Wormhole solutions in f ( Q, T ) gravity with a radial dependent B parameter

Moreshwar Tayde ,1, ∗ Joao R. L. Santos ,2, † Julia N. Araujo ,2, ‡ and P. K. Sahoo 1, §

1 Departmentof Mathematics, Birla Institute of Technology and Science-Pilani,

Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad-500078, India.
2 UFCG - Universidade Federal de Campina Grande - Unidade Acadêmica de Fı́sica, 58429-900 Campina Grande, PB, Brazil.

(Dated: December 16, 2022)

A possible astrophysical object to be found in General Relativity is the wormhole. This special solu-
tion describes a topological bridge connecting points in two distinguished universes or two different
points in the same universe. Despite it was never observed so far, is desired to find traversable worm-
holes, i.e. wormholes which have a throat at which there is no horizon. However, the traversable
wormhole constraints yield solutions that violate all the energy conditions in General Relativity. In
the last few years, several models to describe gravity beyond ΛCDM have been proposed. Then, it
arXiv:2212.07943v1 [gr-qc] 14 Dec 2022

is relevant to look for wormhole solutions for these new theories. In this study, we are going to un-
veil new wormhole solutions for the so-called f ( Q, T ) gravity. This theory of gravity is based on the
non-metricity scalar Q, which is responsible for the gravitational interaction together with the energy-
momentum trace T. We use the embedding procedure to find both the energy and the equilibrium
conditions for the existence of wormholes. Then, the nontrivial contributions coming from f ( Q, T )
gravity are embedded into the effective equations for density and pressures. We also considered the
presence of exotic strange matter in the wormhole throat. Such a matter obeys the notorious MIT bag
Model. We are going to present new scenarios confirming the viability of traversable wormholes in
f ( Q, T ) gravity with the strange matter, satisfying SEC and WEC energy conditions.

I. INTRODUCTION

The present high-level experiments on astrophysics and cosmology are pushing us toward a new era of discoveries
about our Universe. Collaborations such as LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory) [1], Virgo
[2], Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) [3, 4], International Gamma-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory (INTEGRAL) [5],
Advanced Telescope for High-Energy Astrophysics (ATHENA) [6], Imaging x-ray Polarimetry mission (IXPE) [7],
Swift [8], CHIME [9] have been testing gravity and astrophysical objects as we never saw before. Moreover, new
surveys such as LISA [10], BINGO [11] and SKA [12] have the potential to impose really strong boundaries on
gravity theories, restricting the huge amount of theoretical proposals which have been appearing in the literature so
far.
An intriguing and exotic type of solution of Einstein’s equations for General Relativity is the wormhole [13]. The
wormhole can be though as a topological bridge connecting points in two distinguished universes or two different
points in the same universe. Despite been a theoretical solution, there are several studies on the viability of finding
wormholes. An interesting route to find observable wormholes was proposed by Bueno et al. [14], there the authors
use gravitational waves measurements to study echoes of the gravitational wave signal at the horizon scale of black
holes. These gravitational waves would be connected to the postmerger ringdown phase in binary coalescences.
Moreover, Paul et al. [15], worked on distinctive features of the ahasccretion disk images to distinguish between a
wormhole geometry and a black hole, unveiling another interesting path for observation. Also, gravitational lensing
by a wormhole and light deflection has been widely investigated in [16–18].
Another desired features relative to wormholes is the search for traversable solutions, which means, wormholes
which are big enough, in such a way that a person could traverse them and survive the tidal forces. This class of
wormholes was introduced in the seminal paper of Morris and Thorne [19] and is still a hot subject, as we can see
in the beautiful work of Maldacena and Milekhin [20]. There the authors presented a new dark sector based on the

∗ moreshwartayde@gmail.com
† joaorafael@df.ufcg.edu.br
‡ julia.neves@estudante.ufcg.edu.br
§ pksahoo@hyderabad.bits-pilani.ac.in
 2

Randall-Sundrum model [21] for a U (1) gauge field which interacts with Standard Model particles only through
gravity, and where traversable wormholes could exist.
The main problem with traversable wormholes is their violation of all energy conditions in General Relativity.
Consequently, there is a need for searching for traversable wormhole solutions in different theories of gravity that
could obey energy conditions. Another interesting issue is the matter inside the wormhole throats. If Null and
Dominant energy conditions are violated, we have the presence of exotic matter in this region. In this work, we are
going to connect this exotic matter with the strange matter distribution of the famous MIT Bag Model. This model,
originally presented by [22], was motivated to understand the biding of strange quark matter. Later such a model
was applied in the context of astrophysical objects as pointed out by Witten [23]. There, it is highlighted that if
one considers a star made of quark matter and ignores the contributions due to their masses, the relation between
pressure and density is p = 31 (ρ − 4B), where the vacuum pressure B on the Bag wall is responsible to stabilize the
confinement of the quarks.
Among several proposals to describe gravity beyond General Relativity, we highlight the f ( Q) gravity, introduced
by Jimenez et al. [24]. In such a theory, the non-metricity scalar Q is responsible for the gravitational interaction.
The f ( Q) gravity has been tested by several observational data in the last few years, as we can see in the work
of Lazkoz et al. [25]. There the authors constrained f ( Q) gravity using data from the expansion rate, Type Ia
Supernovae, Quasars, Gamma-Ray Bursts, Baryon Acoustic Oscillations data, and Cosmic Microwave Background.
Moreover, the viability of f ( Q) cosmological models with respect to energy conditions, was verified by Mandal et
al. [26]. In such a work, the authors introduced the so-called embedding procedure, which enables one to include
non-trivial contributions from the non-metricity function into the energy conditions. In a recent study, people have
successfully used f ( Q) gravity in the Casimir wormholes [27] as well as the GUP-corrected Casimir wormhole [28].
The f ( Q) gravity was extended by Xu et al. [29] to the so-called f ( Q, T ) gravity, where the T stands for the trace of
the energy-momentum tensor. Such a trace is responsible to add extra contributions from the quantum domain to
classical gravity. Recently Arora et al. unveiled the viability of cosmological models for f ( Q, T ) gravity with respect
to energy conditions [30].
In this investigation, we apply the embedding procedure to derive traversable wormhole solutions in f ( Q, T )
gravity with a radial dependent Bag parameter. The embedding procedure enables us to insert the nontrivial contri-
butions coming from f ( Q, T ) gravity into the effective equations for density and pressures. This methodology allows
us to use the Raychaudhuri equations to derive the constraints over the f ( Q, T ) families of traversable wormholes.
In our studies, we analyze the features of the weak, the null, the dominant, and the strong energy conditions for
wormholes in the presence of an anisotropic fluid.
Along with our discussions, we carefully studied one family of f ( Q, T ) gravity, whose wormhole solutions were
   λ
derived using two different shape functions, a r0 γ 1 − rr0 + r0 and r0 rr0 ones. We are going to present scenarios
with the possibility of traversable wormholes, satisfying at least two sets of energy conditions in the presence of
exotic matter. We also derived the variation of the bag parameter with respect to the radial coordinate for the
wormhole solutions. Moreover, we proved the stability of these wormholes through the equilibrium conditions
coming from the generalized Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov equation.
The ideas presented in this work are summarized in the following nutshell. In sec. II, we presented the generalities
about the f ( Q, T ) gravity. In III we reviewed subjects on the derivation of the equation of motion for the MIT bag
model. Then, in sec. IV we analyzed the energy conditions for the wormhole solutions in f ( Q, T ) gravity, yielding
traversable wormholes which obey at least two sets of energy conditions. In V we presented the equilibrium condi-
tions for these families of wormhole solutions. Our final remarks and perspectives for further works are described
in sec.VI.

