Black Hole Entropy Bounded by the Specific Heat

H. Lu; Kai-Peng Lu

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 39 references

Black Hole Entropy Bounded by the Specific Heat

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 The paper establishes that four-dimensional black holes obey a double inequality between entropy and the inverse specific heat, proving it for static solutions and testing it on rotating ones.

desk verdict The proof for the special static class is clean, but the paper's own formula shows the unqualified conjecture fails for Schwarzschild-dS. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.17812 v1 pith:NQ6YMBC6 submitted 2025-07-23 gr-qc hep-th

Kai-Peng Lu , H. Lu This is my paper

classification gr-qchep-th PACS 04.70.Dy

keywords blackholethermodynamicsspecificheatentropyboundweakcosmiccensorshipenergyconditionsKerrexactsolutionsPenroseinequality

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 proposes a universal bound on black hole entropy expressed through the specific heat at fixed charges rather than through mass or charge. The central claim is a double inequality $-\frac{1}{2}T/S \le U \le \alpha S^{-3/2}$, where $U = T/C_{Q_i}$ is the inverse specific heat and $S$ is the horizon entropy, with $\alpha = 1/(4\sqrt{\pi})$ for spherically symmetric static black holes and $\alpha = 1/(2\sqrt{2\pi})$ for rotating ones. For unstable black holes ($C_{Q_i} < 0$) the inequality becomes the entropy cap $S \le -\frac{1}{2}C_{Q_i}$, and for locally stable ones ($C_{Q_i} > 0$) it becomes $S \le (\alpha T^{-1}C_{Q_i})^{2/3}$. The authors prove both bounds for special static black holes with $g_{tt}g_{rr} = -1$ using the strong and dominant energy conditions on the horizon, and confirm them by explicit calculation on a wide range of exact solutions, including Bardeen, Reissner-Nordström-(A)dS, Kerr, Kerr-Newman, Kerr-Sen, and Kerr-(A)dS black holes. If right, the result extends the algebraic inequalities of black hole thermodynamics, such as the Penrose inequality, to include derivatives of thermodynamic variables, and ties thermodynamic stability to the weak cosmic censorship conjecture.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is $U = T/C_{Q_i}$, the inverse specific heat at fixed charges, which stays finite at second-order phase transitions while preserving the sign that indicates thermodynamic stability. For the spherically symmetric static metric $ds^2 = -e^{2\chi}f\,dt^2 + f^{-1}dr^2 + r^2 d\Omega_2^2$, the proposed inequality is converted into purely geometric inequalities on the horizon radius $r_+$. For the special class $\chi = 0$, meaning $g_{tt}g_{rr} = -1$, the mass function takes the form $f = 1 - 2M/r + g(r, Q_i)$ with $(\partial_M f')|_{r=r_+} = 2/r_+^2$, and two identities express the middle term as $-\frac{1}{r_+}f'(r_+) + 8\pi(\rho + p_r + 2p_T)$ and as $\frac{2}{r_+^2} - \frac{3}{r_+}f'(r_+) - 16\pi(\rho - p_T)$ on the horizon. The strong energy condition then yields the lower bound and the dominant energy condition the upper bound, while the extremal case is handled by $f''(r_+) \ge 0$ and, under the dominant energy condition, $f''(r_+) \le 2/r_+^2$.

