Paper detail

Sharp bounds on $2m/r$ of general spherically symmetric static objects

In 1959 Buchdahl \cite{Bu} obtained the inequality $2M/R\leq 8/9$ under the assumptions that the energy density is non-increasing outwards and that the pressure is isotropic. Here $M$ is the ADM mass and $R$ the area radius of the boundary of the static body. The assumptions used to derive the Buchdahl inequality are very restrictive and e.g. neither of them hold in a simple soap bubble. In this work we remove both of these assumptions and consider \textit{any} static solution of the spherically symmetric Einstein equations for which the energy density $ρ\geq 0,$ and the radial- and tangential pressures $p\geq 0$ and $p_T,$ satisfy $p+2p_T\leqΩρ, Ω>0,$ and we show that $$\sup_{r>0}\frac{2m(r)}{r}\leq \frac{(1+2Ω)^2-1}{(1+2Ω)^2},$$ where $m$ is the quasi-local mass, so that in particular $M=m(R).$ We also show that the inequality is sharp. Note that when $Ω=1$ the original bound by Buchdahl is recovered. The assumptions on the matter model are very general and in particular any model with $p\geq 0$ which satisfies the dominant energy condition satisfies the hypotheses with $Ω=3.$

preprint2007arXivOpen 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.