pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.26369 · v1 · pith:RR4ENNJNnew · submitted 2026-05-25 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE

Energy extraction from NED-deformed rotating black holes via the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection process

Marco Figliolia (1) , Gaetano Lambiase (1) , Ali \"Ovg\"un (2) , R. C. Pantig (3) ((1) Universita degli Studi di Salerno , INFN Gruppo Collegato di Salerno , Italy , (2) Eastern Mediterranean University , Famagusta
show 4 more authors
Turkiye (3) Mapua University Manila Philippines)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 20:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HE
keywords nonlinear electrodynamicsrotating black holesenergy extractionmagnetic reconnectionquasinormal modesblack hole shadowSgr A*Comisso-Asenjo process
0
0 comments X

The pith

NED deformation parameter g in rotating black holes is bounded by shadow size, quasinormal modes, and reconnection energy extraction.

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

The paper derives upper limits on the nonlinear electrodynamics deformation g for both nonrotating and rotating black holes. From the shadow radius of Sgr A* and analytic quasinormal mode shifts, it finds g/M less than or equal to 1.26 independent of spin. For the rotating case it formulates the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection in the zero-angular-momentum observer frame, computes the extracted power from the negative energy window, and obtains a spin-dependent bound from how much the power can deviate from the Kerr value. These complementary limits narrow the allowed values of g in the plane of spin and deformation. This matters because the bounds can be confronted with existing Event Horizon Telescope images and future gravitational wave observations of ringdowns.

Core claim

For the spherical seed metric, weak-field lensing and shadow give g/M ≲ 1.26 from Sgr A* tolerance, with matching QNM ceiling; for rotating geometry the ZAMO-frame Comisso-Asenjo process yields an extraction bound g_δ(a|σ0,ξ) such that the two probes together restrict the admissible region for g/M.

What carries the argument

The Comisso-Asenjo magnetic reconnection process formulated in the ZAMO frame, which identifies the negative-energy window and allows integration of extracted power over radii to define the extraction bound.

If this is right

  • The non-rotating bound g/M ≲ 1.26 is spin-insensitive.
  • The rotating extraction bound depends on the spin a/M and tolerance parameters σ0 and ξ.
  • Combined constraints appreciably narrow the (a/M, g/M) plane.
  • The bounds are testable with present data and upcoming horizon-scale and ringdown campaigns.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The single-layer equatorial setup could be generalized to include off-equatorial effects or full plasma dynamics to assess robustness of the bounds.
  • Similar reconnection analysis might apply to other NED models to derive analogous extraction limits.
  • If confirmed, the bounds could guide parameter choices in numerical simulations of accreting NED black holes.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes the axisymmetric NED-deformed metric with parameter g exists in closed form and that the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection channel applies directly in the ZAMO frame without additional NED-induced corrections.

What would settle it

Detection of a shadow radius or quasinormal mode frequency for a black hole that would require g/M larger than 1.26, or measurement of energy extraction efficiency exceeding the Kerr value by more than the tolerated fraction for the derived g.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26369 by (2) Eastern Mediterranean University, (3) Mapua University, Ali \"Ovg\"un (2), Famagusta, Gaetano Lambiase (1), INFN Gruppo Collegato di Salerno, Italy, Manila, Marco Figliolia (1), Philippines), R. C. Pantig (3) ((1) Universita degli Studi di Salerno, Turkiye.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Figure shows the weak-field deflection angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Constraint on the NED parameter from the shadow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Reduced CA/BZ comparison versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Each series is shown only where the outer horizon exists. FIG. 9. Equatorial circular photon orbits. Prograde (dashed) and retrograde (solid) circular photon radii as func￾tions of the spin a/M, for representative values of g/M. Dotted guides indicate the equatorial outer horizon rH and static-limit radius rL. Appendix B: Explicit expressions of the {t,˙ ϕ,˙ r˙} We report here the explicit expression of ˙t… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study rotating black holes in general relativity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics (NED), focusing on an axisymmetric solution with deformation parameter g. On the spherical seed, weak-field lensing via the Gauss-Bonnet method and the shadow radius yield a spin-insensitive bound by enforcing a conservative ~10% tolerance on the Sgr A* ring size, namely g/M \lesssim 1.26. In the eikonal regime we derive analytic quasinormal-mode shifts, even in g, and obtain an independent ceiling consistent with the shadow constraint. For the rotating geometry, we provide closed-form ZAMO scalars, chart horizons and ergoregion, and analyze equatorial geodesics (photon orbits and ISCO). We then formulate in the ZAMO frame the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection channel, identify the negative-energy window, and integrate the extracted power over the allowed radii; from the tolerated fractional departure from the Kerr power we define a spin-dependent extraction bound g_\delta(a|\sigma_0,\xi). Taken together, the QNM/shadow ceiling and the extraction bound appreciably narrow the admissible region for g/M in the (a/M, g/M) plane, so even within our deliberately simplified, single-layer equatorial setup, the two complementary probes already provide informative constraints on NED deformations, testable with present data and upcoming horizon-scale and ringdown campaigns.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives spin-insensitive bounds on the NED deformation parameter g/M from the shadow radius (via Gauss-Bonnet lensing) and eikonal quasinormal-mode shifts for the spherical seed, enforcing a ~10% tolerance on the Sgr A* ring size. For the rotating axisymmetric solution it supplies closed-form ZAMO scalars, charts the ergoregion and equatorial geodesics, then applies the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection channel in the ZAMO frame to identify the negative-energy window and integrate extracted power, yielding a spin-dependent extraction bound g_δ(a|σ₀,ξ). The central claim is that the combined QNM/shadow ceiling and extraction bound appreciably narrow the admissible region in the (a/M, g/M) plane even within the deliberately simplified equatorial setup.

