The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Formalism for testing theories of gravity using lensing by compact objects: Static, spherically symmetric case
Open accessAbstract
We are developing a general, unified, and rigorous analytical framework for using gravitational lensing by compact objects to test different theories of gravity beyond the weak-deflection limit. In this paper we present the formalism for computing corrections to lensing observables for static, spherically symmetric gravity theories in which the corrections to the weak-deflection limit can be expanded as a Taylor series in one parameter, namely, the gravitational radius of the lens object. We take care to derive coordinate-independent expressions and compute quantities that are directly observable. We compute series expansions for the observables that are accurate to second order in the ratio $\ensuremath{\epsilon}={\ensuremath{\vartheta}}_{\ifmmode\bullet\else\textbullet\fi{}}/{\ensuremath{\vartheta}}_{E}$ of the angle subtended by the lens's gravitational radius to the weak-deflection Einstein radius, which scales with mass as $\ensuremath{\epsilon}\ensuremath{\propto}{M}_{\ifmmode\bullet\else\textbullet\fi{}}^{1/2}$. The positions, magnifications, and time delays of the individual images have corrections at both first and second order in $\ensuremath{\epsilon}$, as does the differential time delay between the two images. Interestingly, we find that the first-order corrections to the total magnification and centroid position vanish in all gravity theories that agree with general relativity in the weak-deflection limit, but they can remain nonzero in modified theories that disagree with general relativity in the weak-deflection limit. For the Reissner-Nordstr\"om metric and a related metric from heterotic string theory, our formalism reveals an intriguing connection between lensing observables and the condition for having a naked singularity, which could provide an observational method for testing the existence of such objects. We apply our formalism to the galactic black hole and predict that the corrections to the image positions are at the level of $10\text{ }\text{ }\ensuremath{\mu}\mathrm{arc}\text{ }\mathrm{s}$ (microarcseconds), while the correction to the time delay is a few hundredths of a second. These corrections would be measurable today if a pulsar were found to be lensed by the galactic black hole, and they should be readily detectable with planned missions like MAXIM.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wald, R. M. (1984) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226870373.001.0001 · Cited by 7,188
Cited by
Okyay, M., & Övgün, A. (2022) · Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/01/009 · Cited by 259
Metadata
- Authors
- Keeton, C. R., & Petters, A. O.
- Venue
- Physical Review D
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2005-11-04
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 10
- ISSN
- 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-7998
- 1550-2368
- OpenAlex
- W2028033275
- Cited by
- 243
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Formalism for testing theories of gravity using lensing by compact objects: Static, spherically symmetric case. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevd.72.104006
- The paper
- Keeton, C. R., & Petters, A. O. (2005). Formalism for testing theories of gravity using lensing by compact objects: Static, spherically symmetric case. Physical Review D. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.72.104006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.