Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 130 references

How does nonmetricity shape quantum emission from rotating bumblebee black holes?

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In a rotating metric-affine black hole, the horizon temperature depends on latitude, so no single Hawking temperature exists.

desk verdict Careful and honest comparison of rotating bumblebee black holes; the no-global-temperature claim is real but conditional on a global regularity extension that is not supplied. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01398 v1 pith:CUYQIM56 submitted 2026-08-02 gr-qc hep-th

A. A. Araújo Filho This is my paper
classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C5783C4783D05 PACS 04.70.Dy04.50.Kd
keywords bumblebeegravitynonmetricitymetric-affinerotatingblackholesHawkingradiationLorentzsymmetryviolationgreybodyfactorsholeevaporation
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

Bumblebee gravity is a modified gravity model in which a vector field spontaneously acquires a preferred direction, breaking Lorentz symmetry. This paper compares the two main ways of building rotating bumblebee black holes: the metric formulation, whose Lorentz-violating parameter is ℓ, and the metric-affine formulation, whose parameter X encodes nonmetricity. After normalizing the asymptotic time coordinate, the metric solution keeps a uniform surface gravity and a separable scalar wave equation, while the metric-affine solution leaves the Kerr horizon locations untouched but makes the local surface gravity latitude-dependent when aX≠0. That latitude dependence means the generic rotating metric-affine configuration cannot be assigned a single global Hawking temperature or an independent channel-by-channel emission spectrum. In the static limit both geometries radiate less and evaporate more slowly than Schwarzschild, with the metric-affine black hole radiating least and living longest, and existing weak-field constraints put all fractional corrections below 1.3×$10^{{-11}}$.

What carries the argument

The central object is the metric-affine rotating line element (Eq. 7), whose off-diagonal component $g_{r\theta} = 2rXa\cos\theta \sqrt{\alpha}\,\beta^{3/2}/\sqrt{\Delta}$ couples the radial and angular sectors and prevents separation of the Klein-Gordon equation. The argument is carried by the local surface-gravity formula $\kappa_{\rm MA}(\theta) = \sqrt{q}\,\Delta'(r_+)/(2(r_+^2+a^2)) \, \sqrt{R_+/(\alpha \Sigma_+)}$, with $R_+ = \beta r_+^2 + \alpha a^2\cos^2\theta$ and $\Sigma_+ = r_+^2 + a^2\cos^2\theta$; the latitude dependence of this quantity is what forbids a global Hawking temperature. The other load-bearing move is the normalization of the stationary Killing vector at spatial inf

What would settle it

Solve the exact scalar field equation for the metric-affine geometry (Eq. 7) numerically with a coupled angular-radial expansion that includes modes with $L' \neq L$. If the flux at future null infinity nevertheless reduces to a Planck distribution with a single temperature after mode mixing, the no-global-temperature claim fails. Conversely, constructing a smooth globally regular bumblebee profile on the full manifold including the poles would settle whether the claimed obstruction is avoidable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that nonmetricity shapes rotating bumblebee-black-hole emission through the horizon geometry and the meridional sector, not through a displacement of the horizon. In the metric-affine rotating solution, the coordinate locations of the horizons and stationary limit surfaces coincide with Kerr's, $r_\pm = M \pm \sqrt{M^2-a^2}$, but the local surface gravity $\kappa_{\rm MA}(\theta)$ depends on the polar angle whenever $aX \neq 0$. As a result, the thermal exponent $(\omega - m\Omega_{\rm MA})/T_{\rm MA}(\theta)$ is latitude-dependent, so no single equilibrium Hawking temperature exists and a factorized Planck distribution over independent angular channels is invali

