Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Gauge-fixing for the completion problem of reconstructed metric perturbations of a Kerr spacetime

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two conditions now fix the final gauge freedom in Kerr metric reconstruction.

desk verdict A genuinely new two-condition prescription for fixing the interior gauge in Kerr metric reconstruction, with correct limiting checks, but the completeness claim rests on an unproven restricted gauge ansatz and an unshown key integral. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03191 v2 pith:UZNIQKTV submitted 2019-08-08 gr-qc

Donato Bini , Andrea Geralico This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc PACS 04.25.Nx04.30.-w04.70.-s
keywords metriccompletiongaugefixinggravitationalself-forceKerrspacetimeblackholeperturbationtheoryeccentricequatorialorbitsnonradiativemultipolesradiationreconstruction
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 claims to close the last open step in the metric completion problem for gravitational self-force calculations on a Kerr spacetime: fixing the gauge part of the reconstructed metric perturbation. The authors propose two conditions that determine the interior gauge vector for eccentric equatorial orbits: continuity of the double contraction of the perturbed metric with the particle's four-velocity, and an integrated form of the Ricci identity across the hypersurface containing the particle's world line. Together these specify the time derivatives of the two functions $\alpha_-(t)$ and $\beta_-(t)$ that generate the gauge piece. The prescription reproduces the known Schwarzschild and circular-orbit limits, and it gives the fully gauge-fixed nonradiative metric needed to compute orbital invariants such as gyroscope precession.

What carries the argument

The central object is the interior gauge vector $\xi^-=\frac{\mu}{M}[\alpha_-(t)\partial_t+\beta_-(t)\partial_\varphi]$, whose only nonvanishing metric components are $h^{\rm gauge-}_{tt}$ and $h^{\rm gauge-}_{t\varphi}$. The argument is carried by two junction-type conditions: the continuity of $h_{UU}$ at $r=r_p(t)$, and the integral form of the Ricci identity obtained by integrating the divergence identity over a spacelike 3-volume whose boundaries bracket the particle's instantaneous position. With the test vector $v=\partial_t$, the radiative part drops out of the mass and angular momentum integrals, and the remaining integrals $I_1,I_2,I_3$ combine with the $h_{UU}$ condition to give the equations for $d\alpha_-/dt$ and $d\beta_-/dt$.

What would settle it

Take a specific eccentric equatorial geodesic in Kerr, construct the metric perturbation with the gauge vector from the new equations, and check directly whether the linearized Einstein equations $\delta G_{\mu\nu}[h]=8\pi T_{\mu\nu}$ hold with no residual delta or derivative-of-delta source at the particle; any leftover distributional term would falsify the gauge fixing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In Kerr, the reconstructed metric perturbation splits as $h_{\pm}=h^{\rm rec}_{\pm}+h^{\rm comp}_{\pm}+h^{\rm gauge}_{\pm}$; the radiative part comes from the Chrzanowski-Cohen-Kegeles procedure, the completion part is a stationary axisymmetric shift of mass and angular momentum in the exterior region and vanishes inside, and the remaining obstruction is the gauge part. The paper's central claim is that the gauge part is fixed by a discontinuous gauge vector $\xi^-=\frac{\mu}{M}[\alpha_-(t)\partial_t+\beta_-(t)\partial_\varphi]$ in the interior, with the exterior part vanishing by asymptotic flatness, and that the two unknown functions are fixed by requiring (i) that $h_{UU}=h_{\alpha\beta}U^\alpha U^\beta$ be continuous at the particle's position, preserving the causality property of the four-velocity, and (ii) that a volume-integrated form of the Ricci identity $(dv)^{\alpha\beta}{}_{;\beta}=-8\pi T^{TR\,\alpha\beta}v_\beta+\dots$ hold across the worldline. Solving these conditions for $v=\partial_t$ yields explicit formulas for $d\alpha_-/dt$ and $d\beta_-/dt$ for eccentric equatorial orbits.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction rests on the ansatz that the only remaining gauge freedom is the two-component interior vector $\xi^-=\frac{\mu}{M}[\alpha_-(t)\partial_t+\beta_-(t)\partial_\varphi]$; if eccentric equatorial orbits require radial or angular gauge components, the two conditions would underdetermine the gauge and the completion would not be unique.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With the gauge vector fixed by the resulting equations, the nonradiative Kerr metric perturbation is fully determined for eccentric equatorial orbits, not just up to gauge.
  • First-order gravitational self-force corrections to gyroscope precession along slightly eccentric Kerr orbits become computable without tuning the gauge against post-Newtonian expansions, as carried out in the companion papers cited by the authors.
  • The circular-orbit limit of the prescription reproduces the previously used Kerr gauge vector, and the Schwarzschild limit reproduces the known eccentric and circular gauge-fixed metrics.
  • The same two conditions provide a route to completing future self-force calculations for bound orbits beyond the equatorial plane, such as inclined orbits relevant to extreme-mass-ratio inspirals.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The two conditions effectively act as junction conditions across the particle's worldline, so the same logic could in principle be applied with a different test vector, such as a zero-angular-momentum-observer four-velocity, to produce consistency checks.
  • A natural testable extension is to enlarge the gauge ansatz to include radial or angular components for inclined orbits; if the two-condition method then fails to close, that would signal the restricted gauge vector is special to equatorial symmetry.
  • Because the delta-singular part of the gauge perturbation contributes nothing to $h_{UU}$, the continuity condition constrains only the regular gauge content, while derivative quantities such as tidal invariants will probe the distributional gauge content more severely.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the metric completion problem in gravitational self-force theory for Kerr spacetime. It proposes a prescription for fixing the remaining gauge freedom in the nonradiative part of the reconstructed metric perturbation. The two conditions are: (i) continuity of the double contraction of the full perturbed metric with the particle's four-velocity at the world line (Eq. 79), and (ii) an integral form of the Ricci identity over a small volume straddling the world line (Eqs. 91-92). For eccentric equatorial orbits these conditions yield two equations, Eq. (100), for the time derivatives of the two functions α−(t) and β−(t) appearing in the interior gauge vector (71). The authors recover the circular-orbit Kerr and Schwarzschild limits and the eccentric Schwarzschild limit, and cite applications in Refs. [35,36].

