Spinning particle orbits around a black hole in an expanding background

I. Antoniou,1, ∗ D. Papadopoulos,2, † and L. Perivolaropoulos1, ‡ 1Department of Physics, University of Ioannina, GR-45110, Ioannina, Greece 2Department of Physics, University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki,54124, Greece (Dated: March 12, 2019) We investigate analytically and numerically the orbits of spinning particles around black holes in the post Newtonian limit and in the presence of cosmic expansion. We show that orbits that are circular in the absence of spin, get deformed when the orbiting particle has spin. We show that the origin of this deformation is twofold: a. the background expansion rate which induces an attractive (repulsive) interaction due to the cosmic background fluid when the expansion is decelerating (accelerating) and b. a spin-orbit interaction which can be attractive or repulsive depending on the relative orientation between spin and orbital angular momentum and on the expansion rate.

PACS numbers: 04.20.Cv, 97.60.Lf, 98.62.Dm

I. INTRODUCTION bound systems in the presence of phantom dark energy with equation of state parameter w < −1 Even though most astrophysical bodies have [2–4]. In the absence of expansion but in the spins and evolve in an expanding cosmological presence of spin for the test particles it has been background, their motion is described well by ig- shown that spin-orbit and spin-spin interactions noring the cosmic expansion and under the non- in a Kerr spacetime can lead to deformations of spinning test particle approximation for large dis- circular orbits for large spin values [14]. In view tances from a central massive body and for rela- of these facts, the following interesting questions tively low spin values [1]. These approximations emerge however become less accurate for large values of 1. Are there circular orbit deformations for the spin and/or when the mass of the cosmic fluid spinning test particles embedded in the post inside the particle orbit becomes comparable to Newtonian limit of McVittie background the mass of the central massive object. For such (Schwarzschild metric embedded in an ex- systems new types of interactions appear which panding background)? Such deformations are proportional to the time derivatives of the cos- could be anticipated due to the coupling mic scale factor and the spin of the orbiting par- of the particle spin with its orbital angu- ticle. For example, phantom dark energy models lar momentum. can lead to dissociation of all bound systems in the context of a Big-Rip future singularity [2–5]. 2. What is the nature of such deformation and Also, the spin-curvature interaction [6] can mod- how do the corresponding deformations de- ify the motion of the test particles in black hole pend on the orientation of the spin with re- spacetimes [7–11] due to spin-spin or spin-orbit spect to the angular momentum? couplings [12–14], or make the motion chaotic arXiv:1903.03835v1 [gr-qc] 9 Mar 2019 [15–17] thus modifying significantly the orbit of 3. How do these deformations depend on the the test body leading to the emission of charac- nature of the background expansion? teristic forms of gravitational waves [18–21]. Such interactions have been investigated previ- These questions are addressed in the present anal- ously for nonspinning test particles in an expand- ysis. ing background around a massive body (McVittie The structure of this paper is the following: In background [22]) and it was shown that acceler- the next section we briefly review the Mathisson- ating cosmic expansion can lead to dissociation of Papapetrou (MP) equations [23] and the com- mon supplementary conditions, we introduce the McVittie background corresponding to a black hole embedded in an expanding background and ∗ [email protected] its post Newtonian limit. In section III we discuss † [email protected] the conserved quantities of a spinning test parti- ‡ [email protected] cle in a given spherically symmetric metric in an 2 expanded background, we consider the post New- interaction between the curvature of the space- tonian limit of McVittie metric and construct the time and the spin of the particle. Due to the geodesic equations of a spinning particle using the coupling between curvature and spin, the four- Mathisson-Papapetrou equations. We also solve momentum is not always parallel to the υµ. This these equations numerically and identify the de- may be seen by multiplying Eq. (2.3) with υν . formation of orbits due to the presence of test Then, leads to particle spin. We identify the dependence of this µν deformation on the relative orientation between µ µ DS p = mυ − υν (2.4) spin and orbital angular momentum of the spin- dτ ning test particle. Finally, in section IV we sum- where m = −pµυ is the rest mass of the particle marize, discuss the implications of our results and µ with respect to υ . identify possible future extensions of our analysis. µ Since τ is the proper time, the condition µ υµυ = −1 applies. The measure of the four- II. THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION OF A momentum SPINNING PARTICLE. THE MP µ 2 EQUATIONS. pµp = −µ (2.5) provides the ‘total’ or ‘effective’ [8] rest mass µ Consider a massive spinning test particle, in (pµ = µuµ) with respect to pµ where uµ is the ‘dy- MP’s model [23, 24]. The equations of motion of namical four-velocity’. and is equal to m, only if a spinning particle originally derived from Papa- υµ coincides with the four-velocity uµ (uµ = υµ). petrou (1951) and later on reformulated by Dixon In the linear approximation of the spin pµ and [25, 26] can be extracted through the correspond- υµ are parallel. Generally, since uµ 6= υµ which ing Hamiltonian [27, 28] or through the extrem- DSµν means that dτ 6= 0 (see Eq. (2.4)) a spin- ization of the corresponding action [29], whose ning particle does not follow the geodesics of the variation is [30] spacetime (the r.h.s. of Eq. (2.2) is non zero, 1 since Sµν 6= 0). Therefore its motion is general- δL = −pµδυ − Sµν δΩ (2.1) µ 2 µν ized on a world line rather than geodesics. In the context of the MP equations the multi- µ dxµ where υ = dτ is the four-velocity of the test pole moments of the particle higher than a spin particle tangent to the orbit xµ = xµ(τ), τ is dipole are ignored [34]. This is the spin-dipole ap- the proper time across the worldline xµ(τ), pµ is proximation, because the particle is described as its four-momentum and Sµν are the components a mass monopole and spin dipole [35]. The equa- of the antisymmetric spin tensor. Also, Ωµν = tions in quadratic order of spin have also been IJ DeνJ IJ derived [36]. The MP equations can also get gen- η eµI dτ is an antisymmetric tensor, η = µ ν µ eI eJ gµν and eI is a tetrad attached to each point eralized in order to describe a test spinning par- of the worldline. ticle in Modified theories of Gravity [37]. The MP equations are of the form [30–33]: The MP equations (2.2) and (2.3) have been discussed by many authors and solutions have Dpµ dpµ 1 ≡ + Γµ υλpν = − Rµ Sλρυν (2.2) been presented. These solutions refer mainly dτ dτ λν 2 νλρ to Schwarzschild background spacetime [21, 38– 44], to Kerr spacetime [21, 45–52], to de Sitter DSµν dSµν spacetime [53–56] and to FRW spacetime [57] ≡ + Γµ υλSρν + Γν υλSµρ dτ dτ λρ λρ (2.3) for chargeless or charged test spinning particles = pµυν − pν υµ [58, 59]. The evolution of spinning particles in spacetimes with torsion has also been investi- The dynamical equations imply, spin-orbit cou- gated [60, 61]. pling, i.e., spin couples to the velocity of the Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3) are the equations of mo- orbiting spinning particle, thus deforming the tion for a spinning body which reduce to the fa- geodesic. Therefore the spin force deforms the miliar geodesic equations when the spin tensor geodesic. Sµν vanishes. However, they do not form a com- The spin tensor keeps track of the intrinsic an- plete set of equations and we need further equa- gular momentum associated with a spinning par- tions to close the system [62]. The problem of ticle. The term in the r.h.s. of Eq. (2.2) shows an the unclosed set of equations in (2.2) and (2.3) 3 can be physically understood by the requirement which defines the centre of mass of the particle in that the particle must have a finite size which the rest frame of the central gravitating body. does not make the choice of the reference world- The McVittie metric describes a expanding line uniquely defined 1. The additional conditions cosmological background with strong gravity, used are the spin supplementary conditions (SSC) such as a spacetime near a black hole or a neutron [63]. When we choose a SSC, we define the evolu- star. In a (t, r, θ, φ) coordinate system McVittie tion of the test body in a unique worldline xµ(τ) [73] found a solution given by the equation (see and we fix the center of mass (corresponds to the eq. (29) of ref. [73] with G = c = 1) centre where the mass dipole vanishes), which is m(t) m(t) usually called centroid. The centroid is a single ds2 = −(1 − )2(1 + )−2dt2 + reference point inside the body, with respect to 2r 2r m(t) which the spin is measured [64]. +(1 + )4a2(t)dr2 + r2dΩ2
(2.8) There are several SSC but two of them are more 2r commonly used where dΩ2 = dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2. t • The P condition (Mathisson-Pirani) [65] The component Gr of the Einstein tensor is

