Physica Scripta

PAPER You may also like

- Cosmological fluids in the equivalence
Constraining study of Rastall parameter on between Rastall and Einstein gravity
Javier Chagoya, J C López-Domínguez
charged anisotropic compact star model and C Ortiz

- P-V criticality and Joule-Thomson

expansion of charged AdS black holes in
To cite this article: Asifa Ashraf et al 2023 Phys. Scr. 98 035027 the Rastall gravity
Yuan Meng, , Jin Pu et al.

- Self-consistent embedded anisotropic

quintessence compact stars in Rastall
gravity via linear equation of state
View the article online for updates and enhancements. G Mustafa, Xia Tie-Cheng and M Farasat
Shamir

This content was downloaded from IP address 47.11.207.242 on 06/06/2023 at 14:09

 Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/acb6bd

PAPER

Constraining study of Rastall parameter on charged anisotropic

RECEIVED
20 October 2022
compact star model
REVISED
3 January 2023
ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
Asifa Ashraf1 , M R Shahzad2, Zhiyue Zhang1,∗, Ertan Güdekli3 and M Farooq Jamal4
27 January 2023 1
School of Mathematical Sciences, Jiangsu Key Laboratory for NSLSCS, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, 210023, People’s Republic of
PUBLISHED China
2
24 February 2023 Department of Mathematics, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Sub-Campus Vehari, Pakistan
3
Department of Physics, Istanbul University, Istanbul 34134, Turkey
4
Department of Mathematics, COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus, Lahore, Pakistan
∗
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: asifa.ashraf70@yahoo.com; asifamustafa3828@gmail.com, rezwan.chaudhery@gmail.com, zhangzhiyue@njnu.edu.cn,
gudekli@istanbul.edu.tr and farooq.jamal43@gmail.com

Keywords: Rastall gravity, Vela X-1, Karmarkar condition

Abstract
The current study discusses the charge anisotropic stellar structures in Rastall theory. For this study,
the Karmarkar condition is considered to develop the embedded solutions of compact stars. To
complete this analysis, the spherically symmetric spacetime is taken, and solve the resulting Rastall
field equations by constraining different values of the Rastall parameter, i.e., ξ = −0.03, ξ = −0.06,
and ξ = −0.09 into account. Further, we choose a well-known interesting form of grr metric
cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n
component as e l (r ) = 1 + (1 + br 2)2 . We explore the properties of compact star models like Vela
X-1, under the effect of different positive values of n, i.e., 1.8 „ n < 7, with n ≠ 2, 4, 6. It is noted that
some results are not satisfied for n … 6.6. We show that the parameters n (appearing due to the grr) and
Rastall parameter ξ play an important role in determining the thermodynamical behavior and stability
of our model. The detailed analysis of the physical parameters like pressure components, energy
density, charge density, and stability features including adiabatic index has been provided with
graphical and numerical investigations. It is important to mention here that our obtained solutions
are physically viable and well-stable.

1. Introduction

During the past few decades, observational facts regarding ultra-dense celestial objects like neutron stars,
pulsars, and black holes (BH) obtained the reasonable interest of researchers to model the structure and interior
composition of compact celestial objects analytically due to their prospective implementation to study the
physical phenomena associated to their internal and external structures. The usual interpretation of these
compact structures through a classical scenario is inadequate due to the ultra-high densities of matter contained
in these objects. Therefore, these extremely dense objects are relativistic in nature and may be handled
adequately with relativistic gravitational theories.
In astrophysics, these compact celestial objects are considered as proving grounds to explore the numerous
traits of gravitational fields. Particularly, relativistic models of compact stars captivated the considerable interest
of the research community during the past few decades, however, the first solution of Einstein’s field equations
describing the vacuum solution (exterior) of spherically symmetric distribution of matter, was invented by
Schwarzchild in 1916. This pioneering work of Schwarzchild Inculcates the researchers to develop the exact
solutions of Einstein’s field equations describing the compact configuration of stellar structures like strange
quark stars, white dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes which are the final fate of the evolutionary stars. The
researchers always seek more realistic theoretical models which are adequately consistent with the observational
facts. Delgaty and Lake [1] presented an exhaustive investigation on the solutions of Einstein’s field equations.

© 2023 IOP Publishing Ltd

Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

They examined 127 known analytical solutions of field equations, from which only nine solutions fulfill the
necessary physical requirements for a viable stellar model. This shows how it is intricate to find a physically
viable solution to field equations describing the realistic stellar model. This situation stimulated the researchers
to find physically plausible models which are consistent with the observational facts. The possibility of the
charged gravitating sphere was firstly discussed by Rosseland [2] and thereafter numerous other researchers
argued on the existence of charged fluid spheres with different perspectives [3–5]. The charged analog for dust
star has been examined by Majumdar [6] and Papapetrou [7]. The investigations of [8] and [9] on the isotropic
charged sphere, revealed that the singularities during the gravitational collapse can be evaded in the presence of
charge and consequently improves the stability of the system. It is worth noting that some models that do not
meet the physical acceptability criteria become physically plausible after the inclusion of charge [10, 11].
The contribution of charged matter in the modeling of compact stars is quite important, as it prevents the
further collapse in the evolutionary phase of a compact star and contributes to maintaining the equilibrium of
the system. A perfect fluid model with charge inclusion has been studied in [12, 13], which showed that the
space-time curvature growth is halted by the inclusion of charge and hence singularities are avoided. Regarding
the stability of the stellar structure, Bakenstein [14] was a pioneer who explored the stability of the charged
matter by generalizing the Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations of hydrostatic equilibrium and afterward, different
authors [15–18] studied the stability of charged self-gravitating fluid sphere. Stettner [19] revealed that the
charged fluid sphere with uniform density is more stable than the uncharged sphere. Therefore Rahaman et al
[20] suggested a general procedure to overcome the singularity caused by gravitational collapse is to incorporate
a charge in the neutral system. It is seen that the inclusion of charge in the neutral system may arise numerous
features in the system: (i) electric repulsion counterbalanced the gravitational attraction with the aid of pressure
gradient [21], (ii) it prevents the space-time curvature growth, which plays an important role in avoiding
singularities [22]. Maurya et al [23] presented a general algorithm for all anisotropic spherically symmetric
charged fluid spheres and discuss their stability. Subsequently, Maurya and Tello-Ortiz [24] studied an
anisotropic charged strange stars satisfying the MIT bag model using Tolman-Kuchowicz geometry. They
presented how anisotropic force and Coulomb repulsive force take part in the stability and equilibrium of the
system against gravitational collapse. Majumdar [25] and Skenderis [26, 27] further discussed the stability and
other physical aspects of a charged dust star. Schwarzchild interior solution of a fluid sphere composed of
charged anisotropic matter has been proposed by Singh and Pant [28]. They also studied the impact of
anisotropy and charged matter on the stability of the system. Maurya et al [29] propounded a spherically
symmetric charged compact star model using the Karmakar condition. Ratanpal and Bhar [30] studied a
charged sphere with a suitable specific choice of radial pressure. In this study, they compared the charged and
uncharged cases to reveal the impact of the charge on the physical behavior of model parameters. The general
solution to the Einstein-Maxwell equations (EME) has been presented by Thirukkanesh and Ragel [31] in static
and spherically symmetric geometry by considering a linear equation of state. The suitable choices for electric
field intensity and one of the potential functions which are consistent with the physical requirements were made
for this study.
To produce a realistic stellar model, geometric conditions may be imposed on the spacetime manifold.
Among these conditions conformal symmetry and embedding of spacetime into a higher dimensional Euclidean
space, have been employed increasingly in recent years to develop exact solutions of Einstein field equations and
EME. The geometrical configuration of conformal symmetries has been analyzed by Maartens et al [32, 33] and
Tupper et al [34] in static and spherically symmetric spacetime. The embedding problem was first proposed by
Schlai [35] in 1871 regarding the geometrical significance, where space-time can be embedded into higher
dimensional pseudo-Euclidean space. The isotropy-embedded theorem was first propounded by Nash [36]. The
embedding of a 4-dimensional spacetime metric into a 5-dimensional Euclidean space is depending on a
particular condition first introduced by Karmarkar [37] (usually known as Karmarkar condition) which is
associated with the Riemann tensor. The class of the solution satisfying this condition is named class one (or
written as ’class I’). For the isotropic configuration of matter, there are only two solutions that are possible, the
Schwarzschild interior solution [38] and the Kohler-Chao solution [39]. Whereas in the context of pressure
anisotropy, numerous well-behaved class one solutions have been obtained by using the Karmarkar condition
[40–44]. In this context, Mustafa and his collaborators [45–51] and Maurya and collaborators [52–55] studied
several embedding class one solutions consistent with the necessary physical requirements in General Relativity
and modified theories of gravitation.
In spite of the accomplishment of General Relativity (GR) that might be viewed as a major component in the
gravitational physics and has been affirmed by numerous experimental evidences, as in the new estimations of
gravitational waves by the coordinated efforts of Virgo and LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave
Observatory) [56, 57], and most recently the discovery of the image of a black hole (for the first time) by the
undertaking Event Horizon Telescope [58], there are still open questions that should be perceived. For example
GR cannot provide the necessary information about the accelerated expansion of the Universe and the rotation