II. GENERALITIES IN f ( Q, T ) GRAVITY

We start the generalities on f ( Q, T ) gravity by considering the following action

1
Z Z
f ( Q, T ) − g d4 x + − g d4 x ,
p p
S= Lm (1)
16π
 3

where f ( Q, T ) is a function of non-metricity Q and trace of the energy momentum tensor T, g is the determinant of
the metric gµν , and Lm is the matter Lagrangian density. Such an action was introduced by Xu et al. in [29] where
the reader can find more details on the generalities about the f ( Q, T ) gravity. The non-metricity tensor is explicitly
written as [24]

Qλµν = 5λ gµν . (2)

There the authors introduced the so-called f ( Q) gravity and present a detailed description of the generalities pre-
sented in this section. Another relevant object of this theory is the non-metricity conjugate or superpotential, whose
form is
1h i
Pα µν = − Qα µν + 2Q(µ α ν) + Qα gµν − Q̃α gµν − δ(αµ Qν) , (3)
4
where
µ
Qα = Qα µ, Q̃α = Qµ αµ . (4)

are the traces of the non-metricity tensor. From the previous definition one can derive the non-metricity scalar by
taking the following contraction [24]

Q = − Qαµν Pαµν (5)

 
β β
= − gµν L αµ Lανβ − L αβ Lαµν , (6)

β
where the disformation L µν is defined as

β 1 β β
L µν = Q µν − Q(µ ν)
. (7)
2
Now, by varying the action with respect to the metric tensor gµν we yield to the equations of motion for f ( Q, T )
gravity, whose form is

−2 p  1    
√ 5α − g f Q Pα µν − gµν f + f T Tµν + Θµν − f Q Pµαβ Qν αβ
− 2 Qαβ µ Pαβν = 8πTµν , (8)
−g 2
∂f ∂f
here f Q = ∂Q and f T = ∂T . Moreover,

δTαβ
Θµν = gαβ , (9)
δgµν

and the energy-momentum tensor is given by

√

2 δ − g Lm
Tµν = −√ . (10)
−g δgµν

III. EQUATION OF STATE FOR THE MIT BAG MODEL

Several works have been connecting phenomenological astrophysical effects to the presence of strange quark mat-
ter, as was beautifully described in the work of Witten [23]. There, it is highlighted that if one considers a star made
of quark matter and ignores the contributions due to their masses, the relation between pressure and density is such
that, p = 13 (ρ − 4B), which is called MIT bag model, where the vacuum pressure B on the Bag wall is responsible
to stabilize the confinement of the quarks. The de-confinement phase transition depends on the temperature and
the baryon number density of the system at high densities. This equation of state has been broadly applied in the
literature, as we can see in [31–39]. In order to justify the form of the equation of state for MIT bag model, let us
carefully revise the discussions presented by [40].
 4

As it is known, the energy density and pressure of a system of particles can be determined from a general ensemble
theory, and the physical features of such a system of particles may be derived from the following partition function

Z= ∑ e−ζ (ENi ,e −∑i Ni µi ) , (11)

Ni ,e

here ζ = k 1T , Ni stands for the particle number, and µi is the chemical potential. We can realize that in general, the
B
microscopic energy ENi ,e is a function of the particle number Ni , the masses of the particles, volume of the system
V, and other quantum numbers e. Therefore, we may write ENi ,e = f ( Ni , mi , V, e). The pressure of the system is
derived from the following relation
!
1 ∂ENi ,e
e−ζ (ENi ,e −∑i Ni µi )
Z N∑,e
p0 =
∂V
i
 
1 1 ∂ −ζ (EN ,e −∑i Ni µi )
Z N∑,e ζ ∂V
= e i

1 ∂ ln Z ∂
= = − (VΞ) , (12)
ζ ∂V ∂V
where Ξ = − ζV 1
ln Z , represents the thermodynamical potential which depend on chemical potential µi , the mass
of the particle mi , and the temperature T. Moreover, for a total number of particles N, the baryon number density is
nb = 3VN
. If the particle masses do not depend on the baryon number density, then the pressure reduces to p0 = −Ξ,
besides, if particle masses depend on the density or the volume, we find that

∂Ξ
p0 = − Ξ + n b . (13)
∂nb
Furthermore, the statistical average of the energy density is such that
1
Ē =
Z ∑ ENi ,e e−ζ (ENi ,e −∑i Ni µi )
Ni ,e
!
1 ∂
= ∑ − + ∑ Ni µi e−ζ (ENi ,e −∑i Ni µi )
Z Ni ,e
∂ζ i
∂
=− ln Z + ∑ N̄i µi , (14)
∂ζ i

where the particle number Ni has the form

1
N̄i =
Z ∑ Ni e−ζ (ENi ,e −∑i Ni µi )
Ni ,e
!
1 1 ∂ −ζ (EN ,e −∑i Ni µi )
=
Z ∑ ζ ∂µi e i
Ni ,e T,V,m j
! !
1 ∂ ∂Ξ
= ln Z = −V . (15)
ζ ∂µi ∂µi
T,V,m j T,m j