µν 8(2r + m) υµS = 0 (2.6) Gt = (˙am + am˙ ) (2.9) r a(2r − m)3 so that the spin four-vector is perpendicular dµ Imposing the ”no-accretion” condition Gt = 0 to the four-velocity and implies that dτ = 0 r [66]. It does not provides a unique choice of (there is no flux of relativistic mass across the a˙ m˙ representative worldline, as it is dependent equatorial surface [73]) we find that a = − m or m0 on the observer’s velocity and therewith on m = a(t) , where m0 is a constant of integration the initial conditions. It is often referred to and is identified with the mass of the central body as the proper centre of mass [63]. at the origin [74]. The curvature of space is here assumed to be asymptotically zero. • The T condition (Tulczyjew-Dixon) [67] At any instant of time t1 the observer’s coor- µν dinate for measuring distance from the origin is pµS = 0 (2.7) r˜ = ra(t1). If we write M = m(t1)a(t1), the so that the spin four-vector is perpendicu- metric (2.8) becomes lar to the four-momentum and implies that 1 − M M dm = 0 [62]. This condition is physically ds2 = −( 2˜r )2dt2 + (1 + )4dr˜2 +r ˜2dΩ2
dτ M 2˜r correct, since the trajectory of the extended 1 + 2˜r body is determined by the position of the (2.10) M center of mass of the body itself [68]. This In the weak field limit we have 2r  1, ie constraint is a consequence of the theory, i.e., the Tulczyjew constraint can derived 2GM 2GM from the Lagrangian theory [69] and re- ds2 = −(1− )dt2 +(1+ )(dr2 +r2dΩ2) r r stricts the spin tensor to generate rotations (2.11) only. which is the Newtonian limit of Schwarzschild’s spacetime. Analytic discussions and thorough reviews on Setting r = a(t)ρ and R = 2M the metric different choices about the SSCs may be found s (2.11) reads in refs [70–72]. Generally, different SSC are not equivalent since every SSC defines a different cen- troid for the system. The author of ref. [1] point R R ds2 = −(1 − s )dt2 + a2(1 + s )(dρ2 + ρ2dΩ2) out that the difference between the two condi- aρ aρ tions (2.6) and (2.7) is third order in the spin, so (2.12) results for physically realistic spin values, are un- For a static background (a = 1) the met- affected. In what follows we use the T condition, ric (2.12) becomes the Schwarzschild metric in isotropic coordinates (the spacelike slices are as close as possible to Euclidean) as expected [75], while for Rs = 0 becomes the FRW metric in 1 https://d-nb.info/1098374932/34 spherical coordinates. 4

