arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 8 Oct 2018

Transcription

1 Effect of the self-gravity of shells on a high energy collision in a rotating Bañados-Teitelboim-Zanelli spacetime Kota Ogasawara 1 Naoki Tsukamoto 1 Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, Tokyo , Japan Frontier Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Sciences & Department of Physics, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi , Japan RUP-18-3 arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 8 Oct 018 We consider a collision of two dust thin shells with a high center-of-mass (CM) energy including their self-gravity in a Bañados-Teitelboim-Zanelli (BTZ) spacetime. The shells divide the BTZ spacetime into three domains the domains are matched by the Darmois-Israel junction conditions. We treat only the collision of two shells which corotate with a background BTZ spacetime because of the junction conditions. The counterpart of the corotating shell collision is a collision of two particles with vanishing angular momenta. We compare the dust thin shell collision the particle collision in order to investigate the effects of the self-gravity of colliding objects on the high CM energy collision. We show that the self-gravity of the shells affects the position of an event horizon it covers the high-energy collisional event. Therefore, we conclude that the self-gravity of colliding objects suppresses its CM energy that any observer who sts outside of the event horizon cannot observe the collision with an arbitrary high CM energy. I. INTRODUCTION In 1975, Piran et al. [1, ] discussed a collisional Penrose process which is a kind of an energy extraction [3] from a Kerr black hole they found that the center-ofmass(cm) energy of two particles can be arbitrarily large in a near-horizon limit in the extremal Kerr spacetime. In 009, Bañados, Silk, West (BSW) rediscovered the arbitrarily high CM energy of the particle collision they pointed out that rotating black holes can act as particle accelerators[4]. The process is often called BSW collision or BSW process after BSW s work. See Harada Kimura [5] for a brief review on the BSW process. In 016, the LIGO Scientific the Virgo Collaborations have reported the first detection of gravitational waves they ensured the existence of astrophysical black holes [6]. Physics in strong gravitational fields of black holes compact objects such as BSW process would be more interest among researchers not only in general relativity but also in astronomy astrophysics. Several critical comments on the BSW process were given in Refs. [7 9]. It is well known that there is the upper bound of the angular momentum of the Kerr black hole in an astrophysical situation [10]. It needs arbitrarily long proper time of either of two particles with the infinite CM energy to reach the event horizon for a maximally rotating Kerr black hole. The self-gravity of colliding particles an emission of gravitational waves will weaken the CM energy. We should keep in mind that an observer distant from a black hole may not see the products of the collision with high energy /or very massive the observed products must be highly red-sifted even if the CM energy is very large [9]. The details of the BSW collision have been investigated k.ogasawara@rikkyo.ac.jp tsukamoto@rikkyo.ac.jp after stimulation by the criticism. Harada Kimura estimated a bounded CM energy on a particle collision including the effect of emission of gravitational waves [11]. Patil et al. [1] considered a finite CM energy of a collision of two particles with a finite proper time. The collision of particle with an innermost stable circular orbit [13], off-equatorial-plane collisions [14], a collision in a weak electromagnetic field [15], the BSW collision in the near-horizon geometry [16] have been investigated. A close relation between the BSW collision the Aretakis instability which is a test-field instability of an extremal horizon [17 