2
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

curves of the galaxies without the presence of unexplained components, for instance, dark energy and dark
matter respectively. Because of these appearing impediments, it tends to be intriguing to consider modified
theories of gravitation as an alternative to GR to responde these inquiries or at least provide a way to improve our
understanding of the theory. In this connection, Malik and his collaborators [59–65] studied the structure of
compact stars in different settings by considering the modified gravity theories.
Compact stars are highly relativistic objects due to their very high mass density and can be considered good
candidates to probe the effects of modified theories. There are several investigations of modified theories of
gravitation in term of compact stars [66–71]. Among the several modified theories of gravity, Rastall theory [72]
recently gained the growing interest of the research community regarding the implication of this theory in the
context of compact stars [73–78], black holes (BH) [79–85], thermodynamics of BH [86–88], wormholes
[89, 90] and cosmology [91–94]. Moreover, some studies on the generalization of the Rastall’s theory [95, 96]
and combination to this with other modified theories [97, 98] are also performed.
Despite researchers’ growing interest in unraveling the more mysterious traits of Rastall’s model and its
implications in both astrophysics and cosmology, Visser [99] disputed that the Rastall theory (RT) is equivalent
to the general theory of relativity. Darabi et al [100] then refute Viser’s claim, demonstrating that RT is a
modified form of GR. By applying the same methodology to the f (R) theory as Visser did for the RT, they were
able to show through straightforward manipulations that the f (R) theory, which is a phenomenologically well-
established theory, will also be equivalent to the GR, which is obviously not true. As a result, the authors came to
the conclusion that the RT is unmistakably distinct from the GR. It has been proposed that GR and RT are two
separate theories on the cosmological scale [101]. Hansraj et al [102] also contributed to counter the claim of
Visser and demonstrated a comparative study to show that these two theories are clearly different. Hansraj and
Banerjee [103] further invigorated their previous study to show the difference between these two theories.
Shahzad and Abbas [104, 105] presented a comparative analysis and reported the non-equivalence of RT and
GR. These empirical findings invigorated Darabi et al [100] against Visser’s claim.
Regarding the growing interest of researchers to further study the implications of Rastall theory, we have
proposed a charged compact star model in the embedding class one and observed the necessary physical
requirements. The sequence of our study is as follows: in section 2, Rastall field equations are given and
Karmarker conditions are applied to them to obtain the potential functions. In section 3, we obtain a new family
of solutions by taking a specific form of electric charge. Section 4 deals with the matching of interior and
corresponding exterior geometries to obtain the value of involved constants in the solution and section 5
represents the physical behavior of the presented model through the graphical analysis and numerical
investigations of important physical parameters. Section 6 contains the concluding remarks of the present study
and the appendix are given in section 7.

2. Rastall field equations

In Rastall theory conservation law of energy-momentum tensor [1] (i.e., ∇νTλν = 0) is not valid. The starting
point of Rastall work is the following expression
n Tln = aR, l. (1)

In Eq.(1) α represents Rastall parameter. The relation between geometry and matter defined by Rastall
parameter (i.e., α). The Rastall field equations are attained by the modification of GR as [45, 47]
ln + k ´ agln  = kTln . (2)

In this work gravitational coupling constant symbolized by κ. We attain the following expression from Eq.(2).
(4ka - 1) = T ; ka ¹ 1 4.
In the above relation the value of T can not be zero. In the context of Rastall theory using the Newtonian limit,
the Rastall parameter which is discussed as dimensionless quantity re-defined as ξ = κ × α. The summarized
relations of Rastall parameter α and coupling parameter κ are given below [45, 47]

4 - 1 x⎞
k = 8p ´ ⎛⎜ ⎟, (3)
⎝6 - 1 x ⎠

x (6 - 1 x ) ⎞
a= ´ ⎛⎜ ⎟. (4)
8p ⎝ (4 - 1 x ) ⎠
Here the parameter is restricted (i.e., ξ ≠ 1/6 and ξ ≠ 1/4). We have obtained the Rastall field equations with the
help of the following general equation of Rastall theory [45, 47]

3
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

4 - 1 x⎞
ln + xgln  = ⎛⎜ ⎟ 8pTln , (5)
⎝6 - 1 x ⎠
In the above equation, Einstein tensor is mentioned by Gλν, ξ is Rastall parameter, Tλν denotes energy-
momentum tensor. Here  represents Ricci Scalar and gλν is metric tensor.
The anisotropic charged matter in the stellar objects can be attained by
Tsd = (r + pt ) us ud + pt gsd + ( pr - pt ) hs hd + Esd , (6)
σ
Here, ρ, pr and pt denote energy density, radial pressure and tangential pressure respectively. υ describes four-
velocity which proves υ συσ = − 1, where its normal vector is η σ which satisfies η σησ = 1.
In the above Eq.(3) Eσδ is the Electromagnetic stress energy tensor and can be written as