The ‘areal’ radius [76] of the metric (2.12) is three independent spin components. With these equal to the square root of the modulus of the assumptions, the spin tensor becomes a vector coefficient of the angular part dΩ2 of the metric, and the formulation will be simpler. From the namely T condition (2.7) we derive the spin components S03 and S13 in terms of S01 as Rs 1/2 R(t, ρ) = (1 + ) aρ (2.13) 03 p1 01 aρ S = − S , p3 p and the corresponding modulus of angular mo- S13 = 0 S01 (3.3) mentum, which is a constant of motion for a spin- p3 less particle, defined as In order to complete the system of Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3) we have to add two more equations, cor- 2 ˙ L = R (t, ρ)φ (2.14) responding to conserved quantities in the context of the T condition. The first is the dynamical mass µ [77] with respect to the four-momentum pµ which defined through Eq. (2.5) and the sec- ond is the particle’s total spin s which is defined III. SPINNING PARTICLE IN MCVITTIE as the positive root of SPACETIME-POST NEWTONIAN LIMIT 1 s2 = S Sµν (3.4) III.1. The MP equations in an expanding 2 µν Universe The first derivative of s2 with respect to τ is s˙2 = µν We consider the case where the spinning par- 2pµS υν [62] which vanishes in the context of T ticle orbits on the equatorial plane, which means condition. From (3.4) we have that θ = π/2. Also, on the equatorial plane valid 01 2 2 θ θ µ µ2 µ 2 (1 − ξ)(S ) 2 υ ≡ υ = 0 and p = 0 since p = m υ . s = 2 3 2 µ (3.5) The metric (2.12) is independent of the φ coor- ρ (p ) dinate, therefore admits a φ-Killing vector e.g. where ξµ = (0, 0, 0, 1) which gives Rs 1 ξ ≡  1 (3.6) J = p ξµ − ξ Sµν (3.1) aρ z µ 2 µ,ν Using the Eqs. (2.5) and (3.5) we define the or parameter Ω2 as the ratio 1 µν 2 01 2 Jz = pφ − gφµ,ν S (3.2) s (S ) 2 Ω2 ≡ = (1 − ξ) (3.7) µ2 ρ2(p3)2 where Jz is the z component of the angular mo- mentum, which is a conserved quantity of the which is a constant of motion, since µ and s are motion of a spinning particle. This constant of conserved quantities. From Eq. (3.7) it is easy to motion exists independently of the choice of the calculate the spin component S01 supplementary condition and reflects the symme- S01 ρΩ try of the background spacetime. = √ (3.8) The spin tensor has six independent compo- p3 1 − ξ nents but since we demand equatorial planar mo- Thus, from Eqs. (3.3) and (3.8) the non zero tion, the particle must have angular momentum spin components in our consideration are only in z axis (Jz 6= 0). The conditions Jx = 0, J = 0 and pθ = 0 (necessary conditions for mo- 3 y 01 ρΩp rθ S = √ tion in the equatorial plane) require that S = 0 1 − ξ and Sθφ = 0. Also, the absence of acceleration p1 perpendicular to the equatorial plane implies that S03 = − S01, Stθ = 0 [57]. Thus, planar motion requires align- ρ2p3 ment of the spin with the orbital angular mo- (1 − 2ξ)p0 S13 = − S01 (3.9) mentum and the motion characterized only by a2ρ2p3 5

Using now the post Newtonian limit of McVit- the presence of the spin angular momen- tie metric (2.12), starting from the MP equation tum. What is actually conserved is the z (2.2) and setting the index µ = 1 it is straight- component of the total angular momentum forward to derive the radial geodesic equation for Jz which is expressed through Eq. (3.2) in the spinning particle. We replace the distance ρ terms of the angular and the spin angular as ρ = r/a and the corresponding derivatives with momenta. respect to t,ρ ˙ = dρ/dt andρ ¨ = d2ρ/dt2. Also, we ignore terms of order (R )2 (post Newtonian • The driving force term proportional to Ωs s ˙ limit) and the final result is and φ in the radial geodesic equation (3.12) has the form of a spin-orbit coupling and a¨ a¨ a˙ 2  changes sign when the spin angular mo- r¨ − r − rφ˙2 = −rΩφ˙ − + a a a2 mentum reverses its direction with respect (3.10) to the orbital angular momentum which is  2 2 ˙  Rs 1 a˙ r˙ 3Ωφ ˙ + − − φ˙2 − + − proportional to φ. This term is responsible 2 r2 a2 r2 r2 for the deformation of the circular orbits and induces the well known chaotic behav- Similarly, from the MP equation (2.2) and setting ior [78] of the spinning particle orbits in the the index µ = 3 = φ we obtain absence of background expansion.

2
d r φ˙ r˙ a˙ a¨ a˙ 2  In what follows we solve the geodesic equations =r ˙φR˙ +Ωr2 − − (3.11) dt s r a a a2 (3.12)-(3.13) for different forms of the expansion (static, accelerating, decelerating and constant) which would lead to orbital angular momentum of the cosmological background and various val- conservation in the absence of spin (Ω = 0). In- ues of the magnitude of the spin s and conse- deed, the first derivative of Eq. (2.14) with re- quently of the dimensionless parameter Ωs. We spect to time must be zero and gives the Eq. setr ˙(ti) = 0 (ti = 1 is the initial time of the sim- (3.11) for a spinless particle [76]. ˙ ulation) and φ(ti) so thatr ¨i = 0 corresponding Now, we introduce the rescalling through the to an initially circular orbit. We present analyt- t r Ω s variables t¯ ≡ ,r ¯ ≡ and Ωs ≡ = Rs Rs Rs µRs ically this issue in the Appendix. Also, we nor- and from now on we omit the bar. The radial malize the scale factor setting a(1) = 1 and we equation (3.10) leads to set the particle at initial distance ri = 6 from the black hole. a¨ a¨ a˙ 2 3  r¨ − r − rφ˙2 = −rΩ φ˙ − + + a s a a2 2r3 1 1 a˙ 2 r˙2  III.2. Numerical Solutions + − − φ˙2 − + 2 r2 a2 r2 (3.12) For a static universe (a(t) = 1) Eq. (3.12) re- In the same way, the azimuthal equation (3.11) duces to leads to

2
2 ˙ d r φ˙ r˙ a˙ a¨ a˙ 2  1 1 r˙ 3Ωsφ =r ˙φ˙ + Ω r2 − − (3.13) r¨ = rφ˙2 + (− − φ˙2 + − ) (3.14) dt s r a a a2 2 r2 r2 r2

Equations (3.12) and (3.13) are the main re- while the Eq. (3.13) becomes sults of the present analysis. They generalize d(r2φ˙) the geodesic equation of non-spinning particles in =r ˙φ˙ ⇒ r2φ¨ + (2r − 1)r ˙φ˙ = 0 (3.15) the post-Newtonian limit of McVittie metric and dt they reduce to those equations for Ω = 0. It is s The effect of the spin-orbit coupling force is straightforward to solve numerically the system demonstrated in Figs.1 and2 where we show (3.12)-(3.13) and we implement such solutions in the circular orbits disrupted due to the spin-orbit what follows. The following comments can be coupling. For Ω φ˙ > 0 (see Fig.1) the spin- made on equations (3.12)-(3.13): s orbit coupling force is attractive, since the term 3Ωsφ˙ • It is clear from Eq. (3.13) that the orbital − 2r2 in Eq. (3.12) is negative and the circu- angular momentum is not conserved due to lar orbits (for a spinless particle) are deformed 6

McVittie spacetime-Post Newtonian limit 6 McVittie spacetime-Post Newtonian limit 6

a(t)=1 4  4 ϕ i>0

Ωs,crit=0.6  2 2 ϕ >0 i Black hole s s 0 0 Ωs=0.7 y / R ri=6 y / R r =6 Black hole i -2 -2 Ωs=1

