AG-2025.12-562·gr-qc·cross-listed: hep-th
Buchdahl limits in theories with regular black holes
Authors
- Pablo Bueno
- Robie A. Hennigar
- Ángel J. Murcia
- Aitor Vicente-Cano
Abstract
We study generalizations of Buchdahl's compactness limits for perfect-fluid star solutions of $D$-dimensional Einstein gravity coupled to higher-curvature corrections. We focus on Quasi-topological theories involving infinite towers of terms for which the unique vacuum spherically symmetric solutions correspond to regular black holes. We solve analytically the problem of constant-density stars and find that the space of solutions is bounded by: configurations with divergent central-pressure, corresponding to the most compact stars; configurations which possess zero central-pressure; and configurations for which the sizes of the stars coincide with the inner-horizon radii of the would-be regular black holes. In the more general case of perfect-fluid stars for which the mean density decreases with increasing radius, we show that, for each density profile, maximum compactness is reached when the metric becomes singular at the center. Under certain additional conditions, we find a novel Buchdahl limit for the maximum compactness of stars, attained by a specific constant-density profile. We show, in particular, that stars in these theories may be more compact than in Einstein gravity. While the vacuum solutions of these theories are such that all curvature invariants take mass-independent maximum finite values, we argue that there exist ordinary matter stars with finite central pressures for which such bounds can be violated -- namely, arbitrarily high curvatures can be reached -- unless additional constraints, such as the dominant energy condition, are imposed on the fluid.
Submitted
22 December 20254 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2512.19796
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.