Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 104 references

Numerical methods solved the two-body problem of general relativity in the mid-2000s, producing the waveforms that made the 2015 gravitational-wave discovery possible.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-10 22:33 UTC pith:TA5S6MFE

load-bearing objection Solid historical review of NR’s solution of the two-body problem and its LIGO role; no new science, but accurate and useful as pedagogy.

arxiv 2607.06728 v1 pith:TA5S6MFE submitted 2026-07-07 gr-qc

The Era of Precision in Computational Models of Gravitational Waves

Ulrich Sperhake This is my paper
classification gr-qc
keywords numerical relativitygravitational wavesblack-hole binariestwo-body problemwaveform modelingEinstein equationsinspiral-merger-ringdown
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This review traces how Einstein's equations, too complex for closed-form solution except in highly symmetric cases, were finally made tractable for the dynamical two-body problem through numerical relativity. After decades of work on well-posed formulations, stable algorithms, singularity handling and initial data, complete multi-orbit black-hole binary evolutions with full gravitational-wave signals became available around 2005. Those results, and the hybrid waveform catalogs built from them, supplied the templates that turned tiny detector strains into confident astrophysical detections. A reader cares because the same computational models now underpin precision tests of strong-field gravity, estimates of black-hole kicks and radiation efficiency, and searches for dark-sector or exotic sources. The paper argues we have entered an era in which numerical relativity is no longer a bottleneck but a precision tool for upcoming observations.

Core claim

The two-body problem of general relativity was solved by numerical methods in the mid-2000s: independent formulations produced stable multi-orbit inspirals, mergers and ringdowns of black-hole binaries whose gravitational-wave signals agree, enabling the hybrid catalogs used in the first detections.

What carries the argument

Well-posed 3+1 formulations of Einstein's equations (conformal decompositions and generalized harmonic gauges) combined with singularity-handling techniques such as excision or moving punctures that keep long binary evolutions numerically stable.

Load-bearing premise

That the independent mid-2000s breakthrough simulations agree closely enough that any leftover numerical errors were too small to have biased the early template banks used for detection.

What would settle it

Re-analyse the first detected event while deliberately injecting residual numerical errors of the size still present in the original 2005-era methods; if recovered signal-to-noise or parameter posteriors move outside the published uncertainties, the claim that those models were already adequate fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Hybrid numerical-plus-analytic waveform catalogs become the standard tool for extracting masses, spins and distances from detector data.
  • Black-hole merger recoils can reach thousands of kilometres per second, large enough to eject remnants from host galaxies.
  • Ultrarelativistic collisions can convert tens of percent of the total mass into gravitational waves, giving a clean probe of the most extreme regime of the theory.
  • The same codes open quantitative searches for dark-matter signatures, modifications of gravity and new compact-object sources.
  • Cosmological simulations performed with full numerical relativity become feasible across all epochs of the universe.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • As detector sensitivity improves, residual truncation and hybridisation errors that were acceptable in 2015 will become the dominant systematic floor and will force higher-order matching schemes.
  • The same well-posed machinery that stabilised vacuum black-hole binaries extends directly to matter-filled spacetimes, making neutron-star and exotic-compact-object catalogues a near-term deliverable rather than a separate research programme.
  • Cross-validation between at least two independent formulations will remain a permanent requirement for any waveform model used in high-precision parameter estimation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a historical and pedagogical review of numerical relativity, centered on the claim that the two-body problem of general relativity was solved in the mid-2000s through independent numerical breakthroughs (Pretorius’ generalized-harmonic excision approach and the Brownsville/Goddard moving-puncture BSSNOK codes). It traces the mathematical foundations (well-posedness, ADM/3+1, constraints), early attempts (Hahn–Lindquist, Smarr–York, Grand Challenge), the 2005 successes, subsequent gold-rush applications (kicks, high-energy collisions, critical phenomena), and the construction of hybrid waveform catalogs that contributed to the 2015 LIGO detection of GW150914, while outlining open questions for future detectors.

