Paper detail

Constraint on parameters of a rotating black hole in Einstein-bumblebee theory by quasi-periodic oscillations

We have studied quasi-periodic oscillations frequencies in a rotating black hole with Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter in Einstein-bumblebee gravity by relativistic precession model. We find that in the rotating case with non-zero spin parameter both of the periastron and nodal precession frequencies increase with the Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter, but the azimuthal frequency decreases. In the non-rotating black hole case, the nodal precession frequency disappears for arbitrary Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter. With the observation data of GRO J1655-40, XTE J1550-564, and GRS 1915+105, we find that the constraint on the Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter is more precise with data of GRO J1655-40 in which the best-fit value of the Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter is negative. This could lead to that the rotating black hole in Einstein-bumblebee gravity owns the higher Hawking temperature and the stronger Hawking radiation, but the lower possibility of exacting energy by Penrose process. However, in the range of $1 σ$, we also find that general relativity remains to be consistent with the observation data of GRO J1655-40, XTE J1550-564 and GRS 1915+105.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.