This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Divergence equations and uniqueness theorem of static spacetimes with conformal scalar hair

Takeshi Shinohara1    Yoshimune Tomikawa2    Keisuke Izumi3,1    Tetsuya Shiromizu1,3 1Department of Mathematics, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan 2Faculty of Economics, Matsuyama University, Matsuyama 790-8578, Japan 3Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan
Abstract

We reexamine the Israel-type proof of the uniqueness theorem of the static spacetime outside the photon surface in the Einstein-conformal scalar system. We derive in a systematic fashion a new divergence identity which plays a key role in the proof. Our divergence identity includes three parameters, allowing us to give a new proof of the uniqueness.

\subjectindex

E0

1 Introduction

The Bocharova-Bronnikov-Melnikov-Bekenstein (BBMB) solution BBM ; Bekenstein is a static black hole solution to the Einstein-conformal scalar system in four dimensions.111Assuming the analyticity at the photon surface, it was shown that higher dimensional counterpart fails to admit a regular event horizon HDBBMB . A natural question to be asked is whether this solution exhausts all the static black holes in this theory. The original uniqueness proof Israel ; Robinson of static black holes in vacuum general relativity demonstrates the uniqueness of the boundary value problem of elliptic system between the event horizon and spatial infinity. In the BBMB solution, the photon surface composed of (unstable) closed circular orbits of photons appears at the points where the coefficient of the Ricci tensor vanishes in the Einstein equation. This feature prevents us to apply the global boundary value problem outside the event horizon. Nevertheless, the uniqueness property of the static region outside the photon surface has been properly addressed in Refs. Tomikawa2017a ; Tomikawa2017b , where it has been shown to be isometric to the BBMB solution.

To prove the uniqueness theorem, two technically and conceptually distinct methods are available so far. The BBMB uniqueness has been demonstrated in Ref. Tomikawa2017a by a way similar to those in Refs. Israel ; Robinson , relying on certain divergence identities. The other proof in Ref. Tomikawa2017b follows the argument in Ref. bm based on the conformal transformation and positive mass theorem SY . Meanwhile, for the uniqueness of black holes in vacuum Einstein, Einstein-Maxwell and Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton systems, the argument by Robinson Robinson , which is regarded as a simplification of Israel’s proof, has been reexamined in Ref. Nozawa2018 . A significant achievement in Ref. Nozawa2018 is to provide a systematic way to derive the divergence identities exploiting the proper deviation from the Schwarzschild metric. The obstruction tensors are of great use in finding a series of divergence identities even in stationary metrics Nozawa:2021udg . Then, it is natural to ask if the procedure developed in Ref. Nozawa2018 works in the Einstein-conformal scalar system and also for the uniqueness proof of photon surfaces.

In this paper, we apply the procedure of Ref. Nozawa2018 to the Einstein-conformal scalar system. We shall see that it indeed works and find a new divergence identity with three parameters. Since the derivation for the divergence identities found in Ref. Tomikawa2017a was rather non-trivial, the systematic way to derive the identity will be of some help in a similar consideration for other systems. Finally, we shall prove the uniqueness of the static photon surface again.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we describe the Einstein-conformal scalar system and the setup of the current paper. In Sect. 3, we develop the procedure of Ref. Nozawa2018 to the Einstein-conformal scalar system. Finally, we will give summary in Sect. 4. In Appendix, we present the relation to Ref. Tomikawa2017a in the details.

2 The BBMB black hole and setup

In this section, we describe the Einstein-conformal scalar system and the basic equations for static spacetimes. The action for the Einstein-conformal scalar system is represented by

S=d4xg(12κR12(ϕ)2112Rϕ2),\displaystyle S=\int d^{4}x\sqrt{-g}\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa}R-\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^{2}-\frac{1}{12}R\phi^{2}\right), (1)

where κ=8πG\kappa=8\pi G is a gravitational constant. The field equations are given by