-4

-4 Ωs=0

-6 t=2000 a(t)=1

-6

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

x/Rs x/Rs

FIG. 1. Spinning particle orbits in a static universe. The circular orbits that would be present for a non-spinning particle get disrupted due to the spin-orbit coupling in the presence of spin. For Ωsφ˙ > 0 the spin-orbit coupling force is attractive and the circular orbits are deformed inward. The left panel (where Ωs = 0.6) corresponds to maximum (critical) value of Ωs, for which the particle remains bounded. The innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO) is 3Rs. When Ωs > 0.6, at some time the radius of the orbit becomes less than 3Rs and the particle is captured by the black hole (right panel). For non-spinning particle (Ωs = 0) the circular orbits shown in right panel remain undisrupted. inward. The orbit of the motion of the parti- motion of the spinning particle in all cases are cle remains bounded if the radius of the orbit is bounded between a minimum (Rs = 6) and a larger than 3Rs. This is the well known effect maximum radius. of the ’innermost stable circular orbit’ (ISCO) In the presence of a decelerating expansion [50, 79, 80]. It is defined as the smallest circu- with a(t) ∼ t2/3 the orbits (solutions of Eqs. lar orbit in which a test particle can stably orbit (3.12)-(3.13)) are shown in Fig.3 for clockwise a massive object [81]. Since rISCO = 3Rs for a and counterclockwise rotation and initial condi- spinless central body in Schwarzschild spacetime, tions that would lead to a circular orbit in the it is obvious that only black holes have innermost absence of spin and expansion. In this case the radius outside their surface. effects of the expansion combined with the effects This minimum allowed radius for bounded mo- of the spin lead to rapid dissociation of the system tion corresponds to a critical value of the di- or capture by the black hole. The result depends mensionless parameter Ωs = 0.6 (left panel). on the magnitude of the attractive and repulsive Generally, in the presence of spin the orbits are terms in Eq. (3.12). Some orbits of the spinning bounded between a minimum and a maximum ra- particles for this case are shown in Fig.3. dius (Rs = 6). As the spin increases (Ωs > 0.6), In left panel of Fig.3 the initial rotation is at some time the orbit’s radius becomes less than clockwise, since φ˙(1) < 0. In this case, the term ˙ 3Rs and the particle gets captured by the black 3Ωsφ − 2r2 in Eq. (3.12) is repulsive and even if the hole (right panel). For non-spinning particle cosmological background is decelerating, for large (Ωs = 0) the circular orbits shown in right panel enough values of spin, such as Ωs = 1 the parti- remain undisrupted. cle rapidly gets deflected to an unbounded or- ˙ For Ωsφ < 0 (see Fig.2) the spin-orbit cou- bit. However, for small values of spin, such as 3Ωsφ˙ pling force is repulsive, since the term − 2r2 in Ωs = 0.1 or Ωs = 0.5 the decelerating background Eq. (3.12) is positive and the circular orbits (for dominates and at some time the particle gets cap- s = 0) are deformed outward. The orbits of the tured by the black hole. 7

10 McVittie spacetime-Post Newtonian limit McVittie spacetime-Post Newtonian limit 30

20 5 Ωs=1 Ωs=0

10

Black hole Ω =5

s s s 0 ri=6 0 y / R y / R  Black hole ϕ i<0 -10

-5 -20 a(t)=1

- = Ω = 30 a(t) 1 s 5  t=10000 ϕ < -10 i 0 ri=6

-10 -5 0 5 10 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

x/Rs x/Rs

FIG. 2. Same as Fig.1 but the spinning particle orbits in the opposite direction. The circular orbits that would be present for a non-spinning particle get disrupted due to the spin-orbit coupling in the presence of spin. For Ωsφ˙ < 0 the spin-orbit coupling force is repulsive and the circular orbits are deformed outward. For non-spinning particle (Ωs = 0) the circular orbits shown in both panels remain undisrupted. Notice that the Ωs = 0 circular orbit, which corresponds to the absence of spin, is an inner bound for clockwise rotation. In any case the particle remains bound.

Similar results are shown in the right panel of the trajectories of the particle in Fig.4. We also Fig.3, where the initial rotation of the particle is show the corresponding orbit of a spinless parti- ˙ 3Ωsφ cle in a static universe, in order to observe the counterclockwise. In this case, the term − 2r2 in Eq. (3.12) which describes the spin-orbit interac- deviation of each orbit from the circular. tion is attractive. For small values of the dimen- Setting a mass value of a typical black hole as 31 sionless parameter Ωs, such as Ωs = 0.1 the spin- M = 10M = 2 × 10 Kg, we conclude that the 2 ning particle approaches the black hole and when dimensionless value ΛRs = 0.03 corresponds to 6 −2 −42 2 the radius of the orbit becomes less than 3Rs, Λ ' 3 × 10 sec or Λ ' 1.3 × 10 GeV much the particle gets captured by the strong gravity larger than the cosmological constant leading to of the central body. However, when the spin takes the cosmic acceleration Λ ' 10−82GeV 2. Due to larger values such as Ωs = 0.5 or Ωs = 1 the par- this normalization, orbit disturbances are much ticle gets deflected to an unbounded orbit, despite larger than the realistic form corresponding to a of the initially attractive effective force induced realistic cosmological setup. on the spinning particle. The expansion effects In left panel of Fig.4 the initial rotation is lead to dissociation of the initially bound system. clockwise, since φ˙(1) < 0. In this case, the term ˙ Now, we consider the effects of a de Sitter back- 3Ωsφ (− 2r2 ) in Eq. (3.12) is positive and induces ground expansion of the form repulsion. In this case the repulsive effects of a(t) = eHt (3.16) the accelerating cosmic expansion are amplified by the effects of the spin. q Λ¯ ¯ For initial counterclockwise rotation (right where H = 3 and Λ is the cosmological con- 3Ωsφ˙ stant in dimensionless form . We solve the system panel in Fig.4) the term − 2r2 in radial equa- of Eqs. (3.12) and (3.13) with the same initial tion is negative and induces attraction. How- conditions (circular orbit in the absence of spin ever, for spinless particle or small values of spin and expansion). We set the cosmological constant and consequently of the parameter Ωs, such as ¯ 2 −2 equal to Λ = ΛRs = 3 × 10 [82] and we present Ωs = 10, the accelerating cosmological back- 8