1 1
Esd = ⎛Fsb Fsb - gsd Fbt F bt ⎞ (7)
4p ⎝ 4 ⎠
In Eq.(4) the electromagnetic field tensor is represented as Fσδ = Aσ, δ − Aδ, σ
Now we use Krori and Barua type spherically symmetric line element to discuss the interior of stellar objects
ds 2 = - e n (r ) dt 2 + e l (r ) dr 2 + r 2 (dq 2 + sin2 qdf 2) , (8)
We have obtained the following Rastall field equations with the help of equation (5) along with line element (8)

6x - 1 ⎛ -l (r ) ⎛ ⎛ 2(e l (r ) - 1) 2(l¢ (r ) - n ¢ (r ))
8pr + E 2 = ⎜e ⎜x - ⎜ - l ¢ (r ) n ¢ (r ) - + n  (r ) + n ¢ (r ) 2 ⎞ ⎟

(4x - 1) ⎝ ⎝ ⎝ r 2 r ⎠
rl¢ (r ) + e l (r ) - 1 ⎞ ⎞
+ ⎟,
⎟ (9)
r2 ⎠⎠
6x - 1 ⎛ -l (r ) ⎛ - e l (r ) + rn ¢ (r ) + 1 ⎛ - 2 (e
l (r ) - 1) 2(l¢ (r ) - n ¢ (r ))
8ppr - E 2 = ⎜e ⎜ - x - l ¢ (r ) n ¢ (r ) -
⎜

(4x - 1) ⎝ ⎝ r 2
⎝ r 2 r
+ n  (r ) + n ¢ (r ) ))) ,
2

(10)

6x - 1 ⎛ -l (r ) ⎛ r ( - l¢ (r )) n ¢ (r ) - 2l¢ (r ) + 2rn  (r ) + rn ¢ (r )2 + 2n ¢ (r ) 2(e l (r ) - 1)

8ppt + E 2 = ⎜e ⎜ - x ⎛- ⎜

(4x - 1) ⎝ ⎝ 4r ⎝ r2
2(l¢ (r ) - n ¢ (r ))
- l ¢ (r ) n ¢ (r ) - + n  (r ) + n ¢ (r )2⎞ ⎞ ⎟⎞. ⎟

r ⎠⎠⎠
(11)
1 r q (r )
E (r ) = 2
r 0 ò
4pr 2se l 2dr = 2 ,
r
(12)

e - l 2
s= (r 2E ) ¢. (13)
4pr 2
In Eq.(12),E(r) denotes electric field and q(r) is total charge inside the star. σ represents the charge density. In
present study, we shall discuss the famous condition named as Karmarkar condition [2]. We formate the
karmarkar condition with the help of embedded class-1 space-time. The components of Riemann tensor for
embedded class-1 are obtained as

e n (r ) (2n  (r ) + n ¢ (r )2 - l ¢ (r ) n ¢ (r )) r 2sin 2 q (e l (r ) - 1)
1414 = 4
,  2323 = e l (r )
,
rl ¢ (r ) rsin 2ql ¢ (r ) e n (r ) - l (r )
1212 = 2
, 3434 = 2
,
1334 = 1224 sin2 q , 1224 = 0.
Karmarkar’s condition which depends on the line element (8) has been described as
1414 2323 = 12241334 + 12123434, (14)
Here, 2323 ¹ 0, describes the space-time of embedded class one. The following equation is obtain from
Karmarkar condition
n ¢ (r ) n ¢ (r )
l¢ (r ) n ¢ (r ) + n ¢2 (r ) - 2(n  (r ) + n ¢2 (r )) = , (15)
1 - e l (r )

4
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

In which e ν( r)≠1. By solving the equation (15), we obtain the relation

2
(
e n (r ) = A + B ò e l (r ) - 1 dr ), (16)

Here, A and B are arbitrary constant. We chose the grr component of the metric tensor given in equation (17) as:
cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n
e l (r ) = 1 + , (17)
(1 + br 2)2
where n is an important parameter with n ä (1.8, 7) − {2, 4, 6}. For the even values of n, the model, which is
proposed in equation (17) is not physically viable. In the current analysis, we are only working with those values,
which are producing physically acceptable and realistic kind of stellar solutions. We get the gtt component by
replacing the equation (17) into equation (16) as
2
abr 2 + b - 2
n
⎛
e n (r ) = ⎜A +
B c (ar 2 + 1)n ( abr + a
2 ) 2F1 (- n
2
,
n n
-2; 1 - 2;
a-b
abr 2 + a ) ⎞⎟ , (18)
⎜ bn ⎟
⎝ ⎠

3. Generating new family of solutions

Here, we express an electric field as E2 = KQr. By using equations (17) and (18) in equations (9)–(11), we obtain
ρ, pr, pt,σ and anisotropy factor Δ = pt − pr as
r = - KQr + (F1 (r )(1 + br 2)( - 1 + 6x )(F18 (r ) + 2bnBF2 (r )n 2 (BF1 (r )(1 + br 2)(F8 (r ) + ar 2F9 (r )) x
B2
- F14 (r )( - 1 + 2x )) F3 (r ) - F10 (r )3 2 (1 + br 2)3F16 (r )( - 1 + 2x ) F3 (r )2⎞ ⎞⎟ ⎟ F12 (r ) ,
r2 ⎠⎠
(19)

pr = KQr + (( - 1 + 6x )(c (1 + ar 2)n ( - 1 + 2x ) - (2F1 (r )(1 + br 2)(b 2n2F2 (r )2 (B2r 2 (1 + ar 2) F1 (r )

´ (1 + br 2)(F4 (r )) x - 2F1 (r )(Abr 2 + A)2F19 (r ) x + ABr (F22 (r ))) - bBn (1 + br 2) F28 (r ) F19 rx
´ F3 (r )2)) ((1 + ar 2)(F4 (r )) F11 (r )))) F6 (r ) , (20)

pt = - KQr + (( - 1 + 6x )(2cx (1 + ar 2)n + ( - ((( - 1 + 4x )(bnF2 (r )n 2 (Bcr 3 (1 + ar 2)n + AF1 (r )

´ (1 + br 2)2) + Bcr (1 + ar 2)n (1 + br 2) F3 (r )) F20 (r )) (F4 (r ))) + bBnF1 (r )(1 + br 2) F2 (r )n 2

´ ( - 1 + 2x )( - bnrF29 (r ))) ((1 + ar 2) F11 (r )))) F6 (r ) , (21)

l (r )
5e - 2 KQ
s= , (22)
8p KQr
1
D = - (2F11 (r ) F4 (r ) F6 (r ) KQr (1 + ar 2) + (1 - 6x )(F20 (r )(F30 (r ))(1 - 4x )
F11 (r ) F4 (r ) F6 (r )(1 + ar 2)
+ b 2BF1 (r ) F2 (r ) F29 (r ) F4 (r ) n2r 3 + 2 (1 + br 2)(1 - 2x ) + 2cF11 (r ) F4 (r ) r (1 + ar 2)1 + n x ) + (1 - 6x )
n

´ (cF11 (r ) F4 (r ) r (1 + ar 2)1 + n (1 - 2x ) - 2bF1 (r ) n (1 + br 2)(BF19 (r ) F28 (r ) F3 (r ) r 4 (1 + br 2) x - b

´ F2 (r ) nr 2 + n (ABF22 (r ) + B2F1 (r ) F4 (r ) r 2 (1 + ar 2)(1 + br 2) x - 2F1 (r ) F19 (r )(A + Abr 2)2x ))))
(23)
where Fi (i = 1, 2, 3,K, 30) are given in the appendix.