(1κ6ϕ2)(Rμν12Rgμν)=\displaystyle\left(1-\frac{\kappa}{6}\phi^{2}\right)\left(R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu\nu}\right)= κ(μϕνϕ12gμν(ϕ)2+16(gμν2μν)ϕ2)\displaystyle\kappa\left(\nabla_{\mu}\phi\nabla_{\nu}\phi-\dfrac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}(\nabla\phi)^{2}+\dfrac{1}{6}(g_{\mu\nu}\nabla^{2}-\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu})\phi^{2}\right) (2)

and

2ϕ16Rϕ=0.\nabla^{2}\phi-\frac{1}{6}R\phi=0. (3)

Taking the trace of Eq. (2), one finds R=0R=0, so that the field equations are simplified to

(1κ6ϕ2)Rμν=κ(23μϕνϕ16gμν(ϕ)213ϕμνϕ)\left(1-\frac{\kappa}{6}\phi^{2}\right)R_{\mu\nu}=\kappa\left(\frac{2}{3}\nabla_{\mu}\phi\nabla_{\nu}\phi-\frac{1}{6}g_{\mu\nu}(\nabla\phi)^{2}-\frac{1}{3}\phi\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}\phi\right) (4)

and

2ϕ=0.\nabla^{2}\phi=0. (5)

This theory admits a static black hole solution (the BBMB solution) BBM ; Bekenstein . Its metric and scalar field are

ds2=(1mr)2dt2+(1mr)2dr2+r2dΩ22ds^{2}=-\left(1-\frac{m}{r}\right)^{2}dt^{2}+\left(1-\frac{m}{r}\right)^{-2}dr^{2}+r^{2}d\Omega^{2}_{2} (6)

and

ϕ=±6κmrm,\phi=\pm{\sqrt{\frac{6}{\kappa}}}\frac{m}{r-m}, (7)

where dΩ22d\Omega^{2}_{2} is the metric of the unit two-sphere and mm is the mass which is supposed to be positive. The event horizon is located at r=mr=m.

One important feature of the Einstein-conformal scalar system is that it may admit points satisfying ϕ=±6/κ\phi=\pm\sqrt{6/\kappa}, where the prefactor of the Ricci tensor in (4) vanishes. This means that the effective gravitational constant diverges. For the BBMB solution, this occurs precisely at the photon surface r=2mr=2m. As far as the outside region of the photon surface is concerned, the uniqueness property has been settled to be affirmative Tomikawa2017a ; Tomikawa2017b . As stated in Sect. 1, we will reexamine the proof of Ref. Tomikawa2017a and then present an elegant way to find the divergence identities used in the proof.

The generic form of a static metric is written as

ds2=V2(xk)dt2+gij(xk)dxidxj,ds^{2}=-V^{2}(x^{k})dt^{2}+g_{ij}(x^{k})dx^{i}dx^{j}, (8)

where VV is the norm of the static Killing vector. The event horizon located at V=0V=0. We also assume that the conformal scalar field is also static ϕ=ϕ(xi)\phi=\phi(x^{i}). The Einstein equation becomes

(1κ6ϕ2)VD2V=κ6[V2(Dϕ)2+2ϕVDiVDiϕ]\Bigl{(}1-\frac{\kappa}{6}\phi^{2}\Bigr{)}VD^{2}V=\frac{\kappa}{6}\left[V^{2}(D\phi)^{2}+2\phi VD^{i}VD_{i}\phi\right] (9)

and

(1κ6ϕ2)(Rij(3)V1DiDjV)=κ(23DiϕDjϕ16gij(Dϕ)213ϕDiDjϕ),\displaystyle\Bigl{(}1-\frac{\kappa}{6}\phi^{2}\Bigr{)}\Bigl{(}{}^{(3)}R_{ij}-V^{-1}D_{i}D_{j}V\Bigr{)}=\kappa\left(\frac{2}{3}D_{i}\phi D_{j}\phi-\frac{1}{6}g_{ij}(D\phi)^{2}-\frac{1}{3}\phi D_{i}D_{j}\phi\right), (10)

where DiD_{i} and Rij(3){}^{(3)}R_{ij} are the covariant derivative and the Ricci tensor with respect to the three dimensional metric gijg_{ij}, respectively. Note here that the front factors in the left-hand side of Eqs. (9) and (10) vanish at the surface SpS_{p} determined by ϕ=±6/κ=:ϕp\phi=\pm\sqrt{6/\kappa}=:\phi_{p}. The equation for the scalar field is written as

