Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

On the uniqueness of Kerr-de Sitter spacetimes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A smooth stationary black hole with positive cosmological constant is forced to be Kerr-de Sitter, provided the event and cosmological horizons carry the same Kerr-de Sitter data — with no real-analyticity assumption.

desk verdict A serious two-sided smooth rigidity program for Kerr-de Sitter, with real gaps at the terminal Mars-Senovilla step and a few unverified analytic details. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.05789 v1 pith:MXUX6RJN submitted 2025-09-06 gr-qc math-phmath.APmath.MP

Allen Juntao Fang This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcmath-phmath.APmath.MP MSC 83C5783C15
keywords Kerr-deSitterblackholerigidityuniquecontinuationMars-Simontensorpseudoconvexitycosmologicalconstantstationaryspacetimes
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 proves that smooth (C∞, not necessarily analytic) stationary solutions of the vacuum Einstein equations with positive cosmological constant Λ are rigid: if the event horizon and the cosmological horizon are regular null bifurcate surfaces whose geometric data agree with a single subextremal Kerr-de Sitter background, then the whole stationary region between them is isometric to that Kerr-de Sitter region. The result is a two-sided rigidity theorem: because Λ>0 spacetimes have no asymptotic flatness to supply mass, angular momentum, or a canonical stationary vector field, the proof inputs that data through compatibility conditions on the two bifurcate spheres. The argument removes the real-analyticity assumption that earlier black-hole rigidity results required, replacing it with unique continuation based on a stationary-adapted notion of pseudoconvexity. Since subextremal Kerr-de Sitter admits no globally pseudoconvex radial foliation, the proof runs from both horizons inward and uses subextremality to show the two propagated regions overlap, covering the entire stationary region. Companion results show that smallness of the Mars-Simon tensor alone forces axisymmetry, and that mixing compatibility at one horizon with smallness at the other still yields full rigidity.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Mars-Simon tensor S = W − Q·U, with W the complexified Weyl tensor and U built from the Killing two-form of the stationary vector field T: its vanishing characterizes Kerr-de Sitter and it satisfies a wave-type equation. The function y = Re(1/J), assembled from the Ernst-potential quantities, plays the role of a radial coordinate whose level sets provide the foliation along which unique continuation is run. The engine of the interior propagation is T-pseudoconvexity — a weakening of Hörmander pseudoconvexity in which the defining quadratic inequality is relaxed by penalizing components along the stationary Killing field T — together with tT,Ku-pseudoconvexity in the

What would settle it

Compute, on a subextremal Kerr-de Sitter metric with the paper's chosen T = ∂t + (a/(r_*²+a²))∂φ, a T-orthogonal trapped null geodesic crossing a level set {y = const} inside the stationary region; the existence of such a geodesic would violate the definition of T-pseudoconvexity and invalidate Proposition 6.5, collapsing the interior extension step. Equivalently, exhibit a smooth non-analytic stationary Λ-vacuum spacetime satisfying (E1)+(C1) whose stationary region is not isometric to Kerr-de Sitter.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is Theorem 2.2: under assumptions of stationarity, regular null-bifurcate event and cosmological horizons, subextremality, and compatibility conditions (E1) and (C1) holding at the two bifurcate spheres for the same parameters (M,a,γ), any smooth solution of Ric(g)=Λg with Λ>0 has its stationary region E isometrically diffeomorphic to the stationary region of the Kerr-de Sitter spacetime with black hole parameters (M,a). The proof works by showing the Mars-Simon tensor S vanishes on each horizon — the compatibility conditions force its P-component to vanish at the bifurcate sphere and the null Bianchi equations transport that along the horizon — th