4] was pointed out [5]. The details of the collisional Penrose process were also investigated by several authors [6 35]. Particle collisions with high CM energy occur not only in a Kerr black hole spacetime but also in a Kerr naked singularity [36], a Kerr-Newmann [37], a Kerr-(anti- )de Sitter [38], lower-dimensional [39 44], higherdimensional spacetimes [5, 45 47]. A particle collision with an unbounded CM energy in an extremal Reissner- Nordström spacetime [48] a higher-dimensional Reissner-Nordström spacetime [5] have been investigated as the electromagnetic counterpart of the BSW collision. The BSW collision is regarded as a universal process in extremal spacetimes in all dimensions. The self-gravity effect of colliding objects on the BSW collision cannot be neglected since the collision occurs in a near-horizon limit. However, it is very difficult to treat the self-gravity of particles analytically in a Kerr spacetime. Kimura et al. considered the collision of two thin shells [49, 50] in a Reissner-Nordström spacetime instead of a Kerr spacetime for its simplicity they calculated analytically the CM energy of the shell collision including their self-gravity [51 53]. Can we treat thin shells in stationary axisymmetric spacetimes? The analytical treatment of a thin shell in the Kerr spacetime is very difficult [54 56] but the difficulty of the technical problem depends on the dimension of the spacetime [57 60]. In Ref. [57], Mann et al. in-

2 vestigated the collapse of a shell in a three-dimensional stationary axisymmetric spacetime they showed that the motion of the shell is tractable. A black hole solution in three dimensions was obtained by Bañados, Teitelboim, Zanelli (BTZ) [61, 6]. The BTZ spacetime has a negative cosmological constant since gravity in three dimensions is weaker than the one in four dimensions. In the BTZ spacetime, particle motions [63], the BSW collision [39 41, 44], gravitational perturbations induced by falling particles [64], thermodynamics of thin shells[65 67] have been investigated. In this paper, we investigate the collision of two dust thin shells in the BTZ spacetime with an angular momentum a negative cosmological constant in three dimensions. We use a thin-shell formalism [68 70] for corotating thin shells investigated by Mann et al. [57]. We study the collision of two particles with vanishing angular momenta as the counterpart of the shell collision then we investigate the effects of the self-gravity of the shells on their collision with a high CM energy. The organization of this paper is as follows. In Sec. II, we investigate a collision of two particles with vanishing angular momenta. We review the thin shell formalism in a corotating frame in Sec. III. In Sec. IV, we investigate the collision of two dust thin shells. Section V is devoted to the discussion conclusion. In this paper, we use the units in which the speed of light 8G are unity as in Sec. III of Ref. [57], G is Newton s constant in three dimensions. II. PARTICLE COLLISION IN THE BTZ SPACETIME In this section, we review the center-of-mass energy of the collision of two particles in the BTZ spacetime. The metric [61, 6] is given by ds = f(r)dt + dr f(r) +r [dϕ Ω(r)dt], (.1) f(r) M + r l + J 4r, (.) Ω(r) g tϕ = J g ϕϕ r, (.3) 1 l Λ. (.4) Here M, J, Ω(r) are the mass, the angular momentum, angular velocity of the spacetime, respectively, l is the scale of a curvature related to the negative cosmological constant Λ < 0. The spacetime is a stationary axisymmetric spacetime with two Killing vectors t ϕ. Without loss of generality, we assume that the angular momentum J is non-negative. In this paper, we concentrate on the case M is positive. The spacetime has an event horizon at ( r = r H l M ) 1+ 1 J l M, (.5) for J lm it is called extremal spacetime for J = lm. For J > lm, it has a naked singularity. We discuss the last case in Appendix A. We consider a particle motion with a 3-momentum p µ a rest mass m. The conserved