arxiv:hep-th/ v1 5 Nov 2003

Transcription

1 Absorption Cross Section for S-wave massive Scalar Eylee Jung, Sung-Hoon Kim, and D. K. Park, Department of Physics, Kyungnam University, Masan, , Korea arxiv:hep-th/ v1 5 Nov 003 Abstract We examine the absorption cross section of the massive scalar field for the higher-dimensional extended object. Adopting the usual quantum mechanical matching conditions between the asymptotic and near-horizon solutions we check whether or not the universal property of the absorption cross section, which is that the low-energy cross section is proportional to the surface area of horizon, is maintained when the mass effect is involved. It is found that the universality is maintained when the particular conditions are imposed if the mass parameter of the scalar field is not too large. eylee@mail.kyungnam.ac.kr shoon@mail.kyungnam.ac.kr dkpark@hep.kyungnam.ac.kr 1

2 I. INTRODUCTION It is well-known that the low-energy absorption cross section of the massless particle for the black hole is proportional to the surface area of the horizon [1 3]. This universal property is shown to be maintained for the higher-dimensional objects such as extremal strings and black p-brane [4]. Furthermore, adopting the usual quantum mechanical matching conditions the authors in Ref. [5] have argued that the genuine physical reason for the occurrence of the universal property is the independence of the matching point between the asymptotic and near-horizon solutions. In this paper we will examine whether the universal property of the low-energy absorption cross section is maintained or not in the higher-dimensional extended system when the mass effect of the scalar field is involved. In order to proceed we will adopt the quantum mechanical matching conditions φ ω (R) = φ 0 ω(r) (1.1) d dr φ ω (R) = d dr φ0 ω(r) which is introduced in Ref. [5]. In Eq.(1.1) φ ω and φ 0 ω are the asymptotic and near-horizon solutions respectively of the massive scalar field and thus, Eq.(1.1) is the matching between them at arbitrary location r = R. For the case of the massless scalar field coupled to the extended spacetime background, it has been shown in Ref. [5] that the low-energy absorption cross section is independent of the matching point R. Ref. [5] stressed also that this insensitivity to the matching location is the origin of the universality. In this paper we will follow Ref. [5] to check the universality when the scalar field is massive. It is shown in the follwing that when the mass parameter m is large to some extent, the universal property is broken. If, however, the mass parameter is too large, it may violate the low-energy criterion we assume throughout the paper. Thus, this case seems to be beyond our scope. For the small m we will show that the universality is maintained

3 when the particular conditions are required. II. EQUATION FOR MASSIVE SCALAR IN THE BACKGROUND OF THE HIGHER-DIMENSIONAL OBJECT The spacetime we consider in this paper is an higher-dimensional object whose (p+n+3)- dimensional metric is ds = γ µν dx µ dx ν + f(r)dr + r h(r)dω n+1 (.1) where µ, ν = 0, 1, p. Let us consider the minimally coupled massive scalar in this background, which should satisfy ( A A m )Φ = 0. (.) If we assume Φ = e iωt φ ω (r) which is valid for the low-energy s-wave, Eq.(.) reduces to ω f(r)γ tt (r) + 1 γ(r)[r h(r)] n+1 f(r) d dr γ(t)[r h(r)] n+1 f(r) where γ(r) detγ µν. Introducing tortose coordinate r as following d dr m f(r) φ ω = 0 (.3) dr = dr γ tt f(r) (.4) Eq.(.3) is simplified as usual Schrödinger type where [ d dr + V (r) ] ψ = ω ψ (.5) ψ(r) = Uφ ω (.6) U(r) = γγ tt {r h(r)} n+1 V (r) = V 0 (r) m γ tt V 0 (r) = 1 U d U (dr ). 3

