1970
DOI: 10.1007/bf01013134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Internal solution for stationary axially symmetric gravitational fields

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1978
1978
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the sake of clarity, it should be mentioned that the structure equations describing uniformly rotating configurations, as derived in general relativity by Hartle in [12], reduce identically to the equations shown in this work for  ¥ c . Correspondingly, the structure equations formulated by Sedrakyan and Chubaryan [45] in general relativity also reduce to their Newtonian counterparts in the corresponding limiting case [22]. The mathematical and physical equivalence of these two formalisms has been recently shown in [46] by comparing the exterior Hartle-Thorne [47] and the Sedrakyan Chubaryan [45] solutions.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Results In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For the sake of clarity, it should be mentioned that the structure equations describing uniformly rotating configurations, as derived in general relativity by Hartle in [12], reduce identically to the equations shown in this work for  ¥ c . Correspondingly, the structure equations formulated by Sedrakyan and Chubaryan [45] in general relativity also reduce to their Newtonian counterparts in the corresponding limiting case [22]. The mathematical and physical equivalence of these two formalisms has been recently shown in [46] by comparing the exterior Hartle-Thorne [47] and the Sedrakyan Chubaryan [45] solutions.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Results In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 92%
“…Correspondingly, the structure equations formulated by Sedrakyan and Chubaryan [45] in general relativity also reduce to their Newtonian counterparts in the corresponding limiting case [22]. The mathematical and physical equivalence of these two formalisms has been recently shown in [46] by comparing the exterior Hartle-Thorne [47] and the Sedrakyan Chubaryan [45] solutions. Thus, the difference in numbers of these two approaches in table 2 can be due to the numerical integrations, only.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Results In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 92%
“…21 A method to compute RWDs configurations accurate up to second order in the angular velocity of a star Ω was developed by two of the authors (see Ref. 22 for details), independently of the work of Hartle(1967. ) 12 In Arutyunyan et.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was shown that the discrepancies between the Hartle formalism and exact numerical computations appear close to the mass shedding limit. In addition, it has been demonstrated that the so-called Sedrakyan and Chubaryan formalism [9,10], usually applied to the study of rigidly rotating WDs and NSs, is identical with the Hartle formalism [35]. Therefore, one can safely employ the Hartle formalism at the mass shedding limit for rough estimates and qualitative analyses [36,37].…”
Section: Problem Setup and Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The physical properties of WDs have been intensively studied both in Newtonian gravity (NG) and general relativity (GR) [2, 3,[9][10][11][12][13][14]. It has been shown that the effects of GR are crucial to analyze the stability of WDs close to the Chandrasekhar mass limit 1.44M  and can be neglected for low mass WDs [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%