinguish naked singularities from black holes?Phys. Rev. D, 86:063010, 2012.arXiv:1206.3077, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.063010

    arXiv 2012

  6. [5]

    Analytical approach to strong gravitational lensing from ultracompact objects.Phys

    Rajibul Shaikh, Pritam Banerjee, Suvankar Paul, and Tapobrata Sarkar. Analytical approach to strong gravitational lensing from ultracompact objects.Phys. Rev. D, 99(10):104040, 2019.arXiv:1903. 08211,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.104040. III A

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.104040 2019

  7. [6]

    Strong gravitational lensing by a strongly naked null singularity

    Suvankar Paul. Strong gravitational lensing by a strongly naked null singularity.Phys. Rev. D, 102(6):064045, 2020.arXiv:2007.05509,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.064045

    work page Pith review arXiv 2020

  8. [7]

    M. Wyman. Static Spherically Symmetric Scalar Fields in General Relativity.Phys. Rev. D, 24:839–841, 1981.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.24.839

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.24.839 1981

Show all 73 references
  1. [8]

    Gravitational lensing by a photon sphere in a Reissner-Nordstr¨ om naked singularity spacetime in strong deflection limits.Phys

    Naoki Tsukamoto. Gravitational lensing by a photon sphere in a Reissner-Nordstr¨ om naked singularity spacetime in strong deflection limits.Phys. Rev. D, 104(12):124016, 2021.arXiv:2107.07146,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.124016

    2021 arXiv

  2. [9]

    The images of a rotating naked singularity with a complete photon sphere

    Mingzhi Wang, Guanghai Guo, Pengfei Yan, Songbai Chen, and Jiliang Jing. The images of a rotating naked singularity with a complete photon sphere. 7 2023.arXiv:2307.16748

    2023 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Gravitational Lensing by Born-Infeld Naked Singularities

    Yiqian Chen, Peng Wang, Houwen Wu, and Haitang Yang. Gravitational Lensing by Born-Infeld Naked Singularities. 5 2023.arXiv:2305.17411. I, III A, III A

    2023 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Weak Lensing Probes of Modified Gravity.Phys

    Fabian Schmidt. Weak Lensing Probes of Modified Gravity.Phys. Rev. D, 78:043002, 2008.arXiv: 0805.4812,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.043002

    2008 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Tests of Gravity from Imaging and Spectroscopic Surveys.Phys

    Jacek Guzik, Bhuvnesh Jain, and Masahiro Takada. Tests of Gravity from Imaging and Spectroscopic Surveys.Phys. Rev. D, 81:023503, 2010.arXiv:0906.2221,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.023503

    2010 arXiv

  6. [13]

    The Distance Duality Relation From Strong Gravitational Lensing.Astrophys

    Kai Liao, Zhengxiang Li, Shuo Cao, Marek Biesiada, Xiaogang Zheng, and Zong-Hong Zhu. The Distance Duality Relation From Strong Gravitational Lensing.Astrophys. J., 822(2):74, 2016.arXiv: 1511.01318,doi:10.3847/0004-637X/822/2/74

    2016 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Phantom wormholes in Einstein–Maxwell-dilaton theory.Class

    Prieslei Goulart. Phantom wormholes in Einstein–Maxwell-dilaton theory.Class. Quant. Grav., 35(2):025012, 2018.arXiv:1708.00935,doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa9dfc

    2018 arXiv

  8. [15]

    J. R. Nascimento, A. Yu. Petrov, P. J. Porfirio, and A. R. Soares. Gravitational lensing in black- bounce spacetimes.Phys. Rev. D, 102(4):044021, 2020.arXiv:2005.13096,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 102.044021

    2020 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Shafqat Ul Islam, Jitendra Kumar, and Sushant G. Ghosh. Strong gravitational lensing by rotating Simpson-Visser black holes.JCAP, 10:013, 2021.arXiv:2104.00696,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/ 10/013

    2021 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Gravitational lensing by two photon spheres in a black-bounce spacetime in strong deflection limits.Phys

    Naoki Tsukamoto. Gravitational lensing by two photon spheres in a black-bounce spacetime in strong deflection limits.Phys. Rev. D, 104(6):064022, 2021.arXiv:2105.14336,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 104.064022

    2021 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Haroldo C. D. Lima Junior, Jian-Zhi Yang, Lu´ ıs C. B. Crispino, Pedro V. P. Cunha, and Carlos A. R. Herdeiro. Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton neutral black holes in strong magnetic fields: Topological charge, shadows, and lensing.Phys. Rev. D, 105(6):064070, 2022.arXiv:2112.10802,do...

