(i) (u/v){}^{\prime} = 0 : One can, without loss of generality, set u=v in this case. Then the algebraic equation for u^{\prime\prime} simplifies to u^{\prime\prime} = -2 \Lambda, which is readily solved as u(r) = v(r) = - \Lambda r^2 + u_1 r + u_2 for integration constants u1 and u2. After a renaming of these, one arrives at \begin{align} \newcommand{\e}{{\rm e}} \displaystyle {\rm d}s_2^2 = \Lambda (r-r_{-}) (r-r_{+}) {\rm d}t^2 - \frac{{\rm d}r^2}{\Lambda (r-r_{-}) (r-r_{+})} + r^2 {\rm d}\theta^2. \label{met2} \nonumber \end{align} \tag{ 18 }

(ii) 2 \Lambda r u + v u^{\prime} = 0 : Solving this constraint for u^{\prime} and demanding that it be compatible with the algebraic equation for u^{\prime\prime}, one arrives at \newcommand{\bi}{\boldsymbol} (v - \Lambda r^2) \big(2 \Lambda r + v^{\prime} \big) = 0. Considering the analysis of the 2 \Lambda r + v^{\prime} = 0 case above, one finds that demanding the second factor to vanish leads one to the metric (, 17: #cqgab28c4eqn020) with the integration constant r1 = 0, which can also be identified with the r_{-} + r_{+} = 0 form of (, 18: #cqgab28c4eqn021). Thus, there is no new solution per se. Finally, setting v(r) = \Lambda r^2, one finds u(r) = u_0/r^2, for an integration constant u0. Taking u0 = 1, one arrives at the metric \begin{align} \newcommand{\e}{{\rm e}} \displaystyle {\rm d}s_\mathrm{L}^2 = - \frac{{\rm d}t^2}{r^2} + \frac{{\rm d}r^2}{\Lambda r^2} + r^2 {\rm d}\theta^2, \label{lif} \nonumber \end{align} \tag{ 19 } which is easily identified as the static Lifshitz spacetime [, 13: #cqgab28c4bib013] with the dynamical exponent z = -1 [, 11: #cqgab28c4bib011] when \Lambda > 0. However, a close scrutiny immediately reveals that C_{t\theta} = 2 \Lambda^{3/2} \neq 0, so that the field equation for MMG (, 5: #cqgab28c4eqn005) is not satisfied by (, 19: #cqgab28c4eqn022)

and Sar&inodot

o&gbreve

Three-dimensional black holes, gravitational solitons, kinks and wormholes for BHT massive gravity J. High