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

Hawking Temperature as the Total Gauss-Bonnet Invariant of the Region Outside a Black Hole

Emel Altas [email protected] Department of Physics,
Karamanoglu Mehmetbey University, 70100, Karaman, Turkey
   Bayram Tekin [email protected] Department of Physics,
Middle East Technical University, 06800, Ankara, Turkey
(January 26, 2025)
Abstract

We provide two novel ways to compute the surface gravity (κ\kappa) and the Hawking temperature (TH)(T_{H}) of a stationary black hole: in the first method THT_{H} is given as the three-volume integral of the Gauss-Bonnet invariant (or the Kretschmann scalar for Ricci-flat metrics) in the total region outside the event horizon; in the second method it is given as the surface integral of the Riemann tensor contracted with the covariant derivative of a Killing vector on the event horizon. To arrive at these new formulas for the black hole temperature (and the related surface gravity), we first construct a new differential geometric identity using the Bianchi identity and an antisymmetric rank-22 tensor, valid for spacetimes with at least one Killing vector field. The Gauss-Bonnet tensor and the Gauss-Bonnet scalar play a particular role in this geometric identity. We calculate the surface gravity and the Hawking temperature of the Kerr and the extremal Reissner-Nordström holes as examples.

I Introduction

Black hole physics, from the vantage point of both observations and theory, is in a remarkable state of development. Rotating Kerr metric [1], as the vacuum solution of Einstein field equations, describe all the observed properties of these black holes with just two parameters: the mass of the black hole mm and the rotation parameter aa which is related to the angular momentum of the black hole as a=J/ma=J/m (See [2] for a detailed exposition.) These two parameters arise as integration constants in the solution of the partial differential equations; but they can be represented as geometric invariants through the usual ADM [3] construction which expresses the mass and angular momentum as integrals of the first derivatives of the metric tensor at spatial infinity [4]. Besides these parameters, the black hole is expected to have thermal properties: for example, an equilibrium black hole obeys the four laws of black hole physics [5, 6, 7]. An explicitly gauge invariant derivation of the black hole laws of black hole thermodynamics was given recently in [8]

Thermodynamics of black holes is currently only understood at a semi-classical level [9]; and hence a proper microscopic understanding of this issue is important for quantum gravity. In black hole thermodynamics, the notion of surface gravity, associated to a Killing (or event) horizon, plays a major role as it is directly related to the zeroth law and the uniform temperature assigned to a black hole. Surface gravity is usually defined as the nonaffinity coefficient (κ\kappa) in the null Killing vector field ζμ\zeta^{\mu} given as:

ζμμζν=κζν,\zeta^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}\zeta^{\nu}=-\kappa\zeta^{\nu}, (1)

which is to be computed on the event horizon. We must keep in mind the well-known ambiguity in the definition of surface gravity here: if the integral curves of the null Killing vector ζμ\zeta^{\mu} are restricted to be affinely parameterized, then ζζ=0\nabla_{\zeta}\zeta=0 and κ\kappa disappears. So affine parameterization should not be imposed. Furthermore, a constant scaling of ζμaζμ\zeta^{\mu}\rightarrow a\zeta^{\mu}, also scales κaκ\kappa\rightarrow a\kappa. So one must fix the normalization ζμ\zeta^{\mu} away from the horizon where it is not null, an issue to which we shall come back below. For two wonderful expositions of this topic, see [10, 11]. As demonstrated in these works in a pedagogical manner, one can show that the surface gravity as defined above (1) is constant on the horizon which, even at a cursory level, suggests a direct connection of the event horizon (or the black hole) with an object with constant temperature that is in equilibrium with its surrounding.

Here we provide a completely unexpected formulation of surface gravity which matches the usual formulation (1) for stationary black holes. Our definition is valid for generic spacetime dimensions larger than 3, and for generic gravity theories. But, in particular, for four dimensional vacuum black holes, we show that the surface gravity is proportional to the volume integral of the Kretschmann scalar outside the black hole region. It is well-known that the Kretschmann scalar diverges for a black hole in some region inside the event horizon and this scalar has been used to detect the singularity of black hole spacetimes See [12] for use of the scalar curvature invariants on the detection of other invariants of black holes. Here we have shown another use of Kretschmann curvature invariant: its integral over the spatial section of the spacetime outside the black hole yields the surface gravity and hence the associated Hawking temperature [9] given in geometric units as

TH=κ2π.T_{H}=\frac{\kappa}{2\pi}. (2)

In what follows, we will show that κ\kappa can be expressed as the total three-volume integral of the Kretschmann scalar, where the integration domain is outside the black hole region, that is from the event horizon to spatial infinity of the spacetime. Equivalently, it can also be expressed as a surface integral (see Fig. 1 (1)) on the cross section of the event horizon with an integral that involves the Riemann tensor and the covariant derivative of the timelike or any other Killing vector. Our formulation is geometric in the sense that it is valid for any gravity theory, for any n4n\geq 4 dimensions. The contents of a theory enter only after the geometric identity (13).