10 10 McVittie-Post Newtonian limit McVittie-Post Newtonian limit

Ωs=1 Ωs=1 Ωs=0.5 a(t)=t 2/3 5 5

 > Ω = Ωs=0.1 ϕ i 0 y 0.5 s y = 0 Black hole ri 6 0 ri=6 Ω = s 0.1  < ϕ i 0 Black hole

-5 -5

a(t)=1,Ω =0 2/3 s a(t)=1,Ωs=0 a(t)=t

-10 -5 0 5 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 x x

FIG. 3. The spinning particle orbits in the presence of decelerating universe expansion a(t) ∼ t2/3 for several values of the spin and initial clockwise (left panel with φ˙(1) < 0) and counterclockwise (right panel with

φ˙(1) > 0) rotation. For small values of Ωs the particle gets captured by the black hole, but as the parameter Ωs increases the particle rapidly gets deflected to an unbounded orbit. ground dominates and the particles get deflected structure distance r (m) mass M (Kg) ∆t (years) to unbounded orbit. On the contrary, when the solar system 5 × 1012 2 × 1030 ∼ 4 × 100 typical galaxy 9 × 1020 2 × 1041 ∼ 3 × 103 spin of the particle is large, such as Ωs = 100, the ˙ cluster of galaxies 3 × 1022 2 × 1045 ∼ 7 × 107 attractive term − 3Ωsφ in radial equation domi- 2r2 black hole 2 × 105 2 × 1031 ∼ 1 × 109 nates the expansion and the spinning particle gets captured by the black hole. TABLE I. In this table we present estimations for A crucial question of our analysis is which are some cosmological structures for the required time 1 GM the cosmological time intervals after which the interval ∆t ' 2 after which the cosmological H0 rc effects of the expansion would become apparent. expansion effects would become apparent on the tra- −1 The answer can be easily obtained on dimensional jectories. For the Hubble rate we have set H0 ' grounds by equating the dimensionless parame- 1.4 × 1010years. In the case of black hole we have ters relevant for gravitational attraction (M/r) consider the distance r = 6Rs, as in the present work. and background expansion H0∆t where H0 is the Hubble parametera/a ˙ at the present time and The MP equations have also been generalized ∆t is the required time interval for the expansion to the case of modified theories of gravity, in effects to be observable. By equating these two which the matter energy-momentum tensor is parameters we find that the required time inter- not conserved. In modified gravity theories the val after which the cosmological expansion effects Schwarzschild metric gets modified and so does would become apparent on the trajectories is the weak field limit, as we can see e.g. from eq. (32) of Ref. [83], which state to f(R) theories M ∆t ' (3.17) (G = 1) H0r where we have set G = 1. The time interval ∆t 0 2 GM 2M (1 + f (R0))Q R0 2 can be easily derived in S.I. as ∆t ' 2 and χ(r) = 1− + − r (3.18) H0rc 2 in TableI we give some estimates of the cosmo- r r 12 logical time intervals for a typical black hole, the Here, Q = rV (r) is the charge of a black hole, solar system, a typical galaxy and a typical clus- V (r) the potential and R0 the curvature of the ter of galaxies. The time intervals are in years, spacetime which we consider constant. An analy- 10 since we have consider that 1/H0 ' 1.4 × 10 sis along the line of the derivation of the McVittie years (the approximate age of the Universe). metric for General Relativity (as discussed in [5]) 9

10 McVittie-Post Newtonian limit McVittie-Post Newtonian limit

_ Λ t 10 Ωs=0 =ⅇ 3 a(t) Ωs=10 5 Λ = 0.03  Black hole 5 ϕ i>0 s s 0 ri=6 y / R y / R  Ωs=100 ϕ i<0 _ Λ Ω = 0 r =6 t s 100 i a(t)=ⅇ 3 -5 Black hole Λ = 0.03 a(t)=1,s=0 Ωs=10 -5

-10 Ωs=0 a(t)=1,Ωs=0

-5 0 5 10 15 -5 0 5 10 15 20

x/Rs x/Rs

q Λ¯ 3 t ¯ 2 FIG. 4. Same as Fig.3, but the scale factor is of the form a(t) = e (de Sitter universe) with Λ = ΛRs. Notice the strong repulsive effects on the trajectories of the spinning/spinless particle for initial clockwise 3Ωsφ˙ rotation (left panel) due to accelerating background expansion. The term − 2r2 in radial equation (3.12) induces repulsion (left panel). However, for initial counterclockwise rotation (right panel) and extremely large 3Ωsφ˙ spin, the particle captured by the black hole since the term − 2r2 in radial equation induces attraction and dominates. could generalize this metric to the case of f(R) spin. As expected for the spin values, for which theories and also lead to the derivation of its New- the radius of the motion of the particle becomes tonian limit (the generalization of Eq. (2.12)). less that 3Rs, the particle is captured by the black Alternatively one could directly include the scale hole. This result is in agreement with previous factor a(t) as a new factor along with the radial studies that have indicated the presence of such coordinate in Eq. (32) of [83] and then take the behavior of the orbits [31]. Newtonian limit showing that it is a good ap- Interesting extensions of our analysis include proximation of the dynamical field equations for the construction and solution of the MP equa- f(R) gravity. This task is beyond the scope of tions for the strong field regime of the McVittie the present analysis but it should be straightfor- metric, or the consideration of different SSC like ward to implement in a future extension of our the P condition. analysis.