Di(VDiϕ)=0.D_{i}(VD^{i}\phi)=0. (11)

The asymptotic conditions at infinity are given as

V=1mr+𝒪(1r2),V=1-\frac{m}{r}+\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{1}{r^{2}}\right), (12)
gij=(1+2mr)δij+𝒪(1r2)g_{ij}=\left(1+\frac{2m}{r}\right)\delta_{ij}+\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{1}{r^{2}}\right) (13)

and

ϕ=𝒪(1r).\displaystyle\phi=\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right). (14)

Equations (9) and (11) give us

Di[(1φ)DiΦ]=0,D_{i}[(1-\varphi)D^{i}\Phi]=0, (15)

where Φ:=(1+φ)V\Phi:=(1+\varphi)V and φ=±κ/6ϕ\varphi=\pm{\sqrt{\kappa/6}}\phi. Then, one considers Ω\Omega which is the bounded region by SpS_{p} and the two-sphere SS_{\infty} at spatial infinity. The volume integration of Eq. (15) over Σ\Sigma shows the relation between VV and ϕ\phi as Tomikawa2017a

ϕ=±6κ(V11).\phi=\pm\sqrt{\frac{6}{\kappa}}(V^{-1}-1). (16)

Through Eq. (16), we see that V=1/2V=1/2 at SpS_{p}

Using the relation (16), the Einstein equation implies

D2v=0,D^{2}v=0, (17)

where vlnVv\coloneqq\ln V. Henceforth, we can regard vv as a kind of the radial coordinate. It allows us to decompose the t=t=constant hypersurface Σ\Sigma into the radial direction and the foliation of the v=v= constant surfaces SvS_{v}. As a consequence, the (i,j)(i,j)-component of the Einstein equation becomes

(2V1)Rij(3)=DiDjv+(4V+1)DivDjvgij(Dv)2.(2V-1){}^{(3)}R_{ij}=D_{i}D_{j}v+(4V+1)D_{i}vD_{j}v-g_{ij}(Dv)^{2}. (18)

The curvature invariant is expressed in terms of geometrical quantities associated with SvS_{v} as

RμνRμν\displaystyle R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu} =\displaystyle= 1(2V1)2ρ2[(2(1V)kij1ρhij)2+(2(1V)k+1+2Vρ)2\displaystyle\frac{1}{(2V-1)^{2}\rho^{2}}\left[\left(2(1-V)k_{ij}-\frac{1}{\rho}h_{ij}\right)^{2}+\left(-2(1-V)k+\frac{1+2V}{\rho}\right)^{2}\right. (19)
+8(1V)2ρ2(𝒟ρ)2]+1ρ4,\displaystyle~{}~{}+\left.\frac{8(1-V)^{2}}{\rho^{2}}({\cal D}\rho)^{2}\right]+\frac{1}{\rho^{4}},

where hijh_{ij} is the induced metric of SvS_{v}, 𝒟i{\cal D}_{i} is the covariant derivatve with respect to hijh_{ij} and ρ\rho is the lapse function, ρ:=(DivDiv)1/2\rho:=(D_{i}vD^{i}v)^{-1/2}. Moreover, kijk_{ij} is the extrinsic curvature of SvS_{v} defined by kij:=hikDknjk_{ij}:=h_{i}^{k}D_{k}n_{j}, where nin_{i} is the unit normal vector to SvS_{v} on Σ\Sigma, and kk is the trace part of kijk_{ij}. Using the lapse function, nin_{i} is expressed by ni=ρDivn_{i}=\rho D_{i}v. From Eq. (19), at V=1/2V=1/2, we have to impose