To derive the new formulas for surface gravity and the black hole temperature , let us start with the construction of a new geometric identity.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: \mathcal{M} denotes the four (or generically n>3n>3) dimensional spacetime, \mathcal{B} represents the three (or generically n1n-1) dimensional ball for which the boundary is the cross section of the event horizon. Also, ¯=×[T,T]\bar{\mathcal{M}}=\mathcal{M}-\mathcal{B}\times\left[-T,T\right] denotes the region of the spacetime between the event horizon and the boundary of the black hole at infinity. To not deal with a trivial divergence over the time integral for stationary spacetimes, we have taken the time dimension to run over the interval [T,T]\left[-T,T\right]. The boundary of ¯\mathcal{\bar{M}}, ¯\partial\mathcal{\bar{M}}, consists of the event horizon as a 33 (generically (n1)(n-1)) dimensional degenerate hypersurface and the boundary at infinity.

II Construction of the geometric identity

In [13, 14], we introduced the following 𝒫\mathcal{P}-tensor

Pμβσν:=Rμβσν+δσνGβμδβνGσμ+GσνgβμGβνgσμ+(R2Λ(n+1)n1)(δσνgβμδβνgσμ).\text{{\hbox{{\cal{P}}}}}^{\nu}\thinspace_{\mu\beta\sigma}:=R^{\nu}\thinspace_{\mu\beta\sigma}+\delta_{\sigma}^{\nu}\text{{\hbox{{\cal{G}}}}}_{\beta\mu}-\delta_{\beta}^{\nu}\text{{\hbox{{\cal{G}}}}}_{\sigma\mu}+\text{{\hbox{{\cal{G}}}}}_{\sigma}^{\nu}g_{\beta\mu}-\text{{\hbox{{\cal{G}}}}}_{\beta}^{\nu}g_{\sigma\mu}+(\frac{R}{2}-\frac{\Lambda(n+1)}{n-1})(\delta_{\sigma}^{\nu}g_{\beta\mu}-\delta_{\beta}^{\nu}g_{\sigma\mu}). (3)

where 𝒢βν:=Rβν12Rδνβ+Λδνβ{\cal{G}}_{\beta}^{\nu}:=R_{\beta}^{\nu}-\frac{1}{2}R\delta_{\nu}^{\beta}+\Lambda\delta_{\nu}^{\beta}. The 𝒫\mathcal{P}-tensor (which vanishes identically in three dimensions) satisfies the symmetries of the Riemann tensor and its contraction yields the Einstein tensor, 𝒫μvσν=(3n)𝒢μσ\text{${\cal{P}}$}^{\nu}\thinspace_{\mu v\sigma}=(3-n)\text{${\cal{G}}$}_{\mu\sigma}. In fact, one of our motivations was to find a rank (1,3)(1,3) tensor whose contraction is not the Ricci tensor, but the Einstein tensor. This 𝒫\mathcal{P}-tensor does the job. Moreover, as defined above, this tensor vanishes identically for maximally symmetric spacetimes; but when Λ=0\Lambda=0, it vanishes for flat spacetimes. Perhaps, the most important property of the 𝒫\mathcal{P}-tensor is that, unlike the Riemann tensor, it is divergence-free for all twice differentiable metrics on a spacetime

ν𝒫βσνμ=0.\nabla_{\nu}{\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}=0. (4)

This fact yields rather remarkable consequences for the underlying manifold. Let βσ\text{${\cal{F}}$}^{\beta\sigma} be a generic antisymmetric tensor. Then, contracting (4) with βσ\text{${\cal{F}}$}^{\beta\sigma} yields

ν(𝒫βσνμβσ)=𝒫βσνμνβσ.\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma})={\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla_{\nu}\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma}. (5)

Let χσ\chi^{\sigma} be a generic vector field on the manifold. Then, we take a particular βσ\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma} such that χσ\chi^{\sigma} be its potential as

βσ=12(βχσσχβ),\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\nabla^{\beta}\chi^{\sigma}-\nabla^{\sigma}\chi^{\beta}\right), (6)

and decompose χσ\chi^{\sigma} as follows

χσ:=ξσ+ψσ,\chi^{\sigma}:=\xi^{\sigma}+\psi^{\sigma}, (7)

where ξσ\xi^{\sigma} is a Killing vector ( i.e. βξσ+σξβ=0\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}+\nabla^{\sigma}\xi^{\beta}=0) and ψσ\psi^{\sigma} is a generic vector. Then βσ\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma} becomes

βσ=βξσ+12(βψσσψβ).\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma}=\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\nabla^{\beta}\psi^{\sigma}-\nabla^{\sigma}\psi^{\beta}\right). (8)

Using the Killing identity, νβξσ=Rνλσβξλ\nabla_{\nu}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}=R^{\sigma\beta}\thinspace_{\nu\lambda}\xi^{\lambda} [15], the right hand side of equation (5) can be written as