APPENDIX IV. CONCLUSIONS In the present analysis we have focused on the We have constructed and solved numerically distortion of orbits that would be circular in the the MP equations in the post Newtonian limit absence of expansion and spin. In order to solve of McVittie background thus obtaining the or- the system of equations (3.12) and (3.13) we have bits of spinning particles close to a massive object assumed that initially the test particle has zero in an expanding cosmological background. We radial velocity (r ˙(ti = 1) = 0) and zero radial have identified the effects of a spin-orbit coupling acceleration (¨r(ti = 1) = 0). The initial value which can be repulsive or attractive depending of the derivative φ˙(1) can derived through the on the relative orientation between spin and or- geodesic equation (3.12). We set a(ti = 1) = 1 bital angular momentum. A static universe (no and initial position for the particle ri = 6 in units expansion) was shown to lead to disrupted spin- of Rs. Assuming a static Universe with a(t) = 1 ning particle orbits which are not closed and are we compute the initial angular momentum from confined between a maximum and a minimum ra- equation (3.12). We set all the time derivatives of dius. This range increases with the value of the the scale factor equal to zero and thus we arrive 10 at the following quadratic equation

2 ˙ 2 ˙ ri (2ri − 1)(φ(1)) − 3Ωsφ(1) − 1 = 0 (4.1)

Setting Ωs = 0, we obtain √ 11 φ˙(1) = ± ' ±5 × 10−2 (4.2) 66

[1] Michael D. Hartl, “Dynamics of spinning test [12] Lior M. Burko, “Orbital evolution of a parti- particles in Kerr space-time,” Phys. Rev. D67, cle around a black hole. 2. Comparison of con- 024005 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0210042 [gr-qc]. tributions of spin orbit coupling and the self- [2] Robert R. Caldwell, Marc Kamionkowski, and force,” Phys. Rev. D69, 044011 (2004), arXiv:gr- Nevin N. Weinberg, “Phantom energy and cos- qc/0308003 [gr-qc]. mic doomsday,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 071301 [13] Masaru Shibata, “Gravitational waves induced (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0302506 [astro-ph]. by a particle orbiting around a rotating black [3] S. Nesseris and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, hole: spin orbit interaction effect,” Phys. Rev. “The Fate of bound systems in phantom and D48, 663–666 (1993). quintessence cosmologies,” Phys. Rev. D70, [14] Wen-Bias Han and Shu-Cheng Yang, “Exotic or- 123529 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0410309 [astro- bits due to spin–spin coupling around Kerr black ph]. holes,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D27, 1750179 (2017), [4] Ioannis Antoniou and Leandros Perivolaropou- arXiv:1610.01534 [gr-qc]. los, “Geodesics of McVittie Spacetime with a [15] Shingo Suzuki and Kei-ichi Maeda, “Signature of Phantom Cosmological Background,” Phys. Rev. chaos in gravitational waves from a spinning par- D93, 123520 (2016), arXiv:1603.02569 [gr-qc]. ticle,” Phys. Rev. D61, 024005 (2000), arXiv:gr- [5] Brien C. Nolan, “Particle and photon orbits in qc/9910064 [gr-qc]. McVittie spacetimes,” Class. Quant. Grav. 31, [16] David Kubiznak and Marco Cariglia, “On Inte- 235008 (2014), arXiv:1408.0044 [gr-qc]. grability of spinning particle motion in higher- [6] Yuri N. Obukhov, Alexander J. Silenko, and dimensional black hole spacetimes,” Phys. Rev. Oleg V. Teryaev, “Spin in an arbitrary gravi- Lett. 108, 051104 (2012), arXiv:1110.0495 [hep- tational field,” Phys. Rev. D88, 084014 (2013), th]. arXiv:1308.4552 [gr-qc]. [17] J. K. Kao and H. T. Cho, “The Onset of [7] K. P. Tod, F. de Felice, and M. Calvani, “Spin- chaotic motion of a spinning particle around ning test particles in the field of a black hole,” the Schwarzchild black hole,” Phys. Lett. A336, Nuovo Cim. B34, 365 (1976). 159–166 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0406101 [gr-qc]. [8] O. Semerak, “Spinning test particles in a Kerr [18] Motoyuki Saijo, Kei-ichi Maeda, Masaru Shi- field. 1.” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 308, 863– bata, and Yashushi Mino, “Gravitational waves 875 (1999). from a spinning particle plunging into a Kerr [9] I. B. Khriplovich, “Spinning Relativistic Parti- black hole,” Phys. Rev. D58, 064005 (1998). cles in External Fields,” (2008), arXiv:0801.1881 [19] Takahiro Tanaka, Yasushi Mino, Misao Sasaki, [gr-qc]. and Masaru Shibata, “Gravitational waves from [10] Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, “Spinning parti- a spinning particle in circular orbits around a cles moving around black holes: integrability and rotating black hole,” Phys. Rev. D54, 3762–3777 chaos,” in Proceedings, 14th Marcel Grossmann (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9602038 [gr-qc]. Meeting on Recent Developments in Theoreti- [20] Yasushi Mino, Masaru Shibata, and Takahiro cal and Experimental General Relativity, Astro- Tanaka, “Gravitational waves induced by a spin- physics, and Relativistic Field Theories (MG14) ning particle falling into a rotating black hole,” (In 4 Volumes): Rome, Italy, July 12-18, 2015 , Phys. Rev. D53, 622–634 (1996), [Erratum: Vol. 2 (2017) pp. 1960–1965, arXiv:1606.09430 Phys. Rev.D59,047502(1999)]. [gr-qc]. [21] Enno Harms, Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, [11] L. Filipe O. Costa, Jos´eNat´ario, and Miguel Sebastiano Bernuzzi, and Alessandro Na- Zilhao, “Spacetime dynamics of spinning par- gar, “Spinning test body orbiting around a ticles: Exact electromagnetic analogies,” Phys. Schwarzschild black hole: Circular dynamics Rev. D93, 104006 (2016), arXiv:1207.0470 [gr- and gravitational-wave fluxes,” Phys. Rev. D94, qc]. 104010 (2016), arXiv:1609.00356 [gr-qc]. 11

