Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Characteristic precessions of spherical orbit around a rotating braneworld black hole

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Tidal charge sign decides whether precession around a braneworld black hole is faster or slower than in Kerr.

desk verdict Standard epicyclic machinery applied to rotating braneworld black holes gives sign-dependent tidal-charge corrections; the paper is useful but has a sign contradiction in the text and a scope mismatch between its equatorial derivation and its nearly polar orbit applications. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.20736 v1 pith:A46GRUBB submitted 2025-05-27 gr-qc astro-ph.HE

Hui-Min Wang , Kai Liao , Shao-Wen Wei This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.HE
keywords rotatingbraneworldblackholetidalchargerelativisticprecessionLense-ThirringeffectnodalperiastroninnermoststablesphericalorbitRandall-Sundrum
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 a rotating black hole in a Randall-Sundrum braneworld carries a measurable, sign-dependent precession signature through a metric parameter called the tidal charge $b$. For spherical (tilted, non-equatorial) orbits, it derives the nodal and periastron precession frequencies and shows that positive $b$ suppresses both, while negative $b$ enhances them; the same pattern governs the Lense-Thirring precession of a stationary gyroscope. Because $b$ is not an electric charge and can take either sign, the direction of the deviation from Kerr is a clean marker of extra-dimensional gravity. These frequencies matter observationally because they appear in the 11-year precessing jet of M87*, in quasi-periodic oscillations, and in the phase evolution of extreme-mass-ratio inspirals.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the rotating braneworld black hole metric, a Kerr-like solution with a tidal charge $b$ that encodes the influence of the higher-dimensional bulk on the brane and may be positive or negative. The argument uses the conserved energy $E$, angular momentum $L$, and Carter constant $K$, with $K$ rewritten in terms of the tilt angle $\zeta$, and then perturbs circular orbits to obtain the vertical and radial epicyclic frequencies $\Omega_\theta$ and $\Omega_r$. The nodal precession $\Omega_{\rm nod} = \Omega_\varphi - \Omega_\theta$, the periastron precession $\Omega_{\rm per} = \Omega_\varphi - \Omega_r$, and the stationary-gyroscope Lense-Thirring frequency $\Omega_{\rm LT}$ are the quantities whose $b$-dependence carries the physical conclusions. Because $b$ appears directly in $\Delta$ and in the frame-dragging metric function, its sign sets the direction of every precession shift.

What would settle it

Integrate the full geodesic equations for a tilted spherical orbit at $\zeta = 1.45$ rad in the same metric with $a/M = 0.8$ and $b/M^2 = \pm 0.35$, and measure the nodal and periastron precession directly from the orbit; if the sign of $b$'s effect differs from Eqs. (19) and (21), the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the tidal charge $b$, which enters the rotating braneworld metric through $\Delta = r^2 - 2Mr + a^2 + b$, shifts the precession frequencies away from Kerr in a way controlled by its sign. Expanding the epicyclic frequencies for nearly circular equatorial orbits gives $\Omega_{\rm nod} \approx 2aM/r^3 - (3/2)a^2 M^{1/2}/r^{7/2} - ab/r^4$ and $\Omega_{\rm per} \approx (M^{3/2}/r^{5/2})(3 - b/(2M^2) - 4a/(r^{1/2}M^{1/2}))$. So $b>0$ lowers both frequencies, $b<0$ raises them, and the same suppression applies to the Lense-Thirring frequency of a stationary gyroscope at fixed radius and tilt. The paper highlights that positive $b$ simultaneously strengthens gravitational binding (shrinking the ISSO and the horizon) while weakening frame-dragging, a combination that does not occur for the Kerr metric and therefore offers a distinctive observational signature.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that epicyclic frequencies computed for small oscillations around equatorial circular orbits describe the precession of the highly tilted spherical orbits (up to $\zeta = 1.45$ rad) to which its astrophysical conclusions are applied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $b>0$ the ISSO moves inward for prograde equatorial orbits, shifting the inner edge of an accretion disk and its thermal cutoff to smaller radii; for $b<0$ the ISSO moves outward.
  • In the same spacetime, $b<0$ makes nodal and periastron precession faster than Kerr at equal radius and spin, so QPO frequency ratios and EMRI waveforms would show an extra phase advance.
  • If $b>0$, frame-dragging is weaker, so the precessing jet nozzle of M87* would swing more slowly than in Kerr for a given spin, providing a route to bound $b$ from the observed 11-year period.
  • A stationary gyroscope at fixed radius precesses more slowly for $b>0$ and faster for $b<0$, with the effect growing with spin and tilt angle, which future gyroscope missions could in principle detect.
  • All these $b$-dependent deviations decay with distance, so the strongest tests are in the strong-field region near the ISSO, where LISA and the next-generation Event Horizon Telescope are expected to probe.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct fit of the two precession formulas to the observed 11-year precession period of M87*, treating $b$ as a free parameter alongside spin, is not performed in the paper but is the obvious next step; such a fit would translate the sign dependence into a numeric bound on $b$.
  • Because the epicyclic frequencies are derived for equatorial circular orbits, the paper's statements about highly tilted spherical orbits (up to $\zeta = 1.45$ rad) are an extrapolation; integrating fully tilted geodesics would test whether the sign of $b$'s effect survives away from the equator.
  • If several precession channels (nodal, periastron, and Lense-Thirring) are observed for one system, the ratio of their $b$-dependent shifts could break spin-mass degeneracies that no single precession measurement can resolve.
  • The same metric also determines photon orbits and black-hole shadow size, so combining shadow measurements with precession data could isolate $b$ from other deviations, although the paper does not compute shadow observables.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies test-particle and gyroscope precession in the rotating braneworld black hole metric (1)-(4) with tidal charge b. For test particles it computes conserved quantities E, L, K and the ISSO radius for spherical orbits, and then derives nodal and periastron precession frequencies from the standard equatorial epicyclic formulas, obtaining the expansions (19) and (21). For stationary gyroscopes it evaluates the Lense-Thirring frequency via Eq. (22). The central claim is that positive tidal charge suppresses nodal, periastron, and Lense-Thirring precession relative to Kerr, while negative b enhances them, and that these effects provide observational signatures for braneworld gravity.

