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


Thermodynamic phase transition of a Schwarzschild black hole
with global monopole under GUP

Yang Chen College of Physics Science and Technology, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang 110034, China    Hui-Ling Li [email protected] College of Physics Science and Technology, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang 110034, China
Abstract

Abstract:

In this paper, considering the influence of the principle of generalized uncertainty (GUP), the phase transition of a Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole is discussed. First, we use the generalized Dirac equation to obtain corrected Hawking temperature, local temperature, black hole residue, black hole entropy, thermal capacity, and other thermodynamic quantities. Then, we use images to analyze the effects of generalized uncertainty parameters on phase transitions and the effects of magnetic monopole parameters on phase transitions. Finally, we study the thermodynamic stability and phase change structure under the influence of the principle of generalized uncertainty. The results show that, in the black hole with global monopole, there are first-order and second-order phase transitions. In addition, the general uncertainty parameters and monopole parameters will affect the black hole residues.

Keywords: global monopole, thermodynamic phase transition, GUP

PACS: 04.70.-s, 04.70.Dy, 97.60.Lf

I Introduction

In general relativity, black holes are the most surprising objects. In classical (non-quantum) physics, any matter (including light) entering a black hole cannot escape. With the continuous exploration of black holes, scientists have become extremely interested in the thermodynamics of black holes. In 1972, Beckenstein proposed the “hairless theorem” for black holes. He believed that after the star collapsed into a black hole, only the three basic conserved quantities of mass, angular momentum and electric charge continued to play a role. Some other factors (“hair”) disappeared after entering the black hole. This theorem was later rigorously proved by Hawking and others 1 ; 2 . Bekenstein also conceived that the second law of thermodynamics should be universally valid 3 ; 4 , and he believed that black holes should have the entropy proportional to their surface area.

Black holes have rich critical phenomena and phase structures. In 1983, Hawking et al. 5 found through calculation that in the Schwarzschild–anti de Sitter space, there was a phase transition between the stable large black hole phase and the hot gas phase, which is called Hawking–Page phase transition. Through this discovery, physicists have a thorough understanding of the relationship between black hole physics and traditional thermodynamic systems, and opened the door to the study of black hole phase transitions. The location of the Hawking–Page transition between the charged black hole and the pure anti-de Sitter space–time was clearly discuss in 1999 6 . It is studied whether the Hawking–Page transition can occur in three dimensions in 2005 7 . The thermodynamic phase transitions of high–dimensional single–spin asymptotic AdS black holes in a canonical (fixed J) set of extended phase space are studied in 2013 8 . In addition, the criticality index of charged AdS black hole is also calculated, and the results show that they are consistent with the criticality index of the van der Waals system 9 .

In the vacuum phase transition of the early universe, the breakdown of local or global scale symmetry produced topological defects such as domain walls, cosmic strings, and monopoles 10 ; 11 . It was proved in 12 that during the phase transition of the universe, the global monopole charge spontaneously breaks into U (1) with the global O (3) symmetry. In 1994, H. W. Yu et al. studied the thermodynamics of a static spherically symmetric black hole–global unipolar system through two methods, surface gravity and Euclidean path integration 13 . In 14 , Dadhich et al. studied the effect of global monopolar charge on particle orbits and Hawking radiation, and corrected the global monopole black hole Hawking radiation in 15 . In addition, Kimet and Gordana proposed the quantum tunneling effect of the Dirac magnetic monopole in a black hole with an integral magnetic monopole 16 . In 2016, researchers studied the mass fraction of the unipolar parameter and found that it can suppress the maximum accretion rate 17 .

On the other side, the generalized uncertainty principle has been applied to different studies. The form of GUP is

ΔxΔp2[1+β(Δp)2],\displaystyle\Delta x\Delta p\geqslant\frac{\hbar}{2}[1+\beta{(\Delta p)^{2}}], (1)

where Δx\Delta x and Δp\Delta p represent the uncertainty of position and momentum, respectively. GUP parameter β=β0lp2/2=β0/Mpc2\beta={\beta_{0}}l_{{}_{p}}^{2}/{\hbar^{2}}={\beta_{0}}/{M_{p}}{c^{2}}, lpl_{p} is the Planck length (1035\approx{10^{-35}}), MpM_{p} is Planck mass and β0\beta_{0} is a dimensionless parameter. GUP is a low–energy approximation theory. There are three general types of GUP. One of them is GUP with minimum position 18 and the other two are GUP with maximum momentum and minimum position 19 ; 20 , and GUP with minimum position, minimum momentum, and maximum momentum 21 . Adler et al. 22 found that after considering the corrected of GUP, the black holes will not evaporate completely, leaving residual mass. In black hole physics, many meaningful conclusions are drawn by applying different forms of GUP 23 ; 24 ; 25 . Based on the GUP, we will explore the phase transition of a Schwarzschild black hole with a global monopole.

