Purely Electric, Magnetic, and Dyonic Black Holes in Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg Theory

Chao Chen; Dong-han Yeom; Haoyuan Luo; Kok-Geng Lim; Nan Cao; Xiao Yan Chew

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 91 references

Purely Electric, Magnetic, and Dyonic Black Holes in Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg Theory

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Euler–Heisenberg vacuum polarization produces three-horizon black holes in the purely magnetic sector and lets dyonic solutions interpolate between one- and three-horizon causal structures.

desk verdict Solid exact electric solution and phase-diagram work, but the three-horizon headline sits in a regime where the one-loop EH expansion is uncontrolled; fix the asymptotics and the caveat and it's publishable. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.21938 v1 pith:JZ2BR3IC submitted 2026-07-24 gr-qc hep-th

Haoyuan Luo , Nan Cao , Xiao Yan Chew , Kok-Geng Lim , Chao Chen , Dong-han Yeom This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C5783C22 PACS 04.70.-s04.40.Nr

keywords Euler–HeisenbergelectrodynamicsnonlineardyonicblackholesholehorizonsReissner–NordströmcausalstructureweakenergyconditionHawkingtemperature

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper studies static, spherically symmetric black holes in Einstein gravity coupled to Euler–Heisenberg electrodynamics, using the action $L=\mathcal{F}-\epsilon(\mathcal{F}^2+\tfrac{7}{4}\mathcal{G}^2)$ and working directly with the physical electromagnetic invariant $\mathcal{F}$ rather than an auxiliary variable. It derives an exact analytic solution for the purely electric sector, recovers the purely magnetic solution, and constructs dyonic solutions numerically. Its central claim is that for small positive $\epsilon$ the purely magnetic metric function $N(r)=1-2M/r+P^2/r^2-2\epsilon P^4/(5r^6)$ admits three horizons—one event horizon and two inner horizons—and that dyonic solutions interpolate between one- and three-horizon phases depending on the magnetic-to-electric ratio and the coupling. This matters because a physically motivated quantum-electrodynamics effective theory, rather than an engineered Lagrangian, would then produce causal structures absent in Einstein–Maxwell theory, even though the central curvature singularity remains.

What carries the argument

For the magnetic claim, the load-bearing object is the horizon polynomial $N(r)=1-2M/r+P^2/r^2-2\epsilon P^4/(5r^6)$, whose negative $r^{-6}$ term is the nonlinearity that can create an extra pair of inner horizons. For the electric and dyonic sectors, the machinery is the cubic field equation $E^3+p_1(r)E+p_2(r)=0$, whose unique real Cardano root $E_1(r)$ is rewritten as $E_1=\sqrt{B}\,\sinh\!\left(\tfrac{1}{3}\operatorname{arcsinh}D\right)$; this gives the exact electric field, potential, and mass function in the electric case and drives the numerical dyonic integration. The dyonic phase diagrams are produced by integrating the coupled ODEs for $N(r)$ and $V_1(r)$ inward from $r_{\max}=10^4M$ using the large-$r$ expansions (117)–(118) as initial data.

What would settle it

Recompute the dyonic horizon phase diagram using boundary data from a corrected asymptotic expansion that reduces to Eq. (95) at $\beta=0$ and is invariant under $\beta\to-\beta$, and compare the one- and three-horizon boundaries; if the three-horizon region vanishes or moves outside the quoted ranges, the central claim fails. A simpler check is to compare the $\beta=1$ and $\beta=-1$ dyonic solutions, whose horizon radii must coincide because the equations depend only on $\beta^2$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery claim is that the Euler–Heisenberg correction qualitatively changes the horizon structure of charged black holes. In the purely magnetic case the exact metric function is $N(r)=1-2M/r+P^2/r^2-2\epsilon P^4/(5r^6)$; for small dimensionless coupling $\tilde{\epsilon}=\epsilon/M^2$ and magnetic charge above a critical value, this sextic has three positive roots, giving one event horizon and two inner horizons. As $\tilde{\epsilon}$ grows past roughly $0.076$, the extra pair disappears and only a single horizon remains. The dyonic solutions, obtained numerically by integrating the field equations backward from $r_{\max}=10^4M$ with the asymptotic expansion as initial data, show one- and three-horizon phases, with the three-horizon region confined to a finite wedge in the $(\tilde{\epsilon},\beta)$ plane and terminating near $(\tilde{\epsilon},q)\approx(1.3,1.13)$ or $(\beta,q)\approx(0.4,1.052)$ depending on the slice. The paper also reports that purely electric solutions keep the Reissner–Nordström two-horizon pattern, that the EH electric field becomes regular at the center while the magnetic field retains its $P/r^2$ divergence, and that the weak energy condition is violated near the center when a magnetic charge is present.