What would settle it

Compute $Y_2 = U - \alpha S^{-3/2}$ with $\alpha = 1/(2\sqrt{2\pi})$ for a four-dimensional rotating black hole not covered in the paper, for example a charged rotating Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton solution, and find any point of its parameter space with $Y_2 > 0$; a single such counterexample would refute the rotating conjecture, just as the paper's own $D = 6$ Myers-Perry analysis shows the analogous bound failing at large angular momentum.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is the sequence of inequalities (3), $-\frac{1}{2}T/S \le U \le \alpha S^{-3/2}$, where $U = (\partial T/\partial S)_{Q_i} = T/C_{Q_i}$ is the inverse of the specific heat at fixed charges and $S$ is the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, for four-dimensional black holes. For spherically symmetric static black holes the coefficient is $\alpha = 1/(4\sqrt{\pi})$, and for rotating black holes it is $\alpha = 1/(2\sqrt{2\pi})$. The Schwarzschild solution saturates the lower bound, the extremal Reissner-Nordström solution saturates the upper bound for static holes, and the extremal Kerr solution saturates the rotating upper bound. For the special static class with $g_{tt}g_{rr} = -1$, the inequalities are proven: the strong energy condition on the horizon guarantees the lower bound and the dominant energy condition guarantees the upper bound. For general static and rotating solutions the statement remains a conjecture, verified by explicit computation on many exact solutions; in higher dimensions the entropy-only upper bound fails for rotating Myers-Perry black holes with $D \ge 6$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the tested exact solutions are representative: the rotating upper bound is not derived from first principles, its coefficient being fixed by demanding that the extremal Kerr black hole saturates it, and the same bound is assumed to hold for every four-dimensional rotating black hole.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For thermodynamically unstable black holes ($C_{Q_i} < 0$), the entropy satisfies $S \le -\frac{1}{2}C_{Q_i}$, an entropy cap whose purely numerical coefficient the paper suggests may extend to general thermodynamic systems.
For locally stable black holes ($C_{Q_i} > 0$), the entropy satisfies $S \le (\alpha T^{-1}C_{Q_i})^{2/3}$, a bound that carries explicit $\hbar$, $G$, and $c$ dependence once constants are restored, marking it as a quantum-gravity statement.
The inverse specific heat $U$ is the finite-temperature generalization of the zero-temperature quantity $W$ that governs the weak cosmic censorship conjecture in gedanken experiments, so the new bound unites the $T = 0$ censorship analysis with finite-temperature stability.
The saturation pattern, with Schwarzschild at the lower bound and the extremal Reissner-Nordström and Kerr solutions at the upper bounds, places the boundaries of the inequality at the endpoints of gravitational collapse within each stability class.
In higher dimensions the static upper bound persists for Reissner-Nordström-Tangherlini black holes, but no entropy-only upper bound exists for rotating Myers-Perry black holes with $D \ge 6$, restricting the rotating form of the conjecture to four and five dimensions.

Reading between the lines

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

A direct stress-test of the rotating coefficient would be to compute $Y_2 = U - \alpha S^{-3/2}$ on rotating solutions the paper does not examine, such as charged rotating Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton black holes; the paper's closed-form method makes this a substitution exercise.
If the conjecture survives, it effectively bounds the curvature of the entropy function $S(T, Q_i)$ with respect to temperature, placing black hole thermodynamics inside a family of thermodynamic speed limits conjectured for other systems.
The paper's own $D = 6$ Myers-Perry computation suggests that adding independent angular momenta is what breaks the entropy-only upper bound, so the sharpest four-dimensional rotating bound may require additional fixed parameters beyond entropy itself.

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

Start with the bottom line: the paper has a solid core and a significant overclaim. The proof of (3) for spherically symmetric static black holes with g_tt g_rr = -1 is correct and clean: SEC gives the lower bound, DEC plus f'(r+)≥0 gives the upper. The extremal proof also works. The testing across many solutions is serious, and the honest report that the upper bound fails in D≥6 for Myers-Perry is a point in the authors' favor.

But the central conjecture as stated is false, and the counterexample is in the paper. Eq. (22) for RN-(A)dS gives Y1 = U + T/(2S) = (Q^2 - Λ r_+^4)/(4π^2 r_+^5). Setting Q=0, Λ>0 gives the Schwarzschild-de Sitter black hole, for which Y1 < 0. That violates the lower bound of (3) and the derived entropy bound S ≤ -C/2 for C<0. The proof in Sec 2.2.2 requires SEC on the horizon, which dS violates; the authors even note that SEC violation on the horizon violates the lower bound. Yet they still state (3) without qualification and say 'In all cases considered, the inequality holds.' That is inaccurate. The fix is easy: restrict the conjecture to Λ≤0, or to horizons satisfying SEC. Without that, the paper misrepresents its own results.