𝒫βσνμνβσ=𝒫βσνμRνσβξλλ+ν(𝒫βσνμβψσ).{\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla_{\nu}\mathcal{F}^{\beta\sigma}={\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}R^{\sigma\beta}\thinspace_{\nu}\thinspace{}^{\lambda}\xi_{\lambda}+\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\psi^{\sigma}). (9)

We will now write the contraction of the Riemann and the 𝒫\mathcal{P}-tensors, 𝒫βσνμRνλσβ{\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}R^{\sigma\beta}\thinspace_{\nu\lambda}, in terms of the Gauss-Bonnet tensor [16, 17]

μν\displaystyle\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu} :=2(2RRμν2RμανβRαβ+RμαβσRναβσ\displaystyle:=2\Bigl{(}2RR_{\mu\nu}-2R_{\mu\alpha\nu\beta}R^{\alpha\beta}+R_{\mu\alpha\beta\sigma}R_{\nu}\thinspace^{\alpha\beta\sigma}
2RμαRνα14gμνχGB),\displaystyle-2R_{\mu\alpha}R_{\nu}^{\alpha}-\frac{1}{4}g_{\mu\nu}\chi_{GB}\Bigr{)}, (10)

where the Gauss-Bonnet invariant, χGB\chi_{GB}, reads as

χGB:=RμαβσRμαβσ4RμνRμν+R2.\chi_{GB}:=R_{\mu\alpha\beta\sigma}R{}^{\mu\alpha\beta\sigma}-4R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}+R^{2}. (11)

Note that μν\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu} vanishes identically in four dimensions, while χGB\chi_{GB} can be written as the divergence of a vector field, albeit in a non-covariant way. (Vanishing of μν\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu} in four dimensions is not obvious from the definition (10), but a detailed derivation was given in [16] and a concise one in [17].) Then in generic nn spacetime dimensions, one has an identity

𝒫βσνμRνσβ=λ12μλ14gμλχGB+2Λ(n3)(n1)Rμλ.{\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}R^{\sigma\beta}\thinspace_{\nu}\thinspace{}^{\lambda}=-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}\chi_{GB}+\frac{2\Lambda(n-3)}{(n-1)}R^{\mu\lambda}. (12)

Inserting (8, 12) in equation (5), one arrives at the desired geometric identity which is valid for any smooth metric

ν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)=(2Λ(n3)(n1)Rμλ12μλ14gμλχGB)ξλ.\displaystyle\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=\Bigl{(}\frac{2\Lambda(n-3)}{(n-1)}R^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}\chi_{GB}\Bigr{)}\xi_{\lambda}. (13)

Note that, at the end of the construction, the non-Killing part of the χσ\chi^{\sigma} vector dropped in the last equation, and only the Killing part survived. So this identity is valid only for spacetimes that have at least one Killing symmetry, otherwise one does not have this identity.

As the identity (13) is a vector identity, its prone to another covariant derivative. Let us show that, without a constraint on the geometry beyond the assumption of the existence of a Killing symmetry, the covariant derivative of the identity vanishes automatically. This really is desired, otherwise the underlying geometry would be further constrained. So we have

μν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)=μ(2Λ(n3)(n1)Rμλ12μλ14gμλχGB)ξλ.\displaystyle\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=\nabla_{\mu}\Bigl{(}\frac{2\Lambda(n-3)}{(n-1)}R^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}\chi_{GB}\Bigr{)}\xi_{\lambda}. (14)

Let us concentrate on the left-hand side which reads

μν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)\displaystyle\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}) =12[μ,ν](𝒫βσνμβξσ)\displaystyle=\frac{1}{2}[\nabla_{\mu},\nabla_{\nu}]({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})
=Rμνν(𝒫βσλμβξσ)λ\displaystyle=R_{\mu\nu}\,^{\nu}\,{}_{\lambda}({\cal{P}}^{\lambda\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})
+Rμνμ(𝒫βσνλβξσ)λ\displaystyle+R_{\mu\nu}\,^{\mu}\,{}_{\lambda}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\lambda}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})
=Rμλ(𝒫βσλμβξσ)\displaystyle=-R_{\mu\lambda}({\cal{P}}^{\lambda\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})
+Rνλ(𝒫βσνλβξσ).\displaystyle\leavevmode\nobreak\ \leavevmode\nobreak\ \leavevmode\nobreak\ +R_{\nu\lambda}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\lambda}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}). (15)