Load-bearing premise

The metric-affine rotating geometry is assumed to be a physically valid black hole with a regular horizon and polar axis; if a smooth bumblebee field cannot extend through the poles or the geometry is not globally regular, the latitude-dependent surface gravity may be a coordinate artifact rather than a physical horizon property.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any rotating metric-affine bumblebee black hole with $aX \neq 0$, there is no single horizon temperature; the emission spectrum must be described by a coupled-channel greybody matrix, and a product over angular modes would double-count degrees of freedom.
  • Time normalization at infinity is not optional: comparing unnormalized coordinate temperatures makes the two formulations look identical at first order, while normalized clocks give $\ell = 3X/4$ and reverse the ordering of the deformed solutions.
  • In the static limit, both Lorentz-violating geometries are dimmer and longer-lived than Schwarzschild, with the hierarchy $L_{\rm Sch} > L_{\rm met} > L_{\rm MA}$ and $t_{\rm Sch} < t_{\rm met} < t_{\rm MA}$ under the same Stefan-Boltzmann prescription.
  • The slow-rotation weak-deformation expansion preserves this tendency, but it does not yield a global rotating evaporation hierarchy; the exact rotating order is left open.
  • Existing weak-field bounds on $\ell$ and $X$ imply fractional corrections to static temperatures, areas, angular velocities, luminosities, and lifetimes below $1.3\times 10^{-11}$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the latitude-dependent surface gravity is a genuine horizon property, a rotating metric-affine black hole would emit a locally varying Hawking flux whose angular pattern could in principle be computed from the coupled scalar equation; no global Planck spectrum exists, but ray-wise local temperatures might still be meaningful.
  • A known regularity obstruction to smooth symmetry-inheriting constant-norm bumblebee fields raises the possibility that no globally regular rotating metric-affine solution exists; in that case the no-global-temperature result would apply only to the exterior local patch, not to the complete spacetime.
  • The coupled-channel structure suggests a concrete numerical test: solve the truncated coupled radial system for the greybody matrix and check whether mode mixing moves energy flux toward or away from the diagonal approximation; this would quantify how strongly nonmetricity reshapes rotating emission.
  • The calibration $\ell = 3X/4$ could be turned into a cross-theory prediction: if future observations constrain one parameter, the other follows only under the assumption that both formulations describe the same underlying Lorentz violation; the paper itself treats the bounds as independent.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies quantum emission from two rotating bumblebee-black-hole geometries: a Kerr-like metric constructed by a corrected Newman-Janis procedure (Eq. 1) and an exact stationary axisymmetric metric-affine solution (Eq. 7). The author normalizes the stationary Killing vector at spatial infinity, which changes the static temperature/evaporation comparison and yields the calibration ℓ=3X/4. For the metric geometry, Lorentz violation shifts the horizons and extremal boundary, increases the normalized horizon angular velocity, preserves a uniform surface gravity, and keeps the scalar wave equation separable; the paper derives tunneling factors, occupation numbers, a radial potential, and an analytic greybody bound. For the metric-affine geometry, nonmetricity leaves the Kerr coordinate positions of horizons and stationary limits unchanged but modifies the horizon area, angular velocity, and meridional sector; g_rθ couples angular channels and the local surface gravity, Eq. (31), becomes latitude-dependent for aX≠0. The central conclusion is that a single global Hawking temperature and independent channel-by-channel emission spectrum cannot be assigned to the generic rotating metric-affine configuration. The static limit yields exact luminosity and evaporation hierarchies, and the paper propagates weak-field bounds to show fractional corrections below ~1.3×10^{-11}.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would be a useful contribution to the quantum-emission phenomenology of Lorentz-violating black holes. The careful normalization of asymptotic Killing vectors is a genuine improvement over earlier comparisons, and the explicit distinction between area-entropy and Wald entropy, the use of signed absorption probabilities in the superradiant sector, and the honest labeling of the metric solution as a benchmark are all commendable. The exact static hierarchies and the analytical greybody bound for the separable metric geometry are concrete results that do not depend on the rotating regularity issue. The paper is also unusually candid about the limitations of its rotating metric-affine construction.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. II.C and Sec. IV.B (Eq. 31)] The no-global-temperature claim is the central result, but it rests on the metric-affine geometry in Eq. (7) being a globally regular black hole. Sec. II.C explicitly restricts all results to "local exterior and nonpolar" and cites Guo-Fan [73], which obstructs smooth symmetry-inheriting constant-norm one-forms through the poles. Without a globally regular extension of the bumblebee field, the latitude-dependent κ_MA(θ) in Eq. (31) and the local tunneling factor in Eq. (86) are quantities in a local coordinate patch: they do not establish that a physical global black hole cannot have a uniform temperature. The abstract and conclusion state the no-global-temperature result unconditionally. The authors should either supply/verify a global regular extension or reformulate the central claim as explicitly conditional on such an extension.
  2. [Sec. II.A and Sec. II.C (Eq. 1)] The quantitative comparison of the two formulations uses the metric geometry in Eq. (1) as a benchmark, but no rotating bumblebee field profile or field-equation check is provided. The paper acknowledges this in Sec. II.C, yet subsequent sections treat the metric solution on the same footing as the metric-affine solution in deriving temperatures, greybody bounds, and evaporation hierarchies. The static hierarchies are unaffected, but the rotating metric-side predictions (e.g., Figs. 2, 5, and the hierarchy Ω_met>Ω_MA>Ω_K in Sec. VIII.A) should be presented as properties of a metric benchmark, not of a verified rotating bumblebee black hole. A short discussion of what would be needed to upgrade the benchmark to a solution would make the comparison more rigorous.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. VII.C, Fig. 11 caption] The caption refers to the local non-equilibrium luminosity "defined in Eq. (155)", but Eq. (155) is the mass/angular-momentum evolution system. The local luminosity is defined in Eq. (165). Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Introduction, Sec. IX, Sec. X.C] Several typos appear: "regardindg", "seing", "Analogouslly", "crutial". A careful proofreading pass is recommended.
  3. [Sec. IV.B, Eq. (33)] The numerator a² cos²θ − 3r_+² is unambiguous, but adding parentheses, e.g., (a² cos²θ − 3r_+²)/(8(...)), would improve readability because the equation is quoted without a displayed fraction in the text.
  4. [Sec. IV.D, Eq. (58)] The local response C_MA,a(θ) is defined through D_θ(r), but the notation for the partial derivative in Eq. (58) is not fully explicit; specifying whether r or M is held fixed in the derivative would remove ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central results are algebraic consequences of the stated metrics; the ℓ=3X/4 calibration is an explicit comparison convention, and the global-regularity caveat in Sec. II.C is a validity limitation, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that the rotating metric-affine geometry has a latitude-dependent surface gravity and hence no single global Hawking temperature when aX≠0—is a direct calculation from the line element in Eq. (7). The local temperature in Eq. (31) and the detailed-balance factor in Eq. (86) follow algebraically; Eq. (86) is said to 'reproduce the latitude–dependent temperature in Eq. (31)', which is a consistency check, not a circular reuse. The calibration ℓ=3X/4 is introduced as a comparison convention: 'Matching these leading corrections, it turns out that ℓ=3X/4+O(X^2)' (Sec. VIII). It is not fitted to the emission observables and does not define the temperatures; the paper explicitly notes the ordering is sensitive to this lead-order matching (Sec. VIII.E). The metric-affine geometry is taken from the author's earlier solution [62], but it is a parameter-free, externally checkable input with stated assumptions (M, a, X), and it is not defined in terms of the target no-global-temperature result. The manuscript itself flags the crucial validity caveat at Sec. II.C: 'The results below are consequently local exterior and nonpolar results unless a globally regular extension of the bumblebee field is supplied.' This is a limitation on the physical interpretation of the central claim, not a circular step: the local surface gravity calculation is what it is even if the global regularity remains open. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the author's own work to forbid alternatives. The greybody bound, Bogoliubov coefficients, and flux formulas are standard results evaluated on the given metrics. Therefore the derivation chain is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or fundamental entities. Its liberty consists of comparing two existing geometries with different Lorentz-violating parameters, where the comparison calibration and Stefan-Boltzmann emissivity are auxiliary choices.

free parameters (5)
  • ℓ (metric Lorentz-violating parameter)
    Model parameter, not fitted in this paper; used to deform the metric solution. Figures use illustrative values like 0.15.
  • X (metric-affine Lorentz-violating parameter)
    Model parameter, not fitted here; used in the metric-affine geometry. Figures use illustrative values like 0.2.
  • calibration ℓ = 3X/4 = 3X/4 (leading order)
    Chosen to match leading static temperature corrections between the two formulations. It is a comparison convention, not a physical law, and the paper explicitly labels it as a working calibration.
  • frequency-averaged emissivity ϵ_em
    Assumed constant and equal across configurations in the Stefan-Boltzmann estimates of luminosity and lifetime (Sec. VII).
  • effective degrees of freedom g⋆
    Assumed common to all compared black holes in the blackbody estimates.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The rotating metric solution Eq. (1) is treated as a bumblebee black hole benchmark despite no explicit rotating bumblebee vector field or field-equation check.
    Sec. II.C: the paper states this geometry is used as the published metric benchmark, and that its interpretation as a complete bumblebee vacuum still requires a field equation check.
  • domain assumption The metric-affine solution Eq. (7) is assumed to be physically valid on and outside the horizon away from polar singularities.
    Sec. II.C: the paper notes results are local exterior and nonpolar unless a globally regular extension of the bumblebee field is supplied; the Guo-Fan obstruction is discussed.
  • standard math Standard semiclassical methods (Hamilton-Jacobi tunneling, Bogoliubov transformations, transfer-matrix greybody bounds) apply to these geometries.
    These are established tools in black hole quantum emission literature, cited in Secs. V and VI.
  • domain assumption The Stefan-Boltzmann luminosity estimate uses the physical horizon area and a single temperature or a latitude-local temperature.
    Sec. VII: this is an analytical prescription for comparing luminosities and lifetimes, not a full radiative transfer calculation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of How does nonmetricity shape quantum emission from rotating bumblebee black holes?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CUYQIM56

@misc{pith2026260801398,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: How does nonmetricity shape quantum emission from rotating bumblebee black holes?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CUYQIM56}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01398}
}
abstract