[22] Nemanja Kaloper, Matthew Kleban, and 044005 (2013), arXiv:1210.3136 [gr-qc]. Damien Martin, “McVittie’s Legacy: Black [38] Roman Plyatsko and Oleksandr Stefanyshyn, Holes in an Expanding Universe,” Phys. Rev. “Mathisson Equations: Non-Oscillatory Solu- D81, 104044 (2010), arXiv:1003.4777 [hep-th]. tions in a Schwarzschild Field,” Acta Phys. [23] Myron Mathisson, “Neue mechanik materieller Polon. B39, 23 (2008), arXiv:0802.0652 [gr-qc]. systemes,” Acta Phys. Polon. 6, 163–2900 [39] Roman Plyatsko and Oleksandr Stefanyshyn, (1937). “On common solutions of Mathisson equa- [24] Achille Papapetrou, “Spinning test particles in tions under different conditions,” (2008), general relativity. 1.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. arXiv:0803.0121 [gr-qc]. A209, 248–258 (1951). [40] Roman Plyatsko, “Ultrarelativistic circular or- [25] W. G. Dixon, “A covariant multipole formalism bits of spinning particles in a Schwarzschild for extended test bodies in general relativity,” Il field,” Class. Quant. Grav. 22, 1545–1551 (2005), Nuovo Cimento (1955-1965) 34, 317–339 (1964). arXiv:gr-qc/0507023 [gr-qc]. [26] W. G. Dixon, “Dynamics of extended bodies in [41] Roman Plyatsko and Mykola Fenyk, “Antigrav- general relativity. I. Momentum and angular mo- ity: Spin-gravity coupling in action,” Phys. Rev. mentum,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A314, 499–527 D94, 044047 (2016), arXiv:1610.01545 [gr-qc]. (1970). [42] Shingo Suzuki and Kei-ichi Maeda, “Chaos in [27] Enrico Barausse, Etienne Racine, and Alessan- Schwarzschild space-time: The motion of a dra Buonanno, “Hamiltonian of a spinning spinning particle,” Phys. Rev. D55, 4848–4859 test-particle in curved spacetime,” Phys. (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9604020 [gr-qc]. Rev. D80, 104025 (2009), [Erratum: Phys. [43] R H Rietdijk and J W van Holten, “Spinning Rev.D85,069904(2012)], arXiv:0907.4745 [gr-qc]. particles in schwarzschild spacetime,” Classical [28] Daniela Kunst, Tom´aˇs Ledvinka, Georgios and Quantum Gravity 10, 575 (1993). Lukes-Gerakopoulos, and Jonathan Seyrich, [44] Donato Bini, Fernando de Felice, Andrea Ger- “Comparing Hamiltonians of a spinning test par- alico, and Robert T. Jantzen, “Spin preces- ticle for different tetrad fields,” Phys. Rev. D93, sion in the Schwarzschild spacetime: Circular or- 044004 (2016), arXiv:1506.01473 [gr-qc]. bits,” Class. Quant. Grav. 22, 2947–2970 (2005), [29] H. T. Cho, “PostNewtonian approximation for arXiv:gr-qc/0506017 [gr-qc]. spinning particles,” Class. Quant. Grav. 15, [45] Roman Plyatsko, Oleksandr Stefanyshyn, and 2465–2478 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9703071 [gr-qc]. Mykola Fenyk, “Mathisson-Papapetrou-Dixon [30] Rafael A. Porto, “Post-Newtonian corrections to equations in the Schwarzschild and Kerr back- the motion of spinning bodies in NRGR,” Phys. grounds,” Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 195025 Rev. D73, 104031 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511061 (2011), arXiv:1110.1967 [gr-qc]. [gr-qc]. [46] Roman Plyatsko and Mykola Fenyk, “Highly rel- [31] Theocharis A Apostolatos, “A spinning test ativistic circular orbits of spinning particle in body in the strong field of a schwarzschild black the Kerr field,” Phys. Rev. D87, 044019 (2013), hole,” Classical and Quantum Gravity 13, 799 arXiv:1303.4707 [gr-qc]. (1996). [47] Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, Matthaios Kat- [32] C. Chicone, B. Mashhoon, and B. Punsly, “Rel- sanikas, Panos A. Patsis, and Jonathan Seyrich, ativistic motion of spinning particles in a grav- “The dynamics of a spinning particle in a linear itational field,” Phys. Lett. A343, 1–7 (2005), in spin Hamiltonian approximation,” Phys. Rev. arXiv:gr-qc/0504146 [gr-qc]. D94, 024024 (2016), arXiv:1606.09171 [gr-qc]. [33] Jan Steinhoff, “Canonical formulation of spin in [48] D. Bini, A. Geralico, R. T. Jantzen, and general relativity,” Annalen Phys. 523, 296–353 F. de Felice, “Spin precession along circular or- (2011), arXiv:1106.4203 [gr-qc]. bits in the Kerr spacetime: the Frenet-Serret de- [34] W. G. Dixon, “The definition of multipole mo- scription,” Class. Quant. Grav. 23, 3287–3304 ments for extended bodies,” General Relativity (2006), arXiv:1408.4278 [gr-qc]. and Gravitation 4, 199–209 (1973). [49] Michael D. Hartl, “A Survey of spinning test par- [35] Bahram Mashhoon and Dinesh Singh, “Dynam- ticle orbits in Kerr space-time,” Phys. Rev. D67, ics of Extended Spinning Masses in a Gravita- 104023 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0302103 [gr-qc]. tional Field,” Phys. Rev. D74, 124006 (2006), [50] Shingo Suzuki and Kei-ichi Maeda, “Innermost arXiv:astro-ph/0608278 [astro-ph]. stable circular orbit of a spinning particle in Kerr [36] Justin Vines, Daniela Kunst, Jan Steinhoff, space-time,” Phys. Rev. D58, 023005 (1998), and Tanja Hinderer, “Canonical Hamiltonian arXiv:gr-qc/9712095 [gr-qc]. for an extended test body in curved spacetime: [51] Wenbiao Han, “Chaos and dynamics of spinning To quadratic order in spin,” Phys. Rev. D93, particles in Kerr spacetime,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 40, 103008 (2016), arXiv:1601.07529 [gr-qc]. 1831–1847 (2008), arXiv:1006.2229 [gr-qc]. [37] Mahmood Roshan, “Test particle motion in [52] Eva Hackmann, Claus L¨ammerzahl, Yuri N. modified gravity theories,” Phys. Rev. D87, Obukhov, Dirk Puetzfeld, and Isabell Schaf- 12