The other soft spot is the rotating upper bound. The coefficient α for rotating black holes is set by requiring extremal Kerr to saturate, so the verification for Kerr is not independent. That is acceptable for a conjecture, but it should be stated as calibration rather than derivation. Several 'proofs' in the appendices rely on numerical plots (EMD general N, Kerr-dS), which is weaker than analytic proof but tolerable for a test.

Overall, the new idea—a derivative-type thermodynamic inequality bounding entropy by specific heat—is genuinely new, and the special-static proof is worth publishing. The paper deserves peer review, but the authors must fix the dS counterexample and qualify the conjecture before it can be accepted as stated. I'd send it to a referee, but with a note to check the Λ>0 region. I wouldn't cite it until the revision lands.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a pair of thermodynamic inequalities for four-dimensional black holes, -1/2 T/S ≤ U ≤ α S^{-3/2} with U=T/C_Q, and derives entropy bounds S≤-C_Q/2 for C_Q<0 and S≤(α T^{-1}C_Q)^{2/3} for C_Q>0. The coefficient α is claimed to be 1/(4√π) for spherically symmetric static black holes and 1/(2√(2π)) for rotating ones. For the special static subclass with g_tt g_rr=-1, the bounds are proven from the SEC (lower) and DEC with f'(r_+)≥0 (upper); an extremal proof is also given. For more general static and rotating solutions, the paper tests the inequalities on RN-(A)dS, Bardeen, EMD, Kerr, Kerr-Newman, Kerr-Sen, and Kerr-(A)dS black holes, and discusses higher-dimensional extensions, finding that no entropy-only upper bound exists for D≥6 rotating Myers-Perry black holes.

Significance. The special static proof is clean and gives explicit sufficient conditions, and the paper provides explicit Y1 and Y2 formulas for many exact solutions, which is useful for independent verification. If the bounds were established, they would constitute a new type of thermodynamic inequality involving derivatives of black hole variables. However, the universal four-dimensional claim is falsified by the Schwarzschild-de Sitter limit, the rotating upper-bound coefficient is fitted to extremal Kerr rather than derived, and some 'proofs' for general parameter ranges are numerical plots. The sound special-class result and the higher-dimensional negative result remain valuable, but the paper's central conjecture needs substantial qualification.

major comments (3)

[§2.3.1, Eq. (22)] Setting Q=0 in Eq. (22) gives Y1 = U + T/(2S) = -Λ/(4π² r_+) < 0 for Λ>0, so the lower bound in (3) fails for the Schwarzschild-de Sitter solution, which is a member of the class considered in Sec. 2.3.1. The proof in Sec. 2.2.2 relies on SEC on the horizon, and Λ>0 violates SEC, so this is a counterexample rather than a gap in the proof. The abstract's claim that 'in all cases considered, the inequality (3) holds' is therefore inaccurate, and the derived bound S≤-C_Q/2 for C_Q<0 inherits the failure. The conjecture must be explicitly restricted (e.g., to Λ≤0 or to horizons satisfying SEC), and the abstract, Sec. 1, and Sec. 5 must be revised accordingly. Note also that Sec. 3.3 checks only the upper bound for Kerr-dS, so the lower bound remains unverified for rotating dS solutions.
[§3.1, Eqs. (38)-(39)] The rotating upper-bound coefficient α=1/(2√(2π)) is fixed by demanding that extremal Kerr saturate the bound, rather than derived from energy conditions or another first-principles argument. The text itself states that 'the parameter α was established precisely by the extremal Kerr black hole.' Consequently the checks on Kerr-Newman, Kerr-Sen, and Kerr-dS verify that these families lie below a curve whose coefficient is fitted to one endpoint of the Kerr family; they do not constitute an independent test of a predicted coefficient. The paper should present the rotating upper bound as a conjecture calibrated by the extremal Kerr solution, not as an established inequality.
[Appendix B and C, Figs. 1 and 2] Appendix B concludes that Z3≥0 over the region 3<N<4, 0<β<2/3 by 'plotting the picture of Z3', and Appendix C similarly concludes Y4≥0 from a numerical plot in the (x,y) rectangle. The main text in Sec. 3.3 then says this 'establishes the upper bound for the general Kerr-dS black holes.' A plot over a finite parameter range is numerical evidence, not a proof. The wording should be changed to 'numerical evidence' or an analytic argument should be supplied; as written, the paper overstates the status of these two claims.