In the last two lines, each term vanished identically since the Ricci tensor is symmetric while the term in the parenthesis is anti-symmetric. So the lest-hand side of (14) vanishes identically. Let us check the right-hand side of that equation. Since ξ\xi is a Killing vector ξξ=0\nabla_{\xi}\xi=0. Since the geometry is invariant along the flow of this Killing vector, we have ξR=ξμμR=0\nabla_{\xi}R=\xi^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}R=0, which can also be easily shown. Similarly ξχGB=0\nabla_{\xi}\chi_{GB}=0. As the Gauss-Bonnet tensor μλ\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda} comes from the variation of a diffeomorphism invariant action, it satisfies covariant conservation μμλ=0\nabla_{\mu}\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda}=0 So the right-hand side of (14) boils down to 2Λ(n3)(n1)ξλμRμλ\frac{2\Lambda(n-3)}{(n-1)}\xi_{\lambda}\nabla_{\mu}R^{\mu\lambda} which vanishes identically upon use of the Bianchi Identity μRμλ=12λR\nabla_{\mu}R^{\mu\lambda}=\frac{1}{2}\nabla^{\lambda}R plus the identity ξμμR=0\xi^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}R=0 coming from the Killing vector identity. So to some up: covariant derivative of (13) vanishes for all smooth geometries. And as we have just shown, since the right-hand and the left-hand vanishes independently, identically, this allows us to define two equivalent covariantly conserved currents :

𝒥μ:=ν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)\displaystyle{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu}:=\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}) (16)

and

𝒥μ=(2Λ(n3)(n1)Rμλ12μλ14gμλχGB)ξλ.\displaystyle{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu}=\Bigl{(}\frac{2\Lambda(n-3)}{(n-1)}R^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{H}^{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}\chi_{GB}\Bigr{)}\xi_{\lambda}. (17)

We shall use both of these two give two different expressions for the surface gravity and temperature of a stationary black hole.

Since, up to now, we have not assumed any field equations, in principle we can consider any gravity theory, but to derive the consequences of (13) for our World, let us consider four dimensional manifolds that satisfy the cosmological Einstein theory with matter. Then, one has 𝒢μν=κNTμν\mathcal{G}_{\mu\nu}=\kappa_{N}T_{\mu\nu}, with κN=8πGnc4\kappa_{N}=\frac{8\pi G_{n}}{c^{4}}; and as stated above the Gauss-Bonnet tensor μν=0\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu}=0 in four dimensions, yielding

ν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)=(14gμλRραβσRραβσ\displaystyle\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=\Bigl{(}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}
+κN2gμλT~αβT~αβ14gμλκN2T~+22Λ3κT~μλ)ξλ,\displaystyle\leavevmode\nobreak\ +\kappa_{N}^{2}g^{\mu\lambda}\widetilde{T}_{\alpha\beta}\widetilde{T}^{\alpha\beta}-\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\lambda}\kappa_{N}^{2}\widetilde{T}{}^{2}+\frac{2\Lambda}{3}\kappa\widetilde{T}^{\mu\lambda}\Bigr{)}\xi_{\lambda}, (18)

where we have expressed the right-hand side of the identity in terms of the(modified) energy momentum tensor: T~μν:=Tμν12gμνT+ΛκNgμν\widetilde{T}_{\mu\nu}:=T_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}T+\frac{\Lambda}{\kappa_{N}}g_{\mu\nu}. In particular, one of the main applications of this construction will be the astrophysically relevant Kerr black hole for which Λ=0\Lambda=0 and in a vacuum, Tμν=0T_{\mu\nu}=0, and hence (18) reduces to

𝒥μ=ν(𝒫βσνμβξσ)=14ξμRραβσRραβσ.{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu}=\nabla_{\nu}({\cal{P}}^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=-\frac{1}{4}\xi^{\mu}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}. (19)

So on the right-hand side the Gauss-Bonnet invariant reduced to the Kretschmann scalar for Ricci flat metrics i.e. the metrics solving vacuum Einstein equation.

As we have shown in the general case above, above we have μ𝒥μ=0\nabla_{\mu}{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu}=0, which yields a true conservation law μ(g𝒥μ)=0\partial_{\mu}(\sqrt{-g}{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu})=0 which can be integrated over the spacetime d4xμ(g𝒥μ)=0\int_{\mathcal{M}}d^{4}x\partial_{\mu}(\sqrt{-g}{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu})=0.

Let us consider the consequences of this expression for black hole spacetimes. For a detailed discussion of this type of construction, please see the third section in [18]. To be concrete, let ξμ\xi^{\mu} be a time-like Killing vector and let Σ\Sigma be a spatial hypersurface (which will be specified below) in the total spacetime \mathcal{M} and let nmun_{m}u be its (inward-pointing) unit time-like normal vector, and γij\gamma_{ij} be the induced metric on Σ\Sigma. Then Σd3yγnμ𝒥μ\int_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}n_{\mu}{\mathcal{J}}^{\mu} is independent of time and the choice of the spatial hypersurface as per conservation. So then we have the following exact relation

Σd3yγnμν(Rβσνμβξσ)=14Σd3yγnμξμRραβσRραβσ,\displaystyle\intop_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}\thinspace n_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}(R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=-\frac{1}{4}\intop_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}\,n_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}, (20)

where in vacuum, for Ricci flat metrics, the 𝒫{\cal{P}} reduced to the Riemann tensor. We can use the Stokes’ theorem on the left-hand side as follows