4. Matching conditions

This section is dedicated to discuss the Bardeen exterior geometry with the spherically symmetric spacetime and
developed some conditions for further analysis. The exterior geometry of the line element defined by [106]
1
ds 2 = - f (r ) dt 2 + dr 2 + r 2 (dq 2 + sin2 qdf 2) , (24)
f (r )
2Mr 2
where f (r ) = - + 1. The Bardeen black hole has been proven to be a gravitationally collapsed
(q 2 + r 2 )3
magnetic monopole resulting from a special type of non-linear electrodynamics [107]. It is worth noting that
spacetime acts asymptotically as

5
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 1. Shows the variation of metric functions for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8(Black)
and n = 7.0 (Red).

Table 1. Calculated values of A, B, & c for compact

star Vela X-1 (M = 1.77Me and R = 9.56 km).

Rastall parameter ξ = −0.03

n A B c

1.8 -2.815923 −0.032539 0.007100

2.2 3.011801 −0.032606 0.006855
2.6 0.827717 −0.032672 0.006620
3.0 0.268282 −0.032739 0.006392
3.4 −0.108988 −0.032805 0.006172
3.8 −0.891890 −0.032871 0.005960
4.2 0.857011 −0.032937 0.005755
4.6 0.142584 −0.033004 0.005557
5.0 −0.064098 −0.033070 0.005366
5.4 −0.209526 −0.033136 0.005182
5.8 −0.476078 −0.033202 0.005004
6.2 0.041634 −0.033268 0.004832
6.6 −0.197919 −0.033334 0.004666
7.0 −0.278649 −0.033400 0.004505

3Mq 2 2M 1
f (r ) = 1 + 3
- + O ⎛ 5 ⎞. (25)
r r ⎝r ⎠
It is important to note that the expression 1/r in equation (25) implies that the parameter M is related to the mass
1
of the stellar configuration. The second term in equation (25) involves r 3 , which makes things more fascinating,
3Mq 2
unlike the Reissner-Nordstrom solution. As a result, in this study f (r ) » 1 - 2M
r
+ r 3 is taken into account.
By comparing the metric functions from equation (24) with equation (8) with the help of equation (17) and
equation (18), we get the following expressions for c and A:
M (1 + ar 2)-n (1 + br 2)2 ( - 2 + 3kQr 3)
c=- , (26)
r 2 (r + M ( - 2 + 3kQr 3))

r + M ( - 2 + 3KQr 3) B c (1 + ar 2)n F2 r - 2 F3 (r )
n

A=- - , (27)
r bn

Further, by using these values by equation (26) and equation (27), with pr(r = 0) = 0, we get the very long
expression for the parameter B. In the current analysis, we are not including very long expression for parameter
B, but its numeric values against observational data of Vela X-1 for three different values of Rastall parameter are
calculated in tables 1–2.

5. Physical analysis of the compact star properties through graphical presentation

In this section, we discuss the stability of compact star with physical parameters like metric components, energy
density, pressures, gradients of pressure, anisotropy, EoS, equilibrium conditions, stability, energy conditions,

6
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 2. Shows the variation of energy density (km−2) for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Table 2. Calculated values of A, B, & c (M = 1.77Me

and R = 9.56 km).

Rastall parameter ξ = −0.06

n A B c

1.8 −2.903780 −0.033953 0.007100

2.2 3.183322 −0.034076 0.006855
2.6 0.903419 −0.034198 0.006620
3.0 0.319572 −0.034320 0.006392
3.4 −0.074825 −0.034442 0.006172
3.8 −0.896945 −0.034563 0.005960
4.2 0.944606 −0.034685 0.005755
4.6 0.193739 −0.034807 0.005557
5.0 −0.023095 −0.034928 0.005366
5.4 −0.175788 −0.035050 0.005182
5.8 −0.457244 −0.035171 0.005004
6.2 0.092451 −0.035292 0.004832
6.6 −0.160765 −0.035413 0.004666
7.0 −0.245747 −0.035534 0.004505

red-shift function, mass function and adiabatic index. For the configuration of graphical results, we choose
different values of Rastall parameter (i.e., ξ = −0.03, ξ = −0.06, and ξ = −0.09) and parameter n.

5.1. Metric functions

In the study of compact stars metric functions i.e., gtt and grr have important role. In this work, we choose an
cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n
important model i.e., e l (r ) = 1 + (br 2 + 1)2 , we obtain the second metric component (i.e., e ν( r)) by using the
Karmarkar condition. In figure 1 the metric functions e λ( r=0)=1 and e ν( r≠0)=1 show that Karmarkar condition
is acceptable for our model. After the examination of graphical results, we conclude that the metric functions are
monotonically increasing and regular in the core of a compact star.

5.2. Energy density, radial and tangential pressure

The energy density function and pressures (i.e., radial and tangential) should be decreasing and positive in the
whole interior of a star. The positive behavior of energy density can be confirmed from figure 2 and pressures
have maximum values in the core of the star and have a minimum value at the boundary. From the figures 3 and
4, pt > 0 and pr → 0 as r reaches the boundary, also pt > pr.

5.3. Electric density and electric field

It can be noticed from the development of figures 5 and 6 that the charge density turns maximum at center and
then decreases with positive nature downward, and the electric field increases from center to boundary. This is
required and well-justified behavior which in fact helps the other physical parameters to be well-fitted.

7
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 3. Shows the variation of radial pressure (km−2) for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 4. Shows the variation of tangential pressure (km−2) for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with
n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 5. Shows the variation of electric density for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8 (Black)
and n = 7.0 (Red).

5.4. Anisotropy and gradients

The expression Δ = pt − pr is named as anisotropy. The anisotropy shows positive nature, it may confirm from
the figure 7 that the graphical behavior of anisotropy minimum at the center and have maximum value near the
dr dp dp
boundary. We show the graphs of gradients i.e., ( dr , drt and drr ) in figures 8–10 respectively. The derivative of
dr dp dp
energy density, radial and tangential pressure satisfy the condition, i.e., dr  0 , drr  0, and drt  0 . The
nature of graphs decreasing and negative. Graphs of gradients show that our model is physically viable.