The structure of this paper is as follows: In Section 2, we review the modified Dirac equation and use the Dirac equation to derive the relationship between local temperature and mass in a Schwarzschild black hole with the global monopole. The effects of GUP on phase transitions are discussed in Section 3. We finally concluded.

II Quantum tunneling and local temperature based on GUP

In this section, firstly, we consider the effects of quantum gravity and discuss the tunneling behavior of fermions through the Schwarzschild black hole with the global monopole event horizon. In curved space-time, the Generalized Dirac equation can be expressed as 26

[iγ00+iγii(1βm2)+iγiβ2(jj)i+m(1+β2jjβm2)\displaystyle[i{\gamma^{0}}{\partial_{0}}+i{\gamma^{i}}{\partial_{i}}(1-\beta{m^{2}})+i{\gamma^{i}}\beta{\hbar^{2}}({\partial_{j}}{\partial^{j}}){\partial_{i}}+\frac{m}{\hbar}(1+\beta{\hbar^{2}}{\partial_{j}}{\partial^{j}}-\beta{m^{2}})
+iγμΩμ(1+β2jjβm2)]ψ=0.\displaystyle+i{\gamma^{\mu}}{\Omega_{\mu}}(1+\beta{\hbar^{2}}{\partial_{j}}{\partial^{j}}-\beta{m^{2}})]\psi=0. (2)

The curved space-time metric of Schwarzschild black hole with the global monopole is

dS2=f(r)dt2+1g(r)dr2+ar2(dθ2+sin2θdϕ2),\displaystyle d{S^{2}}=-{\rm{f}}\left(r\right)d{t^{2}}+\frac{1}{{g\left(r\right)}}d{r^{2}}+a{r^{2}}\left({d{\theta^{2}}+{{\sin}^{2}}\theta d{\phi^{2}}}\right), (3)

where a=18πη2a=1-8\pi{\eta^{2}} and

f(r)=g(r)=12GMr.\displaystyle f\left(r\right)=g\left(r\right)=1-\frac{{2GM}}{r}. (4)

The mass of black hole is expressed by MM. We have set G=c=1G=c=1 . This metric is not asymptotic flat space time due to the existence of global magnetic monopoles. When f(r+)=0f\left({{r_{+}}}\right){\rm{=0}}, event horizon r+=2GM{r_{+}}=2GM can be obtained. The fermion s movement follows the generalized Dirac equation (2). Therefore, in order to describe the motion, we assume that the wave function state is

ψ=(A0B0)exp(iI(t,r,θ,ϕ)),\displaystyle\psi=\left(\begin{array}[]{l}A\\ 0\\ B\\ 0\\ \end{array}\right)\exp\left({\frac{i}{\hbar}I\left({t,r,\theta,\phi}\right)}\right), (9)

where II is the action of the emitted fermions, AA and BB are functions of coordinates, that is A=A(t,r,θ,ϕ),B=B(t,r,θ,ϕ)A=A\left({t,r,\theta,\phi}\right),B=B\left({t,r,\theta,\phi}\right). Then the γμ{\gamma^{\mu}} matrices are given by

γt=1f(r)(i00i),γθ=gθθ(0σ1σ10),\displaystyle{\gamma^{t}}=\frac{1}{{\sqrt{f\left(r\right)}}}\left({\begin{array}[]{*{20}{c}}i&0\\ 0&{-i}\\ \end{array}}\right),{\gamma^{\theta}}=\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}\left({\begin{array}[]{*{20}{c}}0&{{\sigma^{1}}}\\ {{\sigma^{1}}}&0\\ \end{array}}\right), (14)
γr=g(r)(0σ3σ30),γϕ=gϕϕ(0σ2σ20),\displaystyle{\gamma^{r}}=\sqrt{g\left(r\right)}\left({\begin{array}[]{*{20}{c}}0&{{\sigma^{3}}}\\ {{\sigma^{3}}}&0\\ \end{array}}\right),{\gamma^{\phi}}=\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}\left({\begin{array}[]{*{20}{c}}0&{{\sigma^{2}}}\\ {{\sigma^{2}}}&0\\ \end{array}}\right), (19)

where gθθ=1ar,gϕϕ=1arsinθ\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}=\frac{1}{{\sqrt{a}r}},\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}=\frac{1}{{\sqrt{a}r\sin\theta}}. σi{\sigma^{\rm{i}}} s are the Pauli matrices with i=1,2,3i=1,2,3. Substituting the wave function and gamma matrices into the generalized Dirac equation (2), ignoring the contributions from A\partial A, B\partial B and ignoring high-order terms of \hbar , we finally receive the following equations of motion