Significance. If accepted as an accurate synthesis, the paper supplies a clear, self-contained narrative that correctly situates the 2005 breakthroughs as the enabling step for precision gravitational-wave source modeling. Its strengths are the explicit cross-validation of independent methods, the accessible treatment of well-posedness and gauge issues, and the forward-looking discussion of dark-sector and exotic-compact-object science. These features make it a useful reference for both specialists and a broader gr-qc audience; no new scientific result is claimed, so the contribution is archival and pedagogical rather than predictive.

minor comments (5)
  1. Throughout the Introduction and early sections, several compound words appear without spaces (e.g., “theory ofgeneral relativity”, “ofgeneral”, “spacetime” is inconsistently spaced). These are almost certainly extraction artifacts but should be cleaned for the published version.
  2. Figure 2 caption and surrounding text: the strain amplitude is quoted as order 10^{-20} for an M87-distance source; a brief parenthetical note on the precise luminosity distance used would help readers reproduce the scale.
  3. Section III.F: the phrase “the catharsis of numerical relativity” is vivid but slightly informal for a journal review; a more neutral wording would improve tone consistency.
  4. References: a few arXiv identifiers are given without final journal citations (e.g., some 2025–2026 entries). Updating these where DOIs now exist would strengthen the bibliography.
  5. Section V (future directions): the cosmic-string snapshot (Fig. 3) is mentioned only briefly; a one-sentence pointer to the underlying numerical method would aid readers unfamiliar with the technique.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: historical/pedagogical review whose central claims rest on independent external literature, not self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The manuscript is a narrative review of the history of numerical relativity, not a first-principles derivation or data-fitting exercise. Its load-bearing claims (mid-2000s solution of the GR two-body problem via Pretorius GHG+excision and independent Brownsville/Goddard moving-puncture BSSNOK codes; subsequent role of the resulting waveforms in LIGO) are standard, externally documented facts supported by non-overlapping citations (e.g., Pretorius 2005, Campanelli et al. 2006, Baker et al. 2006, Abbott et al. 2016). Author self-citations appear only for secondary technical contributions (kicks, high-energy collisions, boson-star waveforms, etc.) and do not close any logical loop or force the central historical narrative. There are no fitted parameters re-labeled as predictions, no self-definitional identities, no uniqueness theorems imported from the author’s prior work, and no ansatz smuggled via self-citation. The paper advances no new quantitative result whose validity reduces to its own inputs; it is therefore free of the circularity patterns under examination.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review the paper inherits the standard axioms of classical general relativity and the well-posedness theorems of the literature; it introduces no free parameters or new entities of its own.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Einstein’s vacuum equations are well-posed in the harmonic (and generalized-harmonic) formulation (Choquet-Bruhat 1952 and subsequent extensions).
    Invoked throughout Sections III.A–III.F as the mathematical foundation that makes numerical evolution possible.
  • domain assumption The ADM/3+1 split plus suitable gauge conditions yields a constrained evolution system whose constraints remain satisfied if initially satisfied.
    Used as the starting point for all numerical schemes discussed after the 1960s.
  • domain assumption Gravitational waves carry energy and produce a measurable strain of order 10^{-20} for astrophysical sources at cosmological distances.
    Taken from Bondi–Sachs and LIGO results; underpins the claim that numerical waveforms were essential for detection.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 26091 in / 1828 out tokens · 23315 ms · 2026-07-10T22:33:45.531423+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Einstein's equations of general relativity are one of the most complicated set of equations in all of physics and, for all but idealized physical settings, can only be solved by numerical methods on high-performance computing systems. Generating such solutions is a veritable Odyssey in its own right with adventures across the fields of mathematical theory, physical interpretation and computing challenges. These endeavors came to fruition in the mid 2000s when the two-body problem of general relativity was finally solved. And not too soon, as these results and their follow-up investigations came to play a key role in the Nobel-Prize winning discovery of gravitational waves by LIGO in 2015.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06728 by Ulrich Sperhake.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Illustration of the Earth-Moon system in Newtonian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Snapshot of a cosmic-string network. [Image credit: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 104 canonical work pages · 24 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    finger print data base

    and extended by York in the 1970s [42], Bowen and York [43] managed to find analytic solutions to three of the constraint equations. Even better, their solution con- tains 9 parameters for each black hole, 3 each for the hole’s position, velocity and angular momentum. The fourth constraint does not admit analytic solutions in this general case, but it is ...