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument hinges on the level sets of the constructed function y being T-pseudoconvex throughout the region between the two horizons: if that null-convexity degenerates anywhere in the stationary region, the two unique-continuation fronts from the event and cosmological horizons cannot be glued and the region is never fully covered.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Theorem 2.2 is correct, Kerr-de Sitter is the unique smooth stationary vacuum black hole with positive cosmological constant whose two bifurcate horizons carry matching Kerr-de Sitter data — no real-analyticity assumption is needed.
  • Theorem 2.4 implies that any smooth stationary solution satisfying the smallness conditions (E2)+(C2) admits a rotational Killing field, so stationarity plus Mars-Simon smallness forces axisymmetry; the paper explicitly notes this does not by itself imply isometry to Kerr-de Sitter, since no Carter-Robinson analogue is known for Λ≠0.
  • Under (E1)+(C2), full rigidity follows, meaning a single compatibility condition at the event horizon together with smallness of S at the cosmological horizon is already enough to pin down the metric.
  • The proof structure shows that the obstruction to a one-sided (event-horizon-only) rigidity theorem in Λ>0 is precisely the absence of a global T-pseudoconvex foliation: the subextremality assumption is what guarantees the two propagation regions meet.
  • For the Λ>0 programme, the result moves beyond perturbative rigidity: it allows arbitrary rotation and replaces stability-type input with horizon compatibility conditions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Strictly speaking, Theorem 2.2 is conditional: the compatibility conditions (E1)+(C1) already encode that both horizons are compatible with the same (M,a), so the paper reduces the full Kerr-de Sitter rigidity conjecture to proving that any subextremal stationary Λ-vacuum spacetime with two regular bifurcate horizons must satisfy these compatibility conditions for a single (M,a).
  • The delicate premise is the T-pseudoconvexity of the level sets of y throughout the inter-horizon region; that property is derived from subextremality, smallness of S, and the timelike character of T on {y=y*}, and if it degenerates between the horizons the two unique-continuation regions cannot be glued and E is not covered.
  • A reader checking the printed proof should pay particular attention to Lemma 5.8, whose displayed derivation appears to contain a sign inconsistency; if that lemma cannot be repaired, the quantitative control of y near the bifurcation sphere — and hence the initialization of the bootstrap — would be weaker than claimed. This flag is editorial, not a verdict on the paper.
  • The methods suggest a testable route to the full Λ>0 rigidity conjecture: prove that for any smooth subextremal stationary solution the two bifurcate spheres automatically yield equal parameters (M,a), using the Mars-Simon transport equations combined with the geometry of the cosmological horizon.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a smooth (C^∞, non-analytic) uniqueness theory for Kerr–de Sitter spacetimes in four dimensions with positive cosmological constant. The main results are: Theorem 2.2, asserting that a stationary Λ-vacuum spacetime with regular null-bifurcate event and cosmological horizons, subextremal in a sense formulated through the function y and the polynomial Δ, and satisfying the compatibility conditions (E1) and (C1) at the two bifurcate spheres, must have its stationary region E isometrically diffeomorphic to the stationary region of Kerr–de Sitter with the same parameters; Theorem 2.4, giving a rotational Killing field under Mars–Simon smallness at both horizons; and Theorem 2.6, a mixed rigidity statement. The proof introduces a Mars–Simon tensor adapted to Λ>0, shows that it vanishes on the horizons under the compatibility conditions, uses Carleman estimates and T-pseudoconvexity to propagate the vanishing into E, and constructs a second Killing field from the cosmological horizon under smallness assumptions. The overall structure follows the Ionescu–Klainerman program, adapted to the two-sided, Λ>0 setting.

Significance. If correct, this would be a substantial contribution: it would extend the stationary, non-analytic Kerr rigidity program to Λ>0 without asymptotic flatness, introduce a natural two-sided rigidity hypothesis replacing ADM data, and provide the first smooth uniqueness theorem for Kerr–de Sitter beyond perturbative regimes. The paper also makes a serious effort to be self-contained, including reproductions of Carleman estimates and much of the spin-frame formalism, and it is careful in many places to state where assumptions are used. However, the central claim depends on a long analytic chain and, as printed, contains an internal sign inconsistency in Lemma 5.8 and an unjustified final globalization step in the proof of Theorem 2.2. These issues are load-bearing, so the current version does not establish the advertised theorems.