minor comments (6)

[§2.3.2, Eq. (30)] The sentence 'the SEC on the horizon actually hold is satisfied' is ungrammatical; it should read 'the SEC on the horizon actually holds'.
[§4.2.2, Eq. (76)] 'mininum' should be 'minimum'.
[§3.2.1, Eq. (47)] The parameter range for Δ is not stated; please specify that 2M²-Q² ≥ 2J and give the resulting domain for Δ.
[Table 1, N=3 row] The expression for Y2 appears to have an unbalanced parenthesis; please check the typesetting.
[§5, Eq. (81)] Please clarify whether α in the physical-constants version is the same dimensionless coefficient as in Eq. (4) or is rescaled to absorb the constants.
[§2.1, Eq. (8)] The derivation of U uses the identity dM/dr_+ = 2π r_+ T; this identity should be stated and justified in the text for the general metric (6).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Rotating upper-bound constant is fitted to extremal Kerr, so the Kerr saturation check is partly a restatement; the spherical-static derivation is independent.

fitted input called prediction [Sec. 3 and Sec. 3.1, after Eq. (38)-(39)]
"Instead of declaring that there is no upper bound, we find that a bound still exists if we replace the α by a larger α=1/(2√2π), in which case, the extremal Kerr black hole saturates the bound. ... In fact, as we have mentioned earlier, the parameter α was established precisely by the extremal Kerr black hole."

The rotating-sector upper-bound constant α is not derived from energy conditions or any independent first-principles argument; it is fixed by demanding that the extremal Kerr black hole saturates (3). The subsequent statement in Sec. 3.1 that 'extremal ones saturate this bound' for Kerr is therefore the same condition used to set α, restated as a verification. The non-extremal Kerr monotonicity proof and the later Kerr-Newman, Kerr-Sen, and Kerr-(A)dS checks contain independent content, so the circularity is partial: only the extremal Kerr saturation check reduces by construction to the parameter choice.

full rationale

The spherically-symmetric static sector is not circular: Sec. 2.2.2 derives the bounds from the SEC and DEC, and α=1/(4√π) follows from the coefficient 2/r_+^2 in the DEC upper bound; the extremal RN saturation is a consistency check, not an input. The circularity is confined to the rotating sector, where Sec. 3 fixes α=1/(2√2π) by requiring the extremal Kerr black hole to saturate the upper bound, and then includes that saturation as part of the confirmation of (3). That particular check is the calibration restated; however, the non-extremal Kerr proof and the other rotating examples (Kerr-Newman, Kerr-Sen, Kerr-(A)dS) are genuine tests of the fitted constant. A separate correctness issue from Eq. (22) is that for Schwarzschild-de Sitter (Q=0, Λ>0), Y1 is negative, so the unqualified lower bound of (3) fails; this is a falsification concern rather than a circularity and does not affect the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The main free parameter is the upper-bound coefficient alpha for rotating black holes, which is fitted to the extremal Kerr solution rather than derived. The axioms are standard assumptions in black hole thermodynamics and the stated matter coupling. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)