    work page 1997

  2. [2]

    collaboration involving institutes from the US and Germany. As of writing, the SXS collaboration provides the most accurate and also the most numerous numer- ical waveforms in source modeling for the LIGO-Virgo- KAGRA network of ground-based detectors [93]. This by no means invalidates the importance of other codes which retain important roles for cross v...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Einstein

    A. Einstein. The foundation of the general theory of relativity.Annalen Phys., 49(7):769–822, 1916

    work page 1916

  4. [4]

    J. P. Petit.Le G´ eom’etricon. Ed. Belin, 1980. ISBN- 13 9782701103723

    work page 1980

  5. [5]

    Schwarzschild

    K. Schwarzschild. On the gravitational field of a mass point according to Einstein’s theory.Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys.), 1916:189– 196, 1916

    work page 1916

  6. [6]

    R. P. Kerr. Gravitational Field of a Spinning Mass as an Example of Algebraically Special Metrics.Phys. Rev. Lett., 11:237–238, 1963

    work page 1963

  7. [7]

    Blanchet

    L. Blanchet. Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravitational Waves.Living Rev. Rel., 17:2, 2014

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    T. Damour. Gravitational scattering, post-Minkowskian approximation and Effective One-Body theory.Phys. Rev. D, 94(10):104015, 2016

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Alcubierre.Introduction to 3+1 Numerical Relativ- ity

    M. Alcubierre.Introduction to 3+1 Numerical Relativ- ity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro.Numerical Rela- tivity. Cambridge University Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  11. [11]

    C. Bona, C. Palenzuela-Luque, and C. Bona-Casas.El- ements of Numerical Relativity and Relativistic Hydro- dynamics. Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York, 2009

    work page 2009

  12. [12]

    Sperhake

    U. Sperhake. The numerical relativity breakthrough for binary black holes.Class. Quant. Grav., 32(12):124011, 2015

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    R. Penrose. Gravitational collapse and space-time sin- gularities.Phys. Rev. Lett., 14:57–59, 1965

    work page 1965

  14. [14]

    S. Hawking. The occurrence of singularities in cosmol- ogy. III. Causality and singularities.Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., A300:187–201, 1967

    work page 1967

  15. [15]

    S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose. The Singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology.Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, 314:529–548, 1970

    work page 1970

  16. [16]

    B. P. Abbott et al. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger.Phys. Rev. Lett., 116(6):061102, 2016

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    Einstein

    A. Einstein. ¨Uber Gravitationswellen.Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. ), 1918:154– 167, 1918

    work page 1918

  18. [18]

    P. R. Saulson. Josh Goldberg and the physical reality of gravitational waves.Gen. Rel. Grav., 43:3289–3299, 2011

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    Bondi, M

    H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg, and A. W. K. Metzner. Gravitational waves in general relativity VII. Waves from axi-symmetric isolated systems.Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 269:21–52, 1962

    work page 1962

  20. [20]

    R. K. Sachs. Gravitational Waves in General Relativity

    work page

  21. [21]

    Waves in asymptotically flat Space-times.Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 270:103–126, 1962

    work page 1962

  22. [22]

    APS News, This Month in Physics History – Feb 2020: https://www.aps.org/apsnews/2020/02/joseph-weber- first-gravitational-wave

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    LIGO website: http://www.ligo.org

    work page

  24. [24]

    GEO600 website: http://www.geo600.org/

    work page

  25. [25]

    Virgo websote: https://www.virgo-gw.eu/

    work page

  26. [26]

    KAGRA website: http://gwcenter.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/

    work page

  27. [27]

    LISA website: https://www.esa.int/Science Exploration/Space Science/LISA

    work page

  28. [28]