We can also observe that the energy of the system is evaluated as

Ē ∂(ζΞ)
E0 = = + ∑ ni µi
V ∂ζ i
∂Ξ
= Ξ+ζ + ∑ ni µi
∂ζ i
∂Ξ
E0 = Ξ + ∑ ni µi − T , (16)
i
∂T
 5

and also that number density of particles is such that

!
N̄ ∂Ξ
ni = i = − . (17)
V ∂µi
T,m j

In the case of the MIT bag model, the microscopic energy of the strange matter system is
Bag
EN ,e = ENi ,e + BV , (18)
i

with the correspondent partition function

Z Bag = ∑ e−ζ (ENi ,e +BV −∑i Ni µi )

Ni ,e

= Z e−ζBV . (19)
In this case, the number density of particles has the form
!
Bag N̄ ∂
ni = i =− (Ξ + B) , (20)
V ∂µi
T,m j ,ENi ,e ,B

where the bag pressure and energy are

1 ∂
p Bag = (ln Z Bag )
ζ ∂V
1 ∂
= (ln Z − ζBV )
ζ ∂V
∂
= −(Ξ + B) − V (Ξ + B) (21)
∂V
∂
E Bag = ( Ξ + B ) + ∑ ni µi − T ( Ξ + B ) . (22)
i
∂T

If we take the limit where the mass of the particle does not depend on the baryon density, then Eqs. (20)-(22) yield to
!
Bag ∂Ξ
ni = − (23)
∂µi
∂B
p Bag = −(Ξ + B) + nb V , (24)
∂nb
and

E Bag = (Ξ + B) + ∑ ni µi . (25)
i

From the previous results, we can realize that the second term of Eq. Eq. (24), corresponds to a density-dependent B
parameter. However, for a constant B, the additional terms presented in Eqs. (23)-(25) disappear. So, by combining
these previous equations with (13) and (16), we find that

p Bag = p0 − B ; E Bag = ( E0 + B) . (26)

As its known, for a relativistic fluid p0 = E0 /3. Consequently, by defining that E Bag = ρ, we may write p Bag as
1
p Bag =


ρ−4B , (27)
3
proving the equation of state for the MIT bag model. In our next investigations, we are going to find wormhole
families which obey the set of energy conditions in f ( Q, T ) gravity, whose density and radial pressure obey the
equation of state for the MIT bag model. We also intend to map the features of a bag parameter which depends on
the radial coordinate.
 6

IV. WORMHOLES IN f ( Q, T ) GRAVITY

In order to approach the generalities on the wormhole solutions in f ( Q, T ) gravity, let us consider the spherically
symmetric and static wormhole metric in Schwarzschild coordinates (t, r, θ, Φ) [13, 41], whose specific form is
! −1
2 2φ(r ) 2 b (r )
ds = e dt − 1 − dr2 − r2 dθ 2 − r2 sin2 θ dΦ2 , (28)
r

where φ(r ) and b(r ) denote the redshift function and the shape function, respectively. Also, both obey the following
constraints [13, 41]:
b (r )
(1) For r > r0 , i.e., out of throat, 1 − r > 0, and at the wormhole’s throat i.e., r = r0 , b(r ) must satisfy the
condition b(r0 ) = r0 .
(2) The shape function b(r ) has to fulfill the flaring-out requirement at the throat i.e., b0 (r0 ) < 1.
b (r )
(3) For asymptotic flatness condition, the limit r → 0 as r → ∞ is required.
(4) Redshift function φ(r ) should be finite everywhere.
In the present study, we assume the matter content of wormhole solutions is described by an anisotropic energy-
momentum tensor which is given by [13, 41]



Tµν = ρ + pt uµ uν − pt δµν + pr − pt vµ vν , (29)

where, ρ denotes the energy density, uµ and vµ are the four-velocity vector and unitary space-like vectors, respec-
tively. Moreover, pr and pt are the radial and tangential pressures and both are functions of radial coordinate r. The
anisotropic energy-momentum tensor was introduced by Letelier [42] as a path to investigate a two-fluid model in
plasma physics. Moreover, it has been applied in several distinct scenarios for modeling magnetized neutron stars
[43]. Also, both four velocities satisfy the conditions uµ uν = −vµ vν = 1, and from Eq. (29), one can see that the trace
of the energy-momentum tensor is such that T = ρ − pr − 2pt .

In this investigation, we follow the procedures adopted by Moraes et al. [44] in finding static wormhole solutions
p +2 p
for f ( R, T ). There the authors choose Lm = − P, where P = r 3 t standing for the total pressure. Such Lagrangian
changes Eq. (9) to

Θµν = − gµν P − 2 Tµν . (30)

Besides, the non-metricity scalar Q for the metric (28) is explicit written as [45]
" 0 #
b rb − b 0
Q=− 2 + 2φ . (31)
r r (r − b )

Now, by inserting the Eqs. (28), (29) and (31) into the equation of motion (8), we find
   
!
0 0
2(r − b )  (r − b)  br f QQ Q rφ + 1 2r − b fr 3
 + f T ( P + ρ)  b0
ρ − + b f Q − + = , (32)
(2r − b) f Q 8πr3 r−b r−b 2(r − b )2 2(r − b ) 8π 8πr2


   
   
0
rb −b 0
 b r−b + 2rφ + 2 2br f QQ Q0  f r 3 (r − b ) φ 0


2b  (r − b )  0 f T P − pr 
p + f − 4rφ + + −
 
r Q
 
f r3  16πr3  r−b r−b  8πbr2 8π
  


"  #
b φ0

1 b
= 2 1− − 3 , (33)
8π r r r
 7
  
!
1 (r − b )  4(2b − r )φ0  2 2 f r2
 pt +
 fQ − 4r φ0 − 4rφ00 + − 4r f QQ Q0 φ0 
32πr2

fQ r
+ rφ0 r−b r−b
r −b
!