Load-bearing premise

The dyonic phase diagrams depend on the assumption that the large-distance expansion (117)–(118) used as boundary data at $r_{\max}=10^4M$ is correct and internally consistent, in particular that its $r^{-6}$ term matches the exact $\beta=0$ limit and is even under $\beta\to-\beta$; if that expansion is wrong, the reported dyonic one- and three-horizon boundaries could shift or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the three-horizon magnetic phase is real, magnetically charged EH black holes have an interior causal structure unlike Reissner–Nordström: after crossing the event horizon and an intermediate horizon, an observer can either return to another asymptotic region or continue inward through the innermost horizon to the spacelike singularity.
Stronger Euler–Heisenberg coupling or a larger magnetic-to-electric ratio suppresses the extra horizons, so in the strong-coupling regime magnetically charged EH black holes behave like single-horizon, Schwarzschild-type objects rather than Reissner–Nordström-like ones.
For dyonic solutions with a nonzero magnetic charge, extremality changes: the horizon area and Hawking temperature no longer terminate at a zero-temperature extremal endpoint, and the temperature instead rises in the magnetic-dominated regime.
The electric-field divergence at the center is regularized ($E(0)=0$), but the magnetic field keeps its $P/r^2$ divergence, so the curvature singularity remains; any observational signature of the three-horizon structure would come from the strong-field interior rather than from singularity regularization.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the purely magnetic horizon count is controlled by a simple sextic polynomial, the critical and extremal lines of the magnetic phase diagram could be derived analytically from the discriminant of $N(r)=0$, giving a sharp check on the numerical dyonic boundaries.
The field equations depend on the magnetic-to-electric ratio only through $\beta^2$, so the dyonic phase diagram should be invariant under $\beta\to-\beta$; testing this symmetry would directly verify the consistency of the asymptotic boundary data used in the numerical integration.
If the inner horizons of the three-horizon phase suffer mass-inflation instability, the new causal structures may be transient, which would connect this horizon classification to the strong cosmic censorship question rather than to stable interior geometries.
The same direct-$\mathcal{F}$ formulation extends to higher-order QED corrections, and the shift of the triple-horizon endpoint with those higher-order terms would give a concrete, testable prediction for how vacuum-polarization corrections accumulate.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know before you read this one. The exact electric solution is a real new result, and the paper's systematic horizon/phase analysis is careful. But the headline three-horizon structure sits in a regime where the one-loop EH expansion is not controlled, and the dyonic asymptotic expansion in Eq. (117) is internally inconsistent.

What the paper does well: The hypergeometric electric potential and mass function (Eqs. 82 and 90) are new, as far as I can tell, and the derivation around the cubic equation is clean. The magnetic solution is explicitly acknowledged as known; the authors say so. The dyonic phase diagrams, built by backward integration, are plausible and the thermodynamics treatment is standard. The WEC analysis is correct, and the curvature invariants are checked. Credit is due: the manuscript is clearly written and the claims are mostly modest, except the abstract's 'naturally admits' language.

Now the soft spots. First, Eq. (117) does not limit to Eq. (95) for β=0 (missing factor 5) and is not symmetric under β→−β. That is a real internal inconsistency. However, since it only seeds initial data at rmax=10^4M, the effect on phase boundaries is negligible, so it is a fixable bug rather than a load-bearing flaw. Second, and more substantively: the three-horizon region occurs where ε|F|≈5. For the magnetic solution, the innermost horizon r3 satisfies r3^4≈(2/5)εP^2, so εF=5 there. That is precisely where the first-order EH Lagrangian breaks down; higher-order QED terms are equally important. The paper never confronts this. That undercuts the physical claim that EH theory 'naturally' produces these causal structures. The truncated model does, but the full effective theory is not being controlled. Third, the reader's concern about a dimensional mismatch in Eq. (63) is wrong—I checked the integral; dimensions are fine.

The absence of code or data is a minor annoyance, not a red flag for this subfield.

Bottom line: this is a paper for the NED/black-hole thermodynamics community. The exact electric result is worth citing, and the phase diagrams, after fixing the asymptotics and adding an honest caveat about the truncation, would be useful. I would send it to peer review, but the authors need to address the εF≈5 point head-on before publication.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies static, spherically symmetric black holes in Einstein gravity coupled to the one-loop Euler-Heisenberg Lagrangian L = F - eps(F^2 + 7/4 G^2), working directly in terms of the physical electromagnetic invariant F rather than the auxiliary Hamiltonian variable P. It derives an exact purely electric solution in terms of Cardano branches and hypergeometric functions, recovers the known purely magnetic solution N(r)=1-2M/r+P^2/r^2-2eps P^4/(5r^6), and constructs dyonic solutions numerically by integrating backward from r_max=10^4 M using the asymptotic expansions in Eqs. (117)-(118). The main reported results are the horizon phase diagrams: purely electric solutions retain RN-like one- and two-horizon phases, while purely magnetic and dyonic solutions are claimed to admit a qualitatively new three-horizon phase (one event horizon plus two inner horizons) for small coupling, with the three-horizon region shrinking as either the coupling or the magnetic-to-electric charge ratio increases. The paper also studies curvature invariants, energy conditions, reduced horizon area, Hawking temperature, and Smarr-type mass formulas.

Significance. If the central claim held, the paper would be a useful contribution to the black-hole/NED literature: it provides an explicit analytic electric-field branch and mass function, an analytically checkable horizon polynomial for the magnetic case, a self-contained numerical procedure for the dyonic sector, and phase boundaries that are falsifiable within the stated model. The strengths are real: the magnetic horizon analysis is exact for the truncated Lagrangian, the eps=0 limit correctly reduces to dyonic Reissner-Nordstrom, and the paper explicitly benchmarks all branches against that limit. However, the physical significance of the claimed "new causal structures" is currently undercut by a validity-regime problem: the third horizon is created precisely in the regime where the one-loop Euler-Heisenberg truncation is uncontrolled, and the dyonic numerical results rely on an asymptotic expansion that is internally inconsistent. The paper therefore needs revision before its main physical conclusion can be accepted.

major comments (2)