    P. C. Peters and J. Mathews. Gravitational radiation from point masses in a keplerian orbit.Phys. Rev., 131:435–439, 1963

    work page 1963

  29. [29]

    P. C. Peters. Gravitational Radiation and the Motion of Two Point Masses.Phys. Rev., 136:B1224–B1232, 1964

    work page 1964

  30. [30]

    Four´ es-Bruhat

    Y. Four´ es-Bruhat. Th´ eoreme d’existence pour cer- tains syst` eme d’´ equations aux d´ eriv´ ees partielles non lin´ eaires.Acta Math., 88:141–225, 1952

    work page 1952

  31. [31]

    Arnowitt, S

    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner. The dynamics of general relativity. In L. Witten, editor,Gravitation an introduction to current research, pages 227–265. John Wiley, New York, 1962

    work page 1962

  32. [32]

    J. W. York, Jr. Kinematics and dynamics of general relativity. In L. Smarr, editor,Sources of Gravitational Radiation, pages 83–126. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979

    work page 1979

  33. [33]

    3+1 Formalism and Bases of Numerical Relativity

    E. Gourgoulhon.3+1 Formalism and Bases of Numeri- cal Relativity. Springer, New York, 2012. gr-qc/0703035

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  34. [34]

    S. G. Hahn and R. W. Lindquist. The two body problem in geometrodynamics.Ann. Phys., 29:304–331, 1964

    work page 1964

  35. [35]

    C. W. Misner. Wormhole initial conditions.Phys. Rev., 118:1110, 1960

    work page 1960

  36. [36]

    Crank and P

    J. Crank and P. Nicolson. A practical method for numerical evaluation of solutions of partial differential equations of heat conduction type.Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 43:50–67, 1947

    work page 1947

  37. [37]

    J. G. Charney, R. Fj¨ ortoft, and J. Von Neumann. Nu- merical integration of the barotropic vorticity equation. Tellus, 2:237–254, 1950

    work page 1950

  38. [38]

    ˇCadeˇ z.Colliding black holes

    A. ˇCadeˇ z.Colliding black holes. PhD thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1971

    work page 1971

  39. [39]

    Smarr.The structure of general relativity with a nu- merical illustration: The collision of two black holes

    L. Smarr.The structure of general relativity with a nu- merical illustration: The collision of two black holes. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1975

    work page 1975

  40. [40]

    K. R. Eppley.The numerical evolution of the collision of two black holes. PhD thesis, Princeton University, 1975

    work page 1975

  41. [41]

    Smarr and J

    L. Smarr and J. W. York, Jr. Kinematical conditions in the construction of spacetime.Phys. Rev. D, 17:2529– 2551, 1978

    work page 1978

  42. [42]

    L. Smarr. Gauge conditions, radiation formulae and the two black hole collision. In L. Smarr, editor,Sources of Gravitational Radiation, pages 245–274. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979

    work page 1979

  43. [43]

    D. R. Brill and R. W. Lindquist. Interaction Energy in Geometrostatics.Phys. Rev., 131:471–476, 1963

    work page 1963

  44. [44]

    Lichnerowicz

    A. Lichnerowicz. L’integration des ´ equations de la grav- itation relativiste et le probl` eme desncorps.J. Math. Pures et Appl., 23:37–63, 1944

    work page 1944

  45. [45]

    J. W. York, Jr. Gravitational degrees of freedom and the initial-value problem.Phys. Rev. Lett., 26:1656– 1658, 1971

    work page 1971

  46. [46]

    J. M. Bowen and J. W. York, Jr. Time-asymmetric ini- tial data for black holes and black-hole collisions.Phys. Rev. D, 21:2047–2056, 1980

    work page 2047

  47. [47]

    A simple construction of initial data for multiple black holes

    S. Brandt and B. Br¨ ugmann. A Simple construction of initial data for multiple black holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 78:3606–3609, 1997. gr-qc/9703066

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  48. [48]