    2022 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Olmo, Diego Rubiera-Garcia, and Diego S´ aez-Chill´ on G´ omez

    Gonzalo J. Olmo, Diego Rubiera-Garcia, and Diego S´ aez-Chill´ on G´ omez. New light rings from multiple critical curves as observational signatures of black hole mimickers.Phys. Lett. B, 829:137045, 2022. arXiv:2110.10002,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137045

    2022 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Analytical study of gravitational lensing in Kerr-Newman black-bounce spacetime.JCAP, 11:006, 2022.arXiv:2206.09954,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/ 11/006

    Saptaswa Ghosh and Arpan Bhattacharyya. Analytical study of gravitational lensing in Kerr-Newman black-bounce spacetime.JCAP, 11:006, 2022.arXiv:2206.09954,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/ 11/006. I

    2022 arXiv

  14. [21]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 875:L1, 2019.arXiv:1906.11238,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0ec7. I

    2019 arXiv

  15. [22]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. II. Array and Instrumentation. Astrophys. J. Lett., 875(1):L2, 2019.arXiv:1906.11239,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c96

    2019 arXiv

  16. [23]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. III. Data Processing and Cali- bration.Astrophys. J. Lett., 875(1):L3, 2019.arXiv:1906.11240,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c57

    2019 arXiv

  17. [24]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. IV. Imaging the Central Su- permassive Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 875(1):L4, 2019.arXiv:1906.11241,doi:10.3847/ 2041-8213/ab0e85

    2019 arXiv

  18. [25]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Physical Origin of the Asym- metric Ring.Astrophys. J. Lett., 875(1):L5, 2019.arXiv:1906.11242,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ ab0f43

    2019 arXiv

  19. [26]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. The Shadow and Mass of the Central Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 875(1):L6, 2019.arXiv:1906.11243,doi:10.3847/ 2041-8213/ab1141

    2019 arXiv

  20. [27]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarization of the Ring. Astrophys. J. Lett., 910(1):L12, 2021.arXiv:2105.01169,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abe71d

    2021 arXiv

  21. [28]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VIII. Magnetic Field Structure near The Event Horizon.Astrophys. J. Lett., 910(1):L13, 2021.arXiv:2105.01173,doi:10.3847/ 2041-8213/abe4de

    2021 arXiv

  22. [29]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L12, 2022. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac6674

    2022 doi

  23. [30]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. II. EHT and Mul- tiwavelength Observations, Data Processing, and Calibration.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L13, 2022. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac6675

    2022 doi

  24. [31]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. III. Imaging of the Galactic Center Supermassive Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L14, 2022.doi:10.3847/ 2041-8213/ac6429. 21

    2022

  25. [32]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. IV. Variability, Mor- phology, and Black Hole Mass.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L15, 2022.doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac6736. I

    2022 doi

  26. [33]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Testing Astrophysical Models of the Galactic Center Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L16, 2022.doi:10.3847/ 2041-8213/ac6672

    2022

  27. [34]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Kazunori Akiyama et al. First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. Testing the Black Hole Metric.Astrophys. J. Lett., 930(2):L17, 2022.doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac6756. I

    2022 doi

  28. [35]

    Johnson, and Charles F

    Ramesh Narayan, Michael D. Johnson, and Charles F. Gammie. The Shadow of a Spherically Accreting Black Hole.Astrophys. J. Lett., 885(2):L33, 2019.arXiv:1910.02957,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ ab518c. I

    2019 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Rajibul Shaikh, Prashant Kocherlakota, Ramesh Narayan, and Pankaj S. Joshi. Shadows of spherically symmetric black holes and naked singularities.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 482(1):52–64, 2019. arXiv:1802.08060,doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2624