fer, “Motion of spinning test bodies in Kerr [66] Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, Jonathan spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D90, 064035 (2014), Seyrich, and Daniela Kunst, “Investigat- arXiv:1408.1773 [gr-qc]. ing spinning test particles: spin supplementary [53] Morteza Mohseni, “Stability of circular orbits conditions and the Hamiltonian formalism,” of spinning particles in Schwarzschild-like space- Phys. Rev. D90, 104019 (2014), arXiv:1409.4314 times,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 42, 2477–2490 (2010), [gr-qc]. arXiv:1005.3110 [gr-qc]. [67] W Tulczyjew, “Motion of multipole particles in [54] M. Mortazavimanesh and Morteza Mohseni, general relativity theory,” Acta Phys. Polon. 18, “Spinning particles in Schwarzschild-de Sitter 393 (1959). space-time,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 41, 2697–2706 [68] Donato Bini, Andrea Geralico, and Robert T. (2009), arXiv:0904.1263 [gr-qc]. Jantzen, “Spin-geodesic deviations in the [55] Yuri N. Obukhov and Dirk Puetzfeld, “Dynamics Schwarzschild spacetime,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 43, of test bodies with spin in de Sitter spacetime,” 959 (2011), arXiv:1408.4946 [gr-qc]. Phys. Rev. D83, 044024 (2011), arXiv:1010.1451 [69] Felipe A. Asenjo and Sergio A. Hojman, “Ex- [gr-qc]. act solutions for the motion of spinning massive [56] Zdenek Stuchlik and Petr Slany, “Equatorial cir- particles in conformally flat spacetimes,” Pro- cular orbits in the Kerr-de Sitter space-times,” ceedings, 19th Chilean Physics Symposium 2014: Phys. Rev. D69, 064001 (2004), arXiv:gr- Concepci´on, Chile, November 26-28, 2014,J. qc/0307049 [gr-qc]. Phys. Conf. Ser. 720, 012011 (2016). [57] Nicolas Zalaquett, Sergio A. Hojman, and Fe- [70] K Kyrian and O Semerak, “Spinning test parti- lipe A. Asenjo, “Spinning massive test parti- cles in a Kerr field,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. cles in cosmological and general static spherically 382, 1922 (2007). symmetric spacetimes,” Class. Quant. Grav. 31, [71] L. Filipe O. Costa and Jos´e Nat´ario, “Cen- 085011 (2014), arXiv:1308.4435 [gr-qc]. ter of mass, spin supplementary conditions, [58] Roberto Hojman and Sergio Hojman, “Spinning and the momentum of spinning particles,” Pro- Charged Test Particles in a Kerr-Newman Back- ceedings, 524th WE-Heraeus-Seminar: Equa- ground,” Phys. Rev. D15, 2724 (1977). tions of Motion in Relativistic Gravity (EOM [59] D. Bini, G. Gemelli, and R. Ruffini, “Spinning 2013): Bad Honnef, Germany, February 17-23, test particles in general relativity: Nongeodesic 2013, Fund. Theor. Phys. 179, 215–258 (2015), motion in the Reissner-Nordstrom space-time,” arXiv:1410.6443 [gr-qc]. Phys. Rev. D61, 064013 (2000). [72] L. Filipe O. Costa, Georgios Lukes- [60] Koichi Nomura, Takeshi Shirafuji, and Kenji Gerakopoulos, and Oldˇrich Semer´ak,“On spin- Hayashi, “Spinning test particles in space-time ning particles in general relativity: momentum- with torsion,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 86, 1239–1258 velocity relation for the Mathisson-Pirani spin (1991). condition,” (2017), arXiv:1712.07281 [gr-qc]. [61] Debaprasad Maity, Soumitra SenGupta, and [73] G. C. McVittie, “The mass-particle in an ex- Saurabh Sur, “Spinning test particle in Kalb- panding universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. Ramond background,” Eur. Phys. J. C42, 453– 93, 325–339 (1933). 460 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0409143 [hep-th]. [74] Matteo Carrera and Domenico Giulini, “On the [62] Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, “Time parame- generalization of McVittie’s model for an inho- terizations and spin supplementary conditions mogeneity in a cosmological spacetime,” Phys. of the Mathisson-Papapetrou-Dixon equa- Rev. D81, 043521 (2010), arXiv:0908.3101 [gr- tions,” Phys. Rev. D96, 104023 (2017), qc]. arXiv:1709.08942 [gr-qc]. [75] Bernard Schutz, A First Course in General Rel- [63] Filipe Costa, Carlos A. R. Herdeiro, Jose ativity, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Natario, and Miguel Zilhao, “Mathisson’s he- 2009). lical motions for a spinning particle: Are they [76] Matteo Carrera and Domenico Giulini, “On the unphysical?” Phys. Rev. D85, 024001 (2012), influence of the global cosmological expansion on arXiv:1109.1019 [gr-qc]. the local dynamics in the solar system,” (2006), [64] Georgios Lukes-Gerakopoulos, Enno Harms, Se- arXiv:gr-qc/0602098 [gr-qc]. bastiano Bernuzzi, and Alessandro Nagar, [77] Sergio A. Hojman and Felipe A. Asenjo, “Can “Spinning test-body orbiting around a Kerr gravitation accelerate neutrinos?” Class. Quant. black hole: circular dynamics and gravitational- Grav. 30, 025008 (2013), arXiv:1203.5008 wave fluxes,” Phys. Rev. D96, 064051 (2017), [physics.gen-ph]. arXiv:1707.07537 [gr-qc]. [78] Chris Verhaaren and Eric W. Hirschmann, [65] F. A. E. Pirani, “On the Physical significance “Chaotic orbits for spinning particles in of the Riemann tensor,” Acta Phys. Polon. 15, Schwarzschild spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D81, 389–405 (1956), [Gen. Rel. Grav.41,1215(2009)]. 124034 (2010), arXiv:0912.0031 [gr-qc]. 13

[79] Leor Barack and Norichika Sago, “Gravitational ska, and Aleksander Sadowski, “Leaving the self-force correction to the innermost stable cir- ISCO: the inner edge of a black-hole accretion cular orbit of a Schwarzschild black hole,” Phys. disk at various luminosities,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev. Lett. 102, 191101 (2009), arXiv:0902.0573 521, A15 (2010), arXiv:1003.3887 [astro-ph.HE]. [gr-qc]. [82] John T. Giblin, Jr., Donald Marolf, and Robert [80] Paul I. Jefremov, Oleg Yu. Tsupko, and Garvey, “Space-time embedding diagrams for Gennady S. Bisnovatyi-Kogan, “Innermost sta- spherically symmetric black holes,” Gen. Rel. ble circular orbits of spinning test particles in Grav. 36, 83–99 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0305102 [gr- Schwarzschild and Kerr space-times,” Phys. Rev. qc]. D91, 124030 (2015), arXiv:1503.07060 [gr-qc]. [83] A. de la Cruz-Dombriz, A. Dobado, and A. L. [81] Marek A. Abramowicz, Michal Jaroszynski, Maroto, “Black Holes in f(R) theories,” Phys. Shoji Kato, Jean-Pierre Lasota, Agata Rozan- Rev. D80, 124011 (2009), [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D83,029903(2011)], arXiv:0907.3872 [gr-qc].