(r − b ) (rb0 − b)φ0 φ0 f T P − pt
 
2 r
+ φ00 + φ0 − + fQ + rφ0 − 
8πr 2r (r − b) r r−b 8π
" #
(rb0 − b)φ0 rb0 − b φ0

1 b 00 02
= 1− φ +φ − − 2 + , (34)
8π r 2r (r − b) 2r (r − b) r

which are the non-zero components of the field equations for f ( Q, T ) gravity [45]. In order to properly determine
the constraints over the pressures and density for our wormhole solutions, let us consider the Morris-Throne field
equations for traversable wormholes, whose forms for GR are

b0
= ρ̃, (35)
8πr2
"  #
b φ0

1 b
2 1− − 3 = p˜r , (36)
8π r r r

" #
(rb0 − b)φ0 rb0 − b φ0

1 b 00 02
1− φ +φ − − 2 + = p̃t . (37)
8π r 2r (r − b) 2r (r − b) r

where ρ̃, p˜r and p̃t are corresponding energy density, radial pressure and tangential pressure, respectively. So, by
comparing Eqs. (32)-(34) with the Eqs. (35)-(37), we get
   
!
0 0 3
2(r − b )  2r − b
 
1 b  br f QQ Q rφ + 1 fr  + f T ( P + ρ) 
ρ̃ = ρ − 2
1− + b fQ − 2
+  , (38)
(2r − b) f Q 8πr r r−b r−b 2(r − b ) 2(r − b ) 8π

   
   
0
b rbr−−bb + 2rφ0 + 2 2br f QQ Q0  0


3
 + f r (r − b ) φ − f T P − pr 
 
2b  1 b  0

p˜r = 3  pr + 1 −  fQ  − 4rφ + ,

fr  16πr2 r  r−b r−b  8πbr2 8π
 


(39)
  
!
4(2b − r )φ0 2 f r2
 
1 1 b  2
p̃t =   pt +
 1−  fQ − 4r φ0 − 4rφ00 + − 4r f QQ Q0 φ0 
fQ r
+ rφ0 32πr r r−b r−b
r −b
!

(rb0 − b)φ0 φ0 f T P − pt
   
1 b 02 r
+ 1− φ00 + φ − + fQ + rφ0 − . (40)
8π r 2r (r − b) r r−b 8π

The last equations unveiled that the non-trivial contributions from f ( Q, T ) gravity were embedded into ρ̃, p˜r and p̃t ,
which we are going to consider as the effective density, radial and tangential pressures. This embedding procedure
was introduced by Sanjay et al. [26] in determining energy conditions to f ( Q) gravity. It was also applied by Hassan
et al. [46] to constraint energy conditions for traversable wormholes in f ( Q, T ) gravity.
Then, from Eqs. (32)-(34), one can find the following field equations for f ( Q, T ) gravity [45]:

! 
(2r − b) rb0 − b b 2rφ0 + 2 2br f QQ Q0


(r − b )  f r3 2r3 f T ( P + ρ) 
8πρ = fQ + + + − , (41)
2r3 (r − b )2 r−b r−b r−b (r − b )
 8
   
!
rb0 Q0 2r3 f


(r − b )   b −b 2br f QQ f r3 T P − pr 
8π pr = −  fQ + 2rφ0 + 2 − 4rφ0  + + − , (42)
2r3 r−b r−b r−b r−b (r − b )

   

 
rb0 −b 2r
+ 2rφ0 4(2b − r )φ0 4r2 f T P − pt 


(r − b )  r −b
 2 2 f r2
8π pt = −  fQ  + − 4r φ0 − 4rφ00  − 4r f QQ Q0 φ0 + − .

4r 2   r (r − b ) r−b r−b (r − b ) 

(43)

In order to avoid the event horizon, one can consider the redshift function φ(r ) = constant. So, the effective
density and pressures are given by
 ! 
  br f QQ Q0 bf b(2r −b) f Q f r3
1− br r −b + r−Qb − + 2(r − b )
2(r − b )2
 f T ( P+ρ) 
2(r − b ) 
 8πr2
− 8π


2ρ(r − b)
ρ̃ = − , (44)
(2r − b) f Q (2r − b) f Q

  
rb0 −b +2
 
  b fQ
r −b 2br f Q0
1− br + rQQ
 
r −b −b
  
 f ( P − pr )
 
2b  T 8π −

16πr2

 
 
2bpr
p˜r = − , (45)
f r3 f r3

 !
f T ( P− pt ) f r 1− br
(r − b ) 8π − 16π (r −b)
(r − b ) p t
p̃t = − . (46)
r fQ r fQ
Let us dedicate a few lines to standard energy conditions derived using the Raychaudhuri equations. The Ray-
chaudhuri equations enable us to describe the action of congruence and attractiveness of the gravity for timelike,
spacelike, or lightlike curves. By following the prescriptions adopted by Arora et al. [30], the Raychaudhuri equa-
tions impose the following constraints over wormhole’s density and pressures:
• Weak energy conditions (WEC) if ρ̃ ≥ 0, ρ̃ + p̃ j ≥ 0, ∀ j.
• Null energy condition (NEC) if ρ̃ + p̃ j ≥ 0, ∀ j.
• Dominant energy conditions (DEC) if ρ̃ ≥ 0, ρ̃ ± p̃ j ≥ 0, ∀ j.
• Strong energy conditions (SEC) if ρ̃ + p̃ j ≥ 0, ρ̃ + ∑ j p̃ j ≥ 0, ∀ j.
where j = r, t.
So, taking the effective density and pressures into the account from eqs. (44)-(46), we get


b(b − 2r ) f Q2 b(3b − 2r ) − brb0 − f r4 (b − r )2 2b f QQ Q0 + r2 −2 f T ( P + ρ) + f + 16π pr



2(r − b ) ρ + pr
ρ̃ + p˜r = +
(2r − b) f Q 8π f r6 (b − 2r )(b − r ) f Q
 !
 
0 2 2


br (b − r ) f Q 2(b − 2r ) b f QQ Q + r f T pr − P + 8π pr − bfr
+ , (47)
8π f r6 (b − 2r )(b − r ) f Q



2b2 f Q + r (r − b) 2r f T −bpt + bP + 2rpt + 2ρr − b 4 f QQ Q0 + f r + 16πrpt



2(r − b ) ρ + p t
ρ̃ + p̃t = − , (48)
(2r − b) f Q 16πr3 (b − 2r ) f Q
 9


b(b − 2r ) f Q2 b(3b − 2r ) − brb0 + f r4 (b − r )2 2b f QQ Q0 + r2 −2 f T ( P + ρ) + f − 16π pr



2(r − b ) ρ − pr
ρ̃ − p˜r = −
(2r − b) f Q 8π f r6 (b − 2r )(b − r ) f Q
 !
 
