Dynamical black holes and accretion-induced backreaction

C. Molina; Mario C. Baldiotti; Thiago de L. Campos

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Dynamical black holes and accretion-induced backreaction

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 Accreting matter reshapes black-hole horizons through an integral law, with influx splitting extremal horizons and energy density shifting them.

desk verdict A useful component-resolved look at how accretion moves extremal horizons, but the printed derivation of the density-shift result has a normalization error that needs fixing. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.03082 v1 pith:FHXKSTKS submitted 2025-07-03 gr-qc hep-th

Thiago de L. Campos , C. Molina , Mario C. Baldiotti This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C5783C1583C40

keywords trappinghorizonsMisner-SharpmassaccretionbackreactionReissner-NordströmblackholeextremalhorizonVaidyaspacetimeHaywardfirstlawEddington-Finkelsteincoordinates

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 argues that the evolution of a spherically symmetric black hole under accretion is governed by an integral form of Hayward's first law for the Misner-Sharp quasi-local mass. It develops a near-horizon approximation in ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates that makes the metric locally Vaidya-like with a dynamical cosmological constant, then builds a systematic perturbative scheme for accretion backreaction. Applied to an accreting Reissner-Nordström black hole, the scheme yields explicit first-order horizon shifts. The central finding is qualitative: momentum influx alone splits an extremal horizon into outer and inner trapping horizons, while energy density displaces the extremal horizon outward. This matters because it gives concrete, testable formulas for how different components of the stress-energy tensor leave distinct imprints on horizon geometry.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Misner-Sharp quasi-local mass, $M_{MS} = \frac{r}{2}(1 - g^{\mu\gamma}\partial_\mu r\,\partial_\gamma r)$, interpreted as the energy inside a sphere of areal radius $r$. Its gradients define the flux function $A = 4\pi r^2 T^v_r$ and the energy-density function $B = -4\pi r^2(T^v_v - \rho_\Lambda)$, and the trapping-horizon condition is $r = 2M_{MS}$ with $B = 1/2$ marking the extremal case. The argument is carried by the decomposition of $M_{MS}$ into an initial value, an integrated flux, and a shell integral, together with a first-order near-horizon expansion in $\epsilon = r - r_0$. This expansion turns the general metric into a Vaidya-dark energy form and produces the polynomial equations whose solutions are the horizon positions.

What would settle it

Compute the exact horizon motion for a concrete accreting Reissner-Nordström model, such as a Vaidya-Reissner-Nordström solution with dust or a numerical simulation, extract the displacement $\epsilon(v)$, and test whether $\epsilon(v) \ll |B(v,r_0)/B'(v,r_0)|$ at the values entering Eqs. (58)-(61); if the displacement is not small by that measure, the split and shift formulas do not give the actual horizon positions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that future trapping horizons of accreting spherically symmetric black holes obey an exact integral law, $M_{MS}(v,r) = M_{MS}(0,r_0) + \int_0^v A(v',r_0)\,dv' + \int_{r_0}^r B(v,r')\,dr'$, where $A$ is the radial energy flux and $B$ is the effective energy density. Expanding this near a horizon at $r_0$ with $\epsilon = r - r_0$, the first-order correction to the Misner-Sharp mass depends only on $T^v_v - \rho_\Lambda$; for a perfect fluid it reduces to $\rho - p + 2\rho_\Lambda$, independent of the fluid velocity and the metric. For an accreting Reissner-Nordström background, the first-order horizon is $r_H^{[1]} = m + \bar{A}^{(1)} \pm \sqrt{(\bar{A}^{(1)})^2 + m^2 - Q^2 + 2m\bar{A}^{(1)}}$, so positive influx cannot destroy an extremal horizon but splits it into two. Including the energy density shifts the extremal horizon to $r = |Q|(1 + 2\pi r_0^2 \rho)$ at first order. The paper therefore establishes that momentum influx and energy density affect horizon geometry in qualitatively different ways.