𝒟iρ|Sp=0,kij|Sp=1ρphij|Sp,{\cal D}_{i}\rho|_{S_{p}}=0,\ \ \ \ k_{ij}|_{S_{p}}=\frac{1}{\rho_{p}}h_{ij}|_{S_{p}}, (20)

otherwise the curvature invariant diverges. The first equation of Eq. (20) shows that ρ\rho is constant on SpS_{p}. We write the constant as ρpρ|Sp\rho_{p}\coloneqq\rho|_{S_{p}}. The second condition of Eq. (20) implies that the surface SpS_{p} is totally umbilic. We can see that, under the conditions of Eq. (20), the Kretschmann invariant, RμνρσRμνρσR_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} is also finite at SpS_{p} Tomikawa2017a .

In the proof of the uniqueness in Ref. Tomikawa2017a the following divergence identities are presented without any explanations,

Di(niρ)=0,D_{i}\left(\frac{n^{i}}{\rho}\right)=0, (21)
Di[(ρk2)ni(2V1)ρ32]=12V1ρ12(k~ijk~ij+ρ1𝒟2ρ)D_{i}\left[\frac{(\rho k-2)n^{i}}{(2V-1)\rho^{\frac{3}{2}}}\right]=-\frac{1}{2V-1}\rho^{-\frac{1}{2}}(\tilde{k}_{ij}\tilde{k}^{ij}+\rho^{-1}{\cal D}^{2}\rho) (22)

and

Di((kξ+η)ni)=(k~ijk~ij+ρ1𝒟2ρ)ξ,D_{i}((k\xi+\eta)n^{i})=-(\tilde{k}_{ij}\tilde{k}^{ij}+\rho^{-1}{\cal D}^{2}\rho)\xi, (23)

where ξ(2V1)ρ12\xi\coloneqq(2V-1)\rho^{-\frac{1}{2}}η2(2V+1)ρ32\eta\coloneqq 2(2V+1)\rho^{-\frac{3}{2}} and k~ij\tilde{k}_{ij} is the traceless part of kijk_{ij}. By the volume integration of these equations over Ω\Omega and the use of Stokes’ theorem, one gets one equality and two inequalities. These inequalities are consistent with each other only when equalities hold in both. It gives the result that Ω\Omega is spherically symmetric. Finally, Ref. Xanthopoulos1991 shows that Ω\Omega is unique to be the BBMB solution.

Compared to Eq. (21), the derivation of Eqs. (22) and (23) is far from trivial. In the following, we will discuss the systematic way to derive them, by applying the argument of Ref. Nozawa2018 .

3 Generalization of the divergence equations and uniqueness

In this section, we develop the systematic derivation of the divergence equations following Ref. Nozawa2018 . The obtained divergence equation allows us to show that the uniqueness of the photon surface of the BBMB solution.

First, we wish to find a current JiJ^{i} satisfying the following equation.

DiJi=(termsadefinitesign).D_{i}J^{i}=\left(\ \rm{terms\ a\ definite\ sign}\ \right). (24)

The right-hand side is required to have a definite sign and to consist of a sum of tensors which vanish if and only if the spacetime is the BBMB solution. The candidate for such tensors is

Hij=DiDjv+3V1VDivDjvVρ2(1V)gij.H_{ij}=D_{i}D_{j}v+\frac{3V}{1-V}D_{i}vD_{j}v-\frac{V}{\rho^{2}(1-V)}g_{ij}. (25)

Note that this is symmetric and traceless tensor. A simple calculation shows that HijH_{ij} vanishes for the BBMB solution. The expression for HijH_{ij} in terms of geometric quantities on SvS_{v} is useful for later discussions.