Significance. If the modeling assumptions hold, the work supplies analytic, observationally testable constraints on NED deformations that are directly comparable to existing Sgr A* shadow data and forthcoming horizon-scale and ringdown measurements; explicit credit is due for the closed-form ZAMO scalars, the even-in-g analytic QNM shifts, and the explicit integration of extracted power over equatorial radii.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the section formulating the reconnection channel: the extraction bound g_δ(a|σ₀,ξ) and the claim that the two probes narrow the admissible (a/M, g/M) region rest on applying the standard Comisso-Asenjo channel directly to the NED-deformed metric. The formulation assumes g enters solely through the background geometry (ZAMO scalars, horizons, ergoregion, photon orbits) and produces no additional corrections to the local reconnection rate, magnetic-field evolution, or plasma response inside the current sheet. If the NED Lagrangian modifies the electromagnetic stress-energy or reconnection dynamics, both the location of the negative-energy window and the integrated power would shift, directly affecting the tolerated fractional departure from the Kerr case and therefore the spin-dependent bound. This modeling choice is load-bearing for the central narrowing claim but is not quan
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: while the summary of results is clear, the absence of any displayed equations or explicit error tolerances makes it difficult for a reader to assess the numerical values of the bounds (e.g., g/M ≲ 1.26) without immediately turning to the main text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. The major concern is addressed point-by-point below; we will revise the manuscript to clarify the modeling assumptions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the section formulating the reconnection channel: the extraction bound g_δ(a|σ₀,ξ) and the claim that the two probes narrow the admissible (a/M, g/M) region rest on applying the standard Comisso-Asenjo channel directly to the NED-deformed metric. The formulation assumes g enters solely through the background geometry (ZAMO scalars, horizons, ergoregion, photon orbits) and produces no additional corrections to the local reconnection rate, magnetic-field evolution, or plasma response inside the current sheet. If the NED Lagrangian modifies the electromagnetic stress-energy or reconnection dynamics, both the location of the negative-energy window and the integrated power would shift, directly affecting the tolerated fractional departure from the Kerr case and therefore the spin-dependent bound. This modeling choice is load-bearing for the central narrowing claim but

    Authors: We agree that the analysis applies the standard Comisso-Asenjo reconnection process assuming the NED parameter g affects only the background geometry (ZAMO frame, ergoregion, photon orbits) without additional corrections to local reconnection rate, magnetic evolution, or plasma response. This is a deliberate simplification, consistent with the abstract's description of a 'deliberately simplified, single-layer equatorial setup,' to isolate geometric effects on the negative-energy window and extracted power. A complete treatment would require coupling the NED Lagrangian to the full electromagnetic stress-energy and MHD equations inside the current sheet, which lies outside the present scope. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit paragraph in the reconnection section stating this assumption, noting it as a limitation, and indicating that the quantitative bound g_δ(a|σ₀,ξ) could shift under direct NED-plasma coupling. The central claim for geometric narrowing of the (a/M, g/M) region remains valid within the stated model. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: independent bounds from distinct observables

full rationale

The derivation computes three separate constraints on g/M: (i) shadow radius from Gauss-Bonnet lensing plus ~10% Sgr A* tolerance, (ii) eikonal QNM frequency shifts (even in g), and (iii) integrated extracted power in the ZAMO-frame Comisso-Asenjo channel, from which a spin-dependent g_δ(a|σ0,ξ) is defined via tolerated fractional departure from Kerr. None of these reduces by the paper's own equations to a fitted input, self-citation, or redefinition of another; the extraction calculation uses the closed-form metric scalars directly. No load-bearing self-citation or ansatz smuggling appears. The chain is self-contained against external data and independent calculations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of the axisymmetric NED solution with deformation g and on the direct applicability of the Comisso-Asenjo reconnection process in the ZAMO frame; both are treated as given inputs rather than derived.