Load-bearing premise

The near-horizon expansion truncates at first order in the radial displacement and evaluates the fluid's energy density at the fixed initial horizon radius, with the validity condition on the size of the displacement stated but never checked for the computed horizon shifts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any positive matter influx onto an extremal Reissner-Nordström black hole breaks extremality and splits the single horizon into an outer and an inner trapping horizon rather than removing the black hole.
Including the energy density moves the extremal horizon outward to $r = |Q|(1 + 2\pi r_0^2 \rho)$ at first order, so momentum influx and energy density leave distinguishable signatures in horizon motion.
For a perfect fluid, the first-order backreaction near a horizon depends only on $\rho - p + 2\rho_\Lambda$, not on the fluid's velocity field or the metric components.
Repulsive corrections of the form $\alpha r^{-\beta}$ to the Misner-Sharp mass can make a small future inner horizon vanish, leaving a single outer trapping horizon.
The integral first-law structure is exact for general spherically symmetric spacetimes in ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates, so the perturbative scheme can be applied to other backgrounds and to outgoing-coordinate settings such as Hawking evaporation.

Reading between the lines

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

Because influx and energy density shift horizons differently, tracking the apparent horizon of an accreting charged black hole in numerical simulations could separate the momentum-flux and energy-density contributions of the accreting fluid.
Applying the same near-horizon expansion in outgoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates should produce analogous first-order horizon-shrinkage formulas for evaporating black holes, a direction the paper names but does not develop.
If repulsive corrections destroy inner horizons, the mass-inflation instability associated with inner horizons may be avoided in effective quantum-corrected black-hole models, although the paper establishes only the horizon disappearance, not the subsequent stability.
The first-order shift formulas could be tested in analogue-gravity experiments by tracking the apparent horizon of a charged black hole accreting dust and comparing the measured displacement with the predicted split-versus-shift behavior.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The genuinely new thing here is the split between flux and density effects on extremal horizons: momentum influx splits an extremal RN horizon while energy density shifts its position. That is a clean, teachable result and goes beyond the earlier Babichev–Dokuchaev–Eroshenko scheme. The integral form of Hayward's first law (Eq. 9) is a nice packaging, but it is essentially direct integration of already-known equations, so the novelty sits in the extremal analysis.

The paper does well to lay out a systematic near-horizon perturbative scheme and to state the validity condition explicitly (Eq. 26). The algebra in the extremal splitting (Eqs. 52–58) is internally consistent, and the result that positive influx cannot destroy horizons but merely splits them, while phantom influx can, is plausible and clearly explained.

But there is a real problem. Eq. (29) does not satisfy u·u = −1. The correct F has a 1/(G + sqrt(...)) factor, not (G + sqrt(...)). As a result, Eq. (30) is wrong, and the derivation of Eq. (31) does not follow from the printed formulas. The final expression Eq. (31) is actually the standard near-horizon result for a perfect fluid, so I suspect the authors meant the correct normalization, but the paper as written does not establish the density-shift claim. Relatedly, Eq. (60) has the square root inverted relative to what solving r = 2M and dM/dr = 1/2 gives; the first-order expansion of the correct expression is Eq. (61). These are repairable, but they are load-bearing for the second half of the abstract.

The validity condition (26) is stated but never checked for the extremal displacements, so the size of the shift versus the truncation error is uncontrolled. That is a minor-to-moderate gap, not a fatal one. Section V on inner-horizon destruction is qualitative and under-supported; it reads as a remark, not a result, so I would not hold the paper to a high standard there.

Who is this for: people working on dynamical horizons, accretion backreaction, and near-extremal black holes. It deserves a serious referee — the core idea is worth engaging with, and the errors are local fixable slips rather than a broken program. Send it to peer review with a request for revision; the referee should ask for the corrected 4-velocity and re-derived energy-momentum components, plus a check of Eq. (26) for the extremal case.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a quasi-local treatment of dynamical, spherically symmetric black holes using the Misner–Sharp mass in ingoing Eddington–Finkelstein coordinates. It derives an integral form of Hayward's first law, introduces a near-horizon approximation that yields a 'Vaidya-dark energy' effective form for the metric (with an effective dynamical cosmological constant for perfect fluids), and proposes a systematic perturbative scheme for accretion backreaction. The main applications are to accreting Reissner–Nordström black holes: the authors claim that momentum influx splits an extremal horizon into inner and outer horizons, while energy density shifts the extremal horizon position, and they also discuss how repulsive corrections of the form α r^{-β} can destroy a future inner trapping horizon.