4 Usually the tortose coordinate r goes to ± in the asymptotic and near-horizon regions of r and the potential V 0 (r) makes a barrier which separates these two regions. If, for example, we consider the usual 4d Schwarzschild spacetime by choosing f(r) = γ tt = (1 r H /r) 1, the tortose coordinate r and the potential V 0 (r) reduce to r = r+r H ln(r r H ) and V 0 (r) = (r H /r 3 )(1 r H /r). Fig. 1 shows r -dependence of V 0 (r) in this simple example when r H = 1. From Fig. 1 we understand that V 0 (r) makes a barrier between the asymptotic and near-horizon regions. We will solve Eq.(.5) in the asymptotic region (r ) and near-horizon region (r 0) separately. Matching them using Eq.(1.1), we will derive the conditions for the maintenance of the universality. III. SOLUTION AT ASYMPTOTIC REGION In this section we will solve Eq.(.5) in the asymptotic region. For this we assume the geometry is asymptotic flat for simplicity; lim γ µν = η µν (3.1) r lim f(r) = lim h(r) = 1. r r Using Eq.(3.1) Eq.(.5) reduces to d u dr + 1 r ( ) du dr + ω m n u 4r = 0 (3.) in the asymptotic region where u ψ / r. Here the subscript denotes the region we consider for the solution of Eq.(.5). Eq.(3.) is easily solved in terms of Bessel function as following: u = AJ n (ωvr) + BJ n (ωvr) (3.3) and hence φ ω r U u = 1 (ωvr) n [ AJ n (ωvr) + BJ n (ωvr)] (3.4) 4

5 where v = 1 m /ω. Now we define the flux of the massive scalar as F = 1 ( U φ dφ ω i γ tt ω f(r) dr φ dφ ) ω ω. (3.5) dr Inserting (3.4) into Eq.(3.5) yields the incomong flux in the form; F in = 1 [ A + B + A Be i n π(ωv) n π + AB e i n π]. (3.6) When deriving Eq.(3.6) we used only the incoming wave, i.e. e iωvr, in the asymptotic formula of Bessel function. IV. SOLUTION AT NEAR-HORIZON REGION In this section we will solve Eq.(.5) in the near-horizon region. Following Ref. [4,5] we take a following assumption lim r 0 lim U r 0 Sra b (4.1) γ tt f T r b+1 lim r 0 γtt W r c where S, T and W are some constant parameters. Especially, the parameter S is proportional to the area of the absorption hypersurface 1. Thus, the universality means that the absorption cross section for the low-energy massless particle is proportional to the parameter S. For example, the low-energy cross section for the massless scalar particle is found to be σ L = Ω n+1 S [4,5] when a = b, where Ω n+1 is an surface area of S n+1, which exactly coincides with the area of the absorption hypersurface. Making use of Eq.(4.1) we can transform Eq.(.5) into 1 In the black hole spacetime this is same with area of the horizon surface 5

6 in the r 0 region, where d χ dy + 1 dχ y dy + [1 + V 1(y) + V (y)]χ = 0 (4.) y = ωt χ(r) = r b br b ψ0 (4.3) ( V 1 (y) = m ω T ) c b V Wω b y (y) = a 1 4b y. It seems to be impossible to solve Eq.(4.) analytically if both of V 1 (y) and V (y) are present. Thus we should take an approximation for the analytical approach. If 0 < b < c, V (y) is much greater than V 1 (y), which makes χ to be proportional to H () a (y) where H ν () b is usual Hankel function. Thus we have a solution φ 0 ω = 1 (ωr) a H () a b ( ) ωt br b (4.4) in this region. If b = c, V 1 (y) and V (y) are almost same order, which results in φ 0 ω = 1 ( ) ωt H () (ωr) a ν br b (4.5) where ν = a 4b + m T Wb. (4.6) If 0 < c < b, V 1 (y) is a dominant term in the potential. In this case the solution of Eq.(4.) cannot be solved in general. If b = c, however, we can solve Eq.(4.) with V = V 1 (y), which results in φ 0 ω = 1 ωt i e (ωr) a br b U where U(a, b, z) is a confluent hypergeometric function. 1 i m T Wωb, 1, i ωt (4.7) br b V. ABSORPTION CROSS SECTION WHEN 0 < b < c If 0 < b < c, the solution in near-horizon region becames Eq.(4.4). Then it is easy to show that the incident flux for φ 0 ω is 6