[Sec. III.C, Eq. (117)] The asymptotic expansion used as boundary data for the dyonic integration is internally inconsistent. Inserting the electric-field expansion (118) into the mass equation (19) gives, at order eps, the r^-6 coefficient of N(r) as -2 eps(1+6 beta^2) Q^4/(5 r^6), with no linear beta term and with the factor 1/5; Eq. (117) instead states -2 eps(1+5 beta + beta^2) Q^4/r^6. The printed form does not reduce to Eq. (95) at beta=0 and violates beta -> -beta symmetry, which the metric must respect since the charges enter through Q^2 and P^2 at this order. Because the dyonic phase diagrams in Figs. 5 are obtained from initial data seeded by Eq. (117), the expansion should be corrected and the dyonic computation rerun or independently verified; the error is suppressed by powers of M/r_max at r_max=10^4 M, but the reported expansion is still wrong and its numerical impact should be quantified.
[Sec. III.B, Eq. (101), and Sec. II.A] The central three-horizon claim is made in a regime where the one-loop Euler-Heisenberg truncation is unreliable. For the purely magnetic metric (101), the innermost horizon r3 is set approximately by the balance P^2/r3^2 ~ 2 eps P^4/(5 r3^6), so r3^4 ~ (2/5) eps P^2. At this radius the dimensionless expansion parameter is eps|F| = eps(2P^2/r3^4) ~ 5, independent of eps. Thus the O(eps) term that creates the third horizon is evaluated at eps|F| of order unity, where O(eps^2) and higher-order invariants are equally important and the weak-field, low-frequency condition stated in Sec. II.A is violated. The same magnetic balance controls the dyonic innermost horizon because E1(r) -> 0 as r -> 0, so the objection applies there as well. The paper should either include a higher-order analysis showing that the three-horizon structure survives, or explicitly present the result as a property of the truncated toy Lagrangian rather than as a prediction of Euler-Heisenberg electrodynamics.

minor comments (4)

[Title and throughout] The title contains a spacing typo, "Einste in-Euler-Heisenberg," which should be corrected.
[Sec. III.C, Fig. 5 and surrounding text] The text and abstract refer to one-, two-, and three-horizon dyonic configurations, but the phase diagrams in Fig. 5 display only one- and three-horizon regions, with two-horizon configurations appearing only as degenerate boundaries; the terminology should be made consistent.
[Figs. 2(b), 3(b), 5(b), 5(d), 5(e)] Several phase diagrams have missing or garbled axis labels and legend entries in the typeset version; these figures should be regenerated with clear labels so that the critical and extremal lines are legible.
[Sec. III.B.2] The V'(r) branch leading to Eq. (108) involves a purely imaginary electric field for eps>0 and should be labeled more prominently as a formal mathematical branch rather than as a physical electromagnetic configuration.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the three-horizon phase is read off from the integrated N(r) horizon polynomial and backward-integrated dyonic ODEs, with the EH coupling scanned rather than fitted.

full rationale

The paper's central three-horizon claim is derived by direct integration of the stated Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg field equations, not by injecting the target horizon structure as an input. For the purely magnetic sector, Eq. (101), N(r) = 1 - 2M/r + P^2/r^2 - 2 epsilon P^4/(5 r^6), follows by integrating m'(r) = (P^2/2r^2)(1 - 2 epsilon P^2/r^4), and the three-horizon configuration is then obtained by counting positive roots of N(r) = 0 as a function of scanned parameters (q_m, epsilon-tilde). No parameter is fitted to the horizon data, and the epsilon = 0 limit reproduces the Reissner-Nordstrom solution, which serves as an external benchmark rather than as a fitted input. The dyonic phase diagrams are generated by backward numerical integration of Eqs. (18)-(19) from asymptotic boundary data at r_max = 10^4 M; the boundary expansion only seeds the integration and is not itself the target result, so even an error in Eq. (117) would be a correctness or consistency issue rather than a circularity. The paper explicitly acknowledges that the purely magnetic solution was previously obtained in Refs. [58,62,73,75-82] and claims novelty only in the systematic horizon phase analysis, so citing prior derivation of the background solution is not load-bearing circularity. The skeptical concern that the innermost horizon sits where epsilon|F| is order unity and the O(epsilon) Euler-Heisenberg truncation may be uncontrolled is a validity-of-approximation criticism, not a demonstration that the prediction reduces by construction to its inputs. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work, no ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation, and no known empirical pattern is merely renamed. The derivation is self-contained against the RN limit and the stated Lagrangian, so the appropriate circularity score is zero.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The mathematical core adds no fitted parameters: all solutions follow from the stated EH Lagrangian and the RN limit is recovered as eps to 0. The main external inputs are the EH effective action itself and the chosen numerical seeding for dyonic solutions; no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are postulated.

free parameters (1)

EH coupling eps (dimensionful; eps_tilde=eps/M^2 used in scans) = not fitted; scanned over eps_tilde=0.01, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 10, 100, 1000
The coupling enters the Lagrangian as the coefficient of F^2+G^2; the paper varies it to map horizon phases, but no value is fitted to data.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The one-loop EH effective Lagrangian L=F-eps(F^2+7/4 G^2) is used as the exact matter action for all field strengths down to r=0.
EH is the leading weak-field QED correction; extrapolating to the strong-field interior is an assumption not derived or tested in the paper (Sec. II A).
domain assumption The physical magnetic branch selects V'(r)=0 from the cubic; the imaginary V' branch is discarded.
For Q=0 the field equation factors into V'=0 or imaginary V'; the paper keeps only the real electromagnetic configuration (Sec. III B).
domain assumption Backward numerical integration from rmax=10^4 M with asymptotic boundary conditions from Eq. (117) produces the true dyonic solutions.
The method is not benchmarked against known analytic cases and the boundary expansion appears inconsistent, so the dyonic phase structure depends on this numerical assumption (Sec. III C).
standard math Standard Cardano root formulas and hypergeometric identities are applicable to the cubic and the integrals.
These are background mathematical tools used to integrate the electric field and mass function.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Purely Electric, Magnetic, and Dyonic Black Holes in Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg Theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JZ2BR3IC