    2019 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Shadows and photon spheres with spherical accretions in the four-dimensional Gauss–Bonnet black hole.Eur

    Xiao-Xiong Zeng, Hai-Qing Zhang, and Hongbao Zhang. Shadows and photon spheres with spherical accretions in the four-dimensional Gauss–Bonnet black hole.Eur. Phys. J. C, 80(9):872, 2020.arXiv: 2004.12074,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08449-y

    2020 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Influence of quintessence dark energy on the shadow of black hole.Eur

    Xiao-Xiong Zeng and Hai-Qing Zhang. Influence of quintessence dark energy on the shadow of black hole.Eur. Phys. J. C, 80(11):1058, 2020.arXiv:2007.06333,doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-020-08656-7

    2020 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Image of a regular phantom compact object and its luminosity under spherical accretions.Class

    Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, and Jiliang Jing. Image of a regular phantom compact object and its luminosity under spherical accretions.Class. Quant. Grav., 38(11):115008, 2021.arXiv:2011.04310,doi:10. 1088/1361-6382/abf712

    2021 arXiv

  33. [40]

    J. P. Luminet. Image of a spherical black hole with thin accretion disk.Astron. Astrophys., 75:228–235, 1979

    1979

  34. [41]

    Extreme gravitational lensing near rotating black holes.Mon

    Kris Beckwith and Chris Done. Extreme gravitational lensing near rotating black holes.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 359:1217–1228, 2005.arXiv:astro-ph/0411339,doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005. 08980.x

    2005 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Gralla, Daniel E

    Samuel E. Gralla, Daniel E. Holz, and Robert M. Wald. Black Hole Shadows, Photon Rings, and Lensing Rings.Phys. Rev. D, 100(2):024018, 2019.arXiv:1906.00873,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024018

    2019 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Dokuchaev and Natalia O

    Vyacheslav I. Dokuchaev and Natalia O. Nazarova. The brightest point in accretion disk and black hole spin: implication to the image of black hole M87*.Universe, 5:183, 2019.arXiv:1906.07171, doi:10.3390/universe5080183

    2019 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Influence of quantum correction on black hole shadows, photon rings, and lensing rings.Chin

    Jun Peng, Minyong Guo, and Xing-Hui Feng. Influence of quantum correction on black hole shadows, photon rings, and lensing rings.Chin. Phys. C, 45(8):085103, 2021.arXiv:2008.00657,doi:10.1088/ 1674-1137/ac06bb

    2021 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Shadow images and observed luminosity 22 of the Bardeen black hole surrounded by different accretions *.Chin

    Ke-Jian He, Sen Guo, Shuang-Cheng Tan, and Guo-Ping Li. Shadow images and observed luminosity 22 of the Bardeen black hole surrounded by different accretions *.Chin. Phys. C, 46(8):085106, 2022. arXiv:2103.13664,doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac67fe

    2022 arXiv

  39. [46]

    From a locality-principle for new physics to image features of regular spinning black holes with disks.JCAP, 05:073, 2021.arXiv:2103.13163,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/ 2021/05/073

    Astrid Eichhorn and Aaron Held. From a locality-principle for new physics to image features of regular spinning black holes with disks.JCAP, 05:073, 2021.arXiv:2103.13163,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/ 2021/05/073

    2021 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Shadows and rings of the Kehagias-Sfetsos black hole surrounded by thin disk accretion.JCAP, 06:037, 2021.arXiv:2105.08521,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/037

    Guo-Ping Li and Ke-Jian He. Shadows and rings of the Kehagias-Sfetsos black hole surrounded by thin disk accretion.JCAP, 06:037, 2021.arXiv:2105.08521,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/037

    2021 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Photon spheres and spherical accretion image of a hairy black hole.Phys

    Qingyu Gan, Peng Wang, Houwen Wu, and Haitang Yang. Photon spheres and spherical accretion image of a hairy black hole.Phys. Rev. D, 104(2):024003, 2021.arXiv:2104.08703,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.024003

    2021 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Photon ring and observational appearance of a hairy black hole.Phys