    M. W. Choptuik. The binary black hole grand challenge project. In D. A. Clarke and M. J. West, editors,Com- putational Astrophysics, volume 123 ofASP Conference Series, page 305, San Francisco, 1997. Astronomical So- ciety of the Pacific

    work page 1997

  49. [49]

    Anninos, D

    P. Anninos, D. Hobill, E. Seidel, L. Smarr, and W.-M. Suen. Head-on collision of two equal mass black holes. Phys. Rev. D, 52:2044–2058, 1995

    work page 2044

  50. [50]

    Anninos and S

    P. Anninos and S. Brandt. Head-on collision of two unequal mass black holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 81:508–511, 14

    work page

  51. [51]

    Anninos, K

    P. Anninos, K. Camarda, J. Mass´ o, E. Seidel, W.-M. Suen, and J. Towns. Three-dimensional numerical rel- ativity: The evolution of black holes.Phys. Rev. D, 52:2059–2082, 1995

    work page 2059

  52. [52]

    Goodale, G

    T. Goodale, G. Allen, G. Lanfermann, J. Mass´ o, T. Radke, E. Seidel, and J. Shalf. The Cactus Frame- work and Toolkit: Design and Applications. InVector and Parallel Processing - VECPAR’2002, 5th Interna- tional Conference, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, 2003. Springer. http://www.cactuscode.org

    work page 2002

  53. [53]

    Einstein Toolkit webpage: http://einsteintoolkit.org/

    work page

  54. [54]

    Friedrich

    H. Friedrich. On the Hyperbolicity of Einstein’s and Other Gauge Field Equations.Comm. Math. Phys., 100(4):525–543, 1985

    work page 1985

  55. [55]

    Harmonic coordinate method for simulating generic singularities

    D. Garfinkle. Harmonic coordinate method for simulat- ing generic singularities.Phys. Rev. D, 65:044029, 2002. gr-qc/0110013

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  56. [56]

    Numerical Relativity Using a Generalized Harmonic Decomposition

    F. Pretorius. Numerical relativity using a general- ized harmonic decomposition.Class. Quantum Grav., 22:425–452, 2005. gr-qc/0407110

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  57. [57]

    Gundlach, G

    C. Gundlach, G. Calabrese, I. Hinder, and J. M. Mart´ ın- Garc´ ıa. Constraint damping in the Z4 formulation and harmonic gauge.Class. Quantum Grav., 22:3767–3773, 2005

    work page 2005

  58. [58]

    Nakamura, K

    T. Nakamura, K. Oohara, and Y. Kojima. General Relativistic Collapse To Black Holes And Gravitational Waves From Black Holes.Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl., 90:1–218, 1987

    work page 1987

  59. [59]

    Shibata and T

    M. Shibata and T. Nakamura. Evolution of three- dimensional gravitational waves: Harmonic slicing case. Phys. Rev. D, 52:5428–5444, 1995

    work page 1995

  60. [60]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro. On the Numerical integration of Einstein’s field equations.Phys. Rev. D, 59:024007, 1998. gr-qc/9810065

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  61. [61]

    Simple excision of a black hole in 3+1 numerical relativity

    M. Alcubierre and B. Br¨ ugmann. Simple excision of a black hole in 3 + 1 numerical relativity.Phys. Rev. D, 63:104006, 2001. gr-qc/0008067

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  62. [62]

    Alcubierre, B

    M. Alcubierre, B. Br¨ ugmann, P. Diener, M. Koppitz, D. Pollney, E. Seidel, and R. Takahashi. Gauge con- ditions for long-term numerical black hole evolutions without excision.Phys. Rev. D, 67:084023, 2003. gr- qc/0206072

    work page arXiv 2003

  63. [63]

    Sperhake, B

    U. Sperhake, B. Kelly, P. Laguna, K. L. Smith, and E. Schnetter. Black-hole head-on collisions and gravi- tational waves with fixed mesh-refinement and dynamic singularity excision.Phys. Rev. D, 71:124042, 2005. gr- qc/0503071

    work page arXiv 2005

  64. [64]