iA1ftIB(1βm2)grIAmβ[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]\displaystyle-iA\frac{1}{{\sqrt{f}}}{\partial_{t}}I-B\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{g}{\partial_{r}}I-Am\beta[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]
+BβgrI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]+Am(1βm2)=0,\displaystyle+B\beta\sqrt{g}{\partial_{r}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]+Am\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)=0, (20)
iB1ftIA(1βm2)grIBmβ[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]\displaystyle iB\frac{1}{{\sqrt{f}}}{\partial_{t}}I-A\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{g}{\partial_{r}}I-Bm\beta[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]
+AβgrI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]+Bm(1βm2)=0,\displaystyle+A\beta\sqrt{g}{\partial_{r}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]+Bm\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)=0, (21)
A(1βm2)gθθθIAβgθθθI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]\displaystyle A\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}I-A\beta\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]
+iA(1βm2)gϕϕϕIiAβgϕϕϕI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]=0,\displaystyle+iA\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}I-iA\beta\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]=0, (22)
B(1βm2)gθθθIBβgθθθI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]\displaystyle B\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}I-B\beta\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]
+iB(1βm2)gϕϕϕIiBβgϕϕϕI[grr(rI)2+gθθ(θI)2+gϕϕ(ϕI)2]=0.\displaystyle+iB\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}I-iB\beta\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}I[{g^{rr}}{({\partial_{r}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\theta\theta}}{({\partial_{\theta}}I)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{({\partial_{\phi}}I)^{2}}]=0. (23)

It is difficult to solve the action from the above equations directly. Following the standard process, we carry out the separation of variables as follows

I=(18πη2)ωt+W(r)+Θ(θ,ϕ),\displaystyle I=-({\rm{1-8}}\pi{\eta^{\rm{2}}})\omega{\rm{t+W}}\left(r\right)+\Theta\left({\theta,\phi}\right), (24)

where ω\omega is the energy of emitted fermions. We substitute eqn. (11) into eqn.s (7)-(10) and observe the last two equations. After dividing by AA and BB respectively, they are found to be same, so we can find

(gθθθΘ+igϕϕϕΘ)[βgrr(rW)2+βgθθ(θΘ)2+βgϕϕ(ϕΘ)2(1βm2)]=0.\displaystyle\left({\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}\Theta+i\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}\Theta}\right)\left[{\beta{g^{rr}}{{\left({{\partial_{r}}W}\right)}^{2}}+\beta{g^{\theta\theta}}{{\left({{\partial_{\theta}}\Theta}\right)}^{2}}+\beta{g^{\phi\phi}}{{\left({{\partial_{\phi}}\Theta}\right)}^{2}}-\left({1-\beta{m^{2}}}\right)}\right]=0. (25)

In the above equation, β\beta is a small quantity and represents the effects from quantum gravity. The value in the square bracket can t vanish. Therefore eqn. (12) is simplified as follow

gθθθΘ+igϕϕϕΘ=0.\displaystyle\sqrt{{g^{\theta\theta}}}{\partial_{\theta}}\Theta+i\sqrt{{g^{\phi\phi}}}{\partial_{\phi}}\Theta=0. (26)

In the previous study, Θ\Theta has a complex function. However, it has no effect on the tunneling rate. Then by canceling AA and BB, eqn. (7) and eqn. (8) are identical and written as

B6(rW)6+B4(rW)4+B2(rW)2+B0=0,\displaystyle{B_{6}}{\left({{\partial_{r}}W}\right)^{6}}+{B_{4}}{\left({{\partial_{r}}W}\right)^{4}}+{B_{2}}{\left({{\partial_{r}}W}\right)^{2}}+{B_{0}}=0, (27)

where

B6=β2g3f;\displaystyle{B_{6}}={\beta^{2}}{g^{3}}f;
B4=βg2f(m2β+2βQ2);\displaystyle{B_{4}}=\beta{g^{2}}f({m^{2}}\beta+2\beta Q-2);
B2=gf[(1βm2)2+β(2m22m4β2Q+βQ2)];\displaystyle{B_{2}}=gf[{(1-\beta{m^{2}})^{2}}+\beta(2{m^{2}}-2{m^{4}}\beta-2Q+\beta{Q^{2}})]; (28)
B0=m2(1βm2βQ)2fω2(18πη2)2;\displaystyle{B_{0}}=-{m^{2}}{(1-\beta{m^{2}}-\beta Q)^{2}}f-{\omega^{2}}{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})^{2}};
Q=gθθ(θΘ)2+gϕϕ(ϕΘ)2.\displaystyle Q={g^{\theta\theta}}{\left({{\partial_{\theta}}\Theta}\right)^{2}}+{g^{\phi\phi}}{\left({{\partial_{\phi}}\Theta}\right)^{2}}.