7 F = 1 U i γ tt f ( φ 0 ω dφ 0 ω dr φ0 ω dφ 0 ) ω = bs dr πω a T. (5.1) Thus the absorption cross section defined as σ (π)n+1 ω n+1 Ω n+1 F0 in F in (5.) becomes σ = 4(π)n+1 bsv n ω a+1 TΩ n+1 1 A + B + A Be i n π + AB e i n π (5.3) where Ω n+1 is surface area of S n+1 Ω n+1 = π1+ n Γ ( ). (5.4) 1 + n Now let us consider the matching between φ ω and φ0 ω. In Ref. [4] author uses lim r 0 φ ω = lim φ 0 r ω. (5.5) This condition requires implicitly the assumption that there exists an intermediate region where φ 0 ω and φ ω can be matched. However, it is not clear at least for us to take this assumption ab initio. Instead of this the authors in Ref. [5] took Eq.(1.1) as matching conditions. Thus we do not need to assume the existence of the intermediate region from the beginning. If we solve Eq.(1.1) with the asymptotic solution (3.4) and the near-horizon solution (4.4), the coefficients A and B become A = ( 1) n+1 B = ( 1) n 1 π(ωr) n a v n [ n + a J n (ωvr)h() a b ( ) ωt ( ) ωt +ωvrj n (ωvr)h () a + ωt b R J b n(ωvr)h() a b π(ωr) n a v n [ ( ) n + a ωt J n (ωvr)h() a b +ωvrj n (ωvr)h () a b ( ) ωt + ωt R b J n (ωvr)h() a b ( ) ] ωt ( ) ] ωt (5.6) where the prime denotes the differentiation with respect to the argument. Inserting Eq.(5.6) into Eq.(5.3) one can compute the absorption cross section σ (1) straightforwardly. 7

8 In order to show that the the low-energy cross section is independent of the matching point, we plot the ω-dependence of σ (1) in Fig., which indicates that in ω m region σ (1) is independent of R. Thus the low-energy universality seems to be maintained when 0 < b < c if m is not too large. To show this more explicitly, we compute the coefficients A and B in the low energy limit using the asymptotic formulae of Bessel and Hankel functions which results in A = i π n Γ ( a b B = 0 ) ( Γ 1 + n ) ( ) a b b Tω b+1 (5.7) at the leading order. It is worthwhile noting that the R-dependence disappears in A and B as indicated before as a physical origin of the universality in the low-energy cross-section. Computing the low-energy cross section by making use of Eq.(5.7), one can obtain easily σ (1) L = π Γ ( a b )Ω n+1 S where L in subscript stands for low-energy limit. If a = b, σ (1) L ( ) ωt a b 1 v n (5.8) b becomes simply σ (1) L = Ω n+1sv n (5.9) which indicates that the mass in scalar particle decreases the absorption cross section. A similar decreasing behavior of the absorption cross section with respect to m was also found by Unruh [7]. The authors in Ref. [5] applied the matching condition (1.1) to the case of the fixed scalar [8], where the low-energy absorption cross section does not obey the universality. The authors in Ref. [8] computed the low-energy cross section σ s by matching φ 0 ω and φ ω through the solution in the intermediate region as Unruh did in his seminal paper [7] and obtained σ s = πω. If one uses, however, the matching condition (1.1), one gets In order to apply our low-energy formulation we should require that the mass of the scalar particle is not large 8