Σd3yγnμν(Rβσνμβξσ)=Σd2zγ(Σ)nμσνRβσνμβξσ\displaystyle\intop_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}\thinspace n_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}(R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=\intop_{\partial\Sigma}d^{2}z\sqrt{\gamma^{(\partial\Sigma)}}\thinspace n_{\mu}\sigma_{\nu}R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma} (21)

where Σ\partial\Sigma is the (spacelike) boundary of the spacelike surface Σ\Sigma while σν\sigma_{\nu} is its spacelike outward unit normal vector and γμν(Σ):=gμν+nμnνσμσν\gamma^{(\partial\Sigma)}_{\mu\nu}:=g_{\mu\nu}+n_{\mu}n_{\nu}-\sigma_{\mu}\sigma_{\nu} is the induced metric on it. Introducing the antisymmetric binormal as

ϵμν:=12(nμσνnνσμ),\epsilon_{\mu\nu}:=\frac{1}{2}\left(n_{\mu}\sigma_{\nu}-n_{\nu}\sigma_{\mu}\right), (22)

we can rewrite (21) as

Σd3yγnμν(Rβσνμβξσ)=Σd2zγ(Σ)ϵμνRβσνμβξσ.\displaystyle\intop_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}\thinspace n_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}(R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma})=\intop_{\partial\Sigma}d^{2}z\sqrt{\gamma^{(\partial\Sigma)}}\epsilon_{\mu\nu}R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}. (23)

So then we have the main identity Σd2zγ(Σ)ϵμνRβσνμβξσ=14Σd3yγnμξμRραβσRραβσ.\displaystyle\intop_{\partial\Sigma}d^{2}z\sqrt{\gamma^{(\partial\Sigma)}}\epsilon_{\mu\nu}R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\nabla^{\beta}\xi^{\sigma}=-\frac{1}{4}\intop_{\Sigma}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}\,n_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}. (24) To proceed, let us now specify the hypersurface Σ\Sigma. To be mathematically somewhat rigorous, let us take the time interval to be compact t[T,T]t\in\left[-T,T\right] and let TT\rightarrow\infty at the end. Then, as depicted in figure (1),¯=×[T,T],\mathcal{\bar{M}}=\mathcal{M}-\mathcal{B}\times\left[-T,T\right] denotes the spacetime region between the event horizon of the black hole and the boundary of the black hole at infinity. Here \mathcal{M} is the total spacetime and \mathcal{B} denotes the three dimensional ball of which the boundary is the two dimensional cross section of the event horizon. Also, ¯\partial\mathcal{\bar{M}} denotes the disconnected boundary of that region: one at spatial infinity \partial\mathcal{M}, the other on the event horizon S2×[T,T]S^{2}\times\left[-T,T\right]. Under these considerations the hypersurface for asymptotically flat spacetimes is given as Σ=3\Sigma=\mathbb{R}^{3}-\mathcal{B}, with two a disconnected boundary composed of an S2S^{2} as the cross section of the event horizon and another S2S^{2} at spatial infinity.

The expression (24) is an identity for all Ricci flat metrics in four dimensions. One important point to note is the following, for black holes the Kretschmann scalar is divergent somewhere inside the event horizon (defining the real singularity of the black hole); and its integral over the totality of the spacetime is also clearly divergent, but here we restrict the integration domain to the spatial region outside the black hole for which the integral is finite. Let us understand the content of the identity, (24), in the case of the Kerr metric.

Application to the Kerr black hole

The coordinates in which the metric is written does not change our construction as we need the Kretschmann scalar, but since we also need a Killing vector field, it is best to take coordinates in such a way that one of them is a Killing coordinate. To this end, one can take the Ricci flat Kerr metric in the Kerr-Schild form [19]

ds2=ds¯2+2mrρ2(kμdxμ)2,ds^{2}=d\bar{s}^{2}+\frac{2mr}{\rho^{2}}\left(k_{\mu}dx^{\mu}\right)^{2}, (25)

where ρ2:=r2+a2cos2θ\rho^{2}:=r^{2}+a^{2}\cos^{2}\theta and with the seed metric given as

ds¯2\displaystyle d\bar{s}^{2} =\displaystyle= dt2+ρ2dr2(r2+a2)+ρ2dθ2+(r2+a2)sin2θdϕ2,\displaystyle-dt^{2}+\frac{\rho^{2}dr^{2}}{\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)}+\rho^{2}d\theta^{2}+\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)\sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}, (26)

The vector kμk_{\mu}, which is null with respect to both the seed and the full metric, is given as

kμdxμ=dt+ρ2dr(r2+a2)asin2θdϕ.k_{\mu}dx^{\mu}=dt+\frac{\rho^{2}dr}{\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)}-a\sin^{2}\theta d\phi.