alpha_rot = 1/(2 sqrt(2 pi))
Coefficient in upper bound for rotating black holes, chosen so the extremal Kerr black hole saturates the bound (Sec. 3.1).
coefficients in MP lower bounds = (D-3)/(D-2) for even D, (D-4)/(D-2) for odd D
Coefficients in lower bound for Myers-Perry black holes (eqs. 68-69) stated without derivation; the form is proposed to fit the examples.
coefficients in MP upper bounds = various powers of S with prefactors in eqs. (70)-(71)
Proposed upper bound forms for higher-dimensional rotating black holes with equal angular momenta; not derived from first principles.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Einstein gravity with minimally coupled matter
Stated in Sec. 2.2; the analysis does not cover non-minimal couplings or alternative theories.
domain assumption Energy conditions (SEC, DEC, NEC) hold on the horizon as sufficient conditions
Used in the proofs for special static and extremal black holes (Sec. 2.2).
standard math First law of black hole thermodynamics dM = T dS + ... at fixed charges
Used to derive U in eq. (8) via dM/dr_+ = 2 pi r_+ T.
domain assumption Energy density falls off sufficiently fast at infinity
Appendix A derives the form f = 1 - 2M/r + g(r,Q_i) from integrating the Einstein equation under this falloff.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Black Hole Entropy Bounded by the Specific Heat." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NQ6YMBC6

@misc{pith2026250717812,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Black Hole Entropy Bounded by the Specific Heat},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NQ6YMBC6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.17812}
}

abstract

We propose new bounds on black hole entropy in terms of the specific heat at fixed charges. For special spherically-symmetric and static black holes ($g_{tt} g_{rr}=-1$), we prove the bounds with suitable sufficient energy conditions. For more general static and rotating black holes, we test the bounds with a variety of examples. This work extends the previously-known algebraic inequalities of the black hole thermodynamic variables such as the Penrose inequality, to include their derivatives.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.17812 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** The 3D numerical picture of Z3 > 0 in the parameter regions 3 < N < 4 and 0 < β < 2 3 . C The sign of Y3 of the Kerr-dS black hole The variables of Y3 are r+ , g and a, but the value ranges of them are less clear. However, we must have positive temperature (58). Therefore, we can introduce a parameter t ≥ 0, which is defined as −a 2 g 2 r 2 + − a 2 − 3g 2 r 4 + + r 2 + = r 2 + [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The numerical picture of Y4 > 0 of Kerr-dS black hole in the parameter regions 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 and 0 < y < 1. References [1] S. W. Hawking, “Black holes in general relativity,” Commun. Math. Phys. 25 (1972), 152-166 doi:10.1007/BF01877517. [2] S.W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,” Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975), 199- 220 [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys. 46 (1976), 206] doi:10.1007/BF02345020. [3] J.M. Bardeen, B. … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

[1]

Black holes in general relativity,

S. W. Hawking, “Black holes in general relativity,” Commun. Math. Phys.25(1972), 152-166 doi:10.1007/BF01877517

doi:10.1007/bf01877517 1972
[2]

Particle creation by black holes,

S.W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,” Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975), 199- 220 [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys.46(1976), 206] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975
[3]

The four laws of black hole mechanics,

J.M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S.W. Hawking, “The four laws of black hole mechanics,” Commun. Math. Phys.31(1973), 161-170 doi:10.1007/BF01645742

doi:10.1007/bf01645742 1973
[4]

Black holes and entropy,

J.D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and entropy,” Phys. Rev. D7(1973), 2333-2346 doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.7.2333

work page 1973
[5]

Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space,

S.W. Hawking and D.N. Page, “Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space,” Commun. Math. Phys.87(1983), 577 doi:10.1007/BF01208266

doi:10.1007/bf01208266 1983
[6]

Charged AdS black holes and catastrophic holography,

A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C.V. Johnson and R.C. Myers, “Charged AdS black holes and catastrophic holography,” Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 064018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 60.064018 [arXiv:hep-th/9902170 [hep-th]]. 22

arXiv 1999
[7]