We investigate how nonmetricity affects particle creation and evaporation in rotating bumblebee black holes by comparing metric and metric-affine solutions. We normalize the stationary Killing vectors at spatial infinity before defining physical frequencies, angular velocities, and temperatures. This procedure changes the static comparison and gives the leading calibration $\ell=3X/4$. In the metric solution, $\ell$ shifts the horizons, stationary limit surfaces, and extremal boundary, increases the normalized horizon angular velocity, and suppresses the Hawking temperature. Nevertheless, the surface gravity remains uniform and the scalar wave equation separable. We derive the tunneling factors, quantum occupation numbers, radial potential, and an analytical lower bound for the axisymmetric greybody factor. In the metric-affine geometry, nonmetricity preserves the Kerr coordinate locations of the horizons and stationary limit surfaces, but changes the physical horizon area, normalized angular velocity, and meridional sector. The component $g_{r\theta}$ couples angular channels, whereas the local surface gravity depends on latitude when $aX\neq0$. Consequently, the generic rotating configuration admits neither a single global Hawking temperature nor an independent channel-by-channel emission spectrum. In the static limit, under the same Stefan-Boltzmann prescription, both Lorentz-violating geometries have lower luminosities and longer lifetimes, with the metric-affine black hole radiating less and evaporating more slowly. A local slow-rotation expansion preserves this tendency but does not establish a global rotating evaporation hierarchy. Existing weak-field constraints limit fractional corrections to static quantum-emission observables to below $1.3\times10^{-11}$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.01398 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Metric–affine horizon angular velocity ΩMA as a function of the mass M for different values of the Lorentz–violating parameter X, with a = 0.1. The X = 0 curve reproduces the Kerr limit, while positive values of X increase ΩMA at fixed M and a. The factor √ k is required by the normalized time (4). Notice that, at least in the metric formulation, at fixed (M, a), a positive ℓ shifts the outer horizon and the station… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the Kerr temperature TKerr, the metric Hawking temperature Tmet, and the equatorial local metric–affine temperature TMA(π/2) as functions of M, for a = 0.1, X = 0.2, and ℓ = 3X/4 = 0.15. Lorentz violation suppresses the temperature relative to Kerr. C. Horizon area and entropy For the metric solution, Amet = 4π  r (met) + 2 + a 2  , S(A) met = Amet 4 . (37) For the metric–affine solution, the induc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of the Kerr entropy SKerr with the area–entropy S (A) met and S (A) MA as functions of M, for a = 0.1, X = 0.2, and ℓ = 3X/4 = 0.15. Both Lorentz–violating configurations reduce the horizon area relative to Kerr, with a more pronounced suppression in the metric–affine case due to the nonmetric deformation of the horizon geometry. D. Heat capacity For the metric solution, we define r ≡ r (met) + and evalua… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the Kerr heat capacity CKerr,a, the metric area-response function C (A) met,a, and the equatorial local metric–affine response C (A) MA,a(π/2) as functions of M, for a = 0.1, X = 0.2, and ℓ = 3X/4 = 0.15. The same principal Hamilton–Jacobi equation govern…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the semiclassical detailed-balance factors BKerr, Bmet, and the equatorial local metric–affine factor BMA(π/2) as functions of Mω, for M = 0.2, a = 0.1, m = 1, X = 0.2, and ℓ = 3X/4 = 0.15. The horizontal dotted line denotes B = 1, while the vertical dott…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Local metric–affine detailed-balance factor BMA(θ) as a function of Mω at θ = 0, π/4, and π/2, for M = 0.2, a = 0.1, m = 1, and X = 0.2. The curves meet at the common threshold Mω = mMΩMA, but exhibit different slopes because the local temperature depends on the latitu…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mean bosonic horizon occupation number as a function of Mω for the Schwarzschild geometry, corresponding to Kerr|a=0, and the static metric and metric–affine bumblebee solutions. We set a = 0, X = 0.2, and ℓ = 3X/4 = 0.15. Lorentz violation lowers the occupation number…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Analytical lower bound on the axisymmetric scalar greybody factor T (met) 00 (ω) as a function of the dimensionless physical frequency Mω, for M = 0.2, a = 0.1, and different values of the Lorentz–violating parameter ℓ. The case ℓ = 0 corresponds to the Kerr limit. Pos…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Static Stefan–Boltzmann luminosity normalized by the Schwarzschild value as a function of the metric–affine parameter X, adopting the calibration ℓ = 3X/4. Both Lorentz–violating configurations exhibit suppressed emission, with the metric–affine geometry producing the …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Static partial evaporation time normalized by the Schwarzschild result as a function of X, for ℓ = 3X/4 and fixed initial and final masses. Both Lorentz–violating deformations increase the lifetime, with the metric–affine black hole exhibiting the largest evaporation …
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Dimensionless luminosity M2L/γ as a function of the spin parameter χ = a/M, for X = 0.10 and ℓ = 3X/4. The curves are evaluated within the simultaneous weak deformation and slow-rotation expansion. The Kerr geometry has the largest luminosity, while the local metric–a…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Normalized partial evaporation time 3γti→f /(M3 i − M3 f ) as a function of χ = a/M, for X = 0.10 and ℓ = 3X/4. Rotation increases the evaporation time in all three cases, with the local metric–affine estimate remaining above the metric and Kerr results. The quantity …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

130 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [73]

    Exact modifications on a vacuum spacetime due to a gradient bumblebee field at its vacuum expectation value,

    F. P. Poulis and M. A. C. Soares, “Exact modifications on a vacuum spacetime due to a gradient bumblebee field at its vacuum expectation value,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 82, p. 613, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    Preservation of the canonical com- mutation relations requires |αc,met|2 − |βc,met|2 = 1,(96) with |βc,met|2 |αc,met|2 =B c,met = exp −x(met) c , x (met) c >0.(97) Combining Eqs

    Bogoliubov transformation for the metric solution For a nonsuperradiant bosonic channel, the near horizon operators may be related by bac,in =α c,metbac,ext −β ∗ c,metba† ec,int,(94) baec,in=α c,metbaec,int−β ∗ c,metba† c,ext,(95) whereecdenotes the interior partner of the exterior channelc. Preservation of the canonical com- mutation relations requires |...

  3. [2]

    Horizon-straddling quantum state The state annihilated by the operators in Eqs. (94) and (95) is Ψ(H) met E = ′Y c Ψ(H) c,met E ,(101) with Ψ(H) c,met E = 1 |αc,met| ∞X n=0 eiϑc |βc,met| |αc,met| n |nc⟩ext |nec⟩int = q 1−e −x(met) c ∞X n=0 e−nx(met) c /2einϑc |nc⟩ext |nec⟩int .(102) 25 The prime excludes bosonic superradiant channels. Indeed,x (met) c <0 ...

  4. [3]

    (102) creates the exterior and interior particles in correlated pairs

    Pair correlations and decoherence The state in Eq. (102) creates the exterior and interior particles in correlated pairs. Its anomalous correlator satisfies |⟨bac,extbaec,int⟩|2 =⟨n c⟩(H) met h 1 +⟨n c⟩(H) met i .(109) 26 The corresponding number covariance is D ∆ bN ext c ∆ bN int ec E =⟨n c⟩(H) met h 1 +⟨n c⟩(H) met i .(110) Since the complete two-mode ...