Hij=1ρk~ij2ρ2n(i𝒟j)ρ+12ρ(hij2ninj)(k2Vρ(1V)),\displaystyle H_{ij}=\frac{1}{\rho}\tilde{k}_{ij}-\frac{2}{\rho^{2}}n_{(i}{\cal D}_{j)}\rho+\frac{1}{2\rho}(h_{ij}-2n_{i}n_{j})\left(k-\frac{2V}{\rho(1-V)}\right), (26)

where we used the Einstein equation. Using HijH_{ij}, we can also construct a vector HiH_{i} which vanishes for the BBMB solution as

Hi=ρ2HijDjv.\displaystyle H_{i}=-\rho^{2}H_{ij}D^{j}v. (27)

Here we suppose that JiJ_{i} has the following form

Ji=f1(v)g1(ρ)Diρ+f2(v)g2(ρ)Div.J_{i}=f_{1}(v)g_{1}(\rho)D_{i}\rho+f_{2}(v)g_{2}(\rho)D_{i}v. (28)

The divergence of Eq. (28) is written by

DiJi\displaystyle D_{i}J^{i} =\displaystyle= (f1g1+f2g2)DivDiρ+f1g1(Dρ)2+f2g2(Dv)2+f1g1D2ρ\displaystyle(f^{\prime}_{1}g_{1}+f_{2}g^{\prime}_{2})D_{i}vD^{i}\rho+f_{1}g^{\prime}_{1}(D\rho)^{2}+f^{\prime}_{2}g_{2}(Dv)^{2}+f_{1}g_{1}D^{2}\rho (29)
=\displaystyle= ρ3f1g1[|Hij|2(g1ρg1+3ρ2)|Hi|2]+ρf1g1DivHiS1+1ρ2f1g2S2,\displaystyle-\rho^{3}f_{1}g_{1}\left[|H_{ij}|^{2}-\left(\frac{g^{\prime}_{1}}{\rho g_{1}}+\frac{3}{\rho^{2}}\right)|H_{i}|^{2}\right]+\rho f_{1}g_{1}D^{i}vH_{i}S_{1}+\frac{1}{\rho^{2}}f_{1}g_{2}S_{2},

where

S1f1f1+f2f1g2g1+(4V1)(3V1)(2V1)(1V)+4ρV1Vg1g1S_{1}\coloneqq\frac{f^{\prime}_{1}}{f_{1}}+\frac{f_{2}}{f_{1}}\frac{g^{\prime}_{2}}{g_{1}}+\frac{(4V-1)(3V-1)}{(2V-1)(1-V)}+\frac{4\rho V}{1-V}\frac{g^{\prime}_{1}}{g_{1}} (30)

and

S22ρV1Vg1g2S14ρV2(1V)2g1g2[ρg1g1+8V27V+22V(2V1)]+f2f1.S_{2}\coloneqq\frac{2\rho V}{1-V}\frac{g_{1}}{g_{2}}S_{1}-\frac{4\rho V^{2}}{(1-V)^{2}}\frac{g_{1}}{g_{2}}\left[\rho\frac{g^{\prime}_{1}}{g_{1}}+\frac{8V^{2}-7V+2}{2V(2V-1)}\right]+\frac{f^{\prime}_{2}}{f_{1}}. (31)

The prime denotes the differentiation with respect to each argument of the functions. In the second equality of Eq.(29), we have used 222With aid of Eq. (18), the direct calculation from the definition of ρ\rho gives this.

D2ρ=ρ3|DiDjv|2+3ρ(Dρ)2+12V1(DiρDiv4Vρ).D^{2}\rho=-\rho^{3}|D_{i}D_{j}v|^{2}+\frac{3}{\rho}(D\rho)^{2}+\frac{1}{2V-1}\left(D_{i}\rho D^{i}v-\frac{4V}{\rho}\right). (32)

To control the sign of the right-hand side of Eq. (29), we require S1=S2=0.S_{1}=S_{2}=0. Following Ref. Nozawa2018 , to have decoupled equations, we suppose that g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} have the following form

g1=cρ(c+1),g2=ρc,g_{1}=-c\rho^{-(c+1)},\ \ \ \ \ g_{2}=\rho^{-c}, (33)

where cc is an integration constant. Then, we have the two ordinary differential equations for f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} as

f2+f1+[(4V1)(3V1)(2V1)(1V)4V(1+c)1V]f1=0f_{2}+f^{\prime}_{1}+\left[\frac{(4V-1)(3V-1)}{(2V-1)(1-V)}-\frac{4V(1+c)}{1-V}\right]f_{1}=0 (34)

and

f2+4cV2(1V)2[8V27V+22V(2V1)(c+1)]f1=0.f^{\prime}_{2}+\frac{4cV^{2}}{(1-V)^{2}}\left[\frac{8V^{2}-7V+2}{2V(2V-1)}-(c+1)\right]f_{1}=0. (35)