For more details on the Kerr metric, see [20]. The outer event horizon is located at rH=m+m2a2r_{H}=m+\sqrt{m^{2}-a^{2}}; and the surface gravity, κ\kappa, at the event horizon can be easily computed from the usual definition via the formula (1), with the Killing vector field

ζ=t+ΩHϕ,\zeta=\partial_{t}+\varOmega_{H}\partial_{\phi}, (27)

which is the horizon-generating null Killing vector field. Here ΩH\varOmega_{H} is the angular velocity of the event horizon given as

ΩH=arH2+a2,\varOmega_{H}=\frac{a}{r_{H}^{2}+a^{2}}, (28)

which makes ζμζμ=0\zeta^{\mu}\zeta_{\mu}=0 on the event horizon

As mentioned in the paragraph below (1), ζμ\zeta^{\mu} has a scaling ambiguity: the choice (27) with the factor 1 in front of the timelike Killing vector removes this ambiguity which is the common practice that is consistent with the laws of black hole mechanics. So, using (27) in (1) one arrives at the known result [10] for the surface gravity of the Kerr black hole

κ=rH2a22rH(rH2+a2),\kappa=\frac{r_{H}^{2}-a^{2}}{2r_{H}(r_{H}^{2}+a^{2})}, (29)

and the Hawking temperature follows from (2).

Let us now show how our integral formula (24) reproduces this result in a completely different manner. One can compute either the left-hand side or the right-hand side of the identity (24), as they are equal, the result of course does not matter. Defining the right-hand side of (24) as

[ξ]:=14Σd3yγnμξμRραβσRραβσ,\mathcal{E}\left[\xi\right]:=-\frac{1}{4}\intop_{{\Sigma}}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}n_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}, (30)

The Kretschmann scalar KRραβσRραβσK\equiv R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma} for the metric (25) can be computed to be

K=96m2AB\displaystyle K=-96m^{2}\frac{A}{B} (31)

where

A=a6cos(6θ)\displaystyle A=a^{6}\cos(6\theta) +\displaystyle+ 10a6180a4r2+240a2r4+6a4(a210r2)cos(4θ)\displaystyle 10a^{6}-180a^{4}r^{2}+240a^{2}r^{4}+6a^{4}\left(a^{2}-10r^{2}\right)\cos(4\theta) (32)
+\displaystyle+ 15a2(a416a2r2+16r4)cos(2θ)32r6,\displaystyle 15a^{2}\left(a^{4}-16a^{2}r^{2}+16r^{4}\right)\cos(2\theta)-32r^{6},

and

B=(a2cos(2θ)+a2+2r2)6.B=\left(a^{2}\cos(2\theta)+a^{2}+2r^{2}\right)^{6}. (33)

The induced metric γ\gamma in the hypersurface Σ\Sigma follows from (25) by setting t=t=constant, that is

ds¯γ2=ρ2dr2(r2+a2)+ρ2dθ2+(r2+a2)sin2θdϕ2,\displaystyle d\bar{s}_{\gamma}^{2}=\frac{\rho^{2}dr^{2}}{\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)}+\rho^{2}d\theta^{2}+\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)\sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}, (34)

and the vector kμk_{\mu} reduces to

kμdxμ=ρ2dr(r2+a2)asin2θdϕ.k_{\mu}dx^{\mu}=\frac{\rho^{2}dr}{\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)}-a\sin^{2}\theta d\phi.

Taking the time-like Killing vector ξ=(1,0,0,0)\xi=(1,0,0,0) and computing the time-like unit normal nμn_{\mu} to the hypersurface Σ\Sigma as

nμ=(11+4mr(a2+r2)(a2+r(r2m))(a2cos(2θ)+a2+2r2),0,0,0)n_{\mu}=-\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{4mr\left(a^{2}+r^{2}\right)}{\left(a^{2}+r(r-2m)\right)\left(a^{2}\cos(2\theta)+a^{2}+2r^{2}\right)}}},0,0,0\right) (35)

Then plugging all these into (30) and carrying out the volume integral over the ranges r[rH,]r\in[r_{H},\infty] and θ[0,π]\theta\in[0,\pi], ϕ[0,2π]\phi\in[0,2\pi] that cover Σ\Sigma, yields

[t]=16πrHm2(rH2a2)(rH2+a2)3.\mathcal{E}\left[\partial_{t}\right]=-\frac{16\pi r_{H}m^{2}(r_{H}^{2}-a^{2})}{(r_{H}^{2}+a^{2})^{3}}. (36)

This expression has the correct behavior for the surface gravity, for example it vanishes exactly for the extremal Kerr metric for which a=ma=m and rH=mr_{H}=m. For the subextremal Kerr metric, one must introduce a constant coefficient which is akin to the scaling ambiguity in (1). In fact, this is evident from the choice of the Killing vector above: we chose ξ=(1,0,0,0)\xi=(1,0,0,0), but any other choice ξ~=(c,0,0,0)\tilde{\xi}=(c,0,0,0), with cc a constant, would scale κ\kappa. So one has the surface gravity of the Kerr metric

κ=132π(amrHΩH)2[t],\kappa=-\frac{1}{32\pi}\left(\frac{a}{mr_{H}\Omega_{H}}\right)^{2}\mathcal{E}\left[\partial_{t}\right], (37)

which is equivalent to (29). For the Schwarzschild black hole, a=0a=0 and one finds the correct limit κ=14m\kappa=\frac{1}{4m}.