Significance. The paper's general framework is genuinely useful: the integral formulation in Eqs. (9)–(19) is an exact and clean consequence of the Misner–Sharp and Hayward formalism, and the perturbative scheme is transparent and not fitted to data. If the printed errors are corrected, the distinction between momentum-flux-driven splitting and density-driven shifts of extremal horizons is a physically interesting observation and could be a starting point for more detailed accretion models. The paper also proposes a concrete, parameter-free (up to the background) perturbative hierarchy, which is a strength. However, the current manuscript contains a load-bearing normalization error in the perfect-fluid 4-velocity and an inverted exact formula, so the second half of the central claim is not established as written.

major comments (4)

[§III.C, Eq. (29)] The expression for the 4-velocity u^μ = (F, -G, 0, 0) does not satisfy u·u = -1. With the line element (2), the normalization condition is e^{2λ} f F^2 + 2 e^λ G F - 1 = 0, f = 1 - 2M/r, whose positive solution is F = e^{-λ} / (G + sqrt(G^2 + f)), not e^{-λ}(G + sqrt(G^2 + f)) as printed. Consequently, the components T^v_v, T^r_v, T^v_r in Eq. (30) are not the correct components for the perfect-fluid stress tensor; for dust the correctly normalized component gives T^v_v → -ρ/2 near the horizon (or (p-ρ)/2 for general p), not the value implied by the printed expression. Since Eq. (31), the effective vacuum energy ρ_Λ̃ = (ρ-p)/2 + ρ_Λ, is derived from T^v_v, and since the density-shift results in Eqs. (57)–(61) depend on the coefficient 2π r0^2 ρ that follows from T^v_v → -ρ/2, the derivation of the energy-density-dependent horizon shift is invalid as printed. This is a repairable error, but the authors must correct Eq. (29), re-derive Eqs. (30)–(31), and recompute or confirm the subsequent density-shift formulas.
[§IV.B, Eq. (60)] The exact extremal horizon position is inverted. Solving the extremality conditions r = 2M and ∂M/∂r = 1/2 with the mass function in Eq. (56) gives r_ext = |Q| / sqrt(1 - A0 ρ(v,r0)) with A0 = 4π r0^2, whose first-order expansion is exactly Eq. (61), |Q|(1 + A0 ρ/2). The printed Eq. (60), |Q| sqrt(1 - A0 ρ), would expand to |Q|(1 - A0 ρ/2), which contradicts Eq. (61). Please correct the position of the square root in Eq. (60).
[§III.B, Eq. (26) and §IV.B] The validity condition ϵ ≪ |B(v,r0)/B'(v,r0)| is stated in Eq. (26) but is never verified for the horizon displacements computed later. In particular, for the extremal shift around r0 ≃ |Q|, the displacement is of order 4π r0^2 ρ r0, so the condition requires A0 ρ ≪ 1; this is plausibly satisfied in the assumed perturbative regime ρ → 0, but the paper should show explicitly that the truncation error in Eq. (24) is controlled for the values of ϵ and ρ used in Eqs. (57)–(61). Without this check, the first-order approximation of the horizon position is not rigorously justified.
[§III.B and §III.C] The claim that the metric acquires a 'Vaidya-dark energy' form near r0 is not fully established because the function λ(v,r) is not shown to be close to λ(v,r0) over the shell region. The approximation of the Misner–Sharp mass alone does not control the metric component g_vv (or the λ- dependence of the 4-velocity and stress tensor). Either prove that e^{λ-λ0} ≈ 1 to the relevant order, or explicitly restrict the claim to the Misner–Sharp mass and the horizon equations rather than the full metric.

minor comments (5)