free parameters (1)
  • g/M
    Deformation parameter whose admissible range is being constrained; no fitted numerical value is reported in the abstract.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Existence of a closed-form axisymmetric solution in GR coupled to NED with deformation parameter g
    Invoked when the rotating geometry, ZAMO scalars, and geodesics are introduced.
  • domain assumption Comisso-Asenjo reconnection channel applies without modification in the NED-deformed spacetime
    Used to identify the negative-energy window and integrate extracted power.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5849 in / 1463 out tokens · 39829 ms · 2026-06-29T20:18:19.704160+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Periodic Timelike Motion and Gravitational Wave Signatures around a Magnetically Charged Black Hole Surrounded by Quintessence

    gr-qc 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Quintessence shifts orbital radii, turning points, and zoom-whirl parameters for timelike geodesics around a magnetically charged black hole, producing burst-like gravitational waveforms whose phase, timing, and milli...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 20 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The NED scaleg induces only even–power corrections, reflecting the g→ −g symmetry of(9)

    Ωc +O(ℓ 0), −ℑωℓn = (n+ 1 2)λ c +O(ℓ −1), (42) with the orbital frequency and Lyapunov exponent Ωc = 1 3 √ 3M 1 + g2 18M2 − g4 216M4 , λc = 1 3 √ 3M 1− g2 27M2 + 11g 4 648M4 , (43) valid through O(g4/M4)within the linearized-αi eikonal approximation. The NED scaleg induces only even–power corrections, reflecting the g→ −g symmetry of(9). To leading order,...

    2017

  2. [2]

    fast reconnection

    and references therein). The two roots correspond to equatorial circular orbits that are co- and counter- rotating with respect to the axial Killing direction(∂ϕ)µ. Throughout this work we take a > 0to fix the spin orientation and define theprograde(co-rotating) branch as the one withsign(ΩK) = sign(a); equivalently, it is the branch that reduces in the K...

  3. [3]

    S. G. Ghosh and R. K. Walia, Annals of Physics434, 168619 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    M. S. Churilova, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 629 (2019), 20 arXiv:1905.04536 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    Comisso and F

    L. Comisso and F. A. Asenjo, Physical Review D103, 023014 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    E. H. T. Collaboration, Astrophysical Journal Letters 875, L1 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    K. A. et al., Astrophysical Journal Letters875, L4 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Collaboration, Astronomy & Astrophysics636, L5 (2020)

    G. Collaboration, Astronomy & Astrophysics636, L5 (2020)

    2020

  9. [9]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,The Large Scale Struc- ture of Space-Time, Cambridge Monographs on Mathe- matical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 1973)

    1973

  10. [10]

    R. M. Wald, Living Rev. Rel.4, 6 (2001)

    2001

  11. [11]

    J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawking, Commu- nications in Mathematical Physics31, 161 (1973)

    1973

  12. [12]

    Allahyari, M

    A. Allahyari, M. Khodadi, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, JCAP02, 003 (2020), arXiv:1912.08231 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    Verbin, B

    Y. Verbin, B. Pulice, A. Övgün, and H. Huang, Phys. Rev. D111, 084061 (2025), arXiv:2412.20989

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Physics Letters B163, 123 (1985)

    1985

  15. [15]

    The Bardeen Model as a Nonlinear Magnetic Monopole

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, Phys. Lett. B493, 149 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0009077

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  16. [16]

    New Regular Black Hole Solution from Nonlinear Electrodynamics

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, Phys. Lett. B464, 25 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9911174

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  17. [17]

    G. W. Gibbons and D. A. Rasheed, Nucl. Phys. B454, 185 (1995), arXiv:hep-th/9506035

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  18. [18]

    Construction of Regular Black Holes in General Relativity

    Z.-Y. Fan and X. Wang, Phys. Rev. D94, 124027 (2016), arXiv:1610.02636 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    Novello, V

    M. Novello, V. A. De Lorenci, J. M. Salim, and R. Klippert, Phys. Rev. D61, 045001 (2000), arXiv:gr- qc/9911085

    work page arXiv 2000

  20. [20]

    Higher-dimensional charged black holes solutions with a nonlinear electrodynamics source