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is a useful step: it offers a concrete, apparently parameter-free prescription for the gauge part of the nonradiative Kerr metric perturbation, which is needed for computing gauge-dependent orbital invariants in self-force calculations. The paper's strengths include explicit formulas, recovery of all advertised limiting cases, agreement with the gauge vector used in Ref. [29] in the circular limit, and the fact that the results have already been used in Refs. [35,36]. However, the completeness claim is not fully established: the restricted form of the gauge ansatz is asserted rather than proven, and the central integral I3 is presented without derivation. These issues make the significance conditional on additional support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III.B, Eq. (71)] The gauge vector is assumed to have the restricted form ξ± = μ/M [α±(t)∂t + β±(t)∂φ], with the text calling this 'general' and citing Refs. [27,29]. Those references treat circular orbits, for which U^r = 0. For eccentric equatorial orbits U^r ≠ 0, a radial component ξ^r would generate additional metric components (including h_rr) and would contribute to h_UU through the (U^r)^2 term as well as to the integrals I1–I3. The paper gives no argument that radial and angular components can be consistently set to zero while preserving the two gauge conditions. Without such a proof, Eqs. (79) and (91)–(92) underdetermine the gauge freedom and the completion is not unique. This is the main obstruction to the paper's central claim.
  2. [Sec. III.C, Eqs. (97)–(98)] The evaluation of I3 is load-bearing for the final result (100), but it is stated as 'We find' with no derivation. Because I3 involves second derivatives of the Heaviside function and must be computed in the distributional sense, the reader cannot verify the claimed cancellation of delta and delta-prime terms. Please provide the full derivation, or a detailed supplementary computation, so that Eq. (100) is checkable.
  3. [Sec. III.C, Eqs. (100) vs. (72)–(74)] The two conditions determine only dα−/dt and dβ−/dt. The functions α−(t) and β−(t) themselves are fixed only up to integration constants, yet these constants enter the delta-singular part of the gauge perturbation (74). The paper does not explain why these constants are irrelevant to the claimed complete determination of the gauge piece or to the subsequent self-force applications. Please clarify this point, since the phrase 'fully determining the gauge part' (Discussion, Sec. IV) is stronger than what Eqs. (100) actually determine.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III.C, Eq. (99)] The expression for h^{comp+}_{UU}(r_p) is long and its derivation from Eq. (62) is not shown; a brief derivation or a reference to the relevant intermediate steps would improve verifiability.
  2. [Secs. II–III] The signature is switched from (+,-,-,-) in the Schwarzschild section to (-,+,+,+) in the Kerr section. This is stated, but it is easy for a reader to miss; please state the convention more prominently at the start of Sec. III.
  3. [Sec. I] The term 'quasi-invariant' is used without definition; please define it or give a precise citation.
  4. [Sec. II, text before Eq. (5)] There is a typo: 'the the particle's energy momentum tensor' should read 'the particle's energy momentum tensor'.
  5. [Sec. III.B, Eq. (71)] Given the concern in Major Comment 1, please clarify precisely which parts of the form (71) are established in Refs. [27,29] for circular orbits and which parts are assumed as an ansatz here.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The two gauge-fixing conditions are independently derived, but the claim that they fully fix the gauge rests on an imported two-component ansatz from overlapping-author prior work.