[§III.C, Eq. (30)] The equations for the stress-tensor components are typeset in a way that is difficult to parse; please rewrite them with clear fractions, parentheses, and square roots so the reader can verify the algebra (especially the λ- and G-dependence).
[§II.B, Eqs. (11)–(12)] The limit r0 → 0 in Eq. (12) requires regularity assumptions on A(v′, r0) and on the initial data near the central singularity; please state these assumptions explicitly.
[§IV.A] The text describes the perturbative framework as 'systematically incorporating higher-order corrections', but the explicit computation in §IV.B treats the B^{(1)} contribution only to first order in ϵ and does not demonstrate a general higher-order algorithm; please soften or clarify this claim.
[§V, Fig. 1] The values of β1, β2, β3 used in Figure 1 are not specified; please provide the actual parameters in the caption or text so the plot is reproducible.
[References] Reference [25] is an arXiv preprint; if it has been published by now, please update to the journal version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the horizon-shift formulas are algebraic consequences of the Misner-Sharp decomposition and the trapping-horizon condition, with no fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—that momentum influx splits an extremal Reissner-Nordström horizon and energy density shifts its position—are derived by substituting the perturbed Misner-Sharp mass into the horizon condition r_H = 2 M_MS and solving the resulting algebraic equations. For example, Eq. (52) is the exact solution of Eq. (51), and Eq. (58) is the exact solution of Eq. (57); the extremal-shift results (60)-(61) follow from imposing B = 1/2 (Appendix A) on the same mass function. No parameter is fitted to data, no target result is assumed in defining the input quantities, and the near-horizon 'Vaidya-dark energy' approximation is an explicit Taylor expansion of the Misner-Sharp mass, not a renamed empirical pattern. The only citation to the authors' own prior work is [25], used in the final remarks as a possible future extension to Hawking evaporation; it is not load-bearing. Reference [26] supplies the test-fluid framework but is not used to justify the new horizon-shift equations. The apparent normalization issue in Eq. (29) flagged in review is a correctness/validity concern about the printed stress-energy components, not a circularity: even if Eq. (30) is wrong, the derivation method is not equivalent to its inputs. Accordingly the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central calculations use background parameters m and Q from prior literature and dynamical fluid inputs rho, G, A that are modeled, not fitted. The only hand-chosen parameters are alpha and beta in Section V. The main axioms are the standard EF-coordinate framing, the smoothness needed for the near-horizon expansion, the test-fluid approximation, and the dominant energy condition.

free parameters (2)

alpha (repulsive correction amplitude)
Introduced by hand in Eq. (62) to model quantum-gravity-inspired corrections in Section V; not fitted or derived.
beta (repulsive correction exponent) = non-negative integer
Chosen by hand in Eq. (62); the paper shows qualitatively different behavior for increasing beta but gives no selection principle.

assumptions (6)

standard math Spherically symmetric metric can be written in the ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein form (2) with Misner-Sharp mass.
Section II.A, Eq. (2); standard coordinate representation.
domain assumption The stress-energy tensor is smooth near r0 so the Taylor expansion (24) and condition (26) hold.
Section III.B; requires epsilon << |B/B'|, not verified for the computed horizon displacements.
domain assumption Test-fluid approximation: first-order matter fields satisfy background equations and M^(1)/M^(0) << 1.
Section IV.A, Eqs. (33)-(36); validity cited from [26], not proven here.
domain assumption Dominant energy condition for physical accreting fluids, so that the flux A^(1) is positive and inequality (55) holds.
Section III.A and Section IV.B; used to conclude matter influx splits rather than destroys horizons.
domain assumption The limit r0 to 0 in Eq. (12) is well-defined and B remains bounded.
Section II.B, Eqs. (11)-(12); needed for the interpretation of M(v) as the singularity's mass.
ad hoc to paper Repulsive corrections M_MS -> M_MS + alpha r^{-beta} are representative of quantum gravity effects.
Section V, Eq. (62); referenced to [41] but with no independent derivation in this paper.

invented entities (1)

Effective dynamical cosmological constant tilde-Lambda(v)
purpose: Bookkeeping device to express the near-horizon metric in a Vaidya-de Sitter-like form via rho_tilde-Lambda = -T^v_v + rho_Lambda (Eq. 25).
It is a local approximation variable, not an independently observed cosmological constant; no new physics is claimed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical black holes and accretion-induced backreaction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FHXKSTKS