@misc{pith2026260721938,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Purely Electric, Magnetic, and Dyonic Black Holes in Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg Theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JZ2BR3IC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21938}
}

abstract

We investigate static, spherically symmetric charged black holes in Einstein gravity coupled to Euler--Heisenberg (EH) nonlinear electrodynamics, including purely electric, purely magnetic, and dyonic configurations. Rather than adopting the Hamiltonian formulation based on the auxiliary electromagnetic invariant $\mathcal{P}$, we work directly with the physical electromagnetic invariant $\mathcal{F}$ in the Einstein-Euler--Heisenberg Lagrangian, thereby describing all charged configurations without introducing auxiliary variables. Within this approach, we derive an exact analytical solution for the purely electric case, recover the purely magnetic solution directly from the field equations, and construct the dyonic solutions numerically. We systematically study the horizon structure, causal properties, and thermodynamics of these solutions. While the purely electric branch exhibits the familiar Reissner--Nordstr\"om horizon structure, the purely magnetic branch naturally admits a novel three-horizon configuration consisting of one event horizon and two inner horizons. The dyonic solutions continuously interpolate between the electric and magnetic limits and exhibit either one- or three-horizon configurations, depending on the magnetic-to-electric charge ratio and the EH coupling. We further show that the EH nonlinear interaction significantly modifies the horizon structure and thermodynamic properties of charged black holes while leaving the central curvature singularity unresolved. These results demonstrate that EH nonlinear electrodynamics gives rise to qualitatively new causal structures beyond Einstein--Maxwell theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21938 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: (a) The locations of two scaled horizons ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: (a) The locations of three scaled horizons ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: The comparison between EM and EEH theories for profile [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: (a) The locations of three scaled horizons ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: (b) shows the reduced Hawking temperature tH as a function of the charge parameter q for the same set of solutions. For the purely electric case (β = 0), tH remains nearly constant for small q before decreasing rapidly to zero at the extremal limit (q ≈ 1.148), reprodu…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: (a) presents the Kretschmann scalar K for dyonic EEH black holes with fixed ˜ǫ = 0.1, β = 0.01, and several values of the charge parameter q. For all values of q, the Kretschmann scalar diverges as r → 0 and decreases monotonically with increasing radial coordinate, co…

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8: Penrose diagrams illustrating the causal structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

[1]

Scaling symmetry The EEH ﬁeld equations are invariant under the scaling transformat ion r → λr, (M, Q, P ) → λ(M, Q, P ), ǫ → λ2ǫ , (45) where λ > 0 is a constant. By contrast, in the EM limit, the corresponding tran sformation takes the simpler form r → λr, (M, Q, P ) → λ(M, Q, P ) , (46) without requiring the transformation of an additional coupling par...
[2]

These quantities provide coordinate-independent measures of t he spacetime curvature and are particularly useful for identifying curvature singularities

Curvature invariants To characterize the geometry of the EEH black holes, we evaluate t he Ricci scalar R and the Kretschmann scalar K. These quantities provide coordinate-independent measures of t he spacetime curvature and are particularly useful for identifying curvature singularities. For the metric ansatz ( 8), the Ricci scalar is R = 2(1 − N ) r2 − ...
[3]

Since σ(r) = 0 for the present solutions, TH = 1 4π N ′(rH )

Horizon area and Hawking temperature The thermodynamic properties of a static and spherically symmetric black hole can be characterized by its horizon area AH and Hawking temperature TH , AH = 4πr2 H , T H = 1 4π e−σH N ′(rH ) , (54) where rH denotes the radius of the event horizon and σH = σ(rH ). Since σ(r) = 0 for the present solutions, TH = 1 4π N ′(r...
[4]

The corresponding Komar integral is Kξ = 1 8π ∫ Σ ∇µξν dSµν , (59) up to the orientation convention adopted for the integration surf ace

Smarr relation The total mass of an asymptotically ﬂat stationary spacetime can b e related to the Komar integral associated with the asymptotically normalized timelike Killing vector ξµ = (1, 0, 0, 0) which satisﬁes ∇µξν + ∇νξµ = 0. The corresponding Komar integral is Kξ = 1 8π ∫ Σ ∇µξν dSµν , (59) up to the orientation convention adopted for the integra...
[5]

The weak energy condition (WEC) requires ρ ≥ 0 , ρ + pr ≥ 0 , ρ + pt ≥ 0

Weak energy condition For an anisotropic energy–momentum tensor, T µν = diag(−ρ, pr, pt, pt), (64) where ρ is the energy density, pr is the radial pressure and pt is the tangential pressure. The weak energy condition (WEC) requires ρ ≥ 0 , ρ + pr ≥ 0 , ρ + pt ≥ 0 . (65) These inequalities ensure that the local energy density measured b y any timelike obse...
[6]

Hence, Eq

Case with V ′(r) = 0 In the purely magnetic conﬁguration, the electric charge vanishes (Q = 0), and therefore the gauge potential satisﬁes V (r) = 0. Hence, Eq. ( 19) reduces to m′(r) = P 2 2r2 ( 1 − 2ǫP 2 r4 ) . (99) Integrating this equation gives m(r) = M − P 2 2r + ǫP 4 5r5 , (100) or equivalently, N (r) = 1 − 2m(r) r = 1 − 2M r + P 2 r2 − 2ǫP 4 5r6 ....
[7]

Consequently, this branch does not correspon d to a real purely magnetic in the electromagnetic conﬁguration, sinc e the associated electric potential V (r) becomes complex

Case with V ′(r) = ± √ − 1 4ǫ ( 1 + 10ǫP 2 r4 ) For ǫ > 0, the above expression implies that V ′ is purely imaginary. Consequently, this branch does not correspon d to a real purely magnetic in the electromagnetic conﬁguration, sinc e the associated electric potential V (r) becomes complex. Nevertheless, the Einstein ﬁeld equations remain well deﬁn ed and...