Holography, thermody- namics and fluctuations of charged AdS black holes,

A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C.V. Johnson and R.C. Myers, “Holography, thermody- namics and fluctuations of charged AdS black holes,” Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 104026 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.104026 [arXiv:hep-th/9904197 [hep-th]]

arXiv 1999
[8]

Black hole chemistry: thermodynamics with Lambda,

D. Kubiznak, R.B. Mann and M. Teo, “Black hole chemistry: thermodynamics with Lambda,” Class. Quant. Grav.34(2017) no.6, 063001 doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa5c69 [arXiv:1608.06147 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2017

Show all 39 references

[9]

Extended phase space thermodynamics for charged and rotating black holes and Born-Infeld vacuum polarization,

S. Gunasekaran, R.B. Mann and D. Kubiznak, “Extended phase space thermodynamics for charged and rotating black holes and Born-Infeld vacuum polarization,” JHEP11 (2012), 110 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2012)110 [arXiv:1208.6251 [hep-th]]

2012 arXiv
[10]

Thermodynamics of rotating black holes and black rings: phase transitions and thermodynamic volume,

N. Altamirano, D. Kubiznak, R.B. Mann and Z. Sherkatghanad, “Thermodynamics of rotating black holes and black rings: phase transitions and thermodynamic volume,” Galaxies2(2014), 89-159 doi:10.3390/galaxies2010089 [arXiv:1401.2586 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[11]

Ruppeiner geometry, phase transitions, and the microstructure of charged AdS black holes,

S.W. Wei, Y. X. Liu and R.B. Mann, “Ruppeiner geometry, phase transitions, and the microstructure of charged AdS black holes,” Phys. Rev. D100(2019) no.12, 124033 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.124033 [arXiv:1909.03887 [gr-qc]]

2019 arXiv
[12]

Gravitational collapse: the role of general relativity,

R. Penrose, “Gravitational collapse: the role of general relativity,” Riv. Nuovo Cim.1, 252-276 (1969) doi:10.1023/A:1016578408204

1969 doi
[13]

Gedanken experiments to destroy a black hole. II. Kerr-Newman black holes cannot be overcharged or overspun,

J. Sorce and R.M. Wald, “Gedanken experiments to destroy a black hole. II. Kerr-Newman black holes cannot be overcharged or overspun,” Phys. Rev. D96, no.10, 104014 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.104014 [arXiv:1707.05862 [gr-qc]]

2017 arXiv
[14]

Kerr-Newman black holes cannot be over-charged or over-spun,

R.M. Wald, “Kerr-Newman black holes cannot be over-charged or over-spun,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D27(2018) no.11, 1843003 doi:10.1142/S0218271818430034

2018 doi
[15]

Weak cosmic censorship conjecture cannot be violated in gedanken experiments,

P.Y. Wu, H. Khodabakhshi and H. L¨ u, “Weak cosmic censorship conjecture cannot be violated in gedanken experiments,” Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.10, 104019 doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.110.104019 [arXiv:2408.09444 [gr-qc]]

2024
[16]

Weak cosmic censorship conjecture in Gedanken ex- periments at all orders,

K.P. Lu, P.Y. Wu and H. L¨ u, “Weak cosmic censorship conjecture in Gedanken ex- periments at all orders,” Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.10, 104036 doi:10.1103/ Phys- RevD.111.104036 [arXiv:2502.02639 [gr-qc]]

2025 arXiv
[18]

The black branes of M-theory,

M.J. Duff, H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope “The black branes of M-theory,” Phys. Lett. B382, 73-80 (1996) doi:10.1201/9781482268737-29 [arXiv:hep-th/9604052 [hep-th]]

1996 arXiv
[19]

Nonextreme black holes from nonextreme intersecting M- branes,

M. Cvetiˇ c and A.A. Tseytlin, “Nonextreme black holes from nonextreme intersecting M- branes,” Nucl. Phys. B478(1996), 181-198 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(96)00411-7 [arXiv:hep- th/9606033 [hep-th]]