0 2 2


br (b − r ) f Q 2(b − 2r ) b f QQ Q + r f T pr − P + 8π pr + bfr
− , (49)
8π f r6 (b − 2r )(b − r ) f Q

   
2b2 f 0


Q + r (r − b ) 2 r f T ( b − 2r ) pt − bP + 4Pr + 2ρr − 2b f QQ Q + 8πbrpt + f r ( b − 4r )


2(r − b ) ρ − p t
ρ̃ − p̃t = − ,
(2r − b) f Q 16πr3 (b − 2r ) f Q
(50)
 
b2 f Q (−rb0 +3b−2r ) r4 (b−r ) 2r f T (−(b−2r ) pt +bP− Pr +ρr )−2b f QQ Q0 + f r (r −b)−16πr (bpt +rpr )
2(r − b) pr + 2pt + ρ


f ( b −r )
+ (b−2r ) f Q
ρ̃ + p˜r + 2 p̃t = +
(2r − b) f Q 8πr6
   

2 b f QQ Q0 +r2 f T ( pr − P)+8π pr
br2 
br  −

f b−2r 

+ . (51)
8πr6
Therefore, the energy conditions for wormhole at f ( Q, T ) gravity 
from previous equations are 
 
0
QQ Q + b f Q − b(2r −b) f Q + f r3 
  br f
1− br 
 r −b r −b 2(r − b )2 2(r − b ) 
 f T ( P+ρ) 
2(r − b )  − 
 8πr2 8π 
 
(2r −b) f Q
• WEC : ρ̃ ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ≥0 with r −b >0, (2r −b) f Q
≤ 0,
 !
 
br (b−r ) f Q 2(b−2r ) b f QQ Q0 +r2 f T ( pr − P)+8π pr −b f r2
(2r −b) f Q
• NEC : ρ̃ + p˜r ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ + pr ≥ 0 with r −b > 0, 8π f r6 (b−2r )(b−r ) f Q
 
2 b (3b −2r )− brb0 − f r4 ( b −r )2 2b f 0 2
b(b−2r ) f Q ( ) QQ Q +r ( −2 f T ( P + ρ )+ f +16π pr )
+ 8π f r6 (b−2r )(b−r ) f Q
≥0 and
 
(2r −b) f Q 2b2 f Q +r (r −b) 2r f T (−bpt +bP+2rpt +2ρr )−b(4 f QQ Q0 + f r +16πrpt )
ρ̃ + p̃t ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ + pt ≥ 0 with r −b > 0, 16πr3 (b−2r ) f Q
≤ 0,
 !
 
br (b−r ) f Q 2(b−2r ) b f QQ Q0 +r2 f T ( pr − P)+8π pr +b f r2
(2r −b) f Q
• DEC : ρ̃ − p˜r ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ − pr ≥ 0 with r −b > 0, 8π f r6 (b−2r )(b−r ) f Q
 
2 b (3b −2r )− brb0 + f r4 ( b −r )2 2b f 0 2
b(b−2r ) f Q ( ) QQ Q +r ( −2 f T ( P + ρ )+ f −16π pr )
+ 8π f r6 (b−2r )(b−r ) f Q
≤0 and

(2r −b) f Q
ρ̃ − p̃t ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ − pt ≥ 0 with r −b >0,
   
2 0
2b f Q +r (r −b) 2 r f T ((b−2r ) pt −bP+4Pr +2ρr )−2b f QQ Q +8πbrpt + f r (b−4r )
16πr3 (b−2r ) f Q
≤ 0,
(2r −b) f Q
• SEC : ρ̃ + p˜r + 2 p̃t ≥ 0 ⇒ ρ + pr + 2pt ≥ 0 with r −b >0,
  !
2 b f QQ Q0 +r2 ( f T ( pr − P)+8π pr )
br2 b2 f ( −rb0 +3b−2r )+ r4 (b−r ) 2r f T (−(b−2r ) pt +bP− Pr +ρr )−2b f QQ Q0 + f r (r −b)−16πr (bpt +rpr )
( )
br f − b−2r Q
f ( b −r ) (b−2r ) f Q
8πr6
+ 8πr6
≥ 0.

As its known, all the energy conditions previously presented are not obeyed in standard GR for traversable worm-
hole solutions. Especially the NEC violation indicates the presence of exotic matter at the throat of the wormhole,
moreover, the energy density also needs to be positive for a realistic matter source of the wormhole solutions.
In order to test the viability of traversable wormhole solutions which also obey the MIT bag EoS, let us work with
 10

the following f ( Q, T ) function [29]

f ( Q, T ) = α Q + β T. (52)

where α and β are free parameters.

Using the above linear functional form of f ( Q, T ) and assuming the redshift function φ(r ) = constant in the field
equations (41)-(43), we obtain

α(12π − β)b0
ρ= , (53)
3(4π − β)( β + 8π )r2

α 2βrb0 − 3βb + 12πb

pr = − , (54)
3(4π − β)( β + 8π )r3

α ( β + 12π )rb0 + 3b( β − 4π )

pt = − . (55)
6(4π − β)( β + 8π )r3

1. Wormhole solutions with different shape functions

In this subsection we consider a constant redshift function and that the radio pressure obeys a generalized version
of the equation of state for the MIT bag model, whose form is

pr = ω (ρ − 4B) , (56)

where ω is EoS parameter and B is the bag parameter. We can observe that this equation recovers the standard MIT
bag model if ω = 1/3. Consequently, by taking equations (53) and (54) into eq. (56), we obtain

α − βrωb0 + 2βrb0 + 12πrωb0 − 3βb + 12πb

B= , (57)
12(4π − β)( β + 8π )r3 ω

as a bag parameter whose form depends on the shape function b(r ). From the previous equation, we realize that the
bag parameter indicates different energy domains for stabilizing the strange quark matter in different regions of the
wormhole.

Shape Function-1 : As a first example, let us consider a shape function introduced by Harko et al. [47] on the
study of electromagnetic signatures of the accretion disks of wormholes, whose form is
 
r0
b (r ) = r0 γ 1 − + r0 (58)
r

b0 (r ) < 1 , the throat condition b(r ) − r < 0 , and the asymp-

where γ < 1 in order to satisfy
 flaring out condition

b (r )
totically flatness condition r → 0 ; r → ∞ . From Eqs. (57) and (58) we determine the following bag parameter

r0 α(12π (r0 γ(ω − 1) + (γ + 1)r ) − β(r0 γ(ω − 5) + 3(γ + 1)r ))

B= , (59)
12(4π − β)( β + 8π )r4 ω

which is depicted in details in Fig 1. There we can observe that B approaches to zero inside of the wormhole throat
(r = r0 ), it also goes to constant values for big values of r. Moreover, as β decreases, we have smaller maximum
values for the bag parameter, resulting in smaller binding energy for the matter. This behavior of B(r ) was observed
by Deb et al. [40] for f ( R, T ) gravity with a hybrid exponential shape function. It is relevant to say that ω = 0.455
and ω = 0.333 here chosen, were used by Harko and Cheng [48] in their investigation on equations of state for
strange stars and ω = 0.28 is connected with a constraint over the mass of strange quarks as pointed by Deb et al.
[40].
 11

0.008

β=38
0.006
β=40

β=42

B (r )
0.004

0.002

0.000
0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 1. The behavior of Bag parameter B for (a) β = 38 with ω = 0.28, (b) β = 40 with ω = 0.333 and (c) β = 42 with ω = 0.455.
Also, we consider α = 1, γ = 0.5, r0 = 1.