5.5. Energy conditions

The most fascinating feature of GR and other modified theories, the energy constraints for checking the stability
of stellar objects. The four inequalities like dominant energy condition (DEC), null energy condition (NEC),
weak energy condition (WEC) and strong energy condition (SEC) should be satisfied for adequate interior
solution. The expressions of four energy conditions are written below

8
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 6. Shows the variation of electric field for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8 (Black) and
n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 7. Shows the variation of anisotropy for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8 (Black) and
n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 8. Shows the variation of derivative of energy density with respect to r for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09
(right) with n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

(2x )(r - pr )
SEC : r + pr + + 2pt + E 2  0, (28)
4x - 1

WEC : r + pr  0, r + pt + 2E 2  0 (29)

NEC : r + E 2  0, (30)

DEC : r - pr + 2E 2  0, r - pt  0. (31)

Furthermore, we check the stability of our model via energy conditions with graphical behavior. In figures 11–
13, express the realistic nature of the compact star by some necessary expressions of energy conditions. The
behavior of other energy conditions can be confirmed from the figures 2–4. Thus our model is physically viable
through energy conditions.

9
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 9. Shows the variation of derivative of radial pressure with respect to rfor ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09
(right) with n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 10. Shows the variation of derivative of tangential pressure with respect to r for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and
ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 11. Shows the variation of energy conditions for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

5.6. Equation of state

The famous two relation i.e., ωr and ωt are expressed in the following equations as
pr
wr = , (32)
r

pt
wt = . (33)
r

In ωr, we require ratio between radial pressure and energy density. In ωt, we require ratio between tangential
pressure and energy density. The expression ωr and ωt known as the equation of state parameters. As shown in
figure 14, the behavior of graph meet the require limit i.e., 0 „ ωr < 1 and 0 „ ωt < 1 which is necessary for
physically accepted solution.

10
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 12. Shows the variation of energy conditions for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 13. Shows the variation of energy conditions for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 14. Shows the variation of equations of state parameters for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with
n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

5.7. Mass function, red-shift function and compactification parameter

The mass-function, red-shift function and compactness parameter are considered the important components
for the compact star study. The expression of mass function can be calculated by the following formula
r
m (r ) = 4p ò0 rr 2dr , (34)

where m(r) denotes the mass function. The compactness parameter is calculated for this current work as
2m (r )
u (r ) = , (35)
r.

11
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 15. Shows the variation of mass function for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8 (Black)
and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 16. Shows the variation of compactification function for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with
n = 1.8 (Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 17. Shows the variation of red-shift function for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

where u(r) represents the compactness parameter. The red-shift function is expressed as

1
Zs = - 1, (36)
1 - 2u (r )

where Zs symbolizes the red-shift function. We observe the behavior of graph for these parameters like mass
function, red-shift function and compactness parameter i.e., m(r), Zs and u(r). The mass function is positive,
regular and increasing from minimum at the center to maximum at the boundary i.e., m(r) → 0 as r → 0. As
shown in figure 15, the compactness parameter is given in figure 16 satisfies the Bhuchdahl [5] condition i.e.,
8
u (r ) < 9 in the current work. The red-shift function, which is provided in figure 17 meets the Mak and Harko
[6] limit and also satisfies the Bohmer and Harko [7] limits i.e., Zs < 5. The graphs of red-shift function and
compactness parameter have same behavior like mass function.

12
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 18. Shows the variation of Equilibrium condition for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

5.8. Equilibrium condition

The stability of the model depends on the Tolman-Volkoff-Oppenheimer (TOV) equation [3, 4]. The
equilibrium nature of the anisotropic fluid is under different forces. Now, we shall describe TOV equation along
with electric charge, that is expressed as:
2( pt - pr ) dpr n ¢ (r ) x ⎛ dr dp dp l (r )
- - ( pr + r ) + ⎜ - r - t ⎞ - s (r ) E (r ) e 2 = 0.
⎟ (37)
r dr 2 4x - 1 ⎝ dr dr dr ⎠
The above relation can be expressed as:
2( pt - pr )
Fa = ,
r
dpr
Fh = - ,
dr
n ¢ (r )
Fg = - ( pr + r ) ,
2
x ⎛ dr dp dp
Fr = ⎜ - r - t ⎞, ⎟

4x - 1 ⎝ dr dr dr ⎠
l (r )
Fe = - s (r ) E (r ) e 2 . (38)
equation (37) can takes the form
Fa + Fh + Fg + Fr + Fe = 0. (39)
In above relation, these forces are the anisotropic repulsive force Fa, the hydrostatic force Fh, the gravitational
force Fg, the Rastall force Fr and the electric force Fe. As shown in figure 18, the forces Fa, Fh, Fg, Fr and Fe are
balanced and satisfied the equilibrium conditions for a compact star. The effects of these forces balance each
other which is necessary for the configuration of stable model.

5.9. Causality condition

The causality condition required that within the charged anisotropic fluid the sound waves traveling should be
less than the electromagnetic radiation (speed of light c = 1). The relations for radial and transverse sound
dp dp
speeds are vr2 = drr and vt2 = drt . The stability region was described by the authors in [108], where vr2 > vt2, and
there is no sign change in vr2 - vt2, however Andréasson in [109] proposed generalizing this region
0 < ∣vt2 - vr2∣ < 1 by incorporating the idea of no cracking where the region is stable. The sound speeds of
electrically charged compact objects are depicted in figures 19 and 20. Therefore, we contend that this cracking
criterion is satisfied everywhere throughout the stellar configurations. The graphical behavior of Abreu
condition is provided in figure 21. It is noted that causality criterion is not satisfied for n … 6.6 and n … 7.0, for
other values of n … 1.8, system is stable and viable. Further, we have summarized these conditions in table 4 for
the different values of parameter n.

6. Discussion and concluding remarks

In the present work, we presented the charged compact stars model in the Rastall theory of gravity by taking
benefit from the Karmarkar condition. In this way we specified one of the metric potentials and other one is

13
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Figure 19. Shows the variation of Causality condition for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 20. Shows the variation of Causality condition for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

Figure 21. Shows the variation of Abreu condition for ξ = −0.03 (left), ξ = −0.06 (middle), and ξ = −0.09 (right) with n = 1.8
(Black) and n = 7.0 (Red).

obtained by employing the Karmarkar condition. Also, we considered a well studied electric intensity function
to obtain the other physical parameters. The constants involved in the physical parameters are obtained by using
some physical facts (i.e. matching the interior metric with the corresponding exterior geometry). The numerical
values of these constants are shown in tables 1–3 for different values of n and the Rastall parameter ξ. We
analyzed the necessary physical requirements by graphical representations. For numerical and graphical study,
we have chosen a representative of compact stars, namely Vela X-1 with M = 1.77Me and Rò = 9.56 km.
Figure 1 shows that both of the metric potentials remain positive for all the considered values of the Rastall
parameter ξ and n throughout the radius of the compact star which is a necessary requirement for a physically
acceptable solution. Figure 2 represents the physical behavior of density for different chosen values of the
parameters n (representing different curves) and ξ (different values along the row). This figure also obey another
physical condition, i.e., figure shows that density remain positive within the radius of the star and has maximum
value at the core and decreases gradually along the boundary of the star which inferred that core of the stellar
object is more dense than the other region. Next two figures (figures 3 and 4) describing the behavior of radial

14
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

Table 3. Calculated values of A, B, & c (M = 1.77Me

and R = 9.56 km).