The solutions are given by

f1=14(2V1)1(1V)12c(a+b(2V1)2)f_{1}=\frac{1}{4}(2V-1)^{-1}(1-V)^{1-2c}(a+b(2V-1)^{2}) (36)

and

f2=14(2V1)1(1V)2c[(a+b)(2cV2V+1)8bcV2(1V)],f_{2}=\frac{1}{4}(2V-1)^{-1}(1-V)^{-2c}\left[(a+b)(2cV-2V+1)-8bcV^{2}(1-V)\right], (37)

where aa and bb are integration constants. Using the fact

12|2ρ2Hi[jDk]vgi[jHk]|2=ρ2|Hij|232|Hi|2,\frac{1}{2}\left|2\rho^{2}H_{i[j}D_{k]}v-g_{i[j}H_{k]}\right|^{2}=\rho^{2}|H_{ij}|^{2}-\frac{3}{2}|H_{i}|^{2}, (38)

the divergence equation is rearranged as

DiJi=cf12ρc[|2ρ2Hi[jDk]vgi[jHk]|2+(2c1)|Hi|2].\displaystyle D_{i}J^{i}=\frac{cf_{1}}{2\rho^{c}}\left[\left|2\rho^{2}H_{i[j}D_{k]}v-g_{i[j}H_{k]}\right|^{2}+(2c-1)|H_{i}|^{2}\right]. (39)

To fix the sign of the right-hand side in Eq. (39), we require

f10,c12.f_{1}\geq 0,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ c\geq\frac{1}{2}. (40)

With 12V<1\frac{1}{2}\leq V<1, it is easy to see that the former is guaranteed by

a0,a+b0.a\geq 0,\ \ \ \ \ a+b\geq 0. (41)

Now, let us integrate Eq. (39) over Ω\Omega. Using Stokes’ theorem, we have

ΩDiJi𝑑Σ=SJini𝑑SSpJini𝑑S0.\int_{\Omega}D_{i}J^{i}d\Sigma=\int_{S_{\infty}}J_{i}n^{i}dS-\int_{S_{p}}J_{i}n^{i}dS\geq 0. (42)

Using the asymptotic behaviors near the spatial infinity, ρ|rV|1r2/m\rho\simeq|\partial_{r}V|^{-1}\simeq r^{2}/m, k2/rk\simeq 2/r, the first terms of the right-hand side is estimated as

SJini𝑑S=π(a+b)m1c.\int_{S_{\infty}}J_{i}n^{i}dS=-\pi(a+b)m^{1-c}. (43)

For the second term, we have to carefully estimate it. Firstly, we have

SpJini𝑑S=ac4(12)12c1ρpc+1Spkρp22V1𝑑S14(12)2c(a+b2ac)1ρpc+1Ap,\int_{S_{p}}J_{i}n^{i}dS=-\frac{ac}{4}\Bigl{(}\frac{1}{2}\Bigr{)}^{1-2c}\frac{1}{\rho_{p}^{c+1}}\int_{S_{p}}\frac{k\rho_{p}-2}{2V-1}dS-\frac{1}{4}\Bigl{(}\frac{1}{2}\Bigr{)}^{-2c}(a+b-2ac)\frac{1}{\rho_{p}^{c+1}}A_{p}, (44)

where ApA_{p} is the area of the surface SpS_{p}. Here note that the Gauss equation with the Einstein equation gives

