4.7 Article

Can we distinguish between black holes and wormholes by their Einstein-ring systems?

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 86, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.104062

关键词

-

资金

  1. Rikkyo University Special Fund for Research
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [21740190, 23654082]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23654082, 21740190] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For the past decade, gravitational lensing in the strong gravitational field has been studied eagerly. It is well known that, for the lensing by a black hole, an infinite number of Einstein rings are formed by the light rays which wind around the black hole nearly on the photon sphere, which are called relativistic Einstein rings. This is also the case for the lensing by a wormhole. In this paper, we study the Einstein ring and relativistic Einstein rings for the Schwarzschild black hole and the Ellis wormhole, the latter of which is an example of traversable wormholes of the Morris-Thorne class. Given the configuration of the gravitational lensing and the radii of the Einstein ring and relativistic Einstein rings, we can distinguish between a black hole and a wormhole in principle. We conclude that we can detect the relativistic Einstein rings by wormholes which have the radii of the throat a similar or equal to 0.5 pc at a Galactic center with the distance 10 Mpc and which have a similar or equal to 10 AU in our Galaxy using the most powerful modern instruments which have the resolution of 10(-2) arcsecond such as a 10-meter optical-infrared telescope. The black holes which make the Einstein rings of the same size as the ones by the wormholes are galactic supermassive black holes and the relativistic Einstein rings by the black holes are too small to measure with the current technology. We may test the hypotheses of astrophysical wormholes by using the Einstein ring and relativistic Einstein rings in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据