1996
[20]

Bardeen, in Proceedings of the International Conference GR5, Tbilisi, U.S.S.R

J.M. Bardeen, in Proceedings of the International Conference GR5, Tbilisi, U.S.S.R. (1968), p. 174

1968
[21]

Regular black holes from analyticf(F 2),

Z.C. Li and H. L¨ u, “Regular black holes from analyticf(F 2),” Eur. Phys. J. C83, no.8, 755 (2023) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11908-x [arXiv:2303.16924 [gr-qc]]

2023 arXiv
[22]

Regular black holes and their singular families,

H. Huang and X.P. Rao, “Regular black holes and their singular families,” Phys. Rev. D 111, no.10, 104040 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.104040 [arXiv:2503.13133 [gr-qc]]

2025 arXiv
[23]

Regular electric black holes from Einstein-Maxwell-scalar grav- ity,

Z.C. Li and H. L¨ u, “Regular electric black holes from Einstein-Maxwell-scalar grav- ity,” Phys. Rev. D110, no.10, 104046 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.104046 [arXiv:2407.07952 [gr-qc]]

2024 arXiv
[24]

Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory,

A. Sen, “Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 69(1992), 1006-1009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.1006 [arXiv:hep-th/9204046 [hep-th]]

1992 arXiv
[25]

Hamilton-Jacobi and Schrodinger separable solutions of Einstein’s equations,

B. Carter, “Hamilton-Jacobi and Schrodinger separable solutions of Einstein’s equations,” Commun. Math. Phys.10(1968) no.4, 280-310 doi:10.1007/BF03399503

1968 doi
[26]

Schwarzschild field in n dimensions and the dimensionality of space problem,

F.R. Tangherlini, “Schwarzschild field in n dimensions and the dimensionality of space problem,” Nuovo Cim.27(1963), 636-651 doi:10.1007/BF02784569

1963 doi
[27]

Black holes in higher dimensional space-times,

R.C. Myers and M.J. Perry, “Black holes in higher dimensional space-times,” Annals Phys. 172(1986), 304 doi:10.1016/0003-4916(86)90186-7

1986 doi
[28]

Rotation and the AdS/CFT correspondence,

S.W. Hawking, C.J. Hunter and M. Taylor, “Rotation and the AdS/CFT correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D59, 064005 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.59.064005 [arXiv:hep-th/9811056 [hep-th]]

1999 arXiv
[29]

The general Kerr-de Sitter metrics in all dimensions,

G.W. Gibbons, H. L¨ u, D.N. Page and C.N. Pope, “The general Kerr-de Sitter metrics in all dimensions,” J. Geom. Phys.53, 49-73 (2005) doi:10.1016/j.geomphys.2004.05.001 [arXiv:hep-th/0404008 [hep-th]]. 24

2005 arXiv
[30]

Rotating black holes in higher dimensions with a cosmological constant,

G.W. Gibbons, H. L¨ u, D.N. Page and C.N. Pope, “Rotating black holes in higher dimensions with a cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 171102 (2004) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.171102 [arXiv:hep-th/0409155 [hep-th]]

2004 arXiv
[31]

The first law of thermodynamics for Kerr- anti-de Sitter black holes,

G.W. Gibbons, M.J. Perry and C.N. Pope, “The first law of thermodynamics for Kerr- anti-de Sitter black holes,” Class. Quant. Grav.22(2005), 1503-1526 doi:10.1088/0264- 9381/22/9/002 [arXiv:hep-th/0408217 [hep-th]]

2005 arXiv
[32]

Gravitational radiation in an expanding universe,

S. Hawking, “Gravitational radiation in an expanding universe,” J. Math. Phys.9(1968), 598-604 doi:10.1063/1.1664615

1968 doi
[33]

