Cited by 96

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Causality Violation in Asymptotically Flat Space-Times

Tipler, Frank J.·1976·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

It is shown that a region containing closed timelike lines cannot evolve from regular initial data in a singularity-free asymptotically flat space-time. Furthermore, the causality assumption made in the black-hole uniqueness proofs is justified: It is demonstrated that no physically realistic nonsingular black hole can have a causality-violating exterior.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevlett.37.879

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. F. J. Tipler, 1974, Phys. Rev. D, 9, 2203, 10.1103/PhysRevD.9.2203 · DOI
  2. B. Carter, 1973, Black Holes, Les Houches Lectures, 1972
  3. D. C. Robinson, 1975, Phys. Rev. Lett., 34, 905, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.34.905 · DOI
  4. R. Penrose, 1972, Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity, 10.1137/1.9781611970609 · DOI
  5. S. W. Hawking, 1971, Phys. Rev. Lett., 26, 1344, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.26.1344 · DOI
  6. R. Penrose, 1969, The Growth Points of Physics, Proceedings of the Florence Inaugural Conference of the European Society

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 96

Metadata

Authors
Tipler, F. J.
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
1976-10-04
Volume
37
Issue
14
Pages
879-882
ISSN
0031-9007
Cited by
96
References
1
Language
en

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