9 σ s = πω R /(R 1). The explicit R-dependence indicates the non-universality, but its ω-dependence is correct. This result may give us a confidence to use (1.1) to examine the ω-dependence of the absorption cross section in the high-energy limit. If one takes, for example, ω limit in the coefficients A and B of Eq.(5.6), it is easy to show that these coefficients are explicitly dependent on the matching point R as A = ( 1) n 1 n a+1 (ωr) ωt v n+1 e i[ ωt π 4(1+ a b)] [ ( sin B = ( 1) n+1 n a+1 (ωr) [ ( sin ωvr + n 1 4 ) π + it ( R b+1 v cos ωt v n+1 e i[ ωt π 4(1+ a b)] ωvr n ) π + it ( R b+1 v cos ωvr + n 1 4 ωvr n )] π )] π. (5.10) Then, it is easy to show that the high-energy absorption cross section becomes σ (1) H = (π/ω)n+1 Ω n+1 R n a [ vr b+1 T 4S/T ]. (5.11) T vr b+1 The appearance of R in Eq.(5.11) indicates that the high energy cross section loses the universality property. However, the ω-dependence of σ (1) H, i.e. σ (1) H ω (n+1) exhibits a decreasing behavior. A similar decreasing behavior was shown in Ref. [9] by adopting a numerical methods and in Ref. [10,11] by analyzing a modified Mathieu equation. VI. ABSORPTION CROSS SECTION WHEN 0 < c b In this section we examine the low-energy absorption cross section when b c. In the case of b = c the asymptotic and near-horizon solutions are (3.4) and (4.5) respectively. The difference of order of Hankel function in (4.5) from (4.4) for 0 < b < c does not change the incoming flux of the near-horizon region because the order of Hankel function is only involved as a phase factor in the asymptotic formula. Thus, the low-energy absorption cross section has a same expression with Eq.(5.3). The difference of the low-energy cross section, however, from that for 0 < b < c case arises due to the matching between the asymptotic and near-horizon solutions. Applying the matching condition (1.1) we obtain 9

10 A = ( 1) n+1 B = ( 1) n 1 π(ωr) n a v n [ ( ) n + a ωt J n (ωvr)h() ν ( ) ωt + ωt ( ) ] ωt R J b n(ωvr)h() ν +ωvrj n (ωvr)h ν () [ n + a π(ωr) n a v n +ωvrj n (ωvr)h () ν J n (ωvr)h() ν ( ) ωt ( ) ωt + ωt R J b n (ωvr)h() ν ( ) ] ωt. (6.1) If we take ω m 0 limit in Eq.(6.1), it is easy to show that the coefficients A and B are explicitly dependent on R unlike massless and 0 < b < c cases. This means the lowenergy cross section for b = c does not maintain the universality. The only way to keep the R-independence we should require the additional conditions W = m T n(a n) a n. (6.) If T is a real parameter, these additional conditions seem to change the Lorentz signiture in the near-horizon region and thus may generate a serious causal problem. We guess this problem may be originated from the matching between the solutions whose valid regions are too distant. If our guess is right, the problem may be cured by introducing the intermediate region between near-horizon and asymptotic regions as Unruh did in Ref. [7]. This issue seems to need a careful treatment and we hope to discuss it in the future. In this paper we will not go further this causal problem. If one takes ω 0 limit in Eq.(6.1) with making use of Eq.(6.), the coefficients A and B become A = 0 (6.3) n 1 ( ) a n ( 1) b b iγ ( ) a n b B = n ω a n ωt Γ ( ) v n. n Thus the coefficients A and B are independent of the matching point R as expected. Inserting Eq.(6.3) into Eq.(5.3) makes the low-energy cross section to be ( ( ) σ () ωt a n L = b n+1 π n nbs Γ 3 n ) ( b Tω n+1 Γ a n )v n. (6.4) b 10