2026
[8]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc, Virgo), Tests of general relativity with G W150914, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221101 (2016), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 129902 (2018)], arXiv:1602.03841 [gr-qc]

arXiv 2016

Show all 91 references

[9]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc, Virgo), Observation of Gravitational Wav es from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

2016 arXiv
[10]

Abbott et al

R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc, Virgo), GW190521: A Binary Black Hole Merg er with a Total Mass of 150 M⊙, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 101102 (2020), arXiv:2009.01075 [gr-qc]

2020
[11]

Abbott et al

R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientiﬁc), GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coa lescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[12]

Akiyama et al

K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telesco pe Results. I. The Shadow of the Super- massive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett. 875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238 [astro-ph.GA]

2019 arXiv
[13]

Akiyama et al

K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First M87 Event Horizon Telesco pe Results. IV. Imaging the Central Supermassive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett. 875, L4 (2019), arXiv:1906.11241 [astro-ph.GA]

2019 arXiv
[14]

Akiyama et al

K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Hori zon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Mil ky Way, Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L12 (2022), arXiv:2311.08680 [astro-ph.HE]

2022 arXiv
[15]

Akiyama et al

K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope), First Sagittarius A* Event Hori zon Telescope Results. III. Imaging of the Galactic Center Supermassive Black Hole, Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L14 (2022), arXiv:2311.09479 [astro-ph.HE]

2022 arXiv
[16]

Israel, Event horizons in static electrovac space-ti mes, Commun

W. Israel, Event horizons in static electrovac space-ti mes, Commun. Math. Phys. 8, 245 (1968)

1968
[17]

D. C. Robinson, Classiﬁcation of black holes with elect romagnetic ﬁelds, Phys. Rev., D., v. 10, no. 2, pp. 458-460 10.1103/PhysRevD.10.458 (1974)

1974 doi
[18]

P. O. Mazur, Proof of uniqueness of the kerr-newman black hole solution,Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 15, 3173 (1982)

1982
[19]

Heusler, Black Hole Uniqueness Theorems , Cambridge Lecture Notes in Physics (Cambridge University Press, 1996)

M. Heusler, Black Hole Uniqueness Theorems , Cambridge Lecture Notes in Physics (Cambridge University Press, 1996)

1996
[20]

Simpson and R

M. Simpson and R. Penrose, Internal instability in a Rei ssner-Nordstrom black hole, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 7, 183 (1973)

1973
[21]

Poisson and W

E. Poisson and W. Israel, Internal structure of black ho les, Phys. Rev. D 41, 1796 (1990)

1990
[22]

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

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

1991
[23]

Bonanno, S

A. Bonanno, S. Droz, W. Israel, and S. M. Morsink, Struct ure of the inner singularity of a spherical black hole, Phys. Rev. D 50, 7372 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9403019

1994 arXiv
[24]

Ayon-Beato and A

E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, Regular black hole in gener al relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5056 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9911046. 26

1998 arXiv
[25]

S. A. Hayward, Formation and evaporation of regular bla ck holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 031103 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0506126

2006 arXiv
[26]

K. A. Bronnikov, Regular magnetic black holes and monop oles from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 63, 044005 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0006014

2001 arXiv
[27]

Zhou and L

T. Zhou and L. Modesto, Geodesic incompleteness of some popular regular black holes, Phys. Rev. D 107, 044016 (2023), arXiv:2208.02557 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[28]

Bokulic, E

A. Bokulic, E. Franzin, T. Juric, and I. Smolic, Lagrang ian reverse engineering for regular black holes, Phys. Lett. B 854, 138750 (2024), arXiv:2311.17151 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv
[29]

Bueno, P

P. Bueno, P. A. Cano, and R. A. Hennigar, Regular black ho les from pure gravity, Physics Letters B 861, 139260 (2025)

2025
[30]

Fan and X

Z.-Y. Fan and X. Wang, Construction of Regular Black Hol es in General Relativity, Phys. Rev. D 94, 124027 (2016), arXiv:1610.02636 [gr-qc]

2016 arXiv
[31]

D. P. Sorokin, Introductory Notes on Non-linear Electr odynamics and its Applications, Fortsch. Phys. 70, 2200092 (2022), arXiv:2112.12118 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[32]

K. A. Bronnikov, Regular black holes sourced by nonline ar electrodynamics, arXiv preprint (2022), arXiv:2211.00743 [gr-qc]

2022 arXiv
[33]

C. Lan, H. Yang, Y. Guo, and Y.-G. Miao, Regular Black Holes: A Short Topic Review, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 62, 202 (2023), arXiv:2303.11696 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[34]

Born and L

M. Born and L. Infeld, Foundations of the new ﬁeld theory , Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 144, 425 (1934)

1934
[35]

A. A. Tseytlin, Born-Infeld action, supersymmetry and string theory, arXiv preprint , 417 (1999) , arXiv:hep-th/9908105

1999 arXiv
[36]

G. W. Gibbons, Aspects of Born-Infeld theory and string / M theory, AIP Conf. Proc. 589, 324 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0106059

2001 arXiv
[37]

Carley and M

H. Carley and M. K. H. Kiessling, Nonperturbative calcu lation of Born-Infeld eﬀects on the Schroedinger spectrum o f the hydrogen atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 030402 (2006), arXiv:math-ph/0506069

2006 arXiv
[38]

Franklin and T

J. Franklin and T. Garon, Approximate Born-Infeld eﬀec ts on the relativistic hydrogen spectrum, Phys. Lett. A 375, 1391 (2011), arXiv:1102.2277 [quant-ph]

2011 arXiv
[39]

Breton, R

N. Breton, R. Lazkoz, and A. Montiel, Observational constraints on electromagnetic Born-Infeld cosmology, JCAP 10, 013, arXiv:1209.2107 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[40]

Heisenberg and H

W. Heisenberg and H. Euler, Consequences of Dirac’s the ory of positrons, Z. Phys. 98, 714 (1936), arXiv:physics/0605038

1936 arXiv
[41]

Euler, On the scattering of light by light according t o Dirac’s theory, Annalen Phys

H. Euler, On the scattering of light by light according t o Dirac’s theory, Annalen Phys. 26, 398 (1936)

1936
[42]

R. P. Mignani, V. Testa, D. G. Caniulef, R. Taverna, R. Tu rolla, S. Zane, and K. Wu, Evidence for vac- uum birefringence from the ﬁrst optical-polarimetry measu rement of the isolated neutron star RX J1856.5 −3754, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 465, 492 (2017), arXiv:1610.08323...