Ignoring the higher order terms of β\beta and solving the above equations at the event horizon, we get

W±\displaystyle{W_{\pm}} =±𝑑r1fgω2m2f+2βm4f[1+β(m2+ω2f)]\displaystyle=\pm\int{dr\frac{1}{{\sqrt{fg}}}}\sqrt{{\omega^{2}}-{m^{2}}f+2\beta{m^{4}}f}\left[{1+\beta\left({{m^{2}}+\frac{{{\omega^{2}}}}{f}}\right)}\right] (29)
=±iπ2Mω(18πη2)(1+12β(3m2+4(18πη2)2ω2))+real part,\displaystyle=\pm i\pi 2M\omega(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})(1+\frac{1}{2}\beta(3{m^{2}}+4{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})^{2}}{\omega^{2}}))+\text{real part},

where +/{+\mathord{\left/{\vphantom{+-}}\right.\kern-1.2pt}-} signs represent the outgoing/ingoing solutions. The real part is independent of the tunneling rate. Therefore, the tunneling rate is written as

Γ\displaystyle\Gamma =exp(4ImW+)\displaystyle=\exp(-4{\mathop{\rm Im}\nolimits}{W_{+}}) (30)
=exp{8πMω(18πη2){1+12β[3m2+4(18πη2)2ω2]}},\displaystyle=\exp\left\{{-8\pi M\omega(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})\left\{{1+\frac{1}{2}\beta\left[{3{m^{2}}+4{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}^{2}}{\omega^{2}}}\right]}\right\}}\right\},

which shows Hawking temperature is written as

T\displaystyle T ={8Mπ(18πη2){1+12β[3m2+4(18πη2)2ω2]}}1\displaystyle={\left\{{8M\pi(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})\left\{{1+\frac{1}{2}\beta\left[{3{m^{2}}+4{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}^{2}}{\omega^{2}}}\right]}\right\}}\right\}^{-1}} (31)
TH{112β[3m2+4(18πη2)2ω2]}.\displaystyle\simeq{T_{H}}\left\{{1-\frac{1}{2}\beta\left[{3{m^{2}}+4{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}^{2}}{\omega^{2}}}\right]}\right\}.

Then, we further discuss on the local temperature based on GUP. According to 27 ; 28 , in order to obtain a local thermodynamic quantity, the Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole needs to be located at the center of the spherical cavity of radius rr. Where TH=14πr+{T_{H}}=\frac{1}{{4\pi{r_{+}}}} is Black hole’s original Hawking temperature, where r+=2GM{{\rm{r}}_{+}}=2GM. It is worth noting that the ADM quality of the magnetic monopole is (18πη2)M(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M 29 . So, Hawking temperature can be written as

TH=18π(18πη2)GM.\displaystyle{T_{H}}=\frac{1}{{8\pi(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})GM}}. (32)

Local temperature in the Schwarzschild black hole can be written as follows

TLocal=Tf(r)=112Mr18πG(18πη2)M{112β[3m2+4(18πη2)2ω2]}.\displaystyle{T_{Local}}=\frac{T}{{\sqrt{f(r)}}}=\frac{1}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{2M}}{r}}}}\frac{1}{{8\pi G(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M}}\left\{{1-\frac{1}{2}\beta\left[{3{m^{2}}+4{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}^{2}}{\omega^{2}}}\right]}\right\}. (33)

In Hawking radiation, in order to facilitate the calculation, we can get the lower limit of the energy of the released particles from the saturated form of the uncertainty principle,

ωΔx.\displaystyle\omega^{\prime}\geq\frac{\hbar}{{\Delta x}}. (34)

It is noteworthy that ω\omega^{\prime} in the magnetic monopole black hole is (18πη2)ω(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})\omega. In the vicinity of the black hole event horizon, the uncertainty can be used in the radius of the black hole 30 . So we can be obtain

ΔxrBH=r+.\displaystyle\Delta x\approx{r_{BH}}={r_{+}}. (35)

From equations (21) and (22), we have

ω=r+.\displaystyle\omega^{\prime}=\frac{\hbar}{{{r_{+}}}}. (36)

So the local temperature can be written as

TLocal=112Mr18πG(18πη2)M{112β[3m2+(M)2]}.\displaystyle{T_{Local}}=\frac{1}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{2M}}{r}}}}\frac{1}{{8\pi G(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M}}\left\{{1-\frac{1}{2}\beta\left[{3{m^{2}}+{{\left({\frac{\hbar}{M}}\right)}^{2}}}\right]}\right\}. (37)

Based on the above equation, we can to find out the critical value of phase transition. When considering the cavity of the radius r as a constant amount, and setting 8πη2=X8\pi{\eta^{2}}{\rm{=}}X, the following three critical values can be calculated by the following equations:

(TLocalM)η,r=(2TLocalM2)η,r=0.\displaystyle{\left({\frac{{\partial{T_{Local}}}}{{\partial M}}}\right)_{\eta,{\rm{r}}}}={\left({\frac{{{\partial^{2}}{T_{Local}}}}{{\partial{M^{2}}}}}\right)_{\eta,{\rm{r}}}}=0. (38)

Setting r=10,=1r=10,\hbar=1, and substituting equation (24) into equation (25), critical mass, critical GUP parameters, and critical local temperature can be obtained as follows βCr=2.52068,MCr=2.59934,TCr=0.019964{\beta_{C{\rm{r}}}}=2.52068,{M_{Cr}}=2.59934,{T_{Cr}}=0.019964. According to Eq. (24), the relationship between local temperature versus mass as a function can be shown as Figures 1-3.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Fixed G=1G=1, r=10r=10 and X=0.1X=0.1, plot a graph of the relationship between TLocal{T_{L{\rm{ocal}}}} and MM for β=1<βC\beta=1<{\beta_{C}} (top), β=βC\beta{\rm{=}}{\beta_{C}}(intermediate), and β=5>βC\beta=5>{\beta_{C}}(bottom).