Significance. The paper is an incremental but useful calculation: it takes a known rotating braneworld metric, applies standard epicyclic and gyroscope formulas, and exhibits the b-dependence of precession frequencies with clean analytic expansions that reduce to Kerr for b=0. There is no fitting step; b is an input parameter, and the derivations are transparent about their cited sources. If the results were valid for the full range of spherical orbits claimed in the title and abstract, they would give a concrete discriminant for extra-dimensional gravity in strong-field regimes, with potential relevance to M87 jet precession, QPOs, and EMRI waveforms. However, the precession formulas are derived for small oscillations about equatorial circular orbits and are then applied to tilted spherical orbits with no justification, which is a load-bearing gap in the central claim. The manuscript also contains a direct sign contradiction in the text around Eq. (19) and an unclear treatment of the gyroscope orientation dependence.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III A, Eqs. (17), (19), (21)] The nodal and periastron precession frequencies are derived for small oscillations about circular equatorial orbits, as the text states ('For a test particle on a circular equatorial orbit' and 'when an orbit deviates slightly from the equatorial plane'), yet the title, abstract, and astrophysical conclusions apply them to spherical orbits with tilt angles up to ζ=1.45 rad (Fig. 2(b)). For a finite-inclination spherical orbit, the polar motion is a large-amplitude libration whose frequency depends on the Carter constant K, so the equatorial vertical epicyclic frequency Ω_θ does not equal the polar frequency of the tilted orbit; consequently, Ω_nod = Ω_φ − Ω_θ evaluated at the equator is not the nodal precession of a generic spherical orbit, and the b-dependent predictions for the M87 jet and non-equatorial scenarios do not follow. The claims should be restricted to near-equatorial orbits or rederived using the inclination-dependent frequency formalism.
  2. [Section III A, paragraph after Eq. (19)] The sentence 'A positive tidal charge b enhances the precession rate at all radii, while a negative b suppresses it' directly contradicts Eq. (19), where the b-term is −ab/r^4, and contradicts Fig. 3(a) and the abstract, both of which show positive b decreasing Ω_nod. This internal inconsistency must be corrected; the formula, figure, and abstract are mutually consistent with one another and with the opposite statement.
  3. [Section IV, Eqs. (22) and Fig. 5(c)] The Lense-Thirring formula (22) depends on the gyroscope's spatial position (r,θ), not on the orientation of its spin axis; the precession-rate magnitude at fixed position is independent of the initial spin direction. The text and Fig. 5(c) nevertheless describe Ω_LT as increasing with the 'tilt angle ζ' of the gyroscope's spin axis and summarize the result as a sensitivity to gyroscope orientation. Unless ζ is actually the polar angle θ of the gyroscope's location, the claimed orientation dependence is not supported by Eq. (22) and should be clarified or rederived.
  4. [Section II, metric (1)-(4), and Section IV] The repeated interpretation that positive tidal charge enhances gravitational attraction is not supported by the metric: in the equatorial weak-field limit Eq. (1) gives g_tt ≈ −(1 − 2M/r + b/r^2), so the Newtonian potential is −M/r + b/(2r^2) and positive b produces a repulsive 1/r^3 correction; Eq. (5) similarly shows b>0 shrinking the horizon. This interpretation is used to explain the 'apparent paradox' in Section IV and should be revised to match the metric's actual behavior.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title and figures] The title contains a typo ('rot ating'), and several figure captions have corrupted or missing superscripts (e.g., 'b/M2' and Ω_LT labels in Figs. 3-5); these should be cleaned before publication.
  2. [Eqs. (17) and (20)] The radical notation in Eqs. (17) and (20) appears as nonstandard artifacts; the formulas should be typeset with conventional square-root symbols.
  3. [Section II and Section IV] The symbol ζ is used for the orbital tilt angle in Section II and for the gyroscope orientation in Section IV; these are physically distinct quantities and should be given distinct names or explicitly connected.
  4. [Section II, text near Eq. (5)] The discussion of the M87 bound b ≤ 0.1211 M^2 should clarify that this bound applies to positive b; the horizon condition also permits negative b without an upper bound of the same form.
  5. [Section III] The expansions in Eqs. (19) and (21) should state the small-parameter assumptions under which the displayed leading terms are valid, given that the omitted terms scale as r^{-9/2} and r^{-7/2} respectively.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the precession results are derived self-containedly from the braneworld metric and standard epicyclic/gyroscope formulas, with the tidal charge treated as an input parameter rather than fitted to the predicted precession output.