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Sec. III B, Eq. (71); used in Sec. III C and Sec. IV]
    "The interior and exterior parts ξ± of the gauge field have the general form [27, 29] ... Only the functions α−(t) and β−(t) remain to be specified. Therefore, we need two further conditions."

    The central claim that Eqs. (79) and (91)–(92) fully fix the interior gauge presupposes that Eq. (71) is the most general admissible gauge vector. The paper imports this 'general form' by citing Refs. [27,29]; Ref. [29] is an overlapping-author paper whose circular-orbit gauge vector has exactly this (∂t,∂φ) form, and no derivation is supplied for eccentric equatorial orbits (U^r≠0), where ξ^r and ξ^θ would contribute to h_UU and to the integral (91). Since the two conditions constrain only α− and β−, any additional components would remain free; the 'full determination' therefore reduces to the unproved two-component ansatz rather than following from the two conditions.

full rationale

Apart from the ansatz in Eq. (71), the paper's derivation is self-contained: the two gauge conditions (79) and (91)–(92) are imposed consistency conditions, not fits to known values. The completion amplitudes δM and δJ are taken from Refs. [24,25], which do not involve the present authors, and the limiting-case recoveries (Schwarzschild and circular Kerr) are post-hoc checks of the resulting expressions, not inputs used to determine α− and β−. The applications in Refs. [35,36] are self-citations, but they validate the prescription against independent post-Newtonian results, so they are not load-bearing circularity. The residual circularity is the importation of the restricted gauge-vector form via a self-citation: the paper's 'fully determining' conclusion is only as strong as that two-component ansatz. This is genuine but partial circularity; score 4 rather than higher because the two conditions and their solution are independently derived content.

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

No free parameters fitted to data appear; the gauge functions are determined by the two imposed conditions. The central load-bearing assumptions are the restricted form of the gauge vector, the standard decomposition of the perturbation, the identification of completion amplitudes from Refs. [24,25], and the validity of the integrated Ricci identity. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The gauge vector has the restricted form ξ± = μ/M [α±(t)∂t + β±(t)∂φ]
    Adopted from Refs. [27,29]; no proof given that this is the most general form for eccentric equatorial orbits. If radial or angular components are needed, the two conditions would not fix the gauge completely. Entered in Sec. III.B before Eq. (71).
  • domain assumption The metric perturbation splits as h = h_rec + h_comp + h_gauge with Heaviside discontinuity across r=rp(t)
    Standard decomposition in GSF literature [23]; relies on distributional calculus.
  • domain assumption The completion amplitudes satisfy δM=μE, δJ=μL and vanish in the interior region
    Taken from Refs. [24,25] by overlapping authors; not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption The radiative reconstructed part carries zero Komar mass and angular momentum
    From Ref. [24], Eq. (59); used to justify computing I1 and I3 from nonradiative part only.
  • domain assumption Higher delta-function derivatives do not contribute to the integrals (92)
    Assumed in the integration of the Ricci identity; not demonstrated in detail.
  • domain assumption Exterior gauge part vanishes due to asymptotic flatness
    Imposed to set α+ = β+ = 0 in Sec. III.B.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gauge-fixing for the completion problem of reconstructed metric perturbations of a Kerr spacetime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UZNIQKTV

@misc{pith2026190803191,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gauge-fixing for the completion problem of reconstructed metric perturbations of a Kerr spacetime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UZNIQKTV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03191}
}
read the original abstract