11 It is interesting to note that σ () L is proportional to v n while σ (1) L in Eq.(5.8) is proportional to v n. This inverse power makes σ () L m unlike σ (1) L. to exhibit an increasing behavior with respect to mass If one takes a ω limit in Eq.(6.1), one can compute the high-energy cross-section σ () H for b = c case. Although ω limit of the coefficients A and B are different from Eq.(5.10), this difference is only phase factor in leading order and therefore does not change the high-energy cross section, i.e. σ () H = σ (1) H. Thus the universality is not maintained in this case too, and the ω-dependence is σ () H ω (n+1). Now let us comment briefly b = c case, whose near-horizon solutions are given in Eq.(4.7). For this case one can compute the coefficients A and B using the matching condition (1.1). However, the low-energy(ω 0) and high-energy(ω ) limits of A and B are dependent on R, whcih means the universality is not maintained in both limits. Since, however, the effect of mass is not small, our fomulation on low-energy scalar does not properly describe physics of this case. It may be suitable to consider the angle-dependence of the scalar field to go beyond a s-wave approximation. VII. CONCLUSION The universal property of the low-energy absorption cross section is examined when the mass effect is involved. Taking an assumption (4.1) in the near-horizon region we have shown that the universal property is maintained when 0 < b < c. If, however, b = c, the universal property is in general broken unless Eq.(6.) is imposed. Thus for the cases of b = c without Eq.(6.) and c < b, the universality of the low-energy cross section is completely broken. We guess, however, that these cases are beyond the low-energy formulation and we should adopt more careful procedure to compute the absorption cross section. We would like to study this subject in the near future. Also we hope to come back to the causal problem generated by Eq.(6.) with careful consideration of the intermediate region. 11

12 Acknowledgement: This work was supported by the Kyungnam University Research Fund, 00. 1

13 REFERENCES [1] A. A. Starobinski and S. M. Churilos, Amplification of electromagnetic and gravitational waves scattered by a rotating black hole, Sov. Phys. JETP, 38 (1974) 1. [] G. W. Gibbons, Vacuum Polarizon and the Spontaneous Loss of Charge by Black Holes, Comm. Math. Phys. 44 (1975) 45. [3] D. N. Page, Particle emission rate from a black hole: Massless particles from an uncharged, nonrotating hole, Phys. Rev. D14 (1976) 351. [4] R. Emparan, Absorption of Scalars by Extended Objects, Nucl. Phys. B516 (1998) 97 [hep-th/970604]. [5] D. K. Park and H. J. W. Müller-Kirsten, Universality or Non Universality of Absorption Cross Sections for Extended Objects, Phys. Lett. B49 (000) 135 [hep-th/000815]. [6] S. R. Das, G. Gibbons, and S. D. Mathur, Universality of Low Energy Absorption Cross Sections for Black Holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 417. [7] W. G. Unruh, Absorption cross section of small black holes, Phys. Rev. D14 (1976) 351. [8] B. Kol and A. Rajaraman, Fixed Scalars and Suppression of Hawking Evaporation, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 983 [hep-th/960816]. [9] M. Cvetic, H. Lü, and J. F. Vazquez-Poritz, Absorption by Extremal D3-brane, JHEP 010 (001) 01 [hep-th/00018]. [10] R. Manvelyan, H. J. W. Müller-Kirsten, J. -Q. Liang and Y. Zhang, Absorption Cross Section of Scalar Field in Supergravity Background, Nucl. Phys. B579 (000) 177 [hepth/ ]. [11] D. K. Park, S. N. Tamaryan, H. J. W. Müller-Kirsten, and J. Zhang, D-Branes and their Absorptivity in Born-Infeld Theory, Nucl. Phys. B594 (001) 43 [hep-th/ ]. 13

14 FIGURES FIG. 1. The plot of potential V 0 in terms of the tortose coordinate. Usually the potential V 0 makes a barrier which separates the asymptotic and near-horizon regions. FIG.. Plot of σ (1) L -vs-ω with various matching points when m = 0.01, and n = a = b = T = S = 1. This figure indicates the low-energy absorption cross section is independent of the matching point, which is the origin of universality. 14

15 0.10 V near-horizon region asymptotic region Fig. 1 r * 15

16 σ L (1) R = Fig. ω 16