Rastall parameter ξ = −0.09

n A B c

1.8 −2.979141 −0.035166 0.007100

2.2 3.330400 −0.035336 0.006855
2.6 0.968311 −0.035505 0.006620
3.0 0.363522 −0.035675 0.006392
3.4 −0.045560 −0.035844 0.006172
3.8 −0.901274 −0.036013 0.005960
4.2 1.019584 −0.036181 0.005755
4.6 0.237509 −0.036350 0.005557
5.0 0.011973 −0.036518 0.005366
5.4 −0.146944 −0.036686 0.005182
5.8 −0.441149 −0.036853 0.005004
6.2 0.135861 −0.037021 0.004832
6.6 −0.129039 −0.037188 0.004666
7.0 −0.217664 −0.037355 0.004505

Table 4. Summary of calculated results for ξ = −0.03, ξ = −0.06, and ξ = −0.09.

Properties n = 1.8 1.8 < n „ 2.2 2.2 < n „ 3 3 „ n „ 4.2 4.2 < n „ 5.4 5.4 < n „ 6.6 n=7

ρ(Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified

pr (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
pt (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
pt (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
σ(Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
E2 (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
Δ (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Not-Justified Not- Justified Not- Justified
dr
dr
(Negative) Not-Justified Not-Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
dpr
dr
(Negative) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
dpt
dr
(Negative) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
NEC (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
WEC (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
DEC (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
SEC (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
m(r) (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
u(r) (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
z(r) (Positive) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
ωr ä (0, 1) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
ωt ä (0, 1) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified
TOV (Balanced) Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied
vr2 Î (0, 1) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Not-Justified
vt2 Î (0, 1) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Not-Justified Not-Justified
∣vt2 - vr2∣ Î (0, 1) Justified Justified Justified Justified Justified Not-Justified Not-Justified

and tangential pressures respectively, which also support the physical acceptability of the proposed model. One
can note that the radial pressure vanishes at the surface of the star which is required for smooth matching of
interior and exteriors geometries. Figures 8–10 describing the gradients of density and pressures respectively,
which support our analytical investigation regarding the maximality of density and pressure at the core of the
stellar object. The profile of the charge density represented in figure 5 which is dominant near the core of the star
and decline gradually along the surface. The next figure depicting the conduct of electric filed showing the
increasing behavior linearly due to considered model. The next 3 figures (figure 11–13) are very important
regarding the physical acceptance of the model which represent the energy conditions. One can see from these
figures that all the energy conditions are satisfied for our presented model which are quite important
requirements for a viable model. Another important physical requirement for a plausible model is that the
equation of state parameters (in the present case both radial and tangential) must lies between 0 and 1. Figure 14
shows that the value of the equation of state parameter remain in the required region.

15
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

The stability of obtained results in the modeling of celestial objects can be determined by employing the causality
condition by Herrera [110] and Abreu et al [111], which impose the limits on the minimum and maximum domain of
the sound speed (both in the present case radial sound speed and tangential sound speed). Causality condition
demands that 0 „ vsr „ 1 and 0 „ vsr „ 1, consequently, the region for which −1 „ vsr − vsr „ 0 is called potentially
stable region and for 0 „ vsr − vsr „ 1 is called potentially unstable. Our graphical investigation shows that the causality
condition proposed by Herrera is hold (for all considered values of n except n … 6.6) and our model is potentially stable
within the entire geometry of the star (see adjoining figures 19–21). Moreover, The hydrostatic equilibrium of the
system can be analyzed by Tolman Volkoff Openhemier equation (usually called TOV equation), which says that the
total effect of the applied forces should be counterbalanced by each other. We employ the same concept to study the
hydrostatic equilibrium of our system by computing the different forces and examined their behavior graphically for
different three chosen values of the Rastall parameter. In all the cases, we observe that gravitational force and Rastall
force counterbalanced by the combined effect of anisotropic force and hydrostatic force. Clearly one can ponder that
the Rastall force effectly take a part to counterbalance the net effect of all the forces.
The mass computed from the presented study (see figure 15) is also regular in the entire radius and lies
within the physical range such that the necessary physical requirement associated to the mass of the star
introduced by the Buchdehal cite101 is attained, which is, the compactness u = M/R must not be greater than a
specific limit, i.e., u < 4/9 (can be observed from figure 16). Besides the maximum range of compactness, the
surface redshift value should not be exceed indefinitely. For different configuration of interior geometries of the
compact objects, different authors referred the maximum limit for the surface redshift. Among all the suggested
limits for different interior geometries, Zs < 5.211 is maximum range. One can obviously contemplate from the
adjoining figure (figure 17) that our obtain surface redshift value in the presented model is in good congruence
with all the suggested limits till now for a physically plausible system.
In the present work we have studied the constraints on the Karmarkar parameter n for some specific values
of the Rastall parameter ξ. In future, one can observe the range of the Rastall parameter for the given range of the
Karmarker parameter for a physically suitable model. The present work can also be extended to study the mutual
connection between the ranges of the Rastall parameter and the Karmarker parameter. Also, it can be extended
to compare the presented results with the standard General Relativity and other modified theories of gravity.
In conclusion, we found that our proposed model is well behaved and meets the physical requirements
which are necessary for a physically plausible model.
Data availability statement

The data generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available for legal/ethical reasons
but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Acknowledgment

This research work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.
11971241.

Appendix

cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n
F1 (r ) = ,
(1 + br 2)2
b + abr 2
F2 (r ) = ,
a + abr 2
n n n a-b ⎞
F3 (r ) = 2F1 ⎛ - , - ; 1 - ; ,
⎝ 2 2 2 a + abr 2 ⎠
F4 (r ) = 1 + 2br 2 + b 2r 4 + cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n ,
F5 (r ) = 3 + 2br 2 - b 2r 4 + cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n ,
cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n
F6 (r ) = 8p (4x - 1)(br 2 + 1)2 ⎛⎜
2 + 1) 2
+ 1⎞ ,
⎟

⎝ ( br ⎠
F7 (r ) = - cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n + b 2r 4 + 2br 2 + 1,
F8 (r ) = 3 + 5b 2r 4 + b 3r 6 + cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n + br 2 (3cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n + 7) ,
F9 (r ) = 3 + 7br 2 + 5b 2r 4 + b 3r 6 + cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n + 3bcr 4 (ar 2 + 1)n + F7 (r ) n (br 2 + 1) ,
cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n
F10 (r ) = ,
(br 2 + 1)2