R(2)=2ρ2+k2kijkij+2(ρk4V)(2V1)ρ2,{}^{(2)}R=\frac{2}{\rho^{2}}+k^{2}-k_{ij}k^{ij}+\frac{2(\rho k-4V)}{(2V-1)\rho^{2}}, (45)

and then

limV1/2R(2)=limV1/22(ρk2)(2V1)ρ2\lim_{V\to 1/2}{}^{(2)}R=\lim_{V\to 1/2}\frac{2(\rho k-2)}{(2V-1)\rho^{2}} (46)

holds, where we used Eq. (20). Using this and the Gauss-Bonnet theorem for the first term in the right-hand side of Eq. (44), we arrive at

SpJini𝑑S=πac2(12)12c1ρpc1χ14(12)2c(a+b2ac)1ρpc+1Ap,\int_{S_{p}}J_{i}n^{i}dS=-\frac{\pi ac}{2}\Bigl{(}\frac{1}{2}\Bigr{)}^{1-2c}\frac{1}{\rho_{p}^{c-1}}\chi-\frac{1}{4}\Bigl{(}\frac{1}{2}\Bigr{)}^{-2c}(a+b-2ac)\frac{1}{\rho_{p}^{c+1}}A_{p}, (47)

where χ\chi is the Euler characteristic. As a consequence, Eq. (42) implies

(a+b)(Apπρp2(4mρp)1c)+ac(πρp2χ2Ap)0.\displaystyle(a+b)\left(A_{p}-\pi\rho_{p}^{2}\left(\frac{4m}{\rho_{p}}\right)^{1-c}\right)+ac\Bigl{(}\pi\rho_{p}^{2}\chi-2A_{p}\Bigr{)}\geq 0\,. (48)

Under the parameter range (40) and (41), we get a pair of inequalities

πρp2(4mρp)1cAp12πρp2χ.\displaystyle\pi\rho_{p}^{2}\left(\frac{4m}{\rho_{p}}\right)^{1-c}\leq A_{p}\leq\frac{1}{2}\pi\rho_{p}^{2}\chi\,. (49)

Setting c=1c=1 gives χ2\chi\geq 2, meaning that only the allowed topology of SpS_{p} is spherical (χ=2\chi=2). Setting χ=2\chi=2 implies that the equality holds, and it occurs if and only if HijH_{ij} vanishes. This is the case that the spacetime is spherically symmetric. According to Ref. Xanthopoulos1991 , the spacetime is unique to be the BBMB solution.

Before closing this section, we comment on the relation to the divergence identities in Ref. Tomikawa2017a . For b=0b=0 and c=1/2c=1/2, Eq. (39) coincides with Eq. (22), and for a=0a=0 and c=1/2c=1/2, Eq. (23). See Appendix for the details.

4 Summary

In this paper, we reexmined the Israel-type proof for the uniqueness of the photon surface in the Einstein-conformal scalar system. Following Ref. Nozawa2018 , we have derived a new divergence identity with three parameters and given a new proof for the uniqueness. In Ref. Nozawa2018 , vacuum Einstein, Einstein-Maxwell and Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton systems have been addressed. Therefore, the current study indicates the powerfulness of the systematic procedure presented there. The deep physical/mathematical reason is expected to be hidden behind the presence of such a procedure.

\ack

We would like to thank Masato Nozawa for valuable comments to the draft. K. I. and T. S. are supported by Grant-Aid for Scientific Research from Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan (No. JP17H01091). K. I. is also supported by JSPS Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) (JP20H01902). T. S. is also supported by JSPS Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (JP21K03551).

Appendix A Relation of Eq. (39) to Eqs. (22) and (23)

Using Eq. (21) or equivalent equality

kρ=niDiρ,k\rho=n^{i}D_{i}\rho, (50)

we have

Ji=cf1ρk+f2ρc+1nicf1𝒟iρρc+1.J_{i}=\frac{-cf_{1}\rho k+f_{2}}{\rho^{c+1}}n_{i}-cf_{1}\frac{{\cal D}_{i}\rho}{\rho^{c+1}}. (51)