@misc{pith2026250703082,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical black holes and accretion-induced backreaction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FHXKSTKS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.03082}
}

read the original abstract

We investigate the evolution of future trapping horizons through the dynamics of the Misner-Sharp mass using ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates. Our analysis shows that an integral formulation of Hayward's first law governs much of the evolution of general spherically symmetric spacetimes. To account for the accretion backreaction, we consider a near-horizon approximation, yielding first-order corrections of a Vaidya-dark energy form. We further propose a systematic perturbative scheme to study these effects for an arbitrary background. As an application, we analyze an accreting Reissner-Nordstr\"om black hole and demonstrate the horizon shifts that are produced. Finally, we compute accretion-induced corrections to an extremal configuration. It is shown that momentum influx and energy density produce distinct effects: the former forces the splitting of the extremal horizon, while the latter induces significant displacements in its position, computed up to first-order perturbative corrections. These results highlight how different components of the stress-energy tensor significantly affect horizon geometry, with potential implications for broader areas of research, including black-hole thermodynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.03082 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

[1]

Fundamental properties and applications of quasi-local black hole horizons.Class

Krishnan, B. Fundamental properties and applications of quasi-local black hole horizons.Class. Quant. Grav. 2008, 25, 114005. arXiv:0712.1575

arXiv 2008
[2]

Mass and angular momentum in general relativity

Jaramillo, J.L.; Gourgoulhon, E. Mass and angular momentum in general relativity. InMass and Motion in General Relativ- ity; Blanchet, L., Spallicci, A., Whiting, B., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 87–124. arXiv:1001.5429

arXiv 2011
[3]

Hayward, S. A. General laws of black-hole dynamics.Phys. Rev. D 1994, 49, 6467

work page 1994
[4]

Relativistic equations for adiabatic, spherically symmetric gravitational collapse.Phys

Misner, C.; Sharp, D. Relativistic equations for adiabatic, spherically symmetric gravitational collapse.Phys. Rev. 1964 136, B571

work page 1964
[5]

C.; Misner, C

Hernandez, W. C.; Misner, C. W. Observer time as a coordinate in relativistic spherical hydrodynamics.Astrophys. J., 1966, 143, 452

work page 1966
[6]

Isolated and dynamical horizons and their applications.Living Rev

Ashtekar, A.; Krishnan, B. Isolated and dynamical horizons and their applications.Living Rev. Rel. 2004, 7, 10. arXiv:gr- qc/0407042

work page arXiv 2004
[7]

Kodama time: Geometrically preferred foliations of spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys

Abreu, G.; Visser, M. Kodama time: Geometrically preferred foliations of spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys. Rev. D 2010, 82, 044027. arXiv:1004.1456

arXiv 2010
[8]

Black-hole boundaries.Can

Booth, I. Black-hole boundaries.Can. J. Phys. 2005, 83, 1073. arXiv:gr-qc/0508107

arXiv 2005

Show all 44 references

[9]

Surface gravity in dynamical spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys

Fodor, G.; Nakamura, K.; Oshiro, Y.; Tomimatsu, A. Surface gravity in dynamical spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys. Rev. D 1996, 54, 3882. arXiv:gr-qc/9603034

1996 arXiv
[10]

Nielsen, A. B. Black holes and black hole thermodynamics without event horizons.Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 2009, 41, 1539. arXiv:0809.3850 13

2009 arXiv
[11]

B.; Yeom, D

Nielsen, A. B.; Yeom, D. Spherically symmetric trapping horizons, the Misner-Sharp mass and black hole evaporation.Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 2009, 24, 5261. arXiv:0804.4435

2009 arXiv
[12]

B.; Yoon, J

Nielsen, A. B.; Yoon, J. H. Dynamical surface gravity.Class. Quant. Grav. 2008, 25, 085010. arXiv:0711.1445

2008 arXiv
[13]

Embedding black holes and other inhomogeneities in the universe in various theories of gravity: a short review

Faraoni, V. Embedding black holes and other inhomogeneities in the universe in various theories of gravity: a short review. Universe 2018, 4, 109. arXiv:1810.04667

2018 arXiv
[14]

Physical observability of horizons.Phys

Visser, M. Physical observability of horizons.Phys. Rev. D 2014, 90, 127502. arXiv:1407.7295