  5. [4]

    Fermionic channels For a fermionic channel, the canonical anticommutation relations give α(F) c,met 2 + β(F) c,met 2 = 1, β(F) c,met 2 α(F) c,met 2 =e −x(met) c .(114) Then, β(F) c,met 2 = 1 ex(met) c + 1 ,(115) and the pair state contains only the empty and singly occupied sectors: Ψ(F) c,met E = |0c,0 ec⟩+e iϑce−x(met) c /2 |1c,1 ec⟩p 1 +e −x(met) c .(1...

  6. [5]

    The mean occupation number becomes ⟨nc⟩out met =A (met) c |βc,met|2 ,(119) which is the Page occupation number already derived above

    Propagation to future null infinity For a nonsuperradiant scalar channel of the separable metric geometry, the exterior potential barrier may be represented as a quantum attenuation channel, bac,I+ = q A(met) c bac,ext + q 1− A(met) c bvc,0≤ A (met) c ≤1,(118) wherebvc is an environmental vacuum mode accounting for the reflected component. The mean occupa...

  7. [6]

    It is important to mention that the coordinateθlabels the horizon crossing position and is not an additional asymptotic quantum number

    Local and multimode structure in the metric–affine geometry At a fixed nonpolar latitude, themetric–affinetunneling residue defines xc,MA(θ) = ωj −mΩ MA TMA(θ) .(123) Forx c,MA(θ)>0, the local ratio of WKB amplitudes may be expressed as βloc c,MA(θ) αloc c,MA(θ) 2 ≡B c,MA(θ) =e −xc,MA(θ).(124) Accordingly, one may associate with an individual horizon cros...

    2025

  8. [7]

    Spontaneous breaking of lorentz symmetry in string theory,

    V. A. Kosteleck´ y and S. Samuel, “Spontaneous breaking of lorentz symmetry in string theory,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 39, pp. 683–685, 1989

    1989

Show all 130 references
  1. [8]

    Gravitational phenomenology in higher-dimensional theories and strings,

    V. A. Kosteleck´ y and S. Samuel, “Gravitational phenomenology in higher-dimensional theories and strings,”Physical Review D, vol. 40, pp. 1886–1903, 1989

    1903

  2. [9]

    Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model,

    D. Colladay and V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model,”Physical Review D, vol. 58, p. 116002, 1998

    1998

  3. [10]

    Gravity, lorentz violation, and the standard model,

    V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “Gravity, lorentz violation, and the standard model,”Physical Review D, vol. 69, p. 105009, 2004

    2004

  4. [11]

    Signals for lorentz violation in post-newtonian gravity,

    Q. G. Bailey and V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “Signals for lorentz violation in post-newtonian gravity,”Physical Review D, vol. 74, p. 045001, 2006

    2006

  5. [12]

    Spontaneous lorentz violation, nambu–goldstone modes, and grav- ity,

    R. Bluhm and V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “Spontaneous lorentz violation, nambu–goldstone modes, and grav- ity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 71, p. 065008, 2005

    2005

  6. [13]

    Spontaneous lorentz and diffeomorphism violation, massive modes, and gravity,

    R. Bluhm, S.-H. Fung, and V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “Spontaneous lorentz and diffeomorphism violation, massive modes, and gravity,”Physical Review D, vol. 77, p. 065020, 2008

    2008

  7. [14]

    Constraints and stability in vector theories with spontaneous lorentz violation,

    R. Bluhm, N. L. Gagn´ e, R. Potting, and A. Vrublevskis, “Constraints and stability in vector theories with spontaneous lorentz violation,”Physical Review D, vol. 77, p. 125007, 2008. Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 79, 029902 (2009)

    2008

  8. [15]

    The flight of the bumblebee: Vacuum solutions of a gravity model with vector-induced spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking,

    O. Bertolami and J. P´ aramos, “The flight of the bumblebee: Vacuum solutions of a gravity model with vector-induced spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking,”Physical Review D, vol. 72, p. 044001, 2005. 51

    2005

  9. [16]

    Exact schwarzschild-like solution in a bumblebee gravity model,

    R. Casana, A. Cavalcante, F. P. Poulis, and E. B. Santos, “Exact schwarzschild-like solution in a bumblebee gravity model,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 97, p. 104001, 2018

    2018

  10. [17]

    Black holes with a cosmological constant in bumblebee gravity,

    R. V. Maluf and J. C. S. Neves, “Black holes with a cosmological constant in bumblebee gravity,” Physical Review D, vol. 103, p. 044002, 2021

    2021

  11. [18]

    Wormholes in Lorentz-violating gravity,

    R. B. Magalh˜ aes, L. A. Lessa, and M. M. Ferreira, “Wormholes in Lorentz-violating gravity,”Eur. Phys. J. Plus, vol. 141, no. 3, p. 269, 2026

    2026

  12. [19]

    Self-consistency of compact objects in Lorentz-violating gravity theories,

    L. A. Lessa, R. B. Magalh˜ aes, and M. M. Ferreira Junior, “Self-consistency of compact objects in Lorentz-violating gravity theories,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 6, p. 064031, 2025

    2025

  13. [20]

    Schwarzschild-like black hole with a topological defect in bumblebee gravity,

    ˙I. G¨ ull¨ u and A.¨Ovg¨ un, “Schwarzschild-like black hole with a topological defect in bumblebee gravity,” Annals of Physics, vol. 436, p. 168721, 2022

    2022

  14. [21]

    Einstein–gauss–bonnet gravity coupled to bumblebee field in four- dimensional spacetime,

    C. Ding, X. Chen, and X. Fu, “Einstein–gauss–bonnet gravity coupled to bumblebee field in four- dimensional spacetime,”Nuclear Physics B, vol. 975, p. 115688, 2022

    2022

  15. [22]

    High-dimensional AdS-like black hole and phase transition in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    C. Ding, Y. Shi, J. Chen, Y. Zhou, and C. Liu, “High-dimensional AdS-like black hole and phase transition in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”Chinese Physics C, vol. 47, p. 045102, 2023

    2023

  16. [23]

    New Exact Vacuum Solutions in Extended Bumblebee Gravity,

    J. Zhu and H. Li, “New Exact Vacuum Solutions in Extended Bumblebee Gravity,” 4 2026

    2026

  17. [24]

    Einstein–bumblebee–dilaton black hole solution,

    L. A. Lessa and J. E. G. Silva, “Einstein–bumblebee–dilaton black hole solution,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 1035, 2023

    2023

  18. [25]

    Static spherical vacuum solutions in the bumblebee gravity model,

    R. Xu, D. Liang, and L. Shao, “Static spherical vacuum solutions in the bumblebee gravity model,” Physical Review D, vol. 107, p. 024011, 2023

    2023

  19. [26]

    A four-parameter black hole solution in the bumblebee gravity model,

    R. Xu, “A four-parameter black hole solution in the bumblebee gravity model,” inProceedings of the Ninth Meeting on CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, World Scientific, 2023

    2023

  20. [27]

    Bumblebee gravity: Spherically symmetric solutions away from the potential minimum,

    Q. G. Bailey, H. S. Murray, and D. T. Walter-Cardona, “Bumblebee gravity: Spherically symmetric solutions away from the potential minimum,”Physical Review D, vol. 112, p. 024069, 2025

    2025

  21. [28]