Obviously, if β<βC\beta<{\beta_{C}}, the image curve will fluctuate, which indicates that there may be a phase change. As β\beta increases, the image curve monotonically increases and the inflection point disappears, which indicates that no phase change may occur.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Fixed G=1G=1, r=10r=10 and β=1\beta{\rm{=}}1, plot a graph of the relationship between TLocal{T_{L{\rm{ocal}}}} and MM. The curve is the image from top to bottom for X=0.3,0.1,0.05X={\rm{}}0.{\rm{3}},0.{\rm{1}},0.05.

The trend of the image is similar to that in Figure 1, so a phase change occurs.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Fixed G=1G=1, r=10r=10 and X=0.1X=0.1, plot a graph of the relationship between TLocal{T_{L{\rm{ocal}}}} and MM. The curve is the image from top to bottom for β=0\beta{\rm{=0}} and β=1\beta{\rm{=1}}.

Form Figure 3, the relationship between the original local temperature (for β=0\beta{\rm{=}}0) and mass and the relationship between local temperature (for β=1\beta{\rm{=}}1) and mass can be obtained respectively. When β=1\beta{\rm{=}}1, the evaporation process of the Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole is generally divided into three stages. In the first stage (M2MM3{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{2}}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{3}}}), the local temperature is reduced by the evaporation process. In the second stage (M1MM2{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{1}}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{2}}}), the local temperature decreases with the mass increases. In the final stage (M0MM1{{\rm{M}}_{0}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{1}}}), because the negative temperature violates the laws of thermodynamics, the mass of the black hole cannot be less than M0{{\rm{M}}_{0}}. When the mass is close to M0{{\rm{M}}_{0}}, the local temperature becomes 0, which results in a residual black hole, that is M0=Mres=2β2{M_{0}}={M_{res}}=\sqrt{\frac{{{\hbar^{2}}\beta}}{2}}. Therefore, a large black hole (LBH) of M2MM3{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{2}}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{3}}}, an intermediate black hole (IBH) of M1MM2{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{1}}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{2}}}, and a small black hole (SBH) of M0MM1{{\rm{M}}_{0}}\leq{\rm{M}}\leq{{\rm{M}}_{\rm{1}}} can be defined.

III The effect of GUP on phase transition

According to the first law of thermodynamics, the local energy of the Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole can be given by

(TLocalM)η,r=(2TLocalM2)η,r=0.\displaystyle{\left({\frac{{\partial{T_{Local}}}}{{\partial M}}}\right)_{\eta,{\rm{r}}}}={\left({\frac{{{\partial^{2}}{T_{Local}}}}{{\partial{M^{2}}}}}\right)_{\eta,{\rm{r}}}}=0. (39)

That is

ELocal\displaystyle{E_{Local}} =(18πη2)M0(18πη2)MTLocalTHd(18πη2)M\displaystyle=\mathop{\smallint}\limits_{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}}){M_{0}}}^{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M}\frac{{{T_{Local}}}}{{{T_{H}}}}d(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M (40)
=(18πη2)2(1+8πη2)2(1+8πη2)M+rr[r(23m2β)+β2(1+d)M]\displaystyle=\frac{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}\sqrt{\frac{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M+r}}{r}}[r(2-3{m^{2}}\beta)+\frac{{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}{{(-1+d)M}}]
(18πη2)2(1+8πη2)[r(23m2β)+2β21+8πη2]r+2(1+8πη2)β2r\displaystyle-\frac{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}\left[{r(2-3{m^{2}}\beta)+\frac{{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{{-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}}}}}\right]\sqrt{\frac{{r+\sqrt{2}(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{r}}
(18πη2)2(1+8πη2)2β2ArcTanh[2(1+8πη2)M+rr]r\displaystyle-\frac{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}\frac{{2\beta{\hbar^{2}}ArcTanh[\sqrt{\frac{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M+r}}{r}}]}}{r}
+(18πη2)2(1+8πη2)2β2ArcTanh[r+2(1+8πη2)β2r]r.\displaystyle+\frac{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})}}\frac{{2\beta{\hbar^{2}}ArcTanh[\sqrt{\frac{{r+\sqrt{2}(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{r}}]}}{r}.