The Penrose inequality,

H.L. Bray and P.T. Chrusciel, “The Penrose inequality,” [arXiv:gr-qc/0312047 [gr-qc]]

arXiv
[34]

Present status of the Penrose inequality,

M. Mars, “Present status of the Penrose inequality,” Class. Quant. Grav.26, 193001 (2009) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/26/19/193001 [arXiv:0906.5566 [gr-qc]]

2009 arXiv
[35]

Dirty black holes: thermodynamics and horizon structure,

M. Visser, “Dirty black holes: thermodynamics and horizon structure,” Phys. Rev. D46, 2445-2451 (1992) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.2445 [arXiv:hep-th/9203057 [hep-th]]

1992 arXiv
[36]

Area–angular momentum inequality for axisymmetric black holes,

S. Dain and M. Reiris, “Area–angular momentum inequality for axisymmetric black holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 051101 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.051101 [arXiv:1102.5215 [gr-qc]]

2011 arXiv
[37]

Cosmic censorship hypothesis and entropy bound on black holes in canonical ensemble,

R.Q. Yang, “Cosmic censorship hypothesis and entropy bound on black holes in canonical ensemble,” Phys. Rev. D103, no.2, 024050 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.024050 [arXiv:2010.07756 [gr-qc]]

2021 arXiv
[38]

When null energy condition meets ADM mass,

R.Q. Yang, L. Li and R.G. Cai, “When null energy condition meets ADM mass,” Commun. Theor. Phys.74, no.9, 095403 (2022) doi:10.1088/1572-9494/ac84cd [arXiv:2205.08246 [gr-qc]]

2022 arXiv
[39]

Tightening the Penrose inequality,

H. Khodabakhshi, H. L¨ u and R. Q. Yang, “Tightening the Penrose inequality,” Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.65, no.12, 120413 (2022) doi:10.1007/s11433-022-2016-3 [arXiv:2207.08833 [gr-qc]]

2022 arXiv
[40]

Energy extraction,

R. Geroch, “Energy extraction,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 224 (1 Sixth Texas S) (1973) 108-C117. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1973.tb41445.x. 25

1973

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Black holes in general relativity,

S. W. Hawking, “Black holes in general relativity,” Commun. Math. Phys.25(1972), 152-166 doi:10.1007/BF01877517

doi:10.1007/bf01877517 1972

[2] [2]

Particle creation by black holes,

S.W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,” Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975), 199- 220 [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys.46(1976), 206] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975

[3] [3]

The four laws of black hole mechanics,

J.M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S.W. Hawking, “The four laws of black hole mechanics,” Commun. Math. Phys.31(1973), 161-170 doi:10.1007/BF01645742

doi:10.1007/bf01645742 1973

[4] [4]

Black holes and entropy,

J.D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and entropy,” Phys. Rev. D7(1973), 2333-2346 doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.7.2333

work page 1973

[5] [5]

Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space,

S.W. Hawking and D.N. Page, “Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space,” Commun. Math. Phys.87(1983), 577 doi:10.1007/BF01208266

doi:10.1007/bf01208266 1983

[6] [6]

Charged AdS black holes and catastrophic holography,

A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C.V. Johnson and R.C. Myers, “Charged AdS black holes and catastrophic holography,” Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 064018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 60.064018 [arXiv:hep-th/9902170 [hep-th]]. 22

arXiv 1999

[7] [7]

Holography, thermody- namics and fluctuations of charged AdS black holes,

A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C.V. Johnson and R.C. Myers, “Holography, thermody- namics and fluctuations of charged AdS black holes,” Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 104026 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.104026 [arXiv:hep-th/9904197 [hep-th]]

arXiv 1999

[8] [8]

Black hole chemistry: thermodynamics with Lambda,

D. Kubiznak, R.B. Mann and M. Teo, “Black hole chemistry: thermodynamics with Lambda,” Class. Quant. Grav.34(2017) no.6, 063001 doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa5c69 [arXiv:1608.06147 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2017