major comments (3)
  1. [§7.3, proof of Theorem 2.2; Theorem 4.27] After deriving S=0 on Σ0∩E, the proof states: 'Then, Theorem 1 of [31] concludes that M must be isometrically diffeomorphic to g_{M,a,Λ}.' But the paper's own imported statement of that result, Theorem 4.27, concludes only that (M,g) is locally isometric to Kerr-(a)dS, and only under an additional 'Moreover' hypothesis on the polynomial V(ζ) and on the range of z. Neither the polynomial condition V(ζ)/((ζ−ζ0)(ζ+ζ0))<0 on [−ζ0,ζ0] nor the condition z:M→[−ζ0,ζ0] is verified in the proof, and no globalization argument is supplied to pass from a local isometry to an isometric diffeomorphism of the entire stationary region E. The same terminal inference is used in the proof of Theorem 2.6. This is a gap in the central claim, independent of the Carleman/pseudoconvexity machinery.
  2. [§5.2.1, Lemma 5.8 (proof)] The proof of Lemma 5.8 contains a sign contradiction. It cites assumption (2.8), which states B_y Δ(y_{S0})>0, and then immediately says: 'However, we know that Δ(y) can only have three positive roots, only one of which satisfies B_yΔ>0. Thus, we must have that for ε_S sufficiently small, B_yΔ|_{p∈S0}<0.' The conclusion B_yΔ<0 is the opposite of the cited hypothesis. The subsequent estimate |y−y_{S0}|≲ε_S^{1/40} identifies y with a root of the opposite monotonicity. This is not a harmless typo: (5.18)–(5.20), Lemma 5.11 and Proposition 6.5 rely on this control to construct the T-pseudoconvex foliation, which is the engine of every interior unique continuation argument. The sign convention and the distinction between the two bifurcate spheres S_0 and S_0 must be corrected before the main theorems can be assessed.
  3. [§6.2, Proposition 6.5 and §2.1] The T-pseudoconvexity of the y-level sets throughout E is presented as a proposition, but its proof depends on the assumed subextremal root structure, the Mars–Simon smallness (E2)/(C2), and crucially on the asserted timelike character of T on {y=y*}. The latter is an assumption in §2.1, not a derived statement. Since Proposition 6.5 is used to justify every Carleman-based extension in Lemmas 7.14, 8.18 and 9.3, the paper should state explicitly which parts of the subextremality assumption are used to guarantee that the timelike condition holds in the bootstrap region and how the constants are chosen so that the pseudoconvexity estimates are uniform under the bootstrap. As written, the proof gives the impression that this is an assumption being relabeled as a proposition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.1, (E1)/(C1) and Theorem 2.2] The compatibility conditions (E1) and (C1) prescribe the same triplet (M,a,γ) at both bifurcate spheres. Consequently, the conclusion of Theorem 2.2 that the spacetime has 'black hole parameters (M,a)' is a restatement of the input rather than an identification derived from the geometry. This is analogous to the role of the technical condition in [20], but it should be stated explicitly so that the reader does not over-read the theorem as producing a parameter-free uniqueness statement.
  2. [§5.2.1, Lemma 5.8 statement] The statement of Lemma 5.8 says 'Similarly, we have that on the bifurcation sphere S_0' twice; the underlined/overlined notation distinguishing S_0 and S_0 appears corrupted in a number of places. Please normalize the notation throughout, especially in the statements of Lemmas 5.8, 5.11 and Propositions 7.1, 8.1.
  3. [§7.3, proof of Theorem 2.2] The step 'S=0 on Σ0∩E' is used to conclude S=0 on all of E before invoking [31]. This uses L_T S=0 and the assumption that every orbit of T intersects Σ0; this should be spelled out, since the final theorem is global in E and the local statement of [31] applies to the spacetime region where S vanishes.
  4. [§3.5, Proposition 3.12] The statement of the Carleman estimate includes terms of the form ∥V_i(φ)∥_{L^2} without a weight e^{-λf_ε}. The proof later derives a weighted version. To avoid confusion, the final displayed estimate should be the weighted one consistently, as in (3.35).
  5. [General] There are numerous typos and minor inconsistencies, e.g., the label 'QF 2−4Λ' in (2.8)–(2.11) versus the text around (4.28), and the use of 'Tphq' and 'pT' in §§5–6. A careful editorial pass would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the rigidity argument propagates assumed horizon compatibility data through independent unique-continuation estimates; the cited Mars-Senovilla characterization is external and not self-referential.