    M. Hassaine and C. Martinez, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 195023 (2008), arXiv:0803.2946 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  21. [21]

    Lovelock black holes with a nonlinear Maxwell field

    H. Maeda, M. Hassaine, and C. Martinez, Phys. Rev. D 79, 044012 (2009), arXiv:0812.2038 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    S. I. Kruglov, Annals Phys.378, 59 (2017), arXiv:1703.02029 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  23. [23]

    S. I. Kruglov, Phys. Rev. D94, 044026 (2016), arXiv:1608.04275 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  24. [24]

    Regular electrically charged structures in Nonlinear Electrodynamics coupled to General Relativity

    I. Dymnikova, Class. Quant. Grav.21, 4417 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0407072

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  25. [25]

    Born and L

    M. Born and L. Infeld, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character144, 425 (1934)

    1934

  26. [26]

    A. A. Tseytlin, In: The Many Faces of the Superworld (M. Shifman, ed.) (1999), hep-th/9908105

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  27. [27]

    Lambiaseand A

    G. Lambiaseand A. R.Prasanna, Phys. Rev.D70, 063502 (2004)

    2004

  28. [28]

    Lambiase and L

    G. Lambiase and L. Mastrototaro, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 728 (2019)

    2019

  29. [29]

    Energy Extraction and Particle Acceleration Around Rotating Black Hole in Horava-Lifshitz Gravity

    A. Abdujabbarov, B. Ahmedov, and B. Ahmedov, Phys. Rev. D84, 044044 (2011), arXiv:1107.5389 [astro-ph.SR]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  30. [30]

    Oteev, A

    T. Oteev, A. Abdujabbarov, Z. Stuchlík, and B. Ahme- dov, Astrophys. Space Sci.361, 269 (2016)

    2016

  31. [31]

    Toshmatov, A

    B. Toshmatov, A. Abdujabbarov, B. Ahmedov, and Z. Stuchlík, Astrophys. Space Sci.360, 19 (2015)

    2015

  32. [32]

    Kerr Black Holes as Particle Accelerators to Arbitrarily High Energy

    M. Banados, J. Silk, and S. M. West, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 111102 (2009), arXiv:0909.0169 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [33]

    Penrose, Rivista del Nuovo Cimento (1969)

    R. Penrose, Rivista del Nuovo Cimento (1969)

    1969

  34. [34]

    Christodoulou and R

    D. Christodoulou and R. Ruffini, Physical Review D4, 3552 (1971)

    1971

  35. [35]

    R. D. Blandford and R. L. Znajek, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.179, 433 (1977)

    1977

  36. [36]

    S. S. Komissarov, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.350, 427 (2004)

    2004

  37. [37]

    Tchekhovskoy, R

    A. Tchekhovskoy, R. Narayan, and J. C. McKinney, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.418, L79 (2011)

    2011

  38. [38]

    Dadhich and A

    N. Dadhich and A. R. Prasanna, Phys. Rev. D29, 2712 (1984)

    1984

  39. [39]

    Dadhich and A

    N. Dadhich and A. R. Prasanna, Phys. Rev. D30, 1631 (1984)

    1984

  40. [40]

    Dadhich and A

    N. Dadhich and A. R. Prasanna, Astrophysical Journal 290, 12 (1985)

    1985

  41. [41]

    Dadhich and A

    N. Dadhich and A. R. Prasanna, Astrophysical Journal 370, 38 (1986)

    1986

  42. [42]

    Dadhich, Physics Reports183, 137 (1989)

    N. Dadhich, Physics Reports183, 137 (1989)

    1989

  43. [43]

    Dadhich and K

    N. Dadhich and K. Lochan, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society478, 189 (2018)

    2018

  44. [44]

    Dadhich and K

    N. Dadhich and K. Lochan, Universe5, 125 (2019)

    2019

  45. [45]

    Dadhich, Astrophysical Journal895, 14 (2020)

    N. Dadhich, Astrophysical Journal895, 14 (2020)

    2020

  46. [46]

    Cheng, S

    Z. Cheng, S. Chen, and J. Jing, Chinese Physics C48, 075103 (2024)

    2024

  47. [47]

    Rodriguez, A

    S. Rodriguez, A. Sidler, L. Rodriguez, and L. R. Ram- Mohan, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15347 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    Zhanget al., Phys

    Y. Zhanget al., Phys. Rev. D107, 024014 (2023)

    2023

  49. [49]

    Sidler, S

    A. Sidler, S. Rodriguez, and L. R. Ram-Mohan, arXiv preprint (2024), arXiv:2405.09342

    work page arXiv 2024

  50. [50]