    D. R. Fiske, J. G. Baker, J. R. van Meter, D.-I. Choi, and J. M. Centrella. Wave zone extraction of gravita- tional radiation in three-dimensional numerical relativ- ity.Phys. Rev. D, 71:104036, 2005. gr-qc/0503100

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  65. [65]

    Numerical simulation of orbiting black holes

    B. Br¨ ugmann, W. Tichy, and N. Jansen. Numerical simulation of orbiting black holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 92:211101, 2004. gr-qc/0312112

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  66. [66]

    Binary Black Hole Mergers in 3d Numerical Relativity

    B. Br¨ ugmann. Binary Black Hole Mergers in 3D Nu- merical Relativity.Int. J. Mod. Phys., 8:85–100, 1999. gr-qc/9708035

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  67. [67]

    Thornburg

    J. Thornburg. Coordinates and boundary conditions for the general relativistic initial data problem.Class. Quantum Grav., 4:1119–1131, 1987

    work page 1987

  68. [68]

    Anninos, G

    P. Anninos, G. Daues, J. Mass´ o, E. Seidel, and W.- M. Suen. Horizon boundary condition for black hole spacetimes.Phys. Rev. D, 51:5562–5578, 1995

    work page 1995

  69. [69]

    Evolution of Binary Black Hole Spacetimes

    F. Pretorius. Evolution of Binary Black-Hole Space- times.Phys. Rev. Lett., 95:121101, 2005. gr-qc/0507014

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  70. [70]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlo- chower. Accurate Evolutions of Orbiting Black-Hole Bi- naries without Excision.Phys. Rev. Lett., 96:111101,

    work page

  71. [71]

    J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D.-I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter. Gravitational-Wave Extraction from an inspiraling Configuration of Merging Black Holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 96:111102, 2006. gr-qc/0511103

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  72. [72]

    C. Bona, T. Ledvinka, C. Palenzuela, and M. ˇZ´ aˇ cek. General-covariant evolution formalism for numerical rel- ativity.Phys. Rev. D, 67:104005, 2003. gr-qc/0302083

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  73. [73]

    Bernuzzi and D

    S. Bernuzzi and D. Hilditch. Constraint violation in free evolution schemes: Comparing BSSNOK with a con- formal decomposition of Z4.Phys. Rev. D, 81:084003, 2010

    work page 2010

  74. [74]

    D. Alic, C. Bona-Casas, C. Bona, L. Rezzolla, and C. Palenzuela. Conformal and covariant formulation of the Z4 system with constraint-violation damping.Phys. Rev. D, 85:064040, 2012. arXiv:1106.2254 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  75. [75]

    J. A. Gonz´ alez, U. Sperhake, B. Br¨ ugmann, M. D. Han- nam, and S. Husa. The maximum kick from nonspinning black-hole binary inspiral.Phys. Rev. Lett., 98:091101,

    work page

  76. [76]

    J. A. Gonz´ alez, M. D. Hannam, U. Sperhake, B. Br¨ ugmann, and S. Husa. Supermassive kicks for spinning black holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 98:231101, 2007. gr-qc/0702052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  77. [77]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, Y. Zlochower, and D. Merritt. Large Merger Recoils and Spin Flips From Generic Black-Hole Binaries.Astrophys. J., 659:L5–L8,

    work page

  78. [78]

    Maximum gravitational recoil

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, Y. Zlochower, and D. Merritt. Maximum gravitational recoil.Phys. Rev. Lett., 98:231102, 2007. gr-qc/0702133

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  79. [79]

    R. Penrose. Gravitational collapse: The role of general relativity.Riv. Nuovo Cim., 1:252–276, 1969. [Gen. Rel. Grav.34,1141(2002)]

    work page 1969

  80. [80]

    Black Strings, Low Viscosity Fluids, and Violation of Cosmic Censorship

    L. Lehner and F. Pretorius. Black Strings, Low Viscos- ity Fluids, and Violation of Cosmic Censorship.Phys. Rev. Lett., 105:101102, 2010. arXiv:1006.5960 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

Showing first 80 references.