full rationale

The black hole parameters (M,a) in Theorem 2.2 are not derived as an output; they are prescribed by the compatibility hypotheses (E1)/(C1) at the bifurcate spheres. This is a standard conditional rigidity statement: the theorem’s content is the propagation of S=0 (or of the Hawking/rotational Killing fields) through the stationary region using Carleman estimates and T- or {T,K}-pseudoconvexity. No quantity is fitted to data and then renamed a prediction, and no load-bearing self-citation occurs. The final local-isometry-to-global-diffeomorphism inference relies on the external Theorem 1 of [31] (Mars-Senovilla), not on the author’s own prior work; any gap in verifying that theorem’s additional polynomial/z-range hypothesis would be a rigor or correctness issue, not circularity. The subextremality and compatibility assumptions are explicitly assumed inputs, and the proof supplies independent propagation arguments. Therefore no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes the rigidity argument but pulls the characterization of Kerr-de Sitter and the wave equation structure from prior work ([31], [32]). The only genuinely ad hoc inputs are the compatibility triplets (which carry M, a, γ into the hypotheses), the smallness threshold ε_S, and the subextremal root conditions on Δ. No physical entities are invented: K, K̄, Φ, and y are all constructed from the assumed data (T, S, F, R, σ). The heaviest unstated load is the assumption that T-pseudoconvexity of the y-level sets holds across E (Section 6), which is what lets the two one-sided continuations overlap.

free parameters (3)
  • compatibility triplet (b_{S0}, c_{S0}, k_{S0}) = b = 2M/(1+γ)^3, c = (1−γ)/(1+γ)^2, k = a²/(1+γ)^4 per (E1)/(C1)
    The mass and angular momentum of the conclusion are hard-coded into the hypotheses: both bifurcate spheres are assumed compatible with the same Kerr-de Sitter member (M,a). This is the Λ>0 replacement for the ADM data that asymptotic flatness supplies in the Λ=0 setting, and it makes 'with parameters (M,a)' an input, not a derived output.
  • Mars-Simon smallness threshold ε_S = sufficiently small, unspecified
    Chosen by hand (ad hoc smallness) in (E2)/(C2); controls the y-foliation and the coefficient regularity in the wave equation for S.
  • constants A_0, ε_0, ε_1 = large/small enough, unspecified
    Standard quantified estimates in the Carleman/pseudoconvexity framework; not fitted to data, but chosen to make (3.12)-(3.21) hold.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Regularity: F² ≠ 0 (regular complex self-dual Killing form) and QF²−4Λ not uniformly zero on S_0 and S_0 (Section 2.1)
    Ensures the null eigendirections and R, J, Q, P, y are well-defined; excludes degenerate cases.
  • domain assumption Subextremality: Δ has four distinct roots, y(p0)>0, Δ(p0)≤0, ∂_yΔ(p0)>0 (resp. <0 on the cosmological side), and T is timelike where y=y* (Section 2.1, (2.8)-(2.12))
    This assumption is the analogue of excluding degenerate or extremal black holes; it guarantees Δ>0 away from the horizons, which makes D_αyD^αy>0 (Lemma 5.6) and the foliation spacelike.
  • standard math Mars-Senovilla characterization (Theorem 4.27 of [31], imported): S=0 plus root conditions implies local isometry to Kerr-de Sitter
    The paper imports without proof the theorem that vanishing of the Mars-Simon tensor characterizes KdS; all three main theorems terminate in an application of this result.
  • standard math Wave equation for S (Theorem 4.33, derived in Section 4.3 from Proposition 4.30 of [32])
    The unique continuation arguments require lgS = N(S,DS) with regular coefficients in regions where R−Jσ_0 ≠ 0.
  • domain assumption The stationary vector T is an input, chosen noncanonically (Section 1.2.1, Remark 2.7)
    The paper stresses that unlike the Λ=0 setting, there is no canonical T in Kerr-de Sitter; the rigidity conclusion is relative to an assumed T with complete orbits, and T-pseudoconvexity is tied to this choice.
  • ad hoc to paper T-pseudoconvexity of the y-level sets throughout E (Proposition 6.5)
    The interior unique continuation engine; derived only under subextremality, S-smallness, and T timelike at y*, and it is the fragile premise flagged in weakest_assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the uniqueness of Kerr-de Sitter spacetimes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MXUX6RJN

@misc{pith2026250905789,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the uniqueness of Kerr-de Sitter spacetimes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MXUX6RJN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05789}
}
abstract