    Static spherical vacuum solution to bumblebee gravity with timelike VEVs,

    H. Li and J. Zhu, “Static spherical vacuum solution to bumblebee gravity with timelike VEVs,”The European Physical Journal C, 2025

    2025

  22. [29]

    Asymptotically flat black holes in bumblebee gravity: Exact solutions and thermodynamics,

    J. Yang, Z.-F. Mai, D. Liang, and L. Shao, “Asymptotically flat black holes in bumblebee gravity: Exact solutions and thermodynamics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.05801, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Exact black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity with lightlike or spacelike VEVs,

    J.-Z. Liu, S.-P. Wu, S.-W. Wei, and Y.-X. Liu, “Exact black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity with lightlike or spacelike VEVs,”Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, vol. 69, p. 270411, 2026

    2026

  24. [31]

    Full classification of static spherical vacuum solutions to bumblebee gravity with general VEVs,

    J. Zhu and H. Li, “Full classification of static spherical vacuum solutions to bumblebee gravity with general VEVs,”Phys. Lett. B, vol. 876, p. 140396, 2026

    2026

  25. [32]

    The flight of the bumblebee in a noncommutative geometry: A new black hole solution,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, N. Heidari, I. P. Lobo, Y. Shi, and F. S. N. Lobo, “The flight of the bumblebee in a noncommutative geometry: A new black hole solution,”Annals of Physics, vol. 490, p. 170487, 2026. 52

    2026

  26. [33]

    Charged spherically symmetric and slowly rotating charged black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity,

    J.-Z. Liu, W.-D. Guo, S.-W. Wei, and Y.-X. Liu, “Charged spherically symmetric and slowly rotating charged black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 85, p. 145, 2025

    2025

  27. [34]

    Taub–nut-like black holes in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    Y.-Q. Chen and H.-S. Liu, “Taub–nut-like black holes in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”Physical Re- view D, vol. 112, p. 084040, 2025

    2025

  28. [35]

    Dyonic reissner–nordstr¨ om-like and taub–nut-like black holes in einstein– bumblebee gravity,

    S. Li, L. Liang, and L. Ma, “Dyonic reissner–nordstr¨ om-like and taub–nut-like black holes in einstein– bumblebee gravity,”Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2026, no. 03, p. 005, 2026

    2026

  29. [36]

    Exact kerr–newman–(a)ds and other spacetimes in bumblebee gravity: Employing a novel generating technique,

    H. Ovcharenko, “Exact kerr–newman–(a)ds and other spacetimes in bumblebee gravity: Employing a novel generating technique,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16037, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Quasinormal modes of massive scalar per- turbations in slow-rotation bumblebee black holes with traceless conformal electrodynamics,

    Y. Sekhmani, W. Liu, W. Deng, and K. Boshkayev, “Quasinormal modes of massive scalar per- turbations in slow-rotation bumblebee black holes with traceless conformal electrodynamics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.16639, 2025

    2025

  31. [38]

    When bumblebee meets NLED: Lorentz-violating black holes and regular spacetimes,

    Z.-C. Li and H. L¨ u, “When bumblebee meets NLED: Lorentz-violating black holes and regular spacetimes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.13963, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Thermodynamics and optical properties of charged black holes in bumblebee gravity sourced by a cloud of strings,

    F. Ahmed, S. Kala, and A. Al-Badawi, “Thermodynamics and optical properties of charged black holes in bumblebee gravity sourced by a cloud of strings,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.08764, 2026

    2026

  33. [40]

    ModMax black hole surrounded by a cloud of strings in bumblebee gravity,

    F. M. Belchior, A. R. P. Moreira, A. Bouzenada, and F. Ahmed, “ModMax black hole surrounded by a cloud of strings in bumblebee gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.20570, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Gravitational lensing under the effect of weyl and bumblebee gravities: Applications of the gauss–bonnet theorem,

    A. ¨Ovg¨ un, K. Jusufi, and˙I. Sakallı, “Gravitational lensing under the effect of weyl and bumblebee gravities: Applications of the gauss–bonnet theorem,”Annals of Physics, vol. 399, pp. 193–203, 2018

    2018

  35. [42]

    Finite-distance gravitational deflection of massive particles by a kerr-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,

    Z. Li and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, “Finite-distance gravitational deflection of massive particles by a kerr-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,”Physical Review D, vol. 101, p. 024040, 2020

    2020

  36. [43]

    Thermodynamics of schwarzschild-like black holes in modified gravity models,

    D. A. Gomes, R. V. Maluf, and C. A. S. Almeida, “Thermodynamics of schwarzschild-like black holes in modified gravity models,”Annals of Physics, vol. 418, p. 168198, 2020

    2020

  37. [44]

    Quasinormal frequencies for a black hole in bumblebee gravity,

    R. Oliveira, D. M. Dantas, and C. A. S. Almeida, “Quasinormal frequencies for a black hole in bumblebee gravity,”EPL, vol. 135, p. 10003, 2021

    2021

  38. [45]

    Quasinormal modes and hawking-radiation sparsity of GUP- corrected black holes in bumblebee gravity with topological defects,

    D. J. Gogoi and U. D. Goswami, “Quasinormal modes and hawking-radiation sparsity of GUP- corrected black holes in bumblebee gravity with topological defects,”Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2022, no. 06, p. 029, 2022

    2022

  39. [46]

    Quasinormal modes of bumblebee black holes with a global monopole,

    Z. Malik, “Quasinormal modes of bumblebee black holes with a global monopole,”International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 63, p. 199, 2024

    2024

  40. [47]

    Lorentz violation induces isospectrality breaking in einstein– bumblebee gravity theory,

    W. Liu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, “Lorentz violation induces isospectrality breaking in einstein– bumblebee gravity theory,”Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, vol. 67, p. 280413, 2024

    2024

  41. [48]

    Some observable physical properties of higher-dimensional ds/ads black holes in einstein–bumblebee gravity theory,

    A. Uniyal, S. Kanzi, and ˙I. Sakallı, “Some observable physical properties of higher-dimensional ds/ads black holes in einstein–bumblebee gravity theory,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 668, 53 2023

    2023

  42. [49]

    Quasinormal modes of spherical bumblebee black holes with a global monopole,

    R.-H. Lin, R. Jiang, and X.-H. Zhai, “Quasinormal modes of spherical bumblebee black holes with a global monopole,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 720, 2023

    2023

  43. [50]

    Testing black holes with cosmological constant in einstein–bumblebee gravity through the black hole shadow using EHT data and deflection angle,

    R. C. Pantig, S. Kala, A. ¨Ovg¨ un, and N. J. L. S. Lobos, “Testing black holes with cosmological constant in einstein–bumblebee gravity through the black hole shadow using EHT data and deflection angle,”International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, p. 2550240, 2025

    2025

  44. [51]

    Greybody factor and quasinormal modes of scalar and dirac field perturbations in a schwarzschild–de sitter-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,

    Y. P. Singh and T. I. Singh, “Greybody factor and quasinormal modes of scalar and dirac field perturbations in a schwarzschild–de sitter-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 84, p. 1245, 2024

    2024

  45. [52]

    Particle dynamics and optical appearance of charged spherically symmetric black holes in bumblebee gravity,