We provide a prescription to solve the metric completion problem in gravitational self-force calculations on a Kerr spacetime by fixing the remaining gauge freedom. We discuss the explicit example of eccentric equatorial orbits, recovering all limiting cases already studied in the literature of eccentric orbits in Schwarzschild as well as circular orbits in both Schwarzschild and Kerr spacetimes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Metric reconstruction and the Hamiltonian for eccentric, precessing binaries in the small-mass-ratio limit

    gr-qc 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    First-order metric perturbations and the generalized redshift invariant are computed for eccentric, precessing orbits in Kerr spacetime using four metric reconstruction methods, with open-source code provided.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [29]

    Linear-in-mass-ratio con- tribution to spin precession and tidal invariants in Schwarzschild spacetime at very high post-Newtonian order,

    A. G. Shah and A. Pound, “Linear-in-mass-ratio con- tribution to spin precession and tidal invariants in Schwarzschild spacetime at very high post-Newtonian order,” Phys. Rev. D 91, no. 12, 124022 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.124022 [arXiv:1503.02414 [gr- qc]]

    arXiv 2015

  2. [1]

    Stability of a Schwarzschild singularity,

    T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, “Stability of a Schwarzschild singularity,” Phys. Rev. 108, 1063 (1957). doi:10.1103/PhysRev.108.1063

    doi:10.1103/physrev.108.1063 1957

  3. [2]

    Gravitational field of a particle falling in a Schwarzschild geometry analyzed in ten- sor harmonics,

    F. J. Zerilli, “Gravitational field of a particle falling in a Schwarzschild geometry analyzed in ten- sor harmonics,” Phys. Rev. D 2, 2141 (1970). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.2.2141

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.2.2141 1970

  4. [3]

    Grav- itational radiation from a particle falling radially into a Schwarzschild black hole,

    M. Davis, R. Ruffini, W. H. Press and R. H. Price, “Grav- itational radiation from a particle falling radially into a Schwarzschild black hole,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 1466 12 (1971). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.27.1466

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.27.1466 1971

  5. [4]

    Low multipole con- tributions to the gravitational selfforce,

    S. L. Detweiler and E. Poisson, “Low multipole con- tributions to the gravitational selfforce,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 084019 (2004) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.084019 [gr-qc/0312010]

    arXiv 2004

  6. [5]

    Self-force and radiation re- action in general relativity,

    L. Barack and A. Pound, “Self-force and radiation re- action in general relativity,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 82, no. 1, 016904 (2019) doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aae552 [arXiv:1805.10385 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [6]

    See the eLISA website at https://www.elisascience.org /

    work page

  8. [7]

    Two-body gravitational spin-orbit interaction at linear order in the mass ratio

    D. Bini and T. Damour, “Two-body gravitational spin-orbit interaction at linear order in the mass ratio,” Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 2, 024039 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.024039 [arXiv:1404.2747 [gr- qc]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

Show all 40 references
  1. [8]

    An- alytic self-force calculations in the post-Newtonian regime: eccentric orbits on a Schwarzschild back- ground,

    S. Hopper, C. Kavanagh and A. C. Ottewill, “An- alytic self-force calculations in the post-Newtonian regime: eccentric orbits on a Schwarzschild back- ground,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 4, 044010 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.044010 [arXiv:1512.01556 [gr- qc]]

    2016 arXiv

  2. [9]

    S. A. Teukolsky, “Perturbations of a rotating black hole

  3. [10]

    Perturbations of a Rotating Black Hole. II. Dynamical Stability of the Kerr Metric,

    W. H. Press and S. A. Teukolsky, “Perturbations of a Rotating Black Hole. II. Dynamical Stability of the Kerr Metric,” Astrophys. J. 185, 649 (1973). doi:10.1086/152445

    1973 doi

  4. [11]

    Fundamental equations for gravitational electromag- netic and neutrino field perturbations,” Astrophys. J. 185, 635 (1973). doi:10.1086/152444

    1973 doi

  5. [12]

    Electromagnetic fields in curved spaces - a constructive procedure,

    J. M. Cohen and L. S. Kegeles, “Electromagnetic fields in curved spaces - a constructive procedure,” Phys. Rev. D 10, 1070 (1974). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.10.1070