Defining the dimensionless rotation parameter of the black hole as α:=a/m\alpha:=a/m and the tangential speed of the horizon as vH=rHΩHv_{H}=r_{H}\Omega_{H}, the prefactor in (37) reads as the dimensionless ratio (α/vH)2(\alpha/v_{H})^{2}. so for the Kerr black hole, the Hawking temperature simply reads as

TH=(a16πmrHΩH)2Σd3yγnμξμRραβσRραβσ,T_{H}=\left(\frac{a}{16\pi mr_{H}\Omega_{H}}\right)^{2}\intop_{{\Sigma}}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}n_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}R_{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}R^{\rho\alpha\beta\sigma}, (38)

where, again, the integral is outside the black hole region. Equivalently, from (24) one can calculate the same integral on the surface of the event horizon.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Plot of the Kretschmann scalar KK (31) for the Kerr black hole with a=1/3a=1/3, m=1m=1; and for the interval r[rH=1.94,3.5]r\in[r_{H}=1.94,3.5], θ[0,π]\theta\in[0,\pi] . The figure is depicted to show how the total Kretschmann scalar of the rotating black hole over the spatial region outside the black hole region can give a finite result.

In Figure (2), we have plotted the Kretschmann scalar KK (31) for the Kerr black hole. Even though this curvature scalar diverges on a ring inside the event horizon, diagnosing the true singularity of spacetime, its finite outside the event horizon. Moreover, as is the premise of this work, as we have shown, its spatial volume integral is also finite and is related to the surface gravity.

Let us give a non-vacuum example: the extremal charged Reissner-Nordström metric which is a solution to Einstein-Maxwell theory. The metric is the of the following form

ds2=f(r)dt2+dr2f(r)+r2(dθ2+sin2θdϕ2)ds^{2}=-f(r)dt^{2}+\frac{dr^{2}}{f(r)}+r^{2}(d\theta^{2}+\sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}) (39)

where we keep f(r)f(r) arbitrary for now but will specify in a moment. The metric is not Ricci-flat generically, so we must now apply the full identity (13). We assume Λ=0\Lambda=0 and in four dimensions, we we already noted, the Gauss-Bonnet 2-tensor vanishes, but the Gauss-Bonnet scalar does not. For (39), we have

χGB=4((f1)f′′+(f)2)r2\chi_{GB}=\frac{4\left((f-1)f^{\prime\prime}+\left(f^{\prime}\right)^{2}\right)}{r^{2}} (40)

for f(r)=12m/r+q2/r2f(r)=1-2m/r+q^{2}/r^{2}, for the time-like vector ξ=(1,0,0,0)\xi=(1,0,0,0), the relevant expression

[ξ]:=14Σd3yγnμξμχGB,\mathcal{E}\left[\xi\right]:=-\frac{1}{4}\intop_{{\Sigma}}d^{3}y\sqrt{\gamma}n_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}\chi_{GB}, (41)

yields

[ξ]=8πrH5(2rH2m23rHmq2+q4),\mathcal{E}\left[\xi\right]=\frac{8\pi}{r_{H}^{5}}\left(2r_{H}^{2}m^{2}-3r_{H}mq^{2}+q^{4}\right), (42)

which vanished identically for the extremal case of q=mq=m, that is rH=mr_{H}=m. This yield κ=0\kappa=0 and so TH=0T_{H}=0 as expected. For the non-extremal case, the constant in front of the Killing vector must be taken not 1.

Finally, let us also note a rather interesting connection (which needs to be better studied) of the above construction with our earlier work [13], [14]. The linearized version of the main identity (13) yields the conserved charges (mass and angular momentum) written in terms of not the derivatives of the metric deviations but in terms of the explicitly diffeomorphism invariant linearized Riemann tensor for asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetimes [13], [14] as

Q(ξ¯)=kΣ¯dn2xγ¯ϵ¯μν(Rβσνμ)(1)F¯βσ,Q\left(\bar{\xi}\right)=k\int_{\partial\bar{\Sigma}}d^{n-2}x\,\sqrt{\bar{\gamma}}\,\bar{\epsilon}_{\mu\nu}\left(R^{\nu\mu}\thinspace_{\beta\sigma}\right)^{\left(1\right)}\bar{\text{{\hbox{{\cal{F}}}}}}^{\beta\sigma}, (43)

with the constant coefficient k=(n1)(n2)/[8(n3)ΛGΩn2]k=(n-1)(n-2)/[8(n-3)\Lambda G\Omega_{n-2}] and the barred quantities refer to the AdS background; and 2¯βσ=¯βξ¯σ¯σξ¯β2\bar{\text{${\cal{F}}$}}_{\beta\sigma}=\bar{\nabla}_{\beta}\bar{\xi}_{\sigma}-\bar{\nabla}_{\sigma}\bar{\xi}_{\beta}.