In this paper, we prove a series of results concerning the uniqueness of Kerr-de Sitter as a family of smooth stationary black hole solutions to the nonlinear Einstein vacuum equations with positive cosmological constant $\Lambda$. The results only assume smoothness rather than analyticity of the solution in question. The results use a two-sided approach to rigidity, requiring assumptions on both the event horizon and the cosmological horizon (or a neighborhood thereof) to formulate an appropriate unique continuation argument to prove the rigidity of Kerr-de Sitter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05789 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The basic steps in [3] to prove perturbative C 8 Kerr rigidity. The olive green regions show the main area of interest in each step while teal regions depict regions previously shown to be axisymmetric. We detail the main steps in the proof of perturbative C 8 Kerr rigidity in [3] below (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The basic steps in [20] to prove C 8 Kerr rigidity conditional on the compatibility of S0. The olive green shows the main area of interest in each step while teal regions depict regions where S “ 0 was previously shown. (3) The third step is to extend the fact that S “ 0 into the entire domain of exterior communication. This is done via a bootstrap argument and the construction of a T￾pseudoconvex foliation. The mai… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A Penrose diagram of a subextremal member of the Kerr-de Sitter family. The olive green region shows where r is T-pseudoconvex. The red region depicts where ´r is T-pseudoconvex. The blue region is where both r and ´r are T-pseudoconvex, and is nonempty as a result of the subextremality assumption. 1.2.2. Stationarity implies axisymmetry. The Carter-Robinson uniqueness theorem played a cru￾cial role in proving the r… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Penrose diagrams describing the main steps in proving Theorem 1.6. The olive green shows the main area of interest in each step while teal regions depict regions previously shown to be axisymmetric. (3) The third step is to extend K and K into the stationary region as …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Penrose diagrams describing the main steps in proving Theorem 1.7. The olive green regions depict the regions of interest in each step and the teal regions are regions where previous steps have already shown that S “ 0. Therefore, one is not free to prescribe the compa…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Penrose diagrams describing the main steps in proving Theorem 1.8. The olive green and purple depict the regions of interest in each step for extending the vanishing of S and the Killing vectorfield K respectively, and the teal and magenta regions are regions where pre…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A Penrose diagram describing the spacetime and the double null frames attached to each of the horizons. We also have, for ε ď ε0, Oε č cl E “ t0 ď u´ ă ε, 0 ď u` ă εu, Oε č cl E “ ␣ 0 ď u´ ă ε, 0 ď u` ă ε ( . If ϕ is a smooth function in Oε and vanishes on H ` Ş Oε , o…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [31]

    M.A Spacetime Characterization of the Kerr-NUT- (A)de Sitter and Related Metrics

    Mars, Marc and Senovilla, Jos´ e M. M.A Spacetime Characterization of the Kerr-NUT- (A)de Sitter and Related Metrics. Annales Henri Poincar´ e16(7) (2015), pp. 1509–1550

    work page 2015

  2. [1]

    Duke Mathematical Journal163(14) (2014), pp

    Alexakis, Spyros, Ionescu, Alexandru D., and Klainerman, S.Rigidity of Stationary Black Holes with Small Angular Momentum on the Horizon. Duke Mathematical Journal163(14) (2014), pp. 2603–2615

    work page 2014

  3. [2]

    Geometric and Functional Analysis20(4) (2010), pp

    Alexakis, Spyros, Ionescu, Alexandru D., and Klainerman, Sergiu.Hawking’s Local Rigidity Theorem Without Analyticity. Geometric and Functional Analysis20(4) (2010), pp. 845– 869

    work page 2010

  4. [3]

    Communica- tions in Mathematical Physics299(1) (2010), pp

    Alexakis, Spyros, Ionescu, Alexandru D., and Klainerman, Sergiu.Uniqueness of Smooth Stationary Black Holes in Vacuum: Small Perturbations of the Kerr Spaces. Communica- tions in Mathematical Physics299(1) (2010), pp. 89–127

    work page 2010

  5. [4]

    and Langer, R.E.Relativity and Modern Physics

    Birkhoff, G.D. and Langer, R.E.Relativity and Modern Physics. Harvard University Press, 1923

    work page 1923

  6. [5]

    Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis247(2) (2023), p

    Borghini, Stefano, Chru´ sciel, Piotr T., and Mazzieri, Lorenzo.On the Uniqueness of Schwarzschild–de Sitter Spacetime. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis247(2) (2023), p. 35

    work page 2023

  7. [6]

