Paper detail

Comment on "The Mass-Radius relation for Neutron Stars in $f(R)$ gravity" by S. Capozziello, M. De Laurentis, R. Farinelli and S. Odintsov

In the present comment we discuss the qualitative and the quantitative differences between the neutron stars models in $f(R)$ gravity presented in the recent paper \cite{Capozziello2015} (Capozziello et al. (2015)) and in our paper \cite{Yazadjiev2014} (Yazadjiev et al. (2014)). The authors of \cite{Capozziello2015} claim that these differences come from the fact that they are using the physical Jordan frame while we are working in the Einstein frame. The results in \cite{Yazadjiev2014} are very well tested by two numerical codes using different formulations of the field equations that give us the confidence that they are correct. Thus we decided to perform an additional test. Namely, we derive the relevant set of field equations in the Jordan frame and solve them numerically in order to disprove the claim in \cite{Capozziello2015} that the difference comes from the use of different frame. The obtained results are in perfect agreement with our previous work \cite{Yazadjiev2014} and therefore the numerical results in \cite{Capozziello2015} seem to be incorrect. At the end we point out several possible sources of error in \cite{Capozziello2015} that can lead to the observed large deviations.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.