2017 arXiv
[43]

R. E. Stewart et al., Vacuum birefringence and the polarized X-ray emission from a radio magnetar, arXiv preprint (2025), arXiv:2509.19446 [astro-ph.HE]

2025 arXiv
[44]

Taverna, R

R. Taverna, R. Turolla, L. Marra, R. M. E. Kelly, A. Borgh ese, G. L. Israel, S. Mereghetti, A. Possenti, S. Zane, and M. Rigoselli, The Long Quest for Vacuum Birefringence in Mag netars: 1E 1547.0–5408 and the Elusive Smoking Gun, Astrophys. J. 1002, 102 (2026), arXiv:2601.15...

2026 arXiv
[45]

Nojiri and S

S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Regular multihorizon blac k holes in modiﬁed gravity with nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 96, 104008 (2017), arXiv:1708.05226 [hep-th]

2017 arXiv
[46]

Gao, Black holes with many horizons in the theories of nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys

C. Gao, Black holes with many horizons in the theories of nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 104, 064038 (2021), arXiv:2106.13486 [gr-qc]

2021 arXiv
[47]

Amaro and A

D. Amaro and A. Mac´ ıas, Geodesic structure of the Euler-Heisenberg static black hole, Phys. Rev. D 102, 104054 (2020)

2020
[48]

Magos and N

D. Magos and N. Bret´ on, Thermodynamics of the Euler-He isenberg-AdS black hole, Phys. Rev. D 102, 084011 (2020), arXiv:2009.05904 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[49]

Bret´ on and L

N. Bret´ on and L. A. L´ opez, Birefringence and quasinor mal modes of the Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg black hole, Phys. Rev. D 104, 024064 (2021), arXiv:2105.12283 [gr-qc]

2021 arXiv
[50]

Q.-M. Fu, L. Zhao, and Y.-X. Liu, Weak deﬂection angle byelectrically and magnetically charged black holes from nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 104, 024033 (2021), arXiv:2101.08409 [gr-qc]

2021 arXiv
[51]

Magos, N

D. Magos, N. Bret´ on, and A. Mac´ ıas, Orbits in static magnetically and dyonically charged Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg black hole spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 108, 064014 (2023)

2023
[52]

Abbas and H

G. Abbas and H. Rehman, Analysis of Accretion Disk Aroun d the Euler-Heisenberg Anti-de Sitter Black Hole, Fortsch. Phys. 71, 2200205 (2023), arXiv:2309.03236 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[53]

Sekhmani, S

Y. Sekhmani, S. Noori Gashti, M. A. S. Afshar, M. R. Alipo ur, J. Sadeghi, B. Pourhassan, and J. Rayim- baev, Thermodynamic topology of Black Holes in F (R)-Euler-Heisenberg gravity’s Rainbow, arXiv preprint (20 24), arXiv:2409.04997 [gr-qc]

arXiv
[54]

Hamil and B

B. Hamil and B. C. L¨ utf¨ uo˘ glu, Euler–Heisenberg Blac k Hole Surrounded by Quintessence in the Background of Perfect Fluid Dark Matter: Thermodynamics, Shadows, and Qu asinormal Modes, Fortsch. Phys. 73, 2400105 (2025), arXiv:2406.02109 [gr-qc]

2025 arXiv
[55]

Jafarzade, Z

K. Jafarzade, Z. Bazyar, S. Saghaﬁ, and K. Nozari, Optic al signatures of Einstein–Euler–Heisenberg AdS/dS black h oles in the light of event horizon telescope, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 869 (2025), arXiv:2504.09690 [gr-qc]

2025 arXiv
[56]

Mondal, T

D. Mondal, T. Roy, and U. Debnath, Thermodynamics of eul er-heisenberg ads black hole surrounded by quintessence ﬁeld using shadow, Nuclear Physics B 1014, 116859 (2025)

2025
[57]

Ditta, R

A. Ditta, R. S. Mehmood, M. Fiaz, B. Bibi, S. Deen, R. Jaﬀa r, and A. Mahmood, Exploring the Enigma of Particle Dynamics and Plasma Lensing Using Einstein–Euler–Heisenb erg Black Hole Geometry, Universe 11, 19 (2025). 27

2025
[58]

Ditta, G

A. Ditta, G. Mustafa, S. Mehmood, F. Atamurotov, O. D¨ on mez, S. K. Maurya, and S. Murodov, Thermodynam- ics around new wormhole solutions in extended teleparallel gravity coupled with Euler-Heisenberg electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 141, 504 (2026)

2026
[59]

C. V. Costa, D. M. Gitman, and A. E. Shabad, Finite ﬁeld-e nergy of a point charge in QED, Phys. Scripta 90, 074012 (2015), arXiv:1312.0447 [hep-th]

2015 arXiv
[60]

C. V. Costa, D. M. Gitman, and A. E. Shabad, Nonlinear cor rections in basic problems of electro- and magneto-statics in the vacuum, Phys. Rev. D 88, 085026 (2013), arXiv:1307.1802 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[61]