    Qingyu Gan, Peng Wang, Houwen Wu, and Haitang Yang. Photon ring and observational appearance of a hairy black hole.Phys. Rev. D, 104(4):044049, 2021.arXiv:2105.11770,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 104.044049. I

    2021 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Chowdhury, Mandar Patil, Daniele Malafarina, and Pankaj S

    Anirban N. Chowdhury, Mandar Patil, Daniele Malafarina, and Pankaj S. Joshi. Circular geodesics and accretion disks in Janis-Newman-Winicour and Gamma metric.Phys. Rev. D, 85:104031, 2012. arXiv:1112.2522,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.104031. I, II B, II B

    2012 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Janis, Ezra T

    Allen I. Janis, Ezra T. Newman, and Jeffrey Winicour. Reality of the Schwarzschild Singularity.Phys. Rev. Lett., 20:878–880, 1968.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.20.878

    1968 doi

  45. [52]

    Joshi, Parth Bambhaniya, Dipanjan Dey, and Pankaj S

    Ashok B. Joshi, Parth Bambhaniya, Dipanjan Dey, and Pankaj S. Joshi. Timelike geodesics in naked singularity and black hole spacetimes ii. 09 2019. URL:https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.08873.pdf, arXiv:1909.08873. I, II B

    2019 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Mandar Patil and Pankaj S. Joshi. Acceleration of particles in Janis-Newman-Winicour singularities. Phys. Rev. D, 85:104014, 2012.arXiv:1112.2525,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.104014. I

    2012 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Image of the Janis-Newman- Winicour naked singularity with a thin accretion disk.Phys

    Galin Gyulchev, Petya Nedkova, Tsvetan Vetsov, and Stoytcho Yazadjiev. Image of the Janis-Newman- Winicour naked singularity with a thin accretion disk.Phys. Rev. D, 100(2):024055, 2019.arXiv: 1905.05273,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024055

    2019 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Imprints of the Janis-Newman-Winicour spacetime on observations related to shadow and accretion.Phys

    Subhadip Sau, Indrani Banerjee, and Soumitra SenGupta. Imprints of the Janis-Newman-Winicour spacetime on observations related to shadow and accretion.Phys. Rev. D, 102(6):064027, 2020.arXiv: 2004.02840,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.064027. III B

    2020 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Observational signatures of strongly naked singularities: image of the thin accretion disk.The European Physical Journal C, 80(11):1017, Nov 2020

    Galin Gyulchev, Jutta Kunz, Petya Nedkova, Tsvetan Vetsov, and Stoytcho Yazadjiev. Observational signatures of strongly naked singularities: image of the thin accretion disk.The European Physical Journal C, 80(11):1017, Nov 2020. URL:https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.11...

    2020 doi

  50. [57]

    Lensing by a Fisher-Janis-Newman-Winicour naked singularity: Observa- tional issues related to the existence of caustic bending in the strongly scalarized case.Phys

    Bertrand Chauvineau. Lensing by a Fisher-Janis-Newman-Winicour naked singularity: Observa- tional issues related to the existence of caustic bending in the strongly scalarized case.Phys. Rev. D, 105(2):024071, 2022. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 106, 129901 (2022)].doi:10.1103/PhysRevD...

    2022 doi

  51. [58]

    Gravitational Lensing by Transparent Janis-Newman-Winicour Naked Singularities

    Deyou Chen, Yiqian Chen, Peng Wang, Tianshu Wu, and Houwen Wu. Gravitational Lensing by Transparent Janis-Newman-Winicour Naked Singularities. 9 2023.arXiv:2309.00905. I, III A

    2023 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Paumard, T

    Sascha Trippe, T. Paumard, T. Ott, S. Gillessen, F. Eisenhauer, F. Martins, and R. Genzel. A polarised infrared flare from Sagittarius A* and the signatures of orbiting plasma hotspots.Mon. Not. Roy. As- tron. Soc., 375:764–772, 2007.arXiv:astro-ph/0611737,doi:10.1111/j.1365-2...