full rationale

The paper's central results, Eqs. (19) and (21), are obtained by substituting the rotating braneworld metric (1)-(4) into standard epicyclic-frequency formulas (17) and (20), which are cited from independent prior work [35,36], and expanding in powers of 1/r. The tidal charge b is a free parameter of the metric, not a quantity fitted to the precession frequencies, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction or self-definitional circularity. The Lense-Thirring gyroscope calculation uses the standard formula (22) from [37] with the same metric; again b is an input. The self-citations in the introduction [10,12] are contextual literature references and are not load-bearing for any derivation, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. One genuine issue, but not a circularity, is that Section III's epicyclic derivation is explicitly framed for 'a test particle on a circular equatorial orbit' that 'deviates slightly from the equatorial plane,' while the title and summary apply the conclusions to spherical orbits with tilt angles up to ζ=1.45 rad; this is an applicability/correctness concern for non-equatorial orbits, not a reduction of the prediction to its inputs. There is also an internal sign contradiction in the text after Eq. (19), which says positive b enhances precession while Eq. (19), Fig. 3, and the abstract say the opposite; this is a textual error, not circular reasoning. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and externally based, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the known Aliev-Gumrukcuoglu metric, the separability of its geodesic equations, standard epicyclic and gyroscope formulas, and the test-particle approximation. No new entities are introduced. The tidal charge b is a free input parameter; it is not fitted to the precession results.

free parameters (1)
  • tidal charge b = varied in plots, e.g. b/M^2 = -0.35, 0, 0.35
    The central sign-dependent precession results are parameterized by b, the tidal charge of the braneworld metric. It is not fitted to data in this paper, but it is a free model parameter chosen to illustrate the effect.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The rotating braneworld metric (1)-(4) with tidal charge b is a physical black hole solution of the effective Randall-Sundrum field equations on the brane.
    Invoked throughout; sourced from [34]. If the metric is not a valid full 5D solution, all results are moot.
  • domain assumption The spacetime admits separable geodesic equations with a Carter-like constant K (Eqs. 7-12).
    The paper writes separated Hamilton-Jacobi equations without proving the hidden symmetry for this metric; used to define spherical orbits and the tilt parameter.
  • domain assumption The epicyclic frequency formulas (17) and (20) for small oscillations around equatorial circular orbits are valid for this metric and adequately represent precession of the spherical orbits in the title.
    Borrowed from [35,36]; this is the weakest-assumption location. Needed for Ω_nod and Ω_per.
  • domain assumption The Lense-Thirring precession formula (22) for a stationary gyroscope is valid in this spacetime.
    Borrowed from [37]; underlies all of Section IV.
  • domain assumption Test-particle and test-gyroscope approximations hold; backreaction, self-force, and radiation reaction are negligible.
    Standard in this line of work, but not explicitly discussed in the derivations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Characteristic precessions of spherical orbit around a rotating braneworld black hole." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A46GRUBB