    Carleo, G

    A. Carleo, G. Lambiase, and A. Övgün, Annalen der Physik535, 2200635 (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    Bambi, Reviews of Modern Physics91, 025006 (2019)

    C. Bambi, Reviews of Modern Physics91, 025006 (2019)

    2019

  52. [52]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Physical Review D63, 044005 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0006014 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  53. [53]

    Generating rotating regular black hole solutions without complexification

    M. Azreg-Ainou, Physical Review D90, 064041 (2014), arXiv:1405.2569 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  54. [54]

    P. A. M. Dirac,The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, International series of monographs on physics (Clarendon Press, 1981)

    1981

  55. [55]

    Javed, J

    W. Javed, J. Abbas, and A. Övgün, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 694 (2019), arXiv:1908.09632 [physics.gen-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  56. [56]

    Javed, A

    W. Javed, A. Hamza, and A. Övgün, Phys. Rev. D101, 103521 (2020), arXiv:2005.09464 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  57. [57]

    Okyay and A

    M. Okyay and A. Övgün, JCAP01, 009 (2022), arXiv:2108.07766 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    R. C. Pantig, L. Mastrototaro, G. Lambiase, and A. Övgün, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 1155 (2022), arXiv:2208.06664 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Kumaran and A

    Y. Kumaran and A. Övgün, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 812 (2023), arXiv:2306.04705 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    Waseem, N

    H. Waseem, N. J. L. S. Lobos, A. Övgün, and R. C. Pantig, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 629 (2025), arXiv:2502.04044 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    G. W. Gibbons and M. C. Werner, Class. Quant. Grav. 25, 235009 (2008), arXiv:0807.0854 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  62. [62]

    E. H. T. Collaboration, Astrophys. J. Lett.930, L12 (2022)

    2022

  63. [63]

    Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A$^*$

    S. Vagnozziet al., Class. Quant. Grav.40, 165007 (2023), arXiv:2205.07787 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    T. Do, A. Hees,et al., Science365, 664 (2020)

    2020

  65. [65]

    Kocherlakota, L

    P. Kocherlakota, L. Rezzolla, and Event Horizon Tele- scope Collaboration, Physical Review D103, 104047 (2021)

    2021

  66. [66]

    Psaltis and Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, Physical Review Letters125, 141104 (2020)

    D. Psaltis and Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, Physical Review Letters125, 141104 (2020)

    2020

  67. [67]

    R. A. Konoplya, L. Rezzolla, and A. Zhidenko, Physical Review D93, 064015 (2016), arXiv:1602.02378

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  68. [68]

    E. T. Newman and A. I. Janis, Journal of Mathematical Physics6, 915 (1965)

    1965

  69. [69]

    Priest and T

    E. Priest and T. Forbes,Magnetic Reconnection: MHD 21 Theory and Applications(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000)

    2000

  70. [70]

    Yamada, R

    M. Yamada, R. Kulsrud, and H. Ji, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 603 (2010)

    2010

  71. [71]

    E. G. Zweibel and M. Yamada, Annual Review of Astron- omy and Astrophysics47, 291 (2009)

    2009

  72. [72]

    J. M. Bardeen, Nature226, 64 (1972)

    1972

  73. [73]

    K. S. Thorne, R. H. Price, and D. A. Macdonald, eds., Black Holes: The Membrane Paradigm(Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1986)

    1986

  74. [74]

    Gourgoulhon,3+1 Formalism in General Relativity: Bases of Numerical Relativity, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol

    E. Gourgoulhon,3+1 Formalism in General Relativity: Bases of Numerical Relativity, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 846 (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2012)

    2012

  75. [75]

    Sironi and A

    L. Sironi and A. Spitkovsky, The Astrophysical Journal Letters783, L21 (2014)

    2014

  76. [76]

    Guo, Y.-H

    F. Guo, Y.-H. Liu, W. Daughton, and H. Li, The Astro- physical Journal806, 167 (2015)

    2015

  77. [77]

    G. R. Werner, D. A. Uzdensky, B. Cerutti, K. Nalewajko, and M. C. Begelman, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 816, L8 (2016)

    2016

  78. [78]

    F. Guo, X. Li, W. Daughton, H. Li, Y.-H. Liu, H. Zhang, and S. Li, Physics of Plasmas27, 080501 (2020)

    2020

  79. [79]

    A. M. Anile,Relativistic Fluids and Magneto-fluids(Cam- bridge University Press, 1989)

    1989

  80. [80]

    Lyubarsky, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society358, 113 (2005)

    Y. Lyubarsky, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society358, 113 (2005)

    2005

Showing first 80 references.