    2007 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Broderick and Abraham Loeb

    Avery E. Broderick and Abraham Loeb. Imaging optically-thin hot spots near the black hole horizon of sgr a* at radio and near-infrared wavelengths.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 367:905–916, 2006. arXiv:astro-ph/0509237,doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10152.x. I, III C

    2006 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Witzel et al

    G. Witzel et al. Rapid Variability of Sgr A* across the Electromagnetic Spectrum.Astrophys. J., 917(2):73, 2021.arXiv:2011.09582,doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac0891. I

    2021 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Michail, Mark Wardle, Farhad Yusef-Zadeh, and Devaky Kunneriath

    Joseph M. Michail, Mark Wardle, Farhad Yusef-Zadeh, and Devaky Kunneriath. Multiwavelength Observations of Sgr A*. I. 2019 July 18.Astrophys. J., 923(1):54, 2021.arXiv:2107.09681,doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2d2c

    2019 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Abuter et al

    R. Abuter et al. Constraining particle acceleration in Sgr A⋆with simultaneous GRAVITY, Spitzer, NuSTAR, and Chandra observations.Astron. Astrophys., 654:A22, 2021.arXiv:2107.01096,doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140981. I

    2021 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Orbital motion near Sagittarius A* - Constraints from polarimetric ALMA observations.Astron

    Maciek Wielgus, Monika Moscibrodzka, Jesse Vos, Zachary Gelles, Ivan Marti-Vidal, Joseph Farah, Nicola Marchili, Ciriaco Goddi, and Hugo Messias. Orbital motion near Sagittarius A* - Constraints from polarimetric ALMA observations.Astron. Astrophys., 665:L6, 2022.arXiv:2209.09...

    2022 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Detection of orbital motions near the last stable circular orbit of the massive black hole sgra.Astronomy & Astrophysics, 618:L10, 2018

    Roberto Abuter, A Amorim, M Baub¨ ock, JP Berger, H Bonnet, W Brandner, Y Cl´ enet, V Coud´ e Du Foresto, PT de Zeeuw, C Deen, et al. Detection of orbital motions near the last stable circular orbit of the massive black hole sgra.Astronomy & Astrophysics, 618:L10, 2018. I

    2018

  59. [67]

    Abbott et al

    B.P. Abbott et al. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger.Phys. Rev. Lett., 116(6):061102, 2016.arXiv:1602.03837,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102. I

    2016 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Observing naked sin- gularities by the present and next-generation event horizon telescope

    Valentin Deliyski, Galin Gyulchev, Petya Nedkova, and Stoytcho Yazadjiev. Observing naked sin- gularities by the present and next-generation event horizon telescope. 01 2024. URL:https: //arxiv.org/pdf/2401.14092.pdf,arXiv:2401.14092. III B

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Interferometric Signatures of Black Holes with Multiple Photon Spheres

    Yiqian Chen, Peng Wang, and Haitang Yang. Interferometric Signatures of Black Holes with Multiple Photon Spheres. 12 2023.arXiv:2312.10304. III B

    2023 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Vincent, and Vitor Cardoso

    Jo˜ ao Lu´ ıs Rosa, Paulo Garcia, Fr´ ed´ eric H. Vincent, and Vitor Cardoso. Observational signatures of hot spots orbiting horizonless objects.Phys. Rev. D, 106(4):044031, 2022.arXiv:2205.11541, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.044031. III C, III C 24

    2022 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Jo˜ ao Lu´ ıs Rosa, Caio F. B. Macedo, and Diego Rubiera-Garcia. Imaging compact boson stars with hot spots and thin accretion disks.Phys. Rev. D, 108(4):044021, 2023.arXiv:2303.17296,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.108.044021. III C

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Observations of Orbiting Hot Spots around Naked Singularities

    Yiqian Chen, Peng Wang, and Haitang Yang. Observations of Orbiting Hot Spots around Naked Singularities. 9 2023.arXiv:2309.04157

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Distinguishing the observational signatures of hot spots orbiting reissner- nordstr¨ om spacetime

    Tianshu Wu and Yiqian Chen. Distinguishing the observational signatures of hot spots orbiting reissner- nordstr¨ om spacetime. 02 2024. URL:https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.06413.pdf,arXiv:2402.06413. III C

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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