Cited by 130Black Holes and Theoretical PhysicsCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories

Linear stability of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet static spacetimes: Tensor perturbations

Open access
Dotti, Gustavo, Gleiser, Reinaldo J.·2005·Physical Review D

Abstract

We study the stability under linear perturbations of a class of static solutions of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity in $D=n+2$ dimensions with spatial slices of the form ${\ensuremath{\Sigma}}_{\ensuremath{\kappa}}^{n}\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{\mathbb{R}}^{+}$, ${\ensuremath{\Sigma}}_{\ensuremath{\kappa}}^{n}$ an $n$ manifold of constant curvature $\ensuremath{\kappa}$. Linear perturbations for this class of spacetimes can be generally classified into tensor, vector and scalar types. The analysis in this paper is restricted to tensor perturbations. We show that the evolution equations for tensor perturbations can be cast in Schr\"odinger form, and obtain the exact potential. We use $S$ deformations to analyze the Hamiltonian spectrum, and find an S-deformed potential that factors in a convenient way, allowing us to draw definite conclusions about stability in every case. It is found that there is a minimal mass for a $D=6$ black hole with a positive curvature horizon to be stable. For any $D$, there is also a critical mass above which black holes with negative curvature horizons are unstable.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.72.044018

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For a d = 6 small spherical black hole with Λ = 0, the tensors have V_eff < 0 near the horizon, giving the instability of [18,19]; this is a failure of hyperbolicity.

    “Similarly, for the d = 6 example the tensors have < V 0 eff near the horizon, which gives the instability of [18,19].But again, this is much worse than an instability, it is a failure of hyperbolicity of the theory.”

    From Causality and hyperbolicity of Lovelock theories (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

    The stability analysis (p. 12) says that for a six-dimensional spherical black hole with Λ = 0, low mass brings a tensor-mode instability. Section V (pp. 10–11) establishes instability when its S-deformed potential is negative somewhere, but does not specifically state that the undeformed effective potential is negative near the horizon. The failure-of-hyperbolicity characterization is the citing authors’ own conclusion, not a finding established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For static spherically or planar symmetric black hole solutions of Lovelock theories, there exist effective metrics G_S, G_V and G_T such that characteristic hypersurfaces are null hypersurfaces with respect to one of these metrics.

    “From this one can infer that there exist 'effective metrics' G ab S , G ab V and G ab T such that characteristic hypersurfaces are null hypersurfaces with respect to one of these metrics.”

    From Causality and hyperbolicity of Lovelock theories (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

    Sections II–III study tensor perturbations of static Einstein–Gauss–Bonnet spacetimes, and Section VI says vector results are preliminary and the scalar case remains under investigation. Searches for effective metrics, characteristic hypersurfaces, and null propagation found no passage establishing the claimed three metrics or their relation to characteristics. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dotti, G., & Gleiser, R. J.
Affiliations
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (AR)
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
2005-08-16
Volume
72
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-7998
  • 1550-2368
OpenAlex
W2097079770
Cited by
130
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Agencia Córdoba Ciencia
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
  • Universidad de Córdoba
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Keywords
Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, static spacetimes, linear stability, tensor perturbations, Hamiltonian spectrum, black hole stability, critical mass, higher-dimensional black holes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review