Meanwhile, we can obtain heat capacity

C\displaystyle C =ELocalTLocal=ELocalMTLocalM\displaystyle=\frac{{\partial{E_{Local}}}}{{\partial{T_{Local}}}}=\frac{{\frac{{\partial{E_{Local}}}}{{\partial M}}}}{{\frac{{\partial{T_{Local}}}}{{\partial M}}}} (41)
=8GM2π12Mr(2M+r)((1+8πη2)2M2(2+3m2β)+β2)2(1+8πη2)M+rr(M2r(23m2β)+M3(6+9m2β)+7Mβ23rβ2).\displaystyle=\frac{{8G{M^{2}}\pi\sqrt{1-\frac{{2M}}{r}}(-2M+r)({{(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})}^{2}}{M^{2}}(-2+3{m^{2}}\beta)+\beta{\hbar^{2}})}}{{\sqrt{\frac{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M+r}}{r}}({M^{2}}r(2-3{m^{2}}\beta)+{M^{3}}(-6+9{m^{2}}\beta)+7M\beta{\hbar^{2}}-3r\beta{\hbar^{2}})}}.

The heat capacity associated with the quality of the Schwarzschild black hole with global magnetic monopoles is shown in Figure 4.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Fixed G=1G=1, r=10r=10 and X=0.1X=0.1, plot the relationship between CC and MM. The figure is the CMC-M image for β=0\beta{\rm{=0}} and β=1\beta{\rm{=1}} respectively.

As shown in Fig. 4, the solid blue line is an image of the thermal capacity of a black hole and the mass change of the black hole when the GUP parameter is taken into account. It can be seen from the figure that there are two stable regions: M0MM1{M_{0}}\leq M\leq{M_{1}} and M2MM3{M_{2}}\leq M\leq{M_{3}}. While when M1MM2{M_{1}}\leq M\leq{M_{2}}, the black hole is in an unstable state. Since the thermal capacity is negative, the red dotted line represents an image of the original heat capacity as a function of the mass of the black hole. When the mass is zero, the thermal capacity also approaches 0. As the mass increases, a divergence point appears at M2{M_{2}}, the thermal capacity on the left side of the divergence point is negative, the black hole is unstable, the thermal capacity on the right side of the divergence point is positive, and the black hole is relatively stable. It can be clearly seen that the images diverge at M1{M_{1}} and M2{M_{2}} , proving the existence of a phase transition. Connecting the Eq.(20), we get the entropy

S=d(18πη2)MTH=4GM2π(18πη2)2.\displaystyle S=\int{\frac{{d(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})M}}{{{T_{H}}}}}=4G{M^{2}}\pi{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})^{2}}. (42)

In order to study the phase transition of the Schwarzschild black hole with the global monopole, we get its free energy as follows 31 ; 32 ,

F\displaystyle F =ELocalTLocalS\displaystyle={E_{Local}}-{T_{Local}}S (43)
=(18πη2)[M2(2+3m2β)+β2]4M12Mr\displaystyle=\frac{{(1-8\pi{\eta^{2}})\left[{{M^{2}}(-2+3{m^{2}}\beta)+\beta{\hbar^{2}}}\right]}}{{4M\sqrt{1-\frac{{2M}}{r}}}}
122(1+8πη2)M+rr[r(23m2β)+β2(1+8πη2)M]\displaystyle-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M+r}}{r}}\left[{r(2-3{m^{2}}\beta)+\frac{{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}{{(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M}}}\right]
+12[r(23m2β)+2β21+8πη2]r+2(1+8πη2)β2r\displaystyle+\frac{1}{2}\left[{r(2-3{m^{2}}\beta)+\frac{{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{{-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}}}}}\right]\sqrt{\frac{{r+\sqrt{2}(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{r}}
+β2ArcTanh[2(1+8πη2)M+rr]r\displaystyle+\frac{{\beta{\hbar^{2}}ArcTanh[\sqrt{\frac{{2(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})M+r}}{r}}]}}{r}
β2ArcTanh[r+2(1+8πη2)β2r]r.\displaystyle-\frac{{\beta{\hbar^{2}}ArcTanh[\sqrt{\frac{{r+\sqrt{2}(-1+8\pi{\eta^{2}})\sqrt{\beta{\hbar^{2}}}}}{r}}]}}{r}.
Refer to caption
Figure 5: Plot the relationship between local temperature TLocal{T_{Local}} and free energy FF. The curve is the image from top to bottom for β=4>βC\beta=4>{\beta_{C}}, β=βC\beta={\beta_{C}}, β=0.5<βC\beta=0.5<{\beta_{C}}. The parameters are taken as r=10r=10, =1\hbar=1, X=105X={10^{-5}}.

From Figure 5, we show free energy FF curves with local temperature TLocal{T_{Local}} under different generalized uncertainty parament β\beta. It can be clearly seen that a dovetail structure appears, when the GUP parameter β\beta at this time is smaller than the critical value βCr{\beta_{Cr}}, which means two phases coexist. That is the first order phase transition occurs. When the GUP parameter β\beta is equal to the critical value βCr{\beta_{Cr}}, an inflection point occurs. The inflection point is the second-order phase transition point. When β\beta is more than βCr{\beta_{Cr}}, the inflection point disappears. The trend of the image corresponds to the trend shown in the TM{\rm{T}}-{\rm{M}} image in Figure 1. To further explore the effect of β\beta on phase transitions. A plot of local temperature TLocal{T_{Local}} and free energy F with β=0\beta=0 is shown in Figure 6.