    W., and Horowitz, Gary T.Uniqueness Theorem for Anti—de Sitter Spacetime

    Boucher, W., Gibbons, G. W., and Horowitz, Gary T.Uniqueness Theorem for Anti—de Sitter Spacetime. Physical Review D30(12) (1984), pp. 2447–2451

    work page 1984

  8. [7]

    Physical Review Letters26(6) (1971), pp

    Carter, B.Axisymmetric Black Hole Has Only Two Degrees of Freedom. Physical Review Letters26(6) (1971), pp. 331–333

    work page 1971

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Living Reviews in Relativity15(7) (2012), p

    Chru´ sciel, Piotr T., Costa, Jo˜ ao Lopes, and Heusler, Markus.Stationary Black Holes: Uniqueness and Beyond. Living Reviews in Relativity15(7) (2012), p. 73

    2012

  2. [9]

    and Herzlich, Marc.The Mass of Asymptotically Hyperbolic Riemann- ian Manifolds

    Chru´ sciel, Piotr T. and Herzlich, Marc.The Mass of Asymptotically Hyperbolic Riemann- ian Manifolds. Pacific Journal of Mathematics212(2) (2003), pp. 231–264

    2003

  3. [10]

    arXiv:2104.08222 [gr-qc]

    Dafermos, Mihalis et al.The Non-Linear Stability of the Schwarzschild Family of Black Holes. arXiv:2104.08222 [gr-qc]. Pre-published

    arXiv

  4. [11]

    arXiv:2207.07902, accepted in Annals of PDE, 2022

    Fang, Allen Juntao.Linear Stability of the Slowly-Rotating Kerr-de Sitter Family. arXiv:2207.07902, accepted in Annals of PDE, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  5. [12]

    arXiv:2112.07183, accepted in Annals of PDE, 2022

    Fang, Allen Juntao.Nonlinear Stability of the Slowly-Rotating Kerr-de Sitter Family. arXiv:2112.07183, accepted in Annals of PDE, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Communications in Mathematical Physics204(3) (1999), pp

    Friedrich, Helmut, R´ acz, Istv´ an, and Wald, Robert M.On the Rigidity Theorem for Space- times with a Stationary Event Horizon or a Compact Cauchy Horizon. Communications in Mathematical Physics204(3) (1999), pp. 691–707

    1999

  7. [14]

    arXiv:2002.02740

    Giorgi, Elena, Klainerman, Sergiu, and Szeftel, J´ er´ emie.A General Formalism for the Stability of Kerr. arXiv:2002.02740. Pre-published

    2002 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Annals of PDE4(1) (2018), p

    Hintz, Peter.Non-Linear Stability of the Kerr–Newman–de Sitter Family of Charged Black Holes. Annals of PDE4(1) (2018), p. 131

    2018

  9. [16]

    Annales Henri Poincar´ e19(2) (2018), pp

    Hintz, Peter.Uniqueness of Kerr–Newman–de Sitter Black Holes with Small Angular Mo- menta. Annales Henri Poincar´ e19(2) (2018), pp. 607–617

    2018

  10. [17]

    Acta Mathematica220(1) (2018), pp

    Hintz, Peter and Vasy, Andr´ as.The Global Non-Linear Stability of the Kerr– de Sitter Family of Black Holes. Acta Mathematica220(1) (2018), pp. 1–206

    2018

  11. [18]

    Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1964

    H¨ ormander, Lars.Linear Partial Differential Operators. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1964

    1964

  12. [19]

    Journal of the American Mathematical Society26(2) (2013), pp

    Ionescu, Alexandru and Klainerman, Sergiu.On the Local Extension of Killing Vector- Fields in Ricci Flat Manifolds. Journal of the American Mathematical Society26(2) (2013), pp. 563–593

    2013

  13. [20]

    and Klainerman, Sergiu.On the Uniqueness of Smooth, Stationary Black Holes in Vacuum

    Ionescu, Alexandru D. and Klainerman, Sergiu.On the Uniqueness of Smooth, Stationary Black Holes in Vacuum. Inventiones mathematicae175(1) (2009), pp. 35–102. REFERENCES 101

    2009

  14. [21]

    and Klainerman, Sergiu.Rigidity Results in General Relativity: A Review

    Ionescu, Alexandru D. and Klainerman, Sergiu.Rigidity Results in General Relativity: A Review. Surveys in Differential Geometry20(1) (2015), pp. 123–156