16
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

F11 (r ) = (AbnrF2 (r )n 2 + BF1 (r ) F3 (r )(br 2 + 1))2 ,

F12 (r ) = 8pF11 (r )(4x - 1) r (ar 2 + 1) F4 (r )2 ,
F13 (r ) = 3 - 7x - 3nx + cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n ((n - 3) x + 1) ,
F14 (r ) = Acr (ar 2 + 1)n F16 (r ) ,
F15 (r ) = - 1 + 3x + nx - cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n (1 + ( - 1 + n) x ) + b 3r 6 (nx + x - 1)
+ b 2r 4 ((3n + 5) x - 3) - br 2F13 (r ) ,
F16 (r ) = F5 (r ) + ar 2 (2n (br 2 + 1)2 + F5 (r )) ,
F17 (r ) = 2ABr (ar 2F9 (r ) + F8 (r )) x - A2 F1 (r ) F16 (r )(br 2 + 1)( - 1 + 2x ) ,
F18 (r ) = b 2n2F2 (r )n (2B2r 2F1 (r )(1 + ar 2+)(1 + br 2)(F4 (r )) x + F17 (r )) ,
F19 (r ) = (1 - br 2 + ar 2 (1 + n - br 2 + bnr 2)) ,
F20 (r ) = bnF2 (r )n 2 (Br (1 + ar 2)(F4 (r )) - AF1 (r )(1 + br 2) F19 (r )) - Bcr (1 + ar 2)n F19 (r ) F3 (r ) ,
F21 (r ) = - 1 - cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n + b 3r 6 ( - 1 + x ) + 3x + cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n x + b 2r 4 ( - 3 + 5x ) ,
F22 (r ) = F21 (r ) + br 2 ( - 3 + 7x + cr 2 (ar 2 + 1)n ( - 1 + 3x )) + ar 2F15 (r ) ,
F23 (r ) = 1 + 3br 2 + 3b 2r 4 + b 3r 6 + cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n ,
F24 (r ) = F23 (r ) + bcr 4 (1 + ar 2)n - 3x - 7br 2x - 5b 2r 4x ,
F25 (r ) = F24 (r ) - b 3r 6x - cr 2 (1 + ar 2)n x - 3bcr 4 (1 + ar 2)n x ,
F26 (r ) = - Br (ar 2 + 1) F1 (r )(1 + br 2) + AF19 (r ) ,
F27 (r ) = (1 + ar 2)n F19 (r ) x + BF1 (r )(F25 (r ) - ar 2F15 (r )) ,
F28 (r ) = F2 (r )n 2 (4AcrF27 (r )) F3 (r ) - 2c (ar 2 + 1)n F1 (r )(B + bBr 2)2 ,
F29 (r ) = F2 (r )n 2 (F26 (r )) - BF1 (r )(1 + br 2) F19 (r ) F3 (r ) ,
F30 (r ) = AbF1 (r ) F2 (r ) nr n 2 (br 2 + 1)2 + Bcr (1 + ar 2)n (bF2 (r ) nr1 + 2 + bF3 (r ) r 2 + F3 (r )) ,
n

ORCID iDs

Asifa Ashraf https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5522-5491

References
[1] Lake K and Degaty M S R 1998 Comput. Phys. Commun. 115 395
[2] Rosseland S 1924 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 84 720
[3] Neslusan L 2001 Astron. Astrophys. 372 913
[4] Anninos P and Rothman T 2001 Phys. Rev. D 65 024003
[5] Giuliani A and Rothman T 2008 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 40 1427
[6] Datta Majumdar S 1947 Phys. Rev. D 72 390
[7] Papapetrou A 1947 Proc. R. Irish Acad. 81 191
[8] Bonnor W B 1965 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 137 239
[9] Ivanov B V 2002 Phys. Rev. D 65 104011
[10] Pant N and Rajasekhara S 2011 Astrophys. Space Sci. 333 161
[11] Kiess T E 2012 Astrophys. Space Sci. 339 329
[12] Bonnor W B 1965 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 137 239
[13] Ivanov B V 2002 Phys. Rev. D 65 104001
[14] Bekenstein J D 1971 Phys. Rev. D 4 2185
[15] Zhang J L, Chau W Y and Deng T Y 1982 Astrophys. and Space Sci. 88 81
[16] de Felice F, Yu Y and Fang Z 1995 Relativistic charged spheres Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 277 17
[17] Yu Y Q and Liu S M 2000 Relativistic charged balls Commun. Theor. Phys. 33 571
[18] de Felice F, Siming L and Yunqiang Y 1999 Relativistic charged spheres: II. Regularity and stability Class. Quantum Grav. 16 2669
[19] Stettner R 1973 Ann. Phys. 80 212
[20] Rahaman F, Ray S, Jafry A K and Chakraborty K 2010 Phys. Rev. D 82 104055
[21] Sharma R, Mukherjee S and Maharaj S D 2001 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 33 999
[22] de Felice F, Yu Y and Fang J 1995 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 277 L17
[23] Maurya S K, Gupta Y K and Ray S 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 360
[24] Maurya S K F 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 360
[25] Majumdar S D 1947 Phys. Rev. 72 390
[26] Compere G, McFadden P, Skenderis K and Taylor M 2011 JHEP JHEP07(2011)50
[27] Skenderis K and Townsend P K 1999 Phys. Lett. B 468 46
[28] Singh Ksh N and Pant N 2015 Astrophys. Space Sci. 358 44
[29] Maurya S K, Gupta Y K, Ray S and Deb D 2017 A new model for spherically symmetric charged compact stars of embedding class 1
Eur. Phys. J. C 77 45
[30] Ratanpal B S and Bhar P 2017 Phys. Astron. Int. J. 1 5
[31] Thirukkanesh S and Ragel F C 2017 Chin. Phys. C 41 015102
[32] Maartens R, Maharaj S D and Tupper B O J 1995 Class. Quantum Gravity 12 2577