energy angular momentum of the particle are given by E g µν ( t ) µ p ν L g µν ( ϕ ) µ p ν, (.6) respectively. From Eq. (.6) the condition p µ p µ = m, we obtain the components of the 3-momentum as p t (r) = S(r) f(r), (.7) p r (r) = σ R(r), (.8) p ϕ (r) = Ω(r)S(r) f(r) σ, S(r), R(r) are defined as + L r, (.9) σ sgn(p r ) = ±1, (.10) S(r) E Ω(r)L, (.11) ) R(r) S (r) (m + L f(r), (.1) respectively. Note that a forward-in-time condition r p t (r) 0, (.13) must be satisfied for a particle motion. An energy equation which describes the radial motion of the particle is given by, from Eq. (.8), ( ) dr +V(r) = 0, (.14) dτ V(r) R(r) is the effective potential for the radial motion of the particle τ is its proper time. Here we have used relations p µ = mu µ u µ = dx µ /dτ, u µ isthe 3-velocityoftheparticle. We callacondition V(r H ) = 0 critical condition. The critical condition is rewritten as E Ω H L = 0, (.15) Ω H Ω(r H ) = J (r H ), (.16) is the angular velocity of the horizon. The angular velocity of a particle ω(r) is defined as ω(r) dϕ dt = pϕ p t. (.17)

3 3 When a particle has a zero conserved angular momentum L = 0, from Eqs. (.7), (.9), (.17), the angular velocity of the particle coincides with the angular velocity of the spacetime, i.e., ω(r) = Ω(r). This means that the particle with L = 0 corotates with the background spacetime. We concentrate on the motion of a particle with L = 0 which is the counterpart of a shell corotating with the background spacetime. Using a dimensionless radial coordinate x r/l, the effective potential of the particle with the specific energy e E/m the position of the event horizon are expressed as V(x) = e +f(x) x H rh l = respectively, = x M e + c x, (.18) M + M 4c, (.19) f(x) = x M + c J x, c 4l. (.0) As x increases from 0 to infinity, V(x) f(x) begin with infinity, monotonically decrease to a local minimum at x = x m c 1 4, monotonically increase to infinity. Theparticlemotionis restrictedtoaregionx x x + the effective potential V(x) is non-positive. The boundaries x ± are obtained as x ± M +e ± (M +e ) 4c. (.1) We notice that a relation x x m x H x +, (.) is satisfied we obtain x m = x H (x H = x + ) in the extremal (critical) case x = x m = x H = x + in the extremal critical case. We consider a collision of two particles, named particle 1, withvanishingconservedangularmomental 1 = L = 0 in a region x H x x + a is seen by an observer who sts at the outside of the horizon x H. Hereinafter p µ a, E a e a, m a, x ± a, V a, σ a denote p µ, E, e, m, x ±, V, σ of particle a (a = 1 ), respectively. From Eq. (.15), the critical condition for particle a with L a = 0 is given by E a = 0, i.e., e a = 0. (.3) The CM energy E cm (x) of the particles is given by E cm(x) g µν (m 1 u µ 1 +m u µ )(m 1u ν 1 +m u ν ) = m 1 +m e 1 e σ 1 σ V1 (x)v (x) +m 1 m. f(x) (.4) Let us consider a rear-end collision, i.e., we choose σ 1 = σ = 1. As x increases from x H to x + a, the CM energy begins with ( E cm (x H ) = m 1 +m +m e 1m + e ) 1,(.5) e 1 e monotonically increases to E cm (x + a) = E max cm, (.6) Ecm max m 1 +m +m e 1 e 1m. (.7) We have used l Hopital s rule to estimate E cm (x H ). We get E cm (x) = m 1 +m if the both particles have a same specific energy e 1 = e. We set particle 1 to be inner than particle in the rest of this section. We are interested in the collision of the inner particle with a critical limit e 1 0 the outer particle which is not critical in the extremal BTZ spacetime since the collision will correspond with the BSW collision in the extremal Kerr spacetime [4] in the extremal Reissner- Nordström spacetime [48]. In this case, the collisional point must be x x H + 0 because of inequality (.) x ± 1 xh ±0 the CM energy E cm divergesthere. Notice that a particle with the critical condition has V 1 (x H ) = V 1 (xh ) = 0 V 1 (xh ) > 0, a prime denotes a derivative with respect to x, in the extremal BTZ spacetime while one has V 1 (x H ) = V 1 (xh ) = 0 V 1 (x H ) < 0 in an extremal Kerr black