    2015

  15. [22]

    Physical Review164(5) (1967), pp

    Israel, Werner.Event Horizons in Static Vacuum Space-Times. Physical Review164(5) (1967), pp. 1776–1779

    1967

  16. [23]

    T.On the General Spherically Symmetric Solutions of Einstein ’s Gravitational Equations in Vacuo.Arkiv for Matematik, Astronomi och Fysik15(18) (1921), p

    Jebsen, J. T.On the General Spherically Symmetric Solutions of Einstein ’s Gravitational Equations in Vacuo.Arkiv for Matematik, Astronomi och Fysik15(18) (1921), p. 18

    1921

  17. [24]

    General Relativity and Gravitation38(3) (2006), pp

    Johansen, Nils Voje and Ravndal, Finn.On the Discovery of Birkhoff’s Theorem. General Relativity and Gravitation38(3) (2006), pp. 537–540

    2006

  18. [25]

    Annals of PDE8(2) (2022)

    Klainerman, Sergiu and Szeftel, J´ er´ emie.Construction of GCM Spheres in Perturbations of Kerr. Annals of PDE8(2) (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    Annals of Mathematics Studies 210

    Klainerman, Sergiu and Szeftel, J´ er´ emie.Global Nonlinear Stability of Schwarzschild Space- time under Polarized Perturbations. Annals of Mathematics Studies 210. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2020

    2020

  20. [27]

    Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly19(3) (2023), pp

    Klainerman, Sergiu and Szeftel, J´ er´ emie.Kerr Stability for Small Angular Momentum. Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly19(3) (2023), pp. 791–1678

    2023

  21. [28]

    International Mathematics Research Notices2012(20) (2012), pp

    Luk, Jonathan.On the Local Existence for the Characteristic Initial Value Problem in Gen- eral Relativity. International Mathematics Research Notices2012(20) (2012), pp. 4625– 4678

    2012

  22. [29]

    Classical and Quantum Gravity16(7) (1999)

    Mars, Marc.A Spacetime Characterization of the Kerr Metric. Classical and Quantum Gravity16(7) (1999)

    1999

  23. [30]

    Classical and Quantum Gravity 17(16) (2000)

    Mars, Marc.Uniqueness Properties of the Kerr Metric. Classical and Quantum Gravity 17(16) (2000)

    2000

  24. [32]

    Classical and Quantum Gravity33(15) (2016)

    Mars, Marc et al.Characterization of (Asymptotically) Kerr–de Sitter-like Spacetimes at Null Infinity. Classical and Quantum Gravity33(15) (2016)

    2016

  25. [33]

    Journal of the European Mathematical Society27(8) (2024), pp

    Petersen, Oliver and Vasy, Andr´ as.Wave Equations in the Kerr–de Sitter Spacetime: The Full Subextremal Range. Journal of the European Mathematical Society27(8) (2024), pp. 3497–3526

    2024

  26. [34]

    Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications (2024)

    Petersen, Oliver, Vasy, Andr´ as, and Stanford University, USA.Stationarity and Fredholm Theory in Subextremal Kerr-de Sitter Spacetimes. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Rendall, A. D. and Penrose, Roger.Reduction of the Characteristic Initial Value Problem to the Cauchy Problem and Its Applications to the Einstein Equations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences427(1872) (1990), pp. 221–239

    1990

  28. [36]

    C.Uniqueness of the Kerr Black Hole

    Robinson, D. C.Uniqueness of the Kerr Black Hole. Physical Review Letters34(14) (1975), pp. 905–906

    1975

  29. [37]

    Acta Mathematica Sinica 21(4) (2005), pp

    Wang, Xiao Dong.On the Uniqueness of the ADS Spacetime. Acta Mathematica Sinica 21(4) (2005), pp. 917–922

    2005

  30. [38]

    PhD thesis

    Wong, Willie Wai-Yeung.On the Uniqueness of Kerr-Newman Black Holes. PhD thesis. Princeton University, 2009

    2009

  31. [39]

    Communications in Mathematical Physics325(3) (2014), pp

    Wong, Willie Wai-Yeung and Yu, Pin.Non-Existence of Multiple-Black-Hole Solutions Close to Kerr–Newman. Communications in Mathematical Physics325(3) (2014), pp. 965– 996

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.