17
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

[33] Maartens R, Maharaj S D and Tupper B O J 1996 Class. Quantum Gravity 13 317
[34] Tupper B O J, Keane A J and Carot J 2012 Class. Quantum Gravity 29 145016
[35] Schlai L 1871 Ann. di Mat. 5 170
[36] Nash J 1956 Ann. Math. 63 20
[37] Karmakar K R 1948 Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci. A 27 56
[38] Schwarzschild K 1916 Sitz. Deut. Akad. Winn. Math-Phys. Berlin 24 424
[39] Kohler M and Chao K L 1965 Z. Naturforsch. Ser. A 20 1537
[40] Singh K N, Pant N and Govender M 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 100
[41] Bhar P, Maurya S K, Gupta Y K and Manna T 2016 Eur. Phys. J. A 52 191
[42] Abbas G and Nazar H 2019 Int. J. Mod. Phys A 34 1950220
[43] Abbas G and Nazar H 2021 Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 18 2150045
[44] Ahmed R and Abbas G 2020 Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35 2050103
[45] Mustafa G, Tie-Cheng X and Farasat Shamir M 2021 Phys. Scr. 96 105008
[46] Mustafa G, Tie-Cheng X, Farasat Shamir M and Javed M 2021 Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136 2
[47] Mustafa G, Hussain I, Farasat Shamir M and Tie-Cheng X 2021 Phys. Scr. 96 045009
[48] Mustafa G, Tie-Cheng X, Ahmad M and Farasat Shamir M 2021 Phys, Dark Univ. 31 100747
[49] Mustafa G, Farasat Shamir M and Tie-Cheng X 2020 Physical Rev. D 101 104013
[50] Mustafa G, Tie-Cheng X and Farasat Shamir M 2020 Ann. Phys. 413 168059
[51] Mustafa G, Zubair M, Waheed S and Tie-Cheng X 2020 Eur. Phys. J. C 80 1
[52] Maurya S K and Govender M 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 347
[53] Maurya S K, Gupta Y K, Smitha T T and Rahaman F 2016 Eur. Phys. J. A 52 191
[54] Maurya S K, Ratanpal B S and Govender M 2017 Ann. Phys. 382 36
[55] Maurya S K and Govender M 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 420
[56] Abbott B P et al 2016 Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 061102
[57] Abbott B et al 2019 Phys. Rev. X 9 031040
[58] Akiyama K et al 2019 Astrophys. J. Lett. 875 L4
[59] Shamir M F and Malik A 2019 Behavior of anisotropic compact stars in f (R, f) gravity Commun. Theor. Phys. 71 599
[60] Shamir M F and Malik A 2021 Bardeen compact stars in modified f(R) gravity Chin. J. Phys. 69 312–21
[61] Malik A 2022 Analysis of Charged Compact Stars in Modified f (R, f) Theory of Gravity New Astron. 93 101765
[62] Malik A, Ahmad I and Kiran 2022 A study of anisotropic compact stars in f (R, f, X) theory of gravity Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 19
2250028
[63] Malik A 2021 A study of Levi-Civitaʼs cylindrical solutions in f (R, f) gravity European Physical Journal Plus 136 1146
[64] Malik A, Nafees A, Ali A and Butt M N 2022 A study of cylindrically symmetric solutions in f (R, f, X) theory of gravity Eur. Phys. J. C
82 166
[65] Shamir M, Asghar Z and Malik A 2022 Fortschr. Phys. 70 2200134
[66] Harada T 1998 Phys. Rev. D 57 4802
[67] Orellana M, Garcia F, Pannia F A T and Romero G E 2013 Gen. Relat. Gravit. 45 771
[68] Momeni D and Myrzakulov R 2015 Int. J. Geomet. Methods Mod. Phys. 12 1550014
[69] Oliveira A, Velten H, Fabris J and Casarini L 2015 Phys. Rev. D 92 044020
[70] Hendi S, Bordbar G, Panah B E and Panahiyan S 2016 J. Cosmo. and Astropar. Phys. 2016 013
[71] Mota C E, Santos L C, Grams G, da Silva F M and Menezes D P 2019 Phys. Rev. D 100 024043
[72] Rastall P 1972 Generalization of the Einstein theory Phys. Rev. D 6 3357
[73] Hansraj S, Banerjee A and Channuie P 2019 Ann. Phys. 400 320
[74] Mota C E, Santos L C, da Silva F M, Flores C V, da Silva T J and Menezes D P 2019 Class. Quantum Grav. 39 085008
[75] Abbas G and Shahzad M R 2018 Eur. Phys. J. A 54 211
[76] Salako I G, Jawad A and Moradpour H 2018 Int. J. Geomet. Meth. Mod. Phys. 15 1850093
[77] Abbas G and Shahzad M R 2018 Astrophys. Space Sci. 363 251
[78] Abbas G and Shahzad M R 2019 Astrophys. Space Sci. 364 50
[79] Heydarzade Y, Moradpour H and Darabi F 2017 Can. J. Phys. 95 1253
[80] Heydarzade Y and Darabi F 2017 Phys. Lett. B 771 365
[81] Ma M S and Zhao R 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 629
[82] Kumar R and Ghosh S G 2018 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 750
[83] Xu Z, Hou X, Gong X and Wang J 2018 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 513
[84] Övgün A, Javed W and Ali R 2018 Adv. High Energy Phys. 2018 3131620
[85] Ali R, Asgher M and Malik M F 2020 Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35 2050225
[86] Bamba K, Jawad A, Rafque S and Moradpour H 2018 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 986
[87] Lobo I P, Moradpour H, Morais Graca J and Salako I 2018 Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 27 1850069
[88] Soroushfar S, Saffari R and Upadhyay S 2019 Gen. Relativ. Gravitation 51 130
[89] Moradpour H, Sadeghnezhad N and Hendi S 2017 Can. J. Phys. 95 1257
[90] Halder S, Bhattacharya S and Chakraborty S 2019 Mod. Phys. Lett. A 34 1950095
[91] Batista C E, Daouda M H, Fabris J C, Piattella O F and Rodrigues D C 2012 Phys. Rev. D 85 084008
[92] Fabris J C, Piattella O F, Rodrigues D C, Batista C E and Daouda M H 2012 International Journal of Modern Physics: Conference Series
18 67
[93] Batista C, Fabris J C, Piattella O F and Velasquez-Toribio A 2013 Eur. Phys. J. C 73 2425
[94] Moradpour H 2016 Phys. Lett. B 757 187
[95] Moradpour H, Heydarzade Y, Darabi F and Salako I G 2017 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 259
[96] Lin K and Qian W L 2020 Eur. Phys. J. C 80 561
[97] Wolf C 1986 Phys. Scr. 34 193
[98] Carames T R, Daouda M H, Fabris J C, Oliveira A M, Piattella O F and Strokov V 2014 Eur. Phys. J. C 74 3145
[99] Visser M 2018 Phys. Lett. B 782 83
[100] Darabi F, Moradpour H, Licata I, Heydarzade Y and Corda C 2018 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 25
[101] Moradpour H, Bonilla A, Abreu E M C and Neto J A 2017 Phys. Rev. D 96 123504 1C13
[102] Hansraj S, Banerjee A and Channuie P 2019 Annals of Phys. 400 320

18
Phys. Scr. 98 (2023) 035027 A Ashraf et al

[103] Hansraj S and Banerjee A 2020 Mod. Phys. Lett.A 35 2050105

[104] Shahzad M R and Abbas G 2020 Astrophys. Space Sci. 365 147
[105] Shahzad M R and Abbas G 2020 Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135 502
[106] Bardeen J M 1968 Non-singular general-relativistic gravitational collapse Proceedings of GR-5, Georgia, U. S. S. R. 174
[107] Ayon-Beato E and Garcia A 2000 The bardeen model as a nonlinear magnetic monopole Phys. Lett. B 493 149
[108] Abreu H, Hernández H and Núñez L A 2007 Calss. Quantum. Grav. 24 4631
[109] Andréasson H 2008 Sharp bounds on 2m/r of general spherically symmetric static objects J. Diff. Eq. 245 2243
[110] Herrera L 1992 Cracking of self-gravitating compact objects Phys. Lett. A 165 206–10
[111] Abreu H, Hernandez H and Nunez L A 2007 Sound speeds Class. Quant. Gravity 24 4631–45

19