S. I. Kruglov, Remarks on Heisenberg–Euler-type elect rodynamics, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32, 1750092 (2017), arXiv:1705.08745 [physics.gen-ph]

2017 arXiv
[62]

Guerrero and D

M. Guerrero and D. Rubiera-Garcia, Nonsingular black h oles in nonlinear gravity coupled to Euler-Heisenberg elec trody- namics, Phys. Rev. D 102, 024005 (2020), arXiv:2005.08828 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[63]

D. A. Rasheed, Nonlinear electrodynamics: Zeroth and ﬁ rst laws of black hole mechanics, arXiv preprint (1997), arXiv:hep-th/9702087

1997 arXiv
[64]

Gulin and I

L. Gulin and I. Smoli´ c, Generalizations of the Smarr fo rmula for black holes with nonlinear electromagnetic ﬁelds , Class. Quant. Grav. 35, 025015 (2018), arXiv:1710.04660 [gr-qc]

2018 arXiv
[65]

Ruﬃni, Y.-B

R. Ruﬃni, Y.-B. Wu, and S.-S. Xue, Einstein-Euler-Heis enberg Theory and charged black holes, Phys. Rev. D 88, 085004 (2013), arXiv:1307.4951 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[66]

G.-R. Li, S. Guo, and E.-W. Liang, High-order QED correc tion impacts on phase transition of the Euler-Heisenberg Ad S black hole, Phys. Rev. D 106, 064011 (2022), arXiv:2111.10812 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[67]

N. J. Gogoi and P. Phukon, Thermodynamic topology of 4D E uler–Heisenberg-AdS black hole in diﬀerent ensembles, Phys. Dark Univ. 44, 101456 (2024), arXiv:2312.13577 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[68]

Zhang, D.-C

L. Zhang, D.-C. Zou, and Y. S. Myung, New scalarization o f the Einstein–Euler–Heisenberg black hole, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1463 (2025), arXiv:2510.07954 [gr-qc]

2025
[69]

S. Kala, A. Negi, and H. Nandan, Quasinormal modes of a dy onic black hole in Einstein–Euler–Heisenberg theory, J. Subatomic Part. Cosmol. 3, 100047 (2025), arXiv:2503.23894 [gr-qc]

2025 arXiv
[70]

H. Guo, M. Park, and Y. S. Myung, Negative potential-ind uced scalarization in the Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg black hole*, Chin. Phys. C 50, 065102 (2026), arXiv:2508.16083 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[71]

Zhang, Y

L. Zhang, Y. S. Myung, D.-C. Zou, and C.-M. Zhang, Charge -dependent scalarization of Einstein- Euler-Heisenberg b lack holes, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2605.15566 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[72]

X. Li, B. Chen, and G. Li, Testing the chaos bound in the spinor ﬁeld of Einstein-Euler-Heisenberg-Anti-de Sitter spacetime, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2604.03914 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[73]

Guo and Y

H. Guo and Y. S. Myung, Scalarization of Einstein-Euler -Heisenberg black hole with multiple horizons, arXiv prepr int (2026), arXiv:2607.10614 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[74]

Becar, P

R. Becar, P. A. Gonzalez, A. Ovgun, J. Saavedra, and Y. Va squez, Scattering, Hawking Radiation and Neutrino En- ergy Deposition in Euler-Heisenberg Black Holes Surrounde d by Perfect Fluid Dark Matter, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2606.20931 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[75]

M. B. Awal and P. Phukon, Complex Phase Structure and Wid om line for Euler Heisenberg black holes, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2606.30233 [hep-th]

2026 arXiv
[76]

Tan, Scattering and Hawking Radiation from Einstein –Euler–Heisenberg–de Sitter Black Holes, arXiv preprint ( 2026), arXiv:2606.03842 [gr-qc]

J. Tan, Scattering and Hawking Radiation from Einstein –Euler–Heisenberg–de Sitter Black Holes, arXiv preprint ( 2026), arXiv:2606.03842 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[77]

Feng, S.-Y

C. Feng, S.-Y. Li, X. Zhang, M. Zhang, D.-C. Zou, and R.-H . Yue, Quasinormal modes of massless scalar and electro- magnetic perturbations for Euler-Heisenberg black holes s urrounded by perfect ﬂuid dark matter, arXiv preprint (2026 ), arXiv:2605.14528 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[78]

Wang and E

Z.-L. Wang and E. Battista, Energy conditions in static , spherically symmetric spacetimes and eﬀective geometrie s, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2604.16545 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[79]

Wang and E

Z.-L. Wang and E. Battista, Families of regular spaceti mes and energy conditions, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2605.03428 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[80]

Yajima and T

H. Yajima and T. Tamaki, Black hole solutions in Euler-H eisenberg theory, Phys. Rev. D 63, 064007 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0005016

2001 arXiv
[81]

Astefanesei, C

D. Astefanesei, C. Herdeiro, A. Pombo, and E. Radu, Eins tein-Maxwell-scalar black holes: classes of solutions, dy ons and extremality, JHEP 10, 078, arXiv:1905.08304 [hep-th]

1905 arXiv
[82]

Maceda and A

M. Maceda and A. Mac´ ıas, Non-commutative inspired bla ck holes in Euler–Heisenberg non-linear electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B 788, 446 (2019), arXiv:1807.05269 [gr-qc]

2019 arXiv
[83]

Karakasis, G

T. Karakasis, G. Koutsoumbas, A. Machattou, and E. Papa ntonopoulos, Magnetically charged Euler-Heisenberg blac k holes with scalar hair, Phys. Rev. D 106, 104006 (2022), arXiv:2207.13146 [gr-qc]

2022 arXiv
[84]