    1974 doi

  6. [13]

    Perturbations of a ro- tating black hole. III - Interaction of the hole with grav- itational and electromagnetic radiation,

    S. A. Teukolsky and W. H. Press, “Perturbations of a ro- tating black hole. III - Interaction of the hole with grav- itational and electromagnetic radiation,” Astrophys. J. 193, 443 (1974). doi:10.1086/153180

    1974 doi

  7. [14]

    Constructive Procedure For Perturbations Of Space-times,

    L. S. Kegeles and J. M. Cohen, “Constructive Procedure For Perturbations Of Space-times,” Phys. Rev. D 19, 1641 (1979). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.19.1641

    1979 doi

  8. [15]

    Vector Potential and Metric Pertur - bations of a Rotating Black Hole,

    P. L. Chrzanowski, “Vector Potential and Metric Pertur - bations of a Rotating Black Hole,” Phys. Rev. D 11, 2042 (1975). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.11.2042

    1975 doi

  9. [16]

    Gravita- tional self-force from radiation-gauge metric pertur- bations,

    A. Pound, C. Merlin and L. Barack, “Gravita- tional self-force from radiation-gauge metric pertur- bations,” Phys. Rev. D 89, no. 2, 024009 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.024009 [arXiv:1310.1513 [gr- qc]]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Reconstruction of inhomogeneous metric perturbations and electromagnetic four potential in Kerr space-time,

    A. Ori, “Reconstruction of inhomogeneous metric perturbations and electromagnetic four potential in Kerr space-time,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 124010 (2003) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.124010 [gr-qc/0207045]

    2003 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Conservative, gravitational self-force for a particle in circular orbit around a Schwarzschild black hole in a Radiation Gauge,

    A. G. Shah, T. S. Keidl, J. L. Friedman, D. H. Kim and L. R. Price, “Conservative, gravitational self-force for a particle in circular orbit around a Schwarzschild black hole in a Radiation Gauge,” Phys. Rev. D 83, 064018 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.064018 [arXiv:1009.4876 [gr-qc]]

    2011 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Gravitational Self-force in a Ra- diation Gauge,

    T. S. Keidl, A. G. Shah, J. L. Friedman, D. H. Kim and L. R. Price, “Gravitational Self-force in a Ra- diation Gauge,” Phys. Rev. D 82, no. 12, 124012 (2010) Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 10, 109902 (2014)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.124012, 10.1103/Phys- RevD.90.109902 [arXiv:1...

    2010 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Metric perturba- tions produced by eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole,

    M. van de Meent and A. G. Shah, “Metric perturba- tions produced by eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 6, 064025 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.064025 [arXiv:1506.04755 [gr- qc]]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [21]

    EMRI corrections to the angular velocity and red- shift factor of a mass in circular orbit about a Kerr black hole,

    A. G. Shah, J. L. Friedman and T. S. Keidl, “EMRI corrections to the angular velocity and red- shift factor of a mass in circular orbit about a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 084059 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.084059 [arXiv:1207.5595 [gr- qc]]

    2012 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Construction of Solutions of Gravitationa l, Electromagnetic, Or Other Perturbation Equations from Solutions of Decoupled Equations,

    R. M. Wald, “Construction of Solutions of Gravitationa l, Electromagnetic, Or Other Perturbation Equations from Solutions of Decoupled Equations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 41, 203 (1978). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.41.203

    1978 doi

  16. [23]

    On perturbations of a Kerr black hole,

    R. M. Wald, “On perturbations of a Kerr black hole,” J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 14, 1453 (1973). doi:10.1063/1.1666203

    1973 doi

  17. [24]

    Completion of metric reconstruction for a particle orbiting a Kerr black hole,

    C. Merlin, A. Ori, L. Barack, A. Pound and M. van de Meent, “Completion of metric reconstruction for a particle orbiting a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 94, no. 10, 104066 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.104066 [arXiv:1609.01227 [gr-qc]]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Time-domain metric recon- struction for self-force applications,

    L. Barack and P. Giudice, “Time-domain metric recon- struction for self-force applications,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 10, 104033 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.104033 [arXiv:1702.04204 [gr-qc]]

    2017 arXiv

  19. [26]

    A Consequence of the gravitational self-force for circular orbits of the Schwarzschild geometry,