    M. Xu, J. Lu, R. Li, Y. Liu, and S.-M. Wu, “Particle dynamics and optical appearance of charged spherically symmetric black holes in bumblebee gravity,”Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 42, p. 135008, 2025

    2025

  46. [53]

    Quasinormal modes and greybody factors of charged black holes in the bumblebee gravity model,

    Y. P. Singh, J. Choudhury, T. I. Singh, and D. J. Gogoi, “Quasinormal modes and greybody factors of charged black holes in the bumblebee gravity model,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.02508, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Quasinormal modes of a charged spherically sym- metric black hole in bumblebee gravity,

    B.-R. Li, J.-Z. Liu, W.-D. Guo, and Y.-X. Liu, “Quasinormal modes of a charged spherically sym- metric black hole in bumblebee gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.20503, 2025

    2025

  48. [55]

    Periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms of black holes in bumblebee gravity,

    Z. Shi, X. Zhang, and Y. Liu, “Periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms of black holes in bumblebee gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.14413, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Metric-affine bumblebee gravity: Classical aspects,

    A. Delhom, J. R. Nascimento, G. J. Olmo, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Metric-affine bumblebee gravity: Classical aspects,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 81, p. 287, 2021

    2021

  50. [57]

    Radiative corrections in the metric-affine bumblebee model,

    A. Delhom, J. R. Nascimento, G. J. Olmo, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Radiative corrections in the metric-affine bumblebee model,”Physics Letters B, vol. 826, p. 136932, 2022

    2022

  51. [58]

    Spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking and one-loop effective action in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. Delhom, T. Mariz, J. R. Nascimento, G. J. Olmo, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking and one-loop effective action in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2022, no. 07, p. 018, 2022

    2022

  52. [59]

    One-loop corrections in maxwell– metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. C. Lehum, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “One-loop corrections in maxwell– metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 57, p. 66, 2025

    2025

  53. [60]

    Vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, p. 085010, 2023

    2023

  54. [61]

    Probing schwarzschild-like black holes in metric-affine bumblebee gravity with accretion disk, deflection angle, greybody bounds, and neutrino propagation,

    G. Lambiase, L. Mastrototaro, R. C. Pantig, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, “Probing schwarzschild-like black holes in metric-affine bumblebee gravity with accretion disk, deflection angle, greybody bounds, and neutrino propagation,”Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2023, ...

    2023

  55. [62]

    Gravitational traces of bumblebee gravity in metric-affine formalism,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, H. Hassanabadi, N. Heidari, J. Kˇ r ´ ıˇ z, and S. Zare, “Gravitational traces of bumblebee gravity in metric-affine formalism,”Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 41, p. 055003, 2024. 54

    2024

  56. [63]

    Scattering effects of bum- blebee gravity in metric-affine formalism,

    N. Heidari, C. F. B. Macedo, A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, and H. Hassanabadi, “Scattering effects of bum- blebee gravity in metric-affine formalism,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.05321, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  57. [64]

    Gravitational lensing and shadow by a schwarzschild-like black hole in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    X.-J. Gao, “Gravitational lensing and shadow by a schwarzschild-like black hole in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 84, p. 973, 2024

    2024

  58. [65]

    Quasinormal modes and different aspects of hawking radiation within the metric-affine bumblebee gravity framework,

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, “Quasinormal modes and different aspects of hawking radiation within the metric-affine bumblebee gravity framework,”Nuclear Physics B, vol. 1002, p. 116536, 2024

    2024

  59. [66]

    Constraining the metric-affine bumblebee gravity parameter using black hole shadows and quasiperiodic oscillations of galactic microquasars,

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, “Constraining the metric-affine bumblebee gravity parameter using black hole shadows and quasiperiodic oscillations of galactic microquasars,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 85, p. 441, 2025

    2025

  60. [67]

    How does non-metricity affect particle creation and evaporation in bumblebee gravity?,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “How does non-metricity affect particle creation and evaporation in bumblebee gravity?,”JCAP, vol. 06, p. 026, 2025

    2025

  61. [68]

    An exact stationary axisym- metric vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “An exact stationary axisym- metric vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”JCAP, vol. 07, p. 004, 2024

    2024

  62. [69]

    Rotating black hole shadows in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    J. R. Nascimento, A. R. M. Oliveira, A. Y. Petrov, P. J. Porf ´ ırio, and A. R. Queiroz, “Rotating black hole shadows in metric-affine bumblebee gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.28722, 2026 (to appear in JCAP)

    2026 arXiv

  63. [70]

    Exact kerr-like solution and its shadow in a gravity model with spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking,

    C. Ding, C. Liu, R. Casana, and A. Cavalcante, “Exact kerr-like solution and its shadow in a gravity model with spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking,”Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 80, p. 178, 2020

    2020

  64. [71]

    Slowly rotating einstein–bumblebee black hole solution and its greybody factor in a lorentz-violation model,

    C. Ding and X. Chen, “Slowly rotating einstein–bumblebee black hole solution and its greybody factor in a lorentz-violation model,”Chinese Physics C, vol. 45, p. 025106, 2021

    2021

  65. [72]

    Comment on “greybody radiation and quasinormal modes of kerr-like black hole in bumblebee gravity model

    R. V. Maluf and C. R. Muniz, “Comment on “greybody radiation and quasinormal modes of kerr-like black hole in bumblebee gravity model”,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 82, p. 94, 2022

    2022

  66. [74]

    Bumblebee gravity with a kerr–sen-like solution and its shadow,

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, “Bumblebee gravity with a kerr–sen-like solution and its shadow,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 81, p. 345, 2021

    2021

  67. [75]

    Rotating BTZ-like black hole and central charges in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    C. Ding, Y. Shi, J. Chen, Y. Zhou, C. Liu, and Y. Xiao, “Rotating BTZ-like black hole and central charges in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 573, 2023

    2023

  68. [76]

    Rotating black holes and the kerr/CFT correspondence in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    Y.-Q. Chen, J.-Y. Shen, and H.-S. Liu, “Rotating black holes and the kerr/CFT correspondence in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.01884, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  69. [77]

    The stealth kerr solution in bumblebee gravity,

    R. Xu, Z.-F. Mai, and D. Liang, “The stealth kerr solution in bumblebee gravity,”Physics Letters B, vol. 875, p. 140364, 2026

    2026

  70. [78]

    Probing lorentz symmetry violation through lensing observables of rotating black holes,

    A. Kumar, S. U. Islam, and S. G. Ghosh, “Probing lorentz symmetry violation through lensing observables of rotating black holes,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 52, p. 102307, 2026. 55

    2026

  71. [79]

    Axial obstructions to rotating bumblebee vacuum solutions,

    M. Guo and Z.-Y. Fan, “Axial obstructions to rotating bumblebee vacuum solutions,”arXiv e-prints, 2026

    2026

  72. [80]

    Thin accretion disk around a rotating kerr-like black hole in the einstein–bumblebee gravity model,

    C. Liu, C. Ding, and J. Jing, “Thin accretion disk around a rotating kerr-like black hole in the einstein–bumblebee gravity model,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.13259, 2019

    1910 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Strong gravitational lensing and shadow constraint from M87* of a slowly rotating kerr-like black hole,