@misc{pith2026250520736,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Characteristic precessions of spherical orbit around a rotating braneworld black hole},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A46GRUBB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.20736}
}
read the original abstract

We study the orbital dynamics and relativistic precession effects in the spacetime of rotating braneworld black holes within the Randall-Sundrum framework. For test particles on spherical orbits, we analyze three conserved quantities-energy, angular momentum, and Carter constant-and examine how the innermost stable spherical orbit depends on the tidal charge and orbital inclination. Compared to Kerr black holes, braneworld corrections significantly modify both nodal and periastron precession frequencies: positive tidal charges suppress precession rates, while negative charges enhance them. For stationary gyroscopes, we calculate the Lense-Thirring precession frequency and demonstrate its sensitivity to the tidal charge, black hole spin, and gyroscope orientation. Our results show that a positive tidal charge weakens frame-dragging effects even as it enhances gravitational attraction-offering a distinctive signature of extra-dimensional gravity. These results have important implications for astrophysical observations, including accretion disk behavior, stellar orbital dynamics, and gravitational wave detection. The modified orbital and gyroscopic precession provide new ways to test braneworld gravity in strong-field regimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.20736 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: The conserved quantities—energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: ISSO radius as a function of tidal charge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Nodal precession frequency Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Periastron precession frequency Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Lense-Thirring precession frequency Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Probing Lorentz-violating effects via precession and accretion disk images of a rotating bumblebee black hole

    gr-qc 2026-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Lorentz violation in a rotating bumblebee black hole suppresses Lense-Thirring precession, increases periastron precession, shrinks the inner shadow, and enhances the lensed ring while leaving the critical curve nearl...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Akiyama, et a l., First M87 Event Horizon Telescope results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., First M87 Event Horizon Telescope results. I. The shadow of the supermassive black hole , Astrophys. J. Lett. 875, L1 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Akiyama, et a l., First M87 Event Horizon Telescope results

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

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Akiyama, et a l., First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarizati on of the Ring , Astrophys. J. Lett. 910, L12 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Akiyama, et a l., The persistent shadow of the supermassive black hole of M87

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., The persistent shadow of the supermassive black hole of M87. I. Observations, calibration, imaging, and analysis , Astron. Astrophys. 681, A79 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. Th e Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Mil ky Way , Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L12 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. Testing the Black Hole Metric , Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L17 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarization of the Ring , Astrophys. J. Lett. 964, L25 (2024). 13

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Akiyama, et a l., Mid-Range Science Objectives for the Event Horizon Telesco pe, arXiv:2410.02986 [astro-ph.HE]

    Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, K. Akiyama, et a l., Mid-Range Science Objectives for the Event Horizon Telesco pe, arXiv:2410.02986 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    Cui et al

    Y.-Z. Cui et al. , Precessing jet nozzle connecting to a spinning black hole in M87, Nature 621, 711 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Wei, Y.-C

    S.-W. Wei, Y.-C. Zou, Y.-P. Zhang, and Y.-X. Liu, Constraining black hole parameters with the precessing jet nozzle of M87*, Phys. Rev. D 110, 064006 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Chen, Q.-Y

    C.-J. Chen, Q.-Y. Pan, and J.-L. Jing, Precessions of spherical orbits in the rotating Melvin blac k hole spacetime and its constraints from the jet of M87* , arXiv:2410.09022 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Meng, C.-H

    X.-C. Meng, C.-H. Wang, and S.-W. Wei, Imprints of black hole charge on the precessing jet nozzle of M87*, JCAP 2, 065 (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    Lense and H

    J. Lense and H. Thirring, Ueber den Einfluss der Eigenrotation der Zentralkoerper auf d ie Bewegung der Planeten und Monde nach der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie , Phys. Z. 19, 156 (1918)

    1918

  6. [14]

    C. W. F. Everitt et al , Gravity Probe B: Final Results of a Space Experiment to Test G eneral Relativity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 221101 (2011)