Now, by considering the Eqs. (52) and (58), we obtain the following set of energy conditions
• NEC : ρ + pr = − r0 α(− 2r0 γ+γr +r )
( β+8π )r4
r α ( γ +1)
and ρ + pt = 2(0β+8π )r3 ,
r0 α(4r0 βγ−3β(γ+1)r +12π (γ+1)r ) r0 α(−4r0 βγ−12π (−4r0 γ+γr +r )+3β(γ+1)r )
• DEC : ρ − pr = 3(4π − β)( β+8π )r4
and ρ − pt = 6(4π − β)( β+8π )r4
,
4r2 αβγ
• SEC : ρ + pr + 2pt = − 3(4π − β0)( β+8π )r4 ,
whose features are presented in Figs. 2 - 5. There we can see that the energy density is positive over the entire
variation of r, satisfying WEC. We also verify that NEC is violated by radial pressure and satisfied by tangential
pressure, and SEC is satisfied. Moreover, DEC is violated inside of the wormholes throats for both radial and tan-
gential pressures. The violation of DEC in this region is consistent with the presence of strange matter inside of the
wormholes throats, and they are compatible with the features presented on wormholes in f ( R, T ) gravity, as we can
see in [49]. It is relevant to point that these constraints over the energy conditions are also observed for ρ̃, p̃r , and
p̃t . The violations of NEC and DEC are compatible with the presence of exotic matter inside the wormholes throats,
which may be formed by strange quarks. The fact that both WEC and SEC are satisfied indicates a scenario of stable
traversable families of wormholes.

Energy density

0.0015
β=38
β=40
β=42
0.0010
ρ

0.0005

0.0000
0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 2. The figure shows the behavior of ρ with respect to r for different valus of β. We consider α = 1, γ = 0.5, r0 = 1.
 12

NEC for radial pressure NEC for tangential pressure

0.006 NEC for radial pressure

NEC for tangential pressure
-0.0070
0.08 0.014
-0.0072
0.004 -0.0074 0.013

ρ + pr
-0.0076

ρ + pt
-0.0078 0.012
0.002 -0.0080
0.06 0.011
-0.0082
0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04 0.010
0.000
ρ + pr r 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04

ρ + pt
0.04 r
-0.002

β=38
-0.004 β=38

0.02 β=40
β=40
-0.006
β=42
β=42
-0.008
0.00

0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
r r

FIG. 3. Profile shows the behavior of NEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, γ = 0.5, r0 = 1.

DEC for radial pressure DEC for tangential pressure

0.00
β=38
β=38
β=40
0.006 β=40
-0.01
β=42
β=42

-0.02 DEC for tangential pressure

ρ - pr

ρ - pt
-0.009
0.001
DEC for radial pressure -0.010
0.0086 -0.011

ρ - pt
0.0084 -0.03
-0.012
ρ - pr

0.0082
0.0080 -0.013
-0.004 0.0078
0.0076 -0.014
-0.04 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04
0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04
r
r
0 1 2 3 4 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

r r

FIG. 4. Profile shows the behavior of DEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, γ = 0.5, r0 = 1.

SEC

0.15 SEC

0.018
ρ + pr + 2 p t

0.016

0.014
0.10
0.012
ρ + pr + 2 p t

0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04

r

β=38
0.05
β=40

β=42

0.00

0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 5. Profile shows the behavior of SEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, γ = 0.5, r0 = 1.

Shape Function-2 : We consider a shape function discussed in the seminal paper of Lobo et al. [50], where the
authors investigated the viability of wormhole solutions for different f ( R) theories of gravity. This shape function is
given by
 λ
r
b (r ) = r0 . (60)
r0

where λ < 1 in order tosatisfy the flaringout condition b0 (r ) < 1 , throat condition b(r ) − r < 0 and asymptoti-



b (r )
cally flatness condition r → 0 , r → ∞ . In order to find the energy constraints let us work with λ = 12 , yielding
 13

to the shape function

r
r
b (r ) = r0 . (61)
r0

With these ingredients in hands we can determine the following form for the bag parameter

α(12π (ω + 2) − β(ω + 4))

B= q , (62)
24(4π − β)( β + 8π )r2 ω rr0

whose features are presented in Fig. 6. There we observe that B(r ) is always positive for the different values of β and
ω here chosen. We also realize that B(r ) increases near to the wormhole throat, raising the binding energy to keep
the strange matter stable. Moreover, the bag parameter goes to a constant value for big values of r. These features
also corroborates with the investigations of Deb et al. in [40].

0.035
β=38
0.030
β=40
0.025
β=42
0.020
B (r )

0.015

0.010

0.005

0.000
0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 6. The behavior of Bag parameter B for (a) β = 38 with ω = 0.28, (b) β = 40 with ω = 0.333 and (c) β = 42 with ω = 0.455.
Also, we consider α = 1, r0 = 1.

Taking Eqs. (52) and (60), we derive the following set of energy conditions
1 q 3 q
• NEC : ρ + pr = − 2 r
and ρ + pt = 2 r
,
2( β+8π )r r0 4( β+8π )r r0
36π −5β 5β+12π
• DEC : ρ − pr = q and ρ − pt = q ,
6(4π − β)( β+8π )r2 rr 12(4π − β)( β+8π )r2 rr
0 0
2β
• SEC : ρ + pr + 2pt = − q ,
3(4π − β)( β+8π )r2 rr
0
which are described in details in Figs. 7 - 10. As in our first example, we observe that the energy density is always
positive, which means that WEC is satisfied. Again we also observe that NEC is violated by radial pressure and
satisfied by the tangential pressure, unveiling the presence of exotic matter in the wormholes throats. Moreover, DEC
is satisfied by the radial pressure and violated by the tangential pressure for r < 1, corroborating with the presence of
strange matter inside of the wormholes throats. Furthermore, SEC is satisfied, so WEC and SEC allow the existence
of stable traversable wormholes with exotic matter on their throats. We also highlight that these constraints over the
energy conditions are observed for ρ̃, p̃r , and p̃t too.
 14

Energy density

0.0010
β=38
0.0008 β=40
β=42
0.0006

ρ
0.0004

0.0002

0.0000
0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 7. The figure shows the behavior of ρ with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, r0 = 1.

