SciPost Submission Page
Gravitational Multipoles in General Stationary Spacetimes
by Daniel R. Mayerson
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Daniel Mayerson |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.05687v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2022-12-19 14:21 |
| Submitted by: | Mayerson, Daniel |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Theoretical |
Abstract
The Geroch-Hansen and Thorne (ACMC) formalisms give rigorous and equivalent definitions for gravitational multipoles in stationary vacuum spacetimes. However, despite their ubiquitous use in gravitational physics, it has not been shown that these formalisms generalize to non-vacuum stationary solutions, except in a few special cases. This short letter fills this gap and shows how the Geroch-Hansen formalism can be generalized to arbitrary non-vacuum stationary spacetimes, for metrics that are sufficiently smooth at infinity and under a mild topological condition on the spacetime (which is automatically satisfied for black holes). The proof of equivalence between the Geroch-Hansen and Thorne formalisms, hitherto only established for stationary vacuum spacetimes, is similarly generalized to arbitrary stationary spacetimes.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Strengths
1- Well written
2- Interesting Idea
Weaknesses
1 - Uniqueness is not clear
2 - No example is given
Report
There are a few queries, after which I will be happy to reconsider for publication.
Requested changes
Please see the attached file.
Report
This is a nice and well written paper, including some improvements of the literature on gravitational multipole moments, extending the Geroch-Hansen definition to stationary non-vacuum spacetimes, and its equivalence with Thorne's definition. I do recommend its publication in SciPost. However, I have several questions and comments, addressing which hopefully helps improving the paper before its publication.
Anonymous on 2023-01-22 [id 3258]
There was an error in the equation at the end of the referee report. This invalidates the last comment of the referee report and therefor it can be discarded.
The attached file is an updated report.
Attachment:
SciPost_Mayerson.pdf