Using

Di(𝒟iρρc+1)=𝒟2ρρc+1c(𝒟ρ)2ρc+2,D^{i}\Biggl{(}\frac{{\cal D}_{i}\rho}{\rho^{c+1}}\Biggr{)}=\frac{{\cal D}^{2}\rho}{\rho^{c+1}}-c\frac{({\cal D}\rho)^{2}}{\rho^{c+2}}, (52)

the left-hand side of Eq. (39) becomes

DiJi=Di(cf1ρk+f2ρc+1ni)cf1𝒟2ρρc+1+c2f1(𝒟ρ)2ρc+2.D^{i}J_{i}=D^{i}\Biggl{(}\frac{-cf_{1}\rho k+f_{2}}{\rho^{c+1}}n_{i}\Biggr{)}-cf_{1}\frac{{\cal D}^{2}\rho}{\rho^{c+1}}+c^{2}f_{1}\frac{({\cal D}\rho)^{2}}{\rho^{c+2}}. (53)

The right-hand side of Eq. (39) is expressed as

cf1ρc[k~ijk~ij+cρ2(𝒟ρ)2+2c12(k2Vρ(1V))2].c\frac{f_{1}}{\rho^{c}}\Biggl{[}\tilde{k}_{ij}\tilde{k}^{ij}+\frac{c}{\rho^{2}}({\cal D}\rho)^{2}+\frac{2c-1}{2}\Bigl{(}k-\frac{2V}{\rho(1-V)}\Bigr{)}^{2}\Biggr{]}. (54)

Thus, we have

Di(cf1ρk+f2ρc+1ni)=cf1ρc[k~ijk~ij+2c12(k2Vρ(1V))2]+cf1𝒟2ρρc+1.D^{i}\Biggl{(}\frac{-cf_{1}\rho k+f_{2}}{\rho^{c+1}}n_{i}\Biggr{)}=c\frac{f_{1}}{\rho^{c}}\Biggl{[}\tilde{k}_{ij}\tilde{k}^{ij}+\frac{2c-1}{2}\Biggl{(}k-\frac{2V}{\rho(1-V)}\Biggr{)}^{2}\Biggr{]}+cf_{1}\frac{{\cal D}^{2}\rho}{\rho^{c+1}}. (55)

Now we consider the c=1/2c=1/2 case and then f1=(1/4)(2V1)1[a+b(2V1)2]f_{1}=(1/4)(2V-1)^{-1}[a+b(2V-1)^{2}] and f2=(1/4)(2V1)1[a+b(12V)(1+2V)]f_{2}=(1/4)(2V-1)^{-1}[a+b(1-2V)(1+2V)]. Setting b=0b=0(a=0a=0), we can see that Eq. (55) becomes Eq. (22) (Eq. (23)).

References

  • (1) N. M. Bocharova, K. A. Bronnikov, and V. N. Melnikov, Vestn. Mosk. Univ. Fiz. Astron. 6, 706 (1970).
  • (2) J. D. Bekenstein, Annals Phys. 82, 535-547 (1974).
  • (3) B. C. Xanthopoulos and T. E. Dialynas, J. Math. Phys. 33, 1463-1471 (1992); C. Klimcik, J. Math. Phys. 34, 1914-1926 (1993); C. Martinez and M. Nozawa, Phys. Rev. D 103, no.2, 024003 (2021).
  • (4) W. Israel, Phys. Rev. 164, 1776-1779 (1967).
  • (5) D. C. Robinson, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 8, 695-698 (1977).
  • (6) Y. Tomikawa, T. Shiromizu and K. Izumi, PTEP 2017, no.3, 033E03 (2017).
  • (7) Y. Tomikawa, T. Shiromizu and K. Izumi, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, no.15, 155004 (2017).
  • (8) G. L. Bunting and A. K. M. Masood-ul-Alam, Gen. Rel. Grav. 19, 147 (1987).
  • (9) R. Schoen and S. T. Yau, Commun. Math. Phys.  65, 45 (1979).
  • (10) M. Nozawa, T. Shiromizu, K. Izumi and S. Yamada, Class. Quant. Grav. 35, no.17, 175009 (2018).
  • (11) M. Nozawa, Class. Quant. Grav. 38, no.15, 155001 (2021).
  • (12) B. C. Xanthopoulos and T. Zannias, J. Math. Phys. 32, 1875 (1991).