NEC for radial pressure NEC for tangential pressure

0.00 0.07
NEC for tangential pressure

β=38 0.06 0.013

-0.01 β=40 0.012

ρ + pt
0.05
β=42 0.011

-0.02 0.04 0.010

NEC for radial pressure
ρ + pr

ρ + pt

0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04

-0.0065
0.03 r
-0.0070
-0.03 -0.0075 β=38
ρ + pr

0.02
-0.0080
β=40
-0.0085
-0.04 0.01 β=42
-0.0090
0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04
r 0.00

0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
r r

FIG. 8. Profile shows the behavior of NEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, r0 = 1.

DEC for radial pressure DEC for tangential pressure

0.05 0.00
DEC for radial pressure

0.0090 β=38
0.04
0.0085 β=40
-0.01
ρ - pr

0.0080 β=42
0.03 DEC for tangential pressure
0.0075
ρ - pt
ρ - pr

-0.02
0.0070 -0.010
0.02 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04
-0.011
ρ - pt

r β=38
-0.012
β=40 -0.03
0.01
-0.013
β=42
0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04

0.00 -0.04 r

0 1 2 3 4 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

r r

FIG. 9. Profile shows the behavior of DEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, r0 = 1.
 15
SEC

SEC
0.018
0.08
0.017

ρ + pr + 2 pt
0.016
0.015
0.06
0.014

ρ + pr + 2 pt
0.013

0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04

0.04
r

β=38

0.02 β=40

β=42

0.00

0 1 2 3 4
r

FIG. 10. Profile shows the behavior of SEC with respect to r for different values of β. We consider α = 1, r0 = 1.

V. EQUILIBRIUM CONDITIONS

In this section, we consider the generalized Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov (TOV) equation [51–53] to find the sta-
bility of our wormholes in f ( Q, T ) gravity. The generalized TOV equation can be written as
0
v d p˜r 2
(ρ̃ + p˜r ) + + ( p˜r − p̃t ) = 0, (63)
2 dr r
where v = 2φ(r ).
Due to anisotropic matter distribution, the hydrostatic, gravitational, and anisotropic forces are defined as follows
0
d p˜r v 2
Fh = − , Fg = − (ρ̃ + p˜r ), Fa = ( p̃t − p˜r ). (64)
dr 2 r
The stability of the wormhole solutions, imposes the constraint Fh + Fg + Fa = 0. Since in this study, we have
assumed the redshift function φ(r ) = constant, the gravitational contribution Fg is null, so the stability constraint is
rewritten as

Fh + Fa = 0. (65)

Then, by taking Eqs. (31),(45),(46),(52), (58) and (64), we get the following equations for the hydrostatic and
anisotropic forces

r0 (4r0 γ − 3(γ + 1)r )

Fh = , (66)
8πr5

r0 (3(γ + 1)r − 4r0 γ)

Fa = . (67)
8πr5
Here we considered the shape function-1. Moreover, by combining the shape function-2, together with Eqs.
(31),(45),(46),(52), (61) and (64), we yield to

5
Fh = − q , (68)
r
16πr3 r0

5
Fa = q , (69)
r
16πr3 r0

as the equations for the hydrostatic and anisotropic forces, respectively. We can verify that the hydrostatic and the
anisotropic forces are independent of ω and β for both shape functions.
 16

Hydrostatic Force Anisotropic Force

0.00
0.15
-0.05
0.10
Fh

Fa
-0.10
0.05
-0.15
0.00
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
r r

Hydrostatic & Anisotropic Forces

0.06
Fh
0.04
Fa
0.02

0.00

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
r

FIG. 11. This profile shows the behavior of hydrostatic forces and anisotropic forces for shape function-1. We consider γ =
0.5, r0 = 1.

Hydrostatic Force Anisotropic Force

0.00
0.15

-0.05
0.10
Fh

Fa

-0.10
0.05
-0.15
0.00
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
r r

Hydrostatic & Anisotropic Forces

0.06
Fh
0.04
Fa
0.02

0.00

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
r

FIG. 12. This profile shows the behavior of hydrostatic forces and anisotropic forces for shape function-2. We consider r0 = 1.

The graphics for the hydrostatic and the anisotropic forces derived from shape functions 1 and 2 are depicted in
Figs. 11 and 12. It can be observed that these forces show the same intensity but are opposite to each other. These
 17

balancing between the forces unveil that our wormholes are stable.

VI. FINAL REMARKS

This investigation presents a new route to find the viability of wormholes solutions in f ( Q, T ) gravity for a ra-
dial dependent bag parameter. In our discussions we derived different families of wormholes solutions using two
different shape functions. Both shape functions are largely used in the recent literature on wormhole solutions for
alternative gravity theories.
The energy conditions were derived trough constraints imposed by the Raychaudhuri using the embedding pro-
cedure introduced by Mandal et al. [26]. We used the energy conditions together with the equation of state for the
MIT Bag Model, and with bounds over ω to derive interesting wormholes families for different values of our free
parameter β. Such a procedure enable us to find wormholes solutions that satisfy at least two energy conditions for
positive energy densities.
Both shape functions unveiled wormhole solutions with positive energy densities satisfying WEC and SEC. The
NEC and DEC energy conditions were partially violated for r < 1, corroborating with the presence of strange matter
at the wormholes throats. Therefore, our approach presents an interesting scenario with the possibility of stable
traversable wormhole solutions which satisfy SEC and WEC in the presence of exotic matter. We also performed a
deep stability analysis of our solutions using the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov (TOV) equation.
The methodology here presented can be applied to several other theories of gravity, opening a new path to obtain
wormhole solutions with strange matter content, and constraining them through energy conditions. It would be
interesting to derive wormhole solutions that obey the equation of state of the MIT Bag Model in noncommutative
geometry, following the approach presented by Hassan et al. in [54]. We hope to report on some of these ideas in
near future.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

M.T. acknowledges University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi, India, for awarding National Fellow-
ship for Scheduled Caste Students (UGC-Ref. No.: 201610123801). JRLS would like to thank CNPq (Grant nos.
420479/2018-0, and 309494/2021-4), and PRONEX/CNPq/FAPESQ-PB (Grant nos. 165/2018, and 0015/2019) for
financial support. JNA would like to thank CNPq PIBIC for financial support. P.K.S. acknowledges National Board
for Higher Mathematics (NBHM) under Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), Govt. of India for financial support
to carry out the Research project No.: 02011/3/2022 NBHM(R.P.)/R&D II/2152 Dt.14.02.2022.