    X.-M. Kuang and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, “Strong gravitational lensing and shadow constraint from M87* of a slowly rotating kerr-like black hole,”Annals of Physics, vol. 447, p. 169147, 2022

    2022

  74. [82]

    Probing lorentz-invariance violation via gravitational lensing and analytical eigenmodes of perturbed slowly rotating bumblebee black holes,

    M. Mangut, H. G¨ ursel, S. Kanzi, and˙I. Sakallı, “Probing lorentz-invariance violation via gravitational lensing and analytical eigenmodes of perturbed slowly rotating bumblebee black holes,”Universe, vol. 9, p. 225, 2023

    2023

  75. [83]

    Shadow cast by a kerr-like black hole in the presence of plasma in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    H.-M. Wang and S.-W. Wei, “Shadow cast by a kerr-like black hole in the presence of plasma in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”The European Physical Journal Plus, vol. 137, p. 571, 2022

    2022

  76. [84]

    Investigating rotating black holes in bumblebee gravity: Insights from EHT observations,

    S. U. Islam, S. G. Ghosh, and S. D. Maharaj, “Investigating rotating black holes in bumblebee gravity: Insights from EHT observations,”Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2024, no. 12, p. 047, 2024

    2024

  77. [85]

    Superradiant instability of a kerr-like black hole in einstein– bumblebee gravity,

    R. Jiang, R.-H. Lin, and X.-H. Zhai, “Superradiant instability of a kerr-like black hole in einstein– bumblebee gravity,”Physical Review D, vol. 104, p. 124004, 2021

    2021

  78. [86]

    Constraint on parameters of a rotating black hole in einstein– bumblebee theory by quasiperiodic oscillations,

    Z. Wang, S. Chen, and J. Jing, “Constraint on parameters of a rotating black hole in einstein– bumblebee theory by quasiperiodic oscillations,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 82, p. 528, 2022

    2022

  79. [87]

    Probing bumblebee gravity with black hole x-ray data,

    J. Gu, S. Riaz, A. B. Abdikamalov, D. Ayzenberg, and C. Bambi, “Probing bumblebee gravity with black hole x-ray data,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 82, p. 708, 2022

    2022

  80. [88]

    Spontaneous lorentz-symmetry-breaking effects on GRB jets arising from neutrino-pair annihilation near a black hole,

    M. Khodadi, G. Lambiase, and L. Mastrototaro, “Spontaneous lorentz-symmetry-breaking effects on GRB jets arising from neutrino-pair annihilation near a black hole,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 239, 2023

    2023

  81. [89]

    Quasinormal modes of a slowly rotating einstein–bumblebee black hole,

    W. Liu, X. Fang, J. Jing, and J. Wang, “Quasinormal modes of a slowly rotating einstein–bumblebee black hole,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 83, p. 83, 2023

    2023

  82. [90]

    Quasinormal modes of a scalar perturbation around a rotating BTZ-like black hole in einstein–bumblebee gravity,

    C. Chen, Q. Pan, and J. Jing, “Quasinormal modes of a scalar perturbation around a rotating BTZ-like black hole in einstein–bumblebee gravity,”Physics Letters B, vol. 846, p. 138186, 2023

    2023

  83. [91]

    GUP-modified hawking radiation in bumblebee gravity,

    S. Kanzi and ˙I. Sakallı, “GUP-modified hawking radiation in bumblebee gravity,”Nuclear Physics B, vol. 946, p. 114703, 2019

    2019

  84. [92]

    Modified hawking radiation of a schwarzschild-like black hole in the bum- blebee gravity model,

    ˙I. Sakallı and E. Y¨ or¨ uk, “Modified hawking radiation of a schwarzschild-like black hole in the bum- blebee gravity model,”Physica Scripta, vol. 98, p. 125307, 2023

    2023

  85. [93]

    Greybody radiation and quasinormal modes of a kerr-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,

    S. Kanzi and ˙I. Sakallı, “Greybody radiation and quasinormal modes of a kerr-like black hole in the bumblebee gravity model,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 81, p. 501, 2021. 56

    2021

  86. [94]

    Particle emission rates from a black hole: Massless particles from an uncharged, non- rotating hole,

    D. N. Page, “Particle emission rates from a black hole: Massless particles from an uncharged, non- rotating hole,”Physical Review D, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 198–206, 1976

    1976

  87. [95]

    Particle emission rates from a black hole. ii. massless particles from a rotating hole,

    D. N. Page, “Particle emission rates from a black hole. ii. massless particles from a rotating hole,” Physical Review D, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 3260–3273, 1976

    1976

  88. [96]

    Observational constraints on local lorentz invariance,

    R. Bluhm, “Observational constraints on local lorentz invariance,” inSpringer Handbook of Spacetime (A. Ashtekar and V. Petkov, eds.), pp. 485–507, Berlin: Springer, 2014

    2014

  89. [97]

    The flight of the bumblebee in a non-commutative geometry: A new black hole solution,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, N. Heidari, I. P. Lobo, Y. Shi, and F. S. N. Lobo, “The flight of the bumblebee in a non-commutative geometry: A new black hole solution,”Annals Phys., vol. 490, p. 170487, 2026

    2026

  90. [98]

    Black hole entropy is the noether charge,

    R. M. Wald, “Black hole entropy is the noether charge,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 48, pp. R3427–R3431, 1993

    1993

  91. [99]

    Some properties of noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,

    V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “Some properties of noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 50, pp. 846–864, 1994

    1994

  92. [100]

    Tunnelling methods and hawking’s radiation: achievements and prospects,

    L. Vanzo, G. Acquaviva, and R. Di Criscienzo, “Tunnelling methods and hawking’s radiation: achievements and prospects,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 28, p. 183001, 2011

    2011

  93. [101]

    Implications of a simpson–visser solution in verlinde’s framework,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “Implications of a simpson–visser solution in verlinde’s framework,”The Euro- pean Physical Journal C, vol. 84, no. 1, p. 73, 2024

    2024

  94. [102]

    Hawking radiation as tunneling,

    M. K. Parikh and F. Wilczek, “Hawking radiation as tunneling,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 85, pp. 5042– 5045, 2000

    2000

  95. [103]

    Hawking radiation as tunneling for extremal and rotating black holes,

    M. Angheben, M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo, and S. Zerbini, “Hawking radiation as tunneling for extremal and rotating black holes,”JHEP, vol. 05, p. 014, 2005

    2005

  96. [104]

    Radiative corrections in metric-affine bumblebee model,

    A. Delhom, J. R. Nascimento, G. J. Olmo, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Radiative corrections in metric-affine bumblebee model,”Phys. Lett. B, vol. 826, p. 136932, 2022

    2022

  97. [105]

    Spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking and one-loop effective action in the metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. Delhom, T. Mariz, J. R. Nascimento, G. J. Olmo, A. Y. Petrov, and P. J. Porf ´ ırio, “Spontaneous lorentz symmetry breaking and one-loop effective action in the metric-affine bumblebee gravity,” JCAP, vol. 07, p. 018, 2022

    2022

  98. [106]

    Particle creation by black holes,

    S. W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,”Commun. Math. Phys., vol. 43, pp. 199–220, 1975

    1975

  99. [107]