2014 arXiv
[15]

McVittie, G. C. The mass-particle in an expanding universe.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1933, 93, 325

1933
[16]

Generalization of McVittie’s model for an inhomogeneity in a cosmological spacetime.Phys

Carrera, M.; Giulini, D. Generalization of McVittie’s model for an inhomogeneity in a cosmological spacetime.Phys. Rev. D 2010, 81, 043521. arXiv:0908.3101

2010 arXiv
[17]

More on McVittie’s Legacy: A Schwarzschild-de Sitter black and white hole embedded in an asymptotically ΛCDM cosmology.Phys

Lake, K.; Abdelqader, M. More on McVittie’s Legacy: A Schwarzschild-de Sitter black and white hole embedded in an asymptotically ΛCDM cosmology.Phys. Rev. D 2011, 84, 044045. arXiv:1106.3666

2011 arXiv
[18]

Faraoni, V.; Moreno, A. F. Z.; Prain, A. The charged McVittie spacetime.Phys. Rev. D 2014, 89, 103514. arXiv:1404.3929

2014 arXiv
[19]

C.; Molina, C

Maciel, A.; Guariento, D. C.; Molina, C. Cosmological black holes and white holes with time-dependent mass,Phys. Rev. D 2015, 91, 084043. arXiv:1502.01003

2015 arXiv
[20]

Ruiz, F.; Molina, C.; Lima, J. A. S. Dynamical model for primordial black holes, Phys. Rev. D 2020, 102, 123516. arXiv:2011.07079

2020 arXiv
[21]

Thakurta, S. N. G. Kerr metric in an expanding universe.Indian J. Phys. B 1981, 55, 304

1981
[22]

Vaidya, P. C. The gravitational field of a radiating star.Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Sect. A 1951, 33, 264

1951
[23]

Vaidya, P. C. ‘Newtonian’ time in general relativity.Nature 1953, 171, 4345

1953
[24]

Mallett, R. L. Radiating Vaidya metric imbedded in de Sitter space.Phys. Rev. D 1985 31, 416

1985
[25]

L.; Molina, C.; Lima, J

Campos, T. L.; Molina, C.; Lima, J. A. S. Black-hole evaporation for cosmological observers.arXiv:2411.08114
[26]

Babichev, E.; Dokuchaev, V.; Eroshenko, Y.; Backreaction of accreting matter onto a black hole in the Eddington- Finkelstein coordinates. Class. Quant. Grav. 2012, 29, 115002. arXiv:1202.2836

2012 arXiv
[27]

Bardeen, J. M. Black holes do evaporate thermally.Phys. Rev. Lett. 1981, 46, 382

1981
[28]

Hayward, S. A. Gravitational energy in spherical symmetry.Phys. Rev. D 1996, 53, 1938. arXiv:gr-qc/9408002

1996 arXiv
[29]

Hayward, S. A. Unified first law of black-hole dynamics and relativistic thermodynamics.Class. Quant. Grav. 1998, 15,

1998
[30]

A.; Di Criscienzo, R.; Nadalini, M.; Vanzo, L.; Zerbini, S

Hayward, S. A.; Di Criscienzo, R.; Nadalini, M.; Vanzo, L.; Zerbini, S. Local Hawking temperature for dynamical black holes. Class. Quant. Grav. 2009, 26, 062001. arXiv:0806.0014

2009 arXiv
[31]

DOI:10.1007/978-3-319- 19240-6

Faraoni, V.Cosmological and black hole apparent horizons ; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2015. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319- 19240-6

2015 doi
[32]

Conserved energy flux for the spherically symmetric system and the backreaction problem in the black hole evaporation

Kodama, H. Conserved energy flux for the spherically symmetric system and the backreaction problem in the black hole evaporation. Prog. Theor. Phys. 1980, 63, 1217

1980
[33]

Griffiths, J.; Poloský, J.Exact space-times in Einstein ’s general relativity ; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK,
[34]

B.; Vaidya, P

Bonnor, W. B.; Vaidya, P. C. Spherically symmetric radiation of charge in Einstein-Maxwell theory.Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 1970, 1, 127-130