    2011

  7. [15]

    M.-H. Wu, H. Guo, and X.-M. Kuang, Precession and Lense-Thirring effect of hairy Kerr spacetime s, Phys. Rev. D 107, 064033 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    A. M. Al Zahrani, Tilted circular orbits around a Kerr black hole , Phys. Rev. D 109, 024029 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Iorio, Lense-Thirring effect at work in M87* , Phys

    L. Iorio, Lense-Thirring effect at work in M87* , Phys. Rev. D 111, 044035 (2025)

    2025

  10. [18]

    W.-Q. Zhen, H. Guo, M.-H. Wu, and X.-M. Kuang, Orbital precession and Lense-Thirring effect of Horndeski ro tating spacetimes, Phys. Lett. B 862, 139307 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    J. M. Bardeen and J. A. Petterson, The Lense-Thirring Effect and Accretion Disks around Kerr Bla ck Holes , Astrophys. J. Lett. 195, L65 (1975)

    1975

  12. [20]

    J. A. Petterson, Twisted accretion disks. I. Derivation of the basic equatio ns, Astrophys. J. 214, 550 (1977)

    1977

  13. [21]

    E. C. Ostriker and J. J. Binney, Warped and tilted galactic discs , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 237, 785 (1989)

    1989

  14. [22]

    LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, B. P. Abbott, et al., GW170104: Observation of a 50-Solar-Mass Binary Black Hole Coalescence at Redshift 0.2 , Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221101 (2017). [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 129901 (2018)]

    2017

  15. [23]

    Pardo, M

    K. Pardo, M. Fishbach, D. E. Holz, and D. N. Spergel, Limits on the number of spacetime dimensions from GW170817 , JCAP 07, 048 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Maartens and K

    R. Maartens and K. Koyama, Brane-World Gravity, Living Rev. Rel. 13, 5 (2010)

    2010

  17. [25]

    P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, and Anne-Christine Davis, Brane world cosmology , Rept. Prog. Phys. 67, 2183 (2004)

    2004

  18. [26]

    Tanahashi and T

    N. Tanahashi and T. Tanaka, Black holes in braneworld models , Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 189, 227 (2011)

    2011

  19. [27]

    Yu, B.-M

    H. Yu, B.-M. Gu, F.-P. Huang, Y.-Q. Wang, X.-H. Meng, and Y.-X. Liu, Probing extra dimension through gravitational wave observations of compact binaries and their electromag netic counterparts, JCAP 02, 039 (2017)

    2017

  20. [28]

    Vagnozzi and L

    S. Vagnozzi and L. Visinelli, Hunting for extra dimensions in the shadow of M87* , Phys. Rev. D 100, 024020 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Banerjee, S

    I. Banerjee, S. Chakraborty, and S. SenGupta, Silhouette of M87*: A New Window to Peek into the World of Hidd en Dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 101, 041301 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Hou, M.-Y

    Y.-H. Hou, M.-Y. Guo, and B. Chen, Revisiting the shadow of braneworld black holes , Phys. Rev. D 104, 024001 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Dadhich, R

    N. Dadhich, R. Maartens, P. Papadopoulos, and V. Rezani a, Black holes on the brane , Phys. Lett. B 487, 1 (2000)

    2000

  24. [32]

    Randall and R

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension , Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999)

    1999

  25. [33]

    Randall and R

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, An Alternative to compactification , Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4690 (1999)

    1999

  26. [34]

    A. N. Aliev and A. E. Gumrukcuoglu, Charged rotating black holes on a 3-brane , Phys. Rev. D 71, 104027 (2005)

    2005

  27. [35]

    F. D. Ryan, Gravitational waves from the inspiral of a compact object in to a massive, axisymmetric body with arbitrary multipole moments , Phys. Rev. D 52, 5707 (1995)

    1995

  28. [36]

    D. D. Doneva, S. S. Yazadjiev, N. Stergioulas, K. D. Kokk otas, and T. M. Athanasiadis, Orbital and epicyclic frequencies around rapidly rotating compact stars in scalar-tensor the ories of gravity , Phys. Rev. D 90, 044004 (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    Chakraborty and P

    C. Chakraborty and P. Majumdar, Strong gravity Lense-Thirring precession in Kerr and Kerr- Taub-NUT spacetimes , Class. Quant. Grav. 31, 075006 (2014)

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.