Refer to caption
Figure 6: Plot the local temperature TLocal{T_{Local}} versus the free energy F for β=0\beta=0. The curve corresponds to the phase transition. The parameters are taken as r=10r=10, =1\hbar=1, X=105X={10^{-5}}.

Figure 6 shows the relationship between free energy and local temperature in the original black hole. It can be found that the local temperature has a minimum at T1{{\rm{T}}_{1}}^{\prime} and there is no black hole solution below it. When β=0\beta=0 and M=0M=0, black hole returns to monopole space-time. Therefore, FGMS{F^{GMS}} represents the free energy of global monopole space time(GMS). For T<TC{\rm{T}}<{{\rm{T}}_{C}}^{\prime}, the free energy of unstable black holes and stable large black holes is higher than FGMS{F^{GMS}}, which means that GMS is more popular than unstable black holes and stable large black holes. However, when T>TC{\rm{T>}}{{\rm{T}}_{C}}^{\prime}, the free energy of the unstable black hole is higher than FGMS{F^{GMS}}, and the free energy of the stable large black hole is lower than FGMS{F^{GMS}}. This indicates that the stable large black hole is more popular than GMS. So at T>TC{\rm{T>}}{{\rm{T}}_{C}}^{\prime}, we can find that the phase transition tunneling radiation collapses to a stable large black hole, and the unstable small black hole eventually evolves into a large black hole.

Refer to caption
Figure 7: Plot the relationship between local temperature TLocal{T_{Local}} and free energy FF for β=0\beta=0. The curve is the image for β=0.5<βC\beta=0.5<{\beta_{C}}. The parameters are taken as r=10r=10, =1\hbar=1, X=105X={10^{-5}}.

As can be seen from Figure 7, F is free energy of curve space (CS). The SBH transforms to IBH at T1{T_{1}}, and the IBH transforms to LBH at T2{T_{2}}. The dovetail structure corresponds to a first-order phase transition. When T0<T<TC{T_{0}}<T<{T_{C}}, FSBH<FLBH<FIBH{F^{SBH}}<{F^{LBH}}<{F^{IBH}}, which means that SBH is more possible than LBH and IBH, therefore LBH and IBH will decay into SBH; when Tc<T<T1{T_{c}}<T<{T_{1}}, FLBH<FSBH<FIBH{F^{LBH}}<{F^{SBH}}<{F^{IBH}}, which means that LBH is more possible than SBH and IBH, hence SBH and IBH will decay into LBH.

IV Conclusion

Based on GUP, we studies the phase transition and stability of Schwarzschild black holes with global monopoles. We calculated corrected thermodynamic quantities such as tunneling temperature, local temperature, heat capacity, and the entropy of the black hole. From the relationship between these thermodynamic quantities, we analyzed the phase transition and thermodynamic behavior of black holes. We find that GUP prevents black holes from completely evaporating and produces a stable residual mass, that is Mres=2β2{M_{res}}=\sqrt{\frac{{{\hbar^{2}}\beta}}{2}}. Secondly, when the GUP parameter β\beta and MM are close to zero, the heat capacity of the black hole disappears. When β<βC\beta<{\beta_{C}}, the heat capacity of a Schwarzschild black hole with a monopole has two stable regions, and there is a first-order phase transition, that is, two phases coexist. Finally, according to the image of free energy vs. local temperature, there are two phase transitions. One is a dovetail structure, which means that there is a first-order phase transition in the Schwarzschild black hole with global monopoles at β<βC\beta<{\beta_{C}}, and the other is a second-order phase transition at β=βC\beta={\beta_{C}}. In addition, we also found that with increasing temperature, stable SBH and unstable IBH will eventually decay into stable LBH. It is worth noting that the effects of GUP parameter and monopole parameter on the thermodynamic properties of Schwarzschild black holes are discussed with GUP parameter as variant. In the following work, we will discuss the thermodynamic behavior of a black hole with an integral magnetic monopole using the magnetic monopole parameters as variant.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11703018), Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province, China (Grant No. 20180550275) and Doctoral Scientific Research Foundation of Shenyang Normal University (Grant No. BS201843).