    S. L. Detweiler, “A Consequence of the gravitational self-force for circular orbits of the Schwarzschild geometry,” Phys. Rev. D 77, 124026 (2008) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.124026 [arXiv:0804.3529 [gr-qc]]

    2008 arXiv

  20. [27]

    The mass and angular momentum of reconstructed metric perturbations,

    M. van De Meent, “The mass and angular momentum of reconstructed metric perturbations,” Class. Quant. Grav. 34, no. 12, 124003 (2017) doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa71c3 [arXiv:1702.00969 [gr-qc]]

    2017 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Self-force corrections to the periapsis advance around a spinning black hole,

    M. van de Meent, “Self-force corrections to the periapsis advance around a spinning black hole,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, no. 1, 011101 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.011101 [arXiv:1610.03497 [gr-qc]]

    2017 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Spin-dependent two-body interactions from gravitational self-force com- putations,

    D. Bini, T. Damour and A. Geralico, “Spin-dependent two-body interactions from gravitational self-force com- putations,” Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 12, 124058 (2015) Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 10, 109902 (2016)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.109902, 10.1103/Phys- RevD.92.124058 [arXiv...

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Gravitational self-force corrections to gyroscope precession along circular orbits in the Kerr spacetime,

    D. Bini, T. Damour, A. Geralico, C. Kavanagh and M. van de Meent, “Gravitational self-force corrections to gyroscope precession along circular orbits in the Kerr spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 10, 104062 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.104062 [arXiv:1809.02516 [gr- qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    High post- 13 Newtonian order gravitational self-force analytical re- sults for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole,

    D. Bini, T. Damour and A. Geralico, “High post- 13 Newtonian order gravitational self-force analytical re- sults for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 12, 124058 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.124058 [arXiv:1602.08282 [gr- qc]]

    2016 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Analytical high-order post-Newtonian expansions for extreme mass ratio binaries,

    C. Kavanagh, A. C. Ottewill and B. Wardell, “Analytical high-order post-Newtonian expansions for extreme mass ratio binaries,” Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 8, 084025 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.084025 [arXiv:1503.02334 [gr- qc]]

    2015 arXiv

  26. [34]

    The mathematical theory of black holes,

    S. Chandrasekhar, “The mathematical theory of black holes,” (Clarendon, Oxford, UK, 1985)

    1985

  27. [35]

    New gravitational self-force analytical results for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole: redshift invariant,

    D. Bini and A. Geralico, “New gravitational self-force analytical results for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole: redshift invariant,” Phys. Rev. D 100, no. 10, 104002 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.104002 [arXiv:1907.11080 [gr-qc]]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Analytical determination of the periastron advance in spinning binaries from self-force computations,

    D. Bini and A. Geralico, “Analytical determination of the periastron advance in spinning binaries from self-force computations,” Phys. Rev. D 100, no. 12, 121502 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.121502 [arXiv:1907.11083 [gr-qc]]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    New gravitational self- force analytical results for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole: gyroscope pre- cession,

    D. Bini and A. Geralico, “New gravitational self- force analytical results for eccentric equatorial orbits around a Kerr black hole: gyroscope pre- cession,” Phys. Rev. D 100, no. 10, 104003 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.104003 [arXiv:1907.11082 [gr-qc]]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    These integrals are constructed from the antisymmetric 2-form (see Eq

    corresponding to the mass-energy content and the angular-momentum content of the metric perturbation hαβ, respectively. These integrals are constructed from the antisymmetric 2-form (see Eq. (121) in Ref. [24]) Fµν [hαβ] = − 1 8π (ξλ¯hλ[µ;ν] +ξλ ;[µ¯hν]λ +ξ[µ¯hν]λ ;λ), (57) wh...

  31. [39]

    Transient res- onances in the inspirals of point particles into black holes,

    E. E. Flanagan and T. Hinderer, “Transient res- onances in the inspirals of point particles into black holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 071102 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.071102 [arXiv:1009.4923 [gr-qc]]

    2012 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Self-force via m-mode regularization and 2+1D evolution: III. Gravita- tional field on Schwarzschild spacetime,

    S. R. Dolan and L. Barack, “Self-force via m-mode regularization and 2+1D evolution: III. Gravita- tional field on Schwarzschild spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 87, 084066 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.084066 [arXiv:1211.4586 [gr-qc]]

    2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.