[1] E. Gourgoulhon, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics, 627, A92 (2019).

[2] R. Abuter, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics, 636, L5 (2020).
[3] A. A. Chael, et al., ApJ, 829, 11 (2016).
[4] K. Akiyama, et al., ApJ, 875, L1 (2019).
[5] C. Winkler, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics, 411, L1 (2003).
[6] X. Barcons, et al., Astronomische Nachrichten, 338, 153 (2017).
[7] P. Soffitta, et al., Experimental Astronomy, 36, 523 (2013).
[8] D. N. Burrows, et al., SSR, 120, 165 (2005).
[9] The CHIME/FRB Collaboration, et al., ApJ, 863, 48 (2018).
[10] Lisa Collaboration, et al., arXiv:1305.5720 [astro-ph.CO].
[11] E. Abdalla, E. G. M. Ferreira, R. G. Landim, A. A. Costa, K. S. F. Fornazier, F. B. Abdalla, L. Barosi, F. A. Brito, A. R. Queiroz and T. Villela, et
al., Astronomy and Astrophysics, 664, A14 (2022).
[12] P. J. Hall, Exp Astronomy 17, 5 (2004).
[13] M. Visser, Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking (American Institute of Physics, 1995), ISBN 978-1-56396-653-8.
[14] Pablo Bueno, Pablo A. Cano, Frederik Goelen, Thomas Hertog, and Bert Vercnocke, Phys. Rev. D, 97, 024040 (2018).
[15] Suvankar Paul, Rajibul Shaikh, Pritam Banerjee, and Tapobrata Sarkar, JCAP, 03, 055 (2020).
[16] A. Övgün, et al., Ann. Phys., 406, 152 (2019).
[17] A. Övgün, Phys. Rev. D, 98, 044033 (2018).
 18

[18] A. Övgün, Turk. J. Phys., 44, 465 (2020).

[19] M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Am. J. of Phys., 56, 395 (1988).
[20] Juan Maldacena and Alexey Milekhin, Phys. Rev. D, 103, 066007 (2021).
[21] L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4690 (1999).
[22] A. Chodos, et al., Phys. Rev. D, 9, 3471 (1974).
[23] E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D, 30, 272 (1984).
[24] J. B. Jimenez, L. Heisenberg, and T. Koivisto, Phys. Rev. D, 98 (2018) 044048.
[25] R. Lazkoz, et al., Phys. Rev. D, 100, 104027 (2019).
[26] Sanjay Mandal, P. K. Sahoo, and J. R. L. Santos, Phys.Rev.D, 102, 2 024057 (2020).
[27] Zinnat Hassan, Sayantan Ghosh, P. K. Sahoo, and K. Bamba, arXiv, arXiv:2207.09945.
[28] Zinnat Hassan, Sayantan Ghosh, P. K. Sahoo, and V. Sree Hari Rao, arXiv, arXiv:2209.02704.
[29] Y. Xu, et al., Eur. Phys. J. C, 79, 708 (2019).
[30] Simran Arora, J. R. L. Santos, and P. K. Sahoo, Phys.Dark Univ., 31, 100790 (2021).
[31] N. Prasad and R. S. Bhalerao, Phys. Rev. D, 69, 103001 (2004).
[32] R. Aguirre, Phys. Lett. B, 559, 207 (2003).
[33] G. F. Burgio, M. Baldo, P. K. Sahu, A. B. Santra, and H. J. Schulze, Phys. Lett. B, 526, 19 (2002).
[34] Y. X. Liu, D. F. Gao, and H. Guo, Nucl. Nuclear Phys. A, 695, 353 (2001).
[35] G. X. Peng, H. C. Chiang, B. S. Zou, P. J. Ning, and S. J. Luo, Phys. Rev. C, 62, 025801 (2000).
[36] S. Chakrabarty, Phys. Rev. D, 54, 1306 (1996).
[37] S. Chakrabarty, Phys. Rev. D, 48, 1409 (1993).
[38] S. Chakrabarty, Phys. Rev. D, 43, 627 (1991).
[39] N. Itoh, Prog. Theor. Phys., 44, 291 (1970).
[40] R. Deb, P. Mandal, and B. C. Paul, Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 137, 481 (2022).
[41] M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Am. J. Phys., 56, 395 (1988).
[42] Patricio S. Letelier, Phys. Rev. D, 22, 807 (1980).
[43] Debabrata Deb, Banibrata Mukhopadhyay, and Fridolin Weber, ApJ, 922, 149 (2021).
[44] P. H. R. S. Moraes, R. A. C. Correa, and R. V. Lobato, J. Cos. Astro. Phys., 07, 029 (2017).
[45] M. Tayde, Z. Hassan, P. K. Sahoo, and S. Gutti, Chinese Phys. C, 46, 115101 (2022).
[46] Zinnat Hassan, G. Mustafa, Joao R.L. Santos, and P. K. Sahoo, EPL, 139, 3 39001 (2022).
[47] T. Harko, et al., Phys. Rev. D., 78, 084005 (2008).
[48] T. Harko and K. S. Cheng, A&A, 385, 947 (2002).
[49] Emilio Elizalde and Martiros Khurshudyan, Phys. Rev. D, 98, 123525 (2018).
[50] F. S. N. Lobo and M. A. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D, 80, 104012 (2009).
[51] J. R. Oppenheimer and G. M. Volkoff, Phys. Rev., 55, 374 (1939).
[52] V. Gorini, U. Moschella, A. Y. Kamenshchik, V. Pasquier, and A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Rev. D, 78, 064064 (2008).
[53] P. K. F. Kuhfittig, Fundamental J. Mod. Phys., 14, 23-31 (2020).
[54] Zinnat Hassan, Ghulam Mustafa, and Pradyumn Kumar Sahoo, Symmetry, 13, 1260 (2021).