References

  • (1) S. W. Hawking, W. Israel, “General Relativity:An Einstein Centenary Survey”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 359-369, 1979.
  • (2) G. W. Gibbons, S. W. Hawking, “Action integrals and partition functions in quantum gravity”, Physical Review D, vol. 23, no.26, pp. 2752, 1977.
  • (3) J. D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and the second law”, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, vol. 4, no. 15, pp. 737-740, 1972.
  • (4) J. D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and entropy”, Physical Review D, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 2333, 1973.
  • (5) S. W. Hawking, D. N. Page, “Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space”, Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 87, no.4, pp. 577-588, 1983.
  • (6) C. Mirjam, S. G. Steven, “Phases of R-charged black holes, spinning branes and strongly coupled gauge theories”, Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 1999, no. 04, pp. 024, 1999.
  • (7) Y. S. Myung, “No Hawking CPage phase transition in three dimensions”, Physics Letters B, vol. 624, no. 3-4, pp. 297-303, 2005.
  • (8) N. Altamirano, D. Kubiz k and R. B. Mann, “Reentrant phase transitions in rotating anti Cde Sitter black holes”, Physical Review D. vol. 88, no. 10, pp. 101502, 2013.
  • (9) D. Kubiznˇa´\check{\texttt{n}}\acute{\texttt{a}}k, R. B. Mann, “P-V criticality of charged AdS black holes”, Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2012, no. 7, pp. 33, 2012.
  • (10) T. W. B. Kibble, “Topology of cosmic domains and strings”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 1387, 1976.
  • (11) A. Vilenkin, “Cosmic strings and domain walls”, Phys. Rep, vol. 121, pp. 263, 1985.
  • (12) M. Barriola, A. Vilenkin, “Gravitational field of a global monopole”, Physical Review Letters, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 341, 1989.
  • (13) H. W. Yu, “Black hole thermodynamics and global monopoles”, Nuclear Physics B, vol. 430, no. 2, pp. 427-440, 1994.
  • (14) N. Dadhich, K. Narayan, and U. A. Yajnik, “Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole charge”, Pramana, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 307-314, 1998.
  • (15) H. L. Li, S. Z. Yang, “Correction to Hawking Tunneling Radiation from Global Monopole Charged Black Hole”, Communications in Theoretical Physics, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 190-192, 2009.
  • (16) K. Jusufi, G. Apostolovska, “Hawking radiation of Dirac monopoles from the global monopole black hole with quantum gravity effects”, Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 361, no. 12, pp. 374, 2016.
  • (17) A. K. Ahmed, U. Camci, “Accretion on Reissner-Nordstro¨\ddot{\texttt{o}}m-(anti)-de Sitter black hole with global monopole”, Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 33, no. 21, pp. 215012, 2016.
  • (18) Z. W. Feng, J. Deng and G. P. Li, “Quantum Tunneling of the Non-stationary Kerr-Newman Black Hole via a New Type of General Tortoise Coordinate Transformation”, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 51, no. 10, pp. 3214-3221, 2012.
  • (19) A. F. Ali, S. Das and E. C. Vagenas, “Discreteness of space from the generalized uncertainty principle”, Physics Letters B, vol. 678, no. 5, pp. 497-499, 2009.
  • (20) S. Das, E. C. Vagenas, A. F. Ali, “Discreteness of space from GUP II: relativistic wave equations”, Physics Letters B, vol. 690, no. 4, pp. 407-412, 2010.
  • (21) K. Nozari, S. Saghafi, “Natural cutoffs and quantum tunneling from black hole horizon”, Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2012, no. 11, pp. 5, 2012.
  • (22) R. J. Adler, P. Chen and D. I. Santiago, “The generalized uncertainty principle and black hole remnants”, General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 2101-2108, 2001.
  • (23) L. Xiang, X. Q. Wen, “A heuristic analysis of black hole thermodynamics with generalized uncertainty principle”, Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2009, no. 10, pp. 046, 2009.
  • (24) R.Banerjee, S. Ghosh, “Generalised uncertainty principle, remnant mass and singularity problem in black hole thermodynamics”, Physics Letters B, vol. 288, no. 2-3, pp. 224-229, 2010.
  • (25) K. Nozari, M. Karami, “Minimal length and generalized Dirac equation”, Modern Physics Letters A, vol. 20, no. 40, pp. 3095-3103, 2005.
  • (26) D. Y. Chen, H. W. Wu and H. T. Yang, “Fermion’s tunnelling with effects of quantum gravity”, Advances in High Energy Physics, vol. 2013, no. 432412, 2013.
  • (27) R. C. Tolman, “On the weight of heat and thermal equilibrium in general relativity”, Physical Review, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 904, 1930.
  • (28) J. Tao, P. Wang and H. T. Yang, “Free-fall frame black hole in gravity s rainbow”, Physical Review D, vol. 94, no. 6, pp. 064068, 2016.
  • (29) M. Sharif, W. Javed, “Tunneling from Reissner-Nordstro¨\ddot{\texttt{o}}m-De Sitter black hole with a global monopole”, In International Journal of Modern Physics: Conference Series, vol. 23, pp. 271-275, World Scientific Publishing Company, 2013.
  • (30) H. L. Li, S. R. Chen, “Formation of the remnant close to Planck scale and the Schwarzschild black hole with global monopole”, General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 128, 2017.
  • (31) R. G. Cai, “Gauss-Bonnet black holes in AdS spaces”, Physical Review D, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 084014, 2002.
  • (32) Y. S. Myung, “Lifshitz black holes in the Horˇ\check{\texttt{r}}ava-Lifshitz gravity”, Physics Letters B, vol. 690, no. 5, pp. 534-540, 2010.