Bakopoulos, T

A. Bakopoulos, T. Karakasis, N. E. Mavromatos, T. Nakas , and E. Papantonopoulos, Exact black holes in string-inspi red Euler-Heisenberg theory, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024014 (2024), arXiv:2402.12459 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[85]

Liang, J

Y. Liang, J. Tao, and R. Yang, Black holes in f(R, T) gravi ty coupled with Euler–Heisenberg electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B 872, 140092 (2026), arXiv:2506.14860 [gr-qc]

2026
[86]

Huang, Y

H. Huang, Y. Xu, M.-Y. Lai, and D.-C. Zou, Distinguishin g black holes from string-inspired Euler–Heisenberg theor y through shadow images, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34, 2550063 (2025)

2025
[87]

Y. S. Myung, Shadow radius and classical scattering ana lysis of two secondary hair Horndeski black holes, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 952 (2025), arXiv:2504.05602 [gr-qc]. 28

2025 arXiv
[88]

Croney, R

L. Croney, R. Gregory, A. Gupta, and C. J. Ram´ ırez-Valdez, Properties of black holes in non-linear electrodynamics, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2604.14011 [hep-th]

2026 arXiv
[89]

Alencar, V

G. Alencar, V. H. U. Borralho, T. M. Crispim, and M. S. Cun ha, On regular black strings spacetimes in nonlinear electrodynamics, arXiv preprint (2026), arXiv:2603.23556 [gr-qc]

2026 arXiv
[90]

Nakonieczna, /suppress L

A. Nakonieczna, /suppress L. Nakonieczny, and D.-h. Yeom, Black hole factory: a review of double-null formalism, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1930006 (2018), arXiv:1805.12362 [gr-qc]

2018 arXiv
[91]

X. Y. Chew and D.-h. Yeom, Insights and guidelines on theCauchy horizon theorems,J. Korean Phys. Soc. 85, 1050 (2024), arXiv:2308.09225 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Scaling symmetry The EEH ﬁeld equations are invariant under the scaling transformat ion r → λr, (M, Q, P ) → λ(M, Q, P ), ǫ → λ2ǫ , (45) where λ > 0 is a constant. By contrast, in the EM limit, the corresponding tran sformation takes the simpler form r → λr, (M, Q, P ) → λ(M, Q, P ) , (46) without requiring the transformation of an additional coupling par...

[2] [2]

These quantities provide coordinate-independent measures of t he spacetime curvature and are particularly useful for identifying curvature singularities

Curvature invariants To characterize the geometry of the EEH black holes, we evaluate t he Ricci scalar R and the Kretschmann scalar K. These quantities provide coordinate-independent measures of t he spacetime curvature and are particularly useful for identifying curvature singularities. For the metric ansatz ( 8), the Ricci scalar is R = 2(1 − N ) r2 − ...

[3] [3]

Since σ(r) = 0 for the present solutions, TH = 1 4π N ′(rH )

Horizon area and Hawking temperature The thermodynamic properties of a static and spherically symmetric black hole can be characterized by its horizon area AH and Hawking temperature TH , AH = 4πr2 H , T H = 1 4π e−σH N ′(rH ) , (54) where rH denotes the radius of the event horizon and σH = σ(rH ). Since σ(r) = 0 for the present solutions, TH = 1 4π N ′(r...

[4] [4]

The corresponding Komar integral is Kξ = 1 8π ∫ Σ ∇µξν dSµν , (59) up to the orientation convention adopted for the integration surf ace

Smarr relation The total mass of an asymptotically ﬂat stationary spacetime can b e related to the Komar integral associated with the asymptotically normalized timelike Killing vector ξµ = (1, 0, 0, 0) which satisﬁes ∇µξν + ∇νξµ = 0. The corresponding Komar integral is Kξ = 1 8π ∫ Σ ∇µξν dSµν , (59) up to the orientation convention adopted for the integra...

[5] [5]

The weak energy condition (WEC) requires ρ ≥ 0 , ρ + pr ≥ 0 , ρ + pt ≥ 0

Weak energy condition For an anisotropic energy–momentum tensor, T µν = diag(−ρ, pr, pt, pt), (64) where ρ is the energy density, pr is the radial pressure and pt is the tangential pressure. The weak energy condition (WEC) requires ρ ≥ 0 , ρ + pr ≥ 0 , ρ + pt ≥ 0 . (65) These inequalities ensure that the local energy density measured b y any timelike obse...

[6] [6]

Hence, Eq

Case with V ′(r) = 0 In the purely magnetic conﬁguration, the electric charge vanishes (Q = 0), and therefore the gauge potential satisﬁes V (r) = 0. Hence, Eq. ( 19) reduces to m′(r) = P 2 2r2 ( 1 − 2ǫP 2 r4 ) . (99) Integrating this equation gives m(r) = M − P 2 2r + ǫP 4 5r5 , (100) or equivalently, N (r) = 1 − 2m(r) r = 1 − 2M r + P 2 r2 − 2ǫP 4 5r6 ....

[7] [7]

Consequently, this branch does not correspon d to a real purely magnetic in the electromagnetic conﬁguration, sinc e the associated electric potential V (r) becomes complex

Case with V ′(r) = ± √ − 1 4ǫ ( 1 + 10ǫP 2 r4 ) For ǫ > 0, the above expression implies that V ′ is purely imaginary. Consequently, this branch does not correspon d to a real purely magnetic in the electromagnetic conﬁguration, sinc e the associated electric potential V (r) becomes complex. Nevertheless, the Einstein ﬁeld equations remain well deﬁn ed and...

2026

[8] [8]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc, Virgo), Tests of general relativity with G W150914, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221101 (2016), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 129902 (2018)], arXiv:1602.03841 [gr-qc]

arXiv 2016