    Notes on black-hole evaporation,

    W. G. Unruh, “Notes on black-hole evaporation,”Physical Review D, vol. 14, pp. 870–892, 1976

    1976

  100. [108]

    Thermo-field dynamics of black holes,

    W. Israel, “Thermo-field dynamics of black holes,”Physics Letters A, vol. 57, pp. 107–110, 1976

    1976

  101. [109]

    Bounding the bogoliubov coefficients,

    P. Boonserm and M. Visser, “Bounding the bogoliubov coefficients,”Annals Phys., vol. 323, pp. 2779– 2798, 2008

    2008

  102. [110]

    Transmission probabilities and the miller–good transformation,

    P. Boonserm and M. Visser, “Transmission probabilities and the miller–good transformation,”J. Phys. A, vol. 42, p. 045301, 2009

    2009

  103. [111]

    Greybody factors for schwarzschild black holes: Path-ordered exponentials and product integrals,

    F. Gray and M. Visser, “Greybody factors for schwarzschild black holes: Path-ordered exponentials and product integrals,”Universe, vol. 4, no. 9, p. 93, 2018. 57

    2018

  104. [112]

    Particle creation and evaporation in Kalb-Ramond gravity,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “Particle creation and evaporation in Kalb-Ramond gravity,”JCAP, vol. 04, p. 076, 2025

    2025

  105. [113]

    Particle production induced by a Lorentzian non-commutative spacetime,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “Particle production induced by a Lorentzian non-commutative spacetime,” Annals Phys., vol. 481, p. 170167, 2025

    2025

  106. [114]

    Absorption, greybody factors of bosonic particles and thermodynamic properties in ModMax-black holes sourced by global monopole in Kalb–Ramond gravity,

    F. M. Belchior, A. R. P. Moreira, A. Bouzenada, and F. Ahmed, “Absorption, greybody factors of bosonic particles and thermodynamic properties in ModMax-black holes sourced by global monopole in Kalb–Ramond gravity,”Annals Phys., vol. 492, p. 170548, 2026

    2026

  107. [115]

    Motions of test particles in gravitational field, perturbations and greybody factor of Bardeen-like AdS black hole with phantom global monopoles,

    F. Ahmed, A. Al-Badawi, ˙I. Sakallı, and S. Kanzi, “Motions of test particles in gravitational field, perturbations and greybody factor of Bardeen-like AdS black hole with phantom global monopoles,” Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 48, p. 101907, 2025

    2025

  108. [116]

    Photon spheres, gravitational lensing/mirroring, and grey- body radiation in deformed AdS-Schwarzschild black holes with phantom global monopole,

    F. Ahmed, A. Al-Badawi, and ˙I. Sakallı, “Photon spheres, gravitational lensing/mirroring, and grey- body radiation in deformed AdS-Schwarzschild black holes with phantom global monopole,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 49, p. 101988, 2025

    2025

  109. [117]

    Quasinormal modes and greybody factors of charged sym- mergent black hole,

    D. J. Gogoi, B. Puli¸ ce, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, “Quasinormal modes and greybody factors of charged sym- mergent black hole,”Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 85, no. 11, p. 1243, 2025

    2025

  110. [118]

    An effective model for the quantum Schwarzschild black hole: Weak deflection angle, quasinormal modes and bounding of greybody factor,

    ´A. Rinc´ on, A.¨Ovg¨ un, and R. C. Pantig, “An effective model for the quantum Schwarzschild black hole: Weak deflection angle, quasinormal modes and bounding of greybody factor,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 46, p. 101623, 2024

    2024

  111. [119]

    Probing Schwarzschild-like black holes in metric-affine bumblebee gravity with accretion disk, deflection angle, greybody bounds, and neutrino propagation,

    G. Lambiase, L. Mastrototaro, R. C. Pantig, and A. Ovgun, “Probing Schwarzschild-like black holes in metric-affine bumblebee gravity with accretion disk, deflection angle, greybody bounds, and neutrino propagation,”JCAP, vol. 12, p. 026, 2023

    2023

  112. [120]

    Amplification of waves during reflection from a rotating black hole,

    A. A. Starobinsky, “Amplification of waves during reflection from a rotating black hole,”Sov. Phys. JETP, vol. 37, pp. 28–32, 1973

    1973

  113. [121]

    Particle emission rates from a black hole. massless particles from an uncharged, nonro- tating hole,

    D. N. Page, “Particle emission rates from a black hole. massless particles from an uncharged, nonro- tating hole,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 13, pp. 198–206, 1976

    1976

  114. [122]

    Particle emission rates from a black hole. ii. massless particles from a rotating hole,

    D. N. Page, “Particle emission rates from a black hole. ii. massless particles from a rotating hole,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 14, pp. 3260–3273, 1976

    1976

  115. [123]

    Re-estimating the spin parameter of the black hole in cygnus x-1,

    X. Zhao, L. Gou, Y. Dong, X. Zheng, J. F. Steiner, J. C. A. Miller-Jones, A. Bahramian, J. A. Orosz, and Y. Feng, “Re-estimating the spin parameter of the black hole in cygnus x-1,”Astrophys. J., vol. 908, p. 117, 2021

    2021

  116. [124]

    Measuring the kerr spin parameter of a non-kerr compact object with the continuum- fitting and the iron line methods,

    C. Bambi, “Measuring the kerr spin parameter of a non-kerr compact object with the continuum- fitting and the iron line methods,”JCAP, vol. 08, p. 055, 2013

    2013

  117. [125]

    Lorentz-violating modifications to particle dynamics, thermodynamics, and vacuum energy in bumblebee gravity,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, K. E. L. de Farias, E. Passos, F. A. Brito, A. ¨Ovg¨ un, H. Hassanabadi, V. B. Bezerra, and A. R. Queiroz, “Lorentz-violating modifications to particle dynamics, thermodynamics, and vacuum energy in bumblebee gravity,”Eur. Phys. J. Plus, vol. 141, no. 7, ...

    2026

  118. [126]

    Thermal analysis of photon-like particles in rainbow gravity,

    J. Furtado, H. Hassanabadi, J. A. A. S. Reis,et al., “Thermal analysis of photon-like particles in rainbow gravity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.08587, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Bouncing universe in a heat bath,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho and A. Y. Petrov, “Bouncing universe in a heat bath,”International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 36, no. 34n35, p. 2150242, 2021

    2021

  120. [128]

    The relativistic aharonov– bohm–coulomb system with position-dependent mass,

    R. R. S. Oliveira, A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, R. V. Maluf, and C. A. S. Almeida, “The relativistic aharonov– bohm–coulomb system with position-dependent mass,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 53, no. 4, p. 045304, 2020

    2020

  121. [129]

    Particles in loop quantum gravity formalism: a thermodynamical description,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “Particles in loop quantum gravity formalism: a thermodynamical description,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 534, no. 12, p. 2200383, 2022

    2022

  122. [130]

    Particle motion and thermal effects around a Kalb–Ramond black hole,

    A. A. Ara´ ujo Filho, “Particle motion and thermal effects around a Kalb–Ramond black hole,”Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 85, no. 9, p. 1002, 2025. 59

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.