1970
[35]

Structure of space-time

Penrose, R. Structure of space-time. InBattelle Rencontres - 1967 lectures in mathematics and physics ; DeWitt. C. M.; Wheeler, J. A.; W. A. Benjamin, USA, 1968; pp. 121-235

1967
[36]

Instability of the Cauchy horizon of Reissner-Nordström black holes.Phys

Matzner, R.; Zamorano, N.; Sandberg, V. Instability of the Cauchy horizon of Reissner-Nordström black holes.Phys. Rev. D 1979, 19, 2821

1979
[37]

Internal structure of black holes,Phys

Poisson, E.; Israel, W. Internal structure of black holes,Phys. Rev. D 1990, 41, 1796

1990
[38]

Inner structure of a charged black hole: An exact mass-inflation solution.Phys

Ori, A. Inner structure of a charged black hole: An exact mass-inflation solution.Phys. Rev. Lett. 1991, 67, 789

1991
[39]

On the inner horizon instability of non-singular black holes

Di Filippo, F.; Carballo-Rubio, R.; Liberati, S.; Pacilio, C.; Visser, M. On the inner horizon instability of non-singular black holes. Universe 2022, 8, 204. arXiv:2203.14516

2022 arXiv
[40]

Mass inflation without Cauchy horizons.Phys

Carballo-Rubio, R.; Filippo, F.; Liberati, S.; Visser, M. Mass inflation without Cauchy horizons.Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024, 133, 181402. arXiv:2402.14913

2024 arXiv
[41]

Quantum-mechanical corrections to the Schwarzschild black-hole metric

Bargueño, P.; Medina, S.; Nowakowski, M.; Batic, D. Quantum-mechanical corrections to the Schwarzschild black-hole metric. Europhysics Letters, 2017, 117, 60006. arXiv:1605.06463

2017 arXiv
[42]

Models of evaporating black holes

Hiscock, W. Models of evaporating black holes. I.Phys. Rev. D 1981, 23, 2813

1981
[43]

Models of evaporating black holes

Hiscock, W. Models of evaporating black holes. II. Effects of the outgoing created radiation.Phys. Rev. D 1981, 23, 2823

1981
[2009]

DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511635397

doi

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Fundamental properties and applications of quasi-local black hole horizons.Class

Krishnan, B. Fundamental properties and applications of quasi-local black hole horizons.Class. Quant. Grav. 2008, 25, 114005. arXiv:0712.1575

arXiv 2008

[2] [2]

Mass and angular momentum in general relativity

Jaramillo, J.L.; Gourgoulhon, E. Mass and angular momentum in general relativity. InMass and Motion in General Relativ- ity; Blanchet, L., Spallicci, A., Whiting, B., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 87–124. arXiv:1001.5429

arXiv 2011

[3] [3]

Hayward, S. A. General laws of black-hole dynamics.Phys. Rev. D 1994, 49, 6467

work page 1994

[4] [4]

Relativistic equations for adiabatic, spherically symmetric gravitational collapse.Phys

Misner, C.; Sharp, D. Relativistic equations for adiabatic, spherically symmetric gravitational collapse.Phys. Rev. 1964 136, B571

work page 1964

[5] [5]

C.; Misner, C

Hernandez, W. C.; Misner, C. W. Observer time as a coordinate in relativistic spherical hydrodynamics.Astrophys. J., 1966, 143, 452

work page 1966

[6] [6]

Isolated and dynamical horizons and their applications.Living Rev

Ashtekar, A.; Krishnan, B. Isolated and dynamical horizons and their applications.Living Rev. Rel. 2004, 7, 10. arXiv:gr- qc/0407042

work page arXiv 2004

[7] [7]

Kodama time: Geometrically preferred foliations of spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys

Abreu, G.; Visser, M. Kodama time: Geometrically preferred foliations of spherically symmetric spacetimes.Phys. Rev. D 2010, 82, 044027. arXiv:1004.1456

arXiv 2010

[8] [8]

Black-hole boundaries.Can

Booth, I. Black-hole boundaries.Can. J. Phys. 2005, 83, 1073. arXiv:gr-qc/0508107

arXiv 2005