III Conclusions

We have given two new expressions for surface gravity and the associated temperature for black holes. Broadly speaking both surface gravity and the temperature of a black hole is directly related to the total (integrated) quadratic curvature invariant outside the black hole region. This is a rather important result which directly links the surface gravity to a curvature invariant and the integration clearly shows the non-locality of the surface gravity concept.

Our construction was based on a divergence-free rank four tensor and an antisymmetric rank two tensor built from the covariant derivative of any Killing vector field: we found an identity (13) valid for all spacetimes of generic n>3n>3 dimensions. A curious fact is that the Gauss-Bonnet tensor μν\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu} (which comes from the variation δgdnxgχGB\delta_{g}\intop d^{n}x\sqrt{-g}\chi_{GB}) and the Gauss-Bonnet scalar, χGB\chi_{GB}, appears on the right-hand side of the expression. When this expression is integrated in a region of spacetime for which the integrals are finite, one obtains an identity, which in four dimensional Ricci flat metrics yield (24). Remarkably the left-hand side or the right-hand side of this identity is related to the Hawking temperature (and the surface gravity) of the black hole. We realized this upon the computation for extremal black holes; the integrals vanish identically and for Schwarzschild black holes they yield the surface gravity κ=1/4m\kappa=1/4m which are the known results. Therefore, besides the usual way of defining the surface gravity via the null geodesic generator as in (1), our construction gives two novel definitions one of which includes the integral of the Kretschmann scalar in the part of the spacetime outside the black hole region, and the other one being an integral of the Riemann tensor (in the Ricci flat case it is actually the Weyl tensor) contracted with the covariant derivative of any Killing vector field.

References

  • [1] R. P. Kerr, Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an example of algebraically special metrics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 11, 237-238 (1963).
  • [2] V. P. Frolov and A. Zelnikov, Introduction to black hole physics, OUP Oxford (2011).
  • [3] R. Arnowitt, S. Deser and C.W. Misner, Canonical variables for general relativity, Phys. Rev. 117, 1595 (1960); The dynamics of general relativity, Gen. Rel. Grav. 40, 1997 (2008).
  • [4] E. Gourgoulhon, 3+1 formalism and bases of numerical relativity, [arXiv:gr-qc/0703035 [gr-qc]].
  • [5] J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, S. W. Hawking, The four laws of black hole mechanics, Communications in Mathematical Physics 31, 161–170 (1973).
  • [6] J. D. Bekenstein, Generalized second law of thermodynamics in black-hole physic, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3292 (1974).
  • [7] W. Israel, Third Law of Black-Hole Dynamics: A Formulation and Proof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 397 (1986).
  • [8] K. Hajian, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and B. Tekin, Gauge invariant derivation of zeroth and first laws of black hole thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 106, no.10, 10 (2022).
  • [9] S. W. Hawking, Particle creation by black holes, Communications in Mathematical Physics 43, 199–220 (1975).
  • [10] R. M. Wald, General Relativity, Chicago Univ. Pr., (1984).
  • [11] E. Gourgoulhon, Geometry and physics of black holes, https://luth.obspm.fr/ luthier/gourgoulhon/en/
  • [12] M. Abdelqader and K. Lake, Invariant characterization of the Kerr spacetime: Locating the horizon and measuring the mass and spin of rotating black holes using curvature invariants, Phys. Rev. D 91, no.8, 084017 (2015).
  • [13] E. Altas and B. Tekin, New approach to conserved charges of generic gravity in AdS spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 99, no.4, 044016 (2019).
  • [14] E. Altas and B. Tekin, Conserved charges in AdS: A new formula, Phys. Rev. D 99, no.4, 044026 (2019).
  • [15] S. Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity, John Wiley and Sons, (1972).
  • [16] M. Gurses, T. C. Sisman and B. Tekin, Is there a novel Einstein–Gauss–Bonnet theory in four dimensions?, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, no.7, 647 (2020).
  • [17] M. Gurses, T. C. Sisman and B. Tekin, Comment on ”Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity in 4-Dimensional Space-Time, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 14, 149001 (2020).
  • [18] H. Adami, M. R. Setare, T. C. Sisman and B. Tekin, Conserved Charges in Extended Theories of Gravity, Phys. Rept. 834, 1 (2019).
  • [19] R.P. Kerr, A. Schild, Republication of: A new class of vacuum solutions of the Einstein field equations. Gen Relativ. Gravit. 41, 2485-2499 (2009).
  • [20] M. Visser, The Kerr spacetime: A Brief introduction, [arXiv:0706.0622 [gr-qc]].