BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Daniela Pérez

Daniela Pérez contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
astro-ph.COgr-qcastro-ph.HEastro-ph.GAphysics.hist-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
5topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Survival of black holes through a cosmological bounce

We analyze whether a black hole can exist and survive in a universe that goes through a cosmological bounce. To this end, we investigate a central inhomogeneity embedded in a bouncing cosmological background modeled by the comoving generalized McVittie metric. Contrary to other dynamical metrics available in the literature, this solution allows for the interaction of the central object with the cosmological fluid. We show that the horizons associated with this metric change with cosmic time because they are coupled to the cosmic evolution as the mass of the central object is always proportional to the scale factor: it decreases during contraction and increases during expansion phases. After a full analysis of the causal structure of this spacetime, we determine that a dynamical black hole persists during the contraction, bounce, and expansion of the universe. This result implies that there is a class of bouncing models that admits black holes at all cosmological epochs. If these models are correct approximation to the real universe, then black holes surviving a cosmic collapse could play some role in the subsequent expanding phase.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Black hole in asymmetric cosmological bounce

We determine the causal structure of the McVittie spacetime for a cosmological model with an asymmetric bounce. The analysis includes the computation of trapping horizons, regular, trapped, and anti-trapped regions, and the integration of the trajectories of radial null geodesics before, during, and after the bounce. We find a trapped region since the beginning of the contracting phase up to shortly before the bounce, thus showing the existence of a black hole. When the universe reaches a certain minimum scale in the contracting phase, the trapping horizons disappear and the central singularity becomes naked. These results suggest that neither a contracting nor an expanding universe can accommodate a black hole at all times.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Astrophysical Constraints on Strong Modified Gravity

We offer a discussion on the strong field regime predictions of two families of theories that deviate from General Relativity in different aspects: $f(R)$-gravity and Scalar-Tensor-Vector Gravity (STVG). We discuss astrophysical effects in models based upon both matter and vacuum solutions of such theories. In particular, we analize neutron star structure and the constraints on the parameters of the theories introduced by the latest observations. We also review black hole solutions and several astrophysical consequences of them, including accretion disks and jets. Finally, we report on the implications of the detection of various gravitational wave events for these theories.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Exact cosmological black hole solutions in Scalar Tensor Vector Gravity

We find an exact solution of Scalar-Tensor-Vector Gravity field equations that represents a black hole embedded in an expanding universe. This is the first solution of the kind found in the theory. We analyze the properties of the apparent horizons as well as the essential singularities of the metric, and compare it with the McVittie spacetime of General Relativity. Depending on the cosmological model adopted and the value of the free parameter $α$ of the theory, the solution describes a cosmological black hole, an inhomogeneity in an expanding universe, or a naked singularity. We use the latter result to set further constraints on the free parameters of the theory.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

New remarks on the Cosmological Argument

We present a formal analysis of the Cosmological Argument in its two main forms: that due to Aquinas, and the revised version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument more recently advocated by William Lane Craig. We formulate these two arguments in such a way that each conclusion follows in first-order logic from the corresponding assumptions. Our analysis shows that the conclusion which follows for Aquinas is considerably weaker than what his aims demand. With formalizations that are logically valid in hand, we reinterpret the natural language versions of the premises and conclusions in terms of concepts of causality consistent with (and used in) recent work in cosmology done by physicists. In brief: the Kalam argument commits the fallacy of equivocation in a way that seems beyond repair; two of the premises adopted by Aquinas seem dubious when the terms `cause' and `causality' are interpreted in the context of contemporary empirical science. Thus, while there are no problems with whether the conclusions follow logically from their assumptions, the Kalam argument is not viable, and the Aquinas argument does not imply a caused origination of the universe. The assumptions of the latter are at best less than obvious relative to recent work in the sciences. We conclude with mention of a new argument that makes some positive modifications to an alternative variation on Aquinas by Le Poidevin, which nonetheless seems rather weak.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access