hole spacetime [4] an extremal Reissner-Nordström spacetime [48]. The positive sign of V 1 (xh ) is caused by the negative cosmological constant it will not affect on the BSW collision strongly as long as the collision occurs near the horizon. III. DUST THIN SHELL AND ITS MOTION IN THE BTZ SPACETIME In this section, as a preparation to study a shell collision, we review the Darmois-Israel junction conditions [68 70] the motion of a dust thin shell in the BTZ spacetime [57]. Hereinafter, we use x µ denoting coordinates in every domain for simplicity. We consider a two-dimensional hypersurface Σ which divides the BTZ spacetime into an interior domain D 1 an exterior domain D. Domain D A (A = 1 ) hasamassm A anangularmomentum J A, see Fig. 1. For simplicity, we assume that D 1 D have the same l. We assume that we can take same coordinates y i on Σ in both the domains. The projection operator from the three-dimensional BTZ spacetime to Σ is defined as e a e µ i xµ y i. (3.1)

4 4 The induced metric on the hypersurface Σ in domain D A is defined as g A ij ga µν eµ i eν j. (3.) Using a unit vector n µ normal to the hypersurface Σ, which directed from D 1 to D, the extrinsic curvature of the hypersurface Σ in the domain D A is defined as K A ij e µ i eν j A µn ν, (3.3) A µ is the covariant derivative within D A. The first second junction conditions are given by [g ij ] = 0 [K ij ] = 0, (3.4) respectively. Here the bracket is defined as [Ψ] Ψ(D ) Σ Ψ(D 1 ) Σ, (3.5) Ψ is any quantity defined on the both sides of Σ. When we introduce a corotating frame on Σ with an azimuth coordinate the metric in D A is given by ds A = g A µνdx µ dx ν dφ dϕ J A R dt, (3.6) (t) = f A (r)dt + dr f A (r) [ +r dφ+ J A ( 1 R (t) 1 r ) dt], (3.7) f A (r) M A + r l + J A 4r. (3.8) From the first junction condition [g ij ] = 0, the induced metric gij A on Σ with is given by t = T (τ) r = R(T (τ)) = R(τ), (3.9) ds Σ = ga ij dyi dy j = dτ +R (τ)dφ [ ] = f A (R) T + Ṙ dτ +R (τ)dφ, f A (R) (3.10) a dot denotes a derivative with respect to the proper time τ of an observer on Σ. This implies β A f A (R) T = β A, (3.11) Ṙ +f A (R). (3.1) The components of e µ i n µ are described by ( ) e µ τ = T,Ṙ,0, e µ φ = (0,0,1), (3.13) FIG. 1. Schematic picture of the BTZ spacetime divided into two domains D 1 D by the hypersurface Σ. Domain D A (A = 1 ) has a mass M A an angular momentum J A. A thin shell on the hypersurface Σ has a proper mass µ specific energy E (M M 1)/µ. n µ = ( Ṙ, T ),0, (3.14) respectively. We obtain the components of the extrinsic curvature (3.3) its trace K A g ij K A ij as K A ττ = β Ȧ R, KA φφ = Rβ A, K A τφ = J A R, (3.15) K A β = Ȧ R + β A R, (3.16) respectively. We notice that the second junction condition [K ij ] = 0 is violated unless we consider a trivial case. Therefore, we introduce a thin shell on Σ following equations πs ij = ([K ij ] [K]g ij ), (3.17) S ij is the surface stress-energy tensor of the thin shell. Letusconsideradustthinshellwiththe surfacestressenergy tensor S ij given by S ij = ρu i u j, (3.18) ρ u i = ( 1,0) are the surface energy density the -velocity of the shell, respectively. Using Eqs. (3.10), (3.15), (3.16), (3.18), the (τ,τ), (φ,φ), (τ,φ) components of Eq. (3.17) are obtained as [β]+πρr = 0, (3.19) [ β] = 0, (3.0)

5 5 [J] = 0, (3.1) respectively. From Eqs. (3.19) (3.0), we obtain d (πρr) = 0. (3.) dτ Therefore, we can define the proper mass µ of the shell µ πρr, (3.3) which is constant along its trajectory. We define the specific energy E of the shell as E [M] µ. (3.4) We assume that the proper mass µ the specific energy E are positive. This implies that the masses satisfy the relation M 1 < M. From Eq. (3.1), the angular momenta in all the domains must be the same, i.e., J J 1 = J. (3.5) Using Eqs. (3.1), (3.19), (3.3), we obtain the energy equation as ( ) dr +V(R) = 0, (3.6) dτ V(R) is the effective potential of the shell motion. Using x R/l, the effective potential is expressed as V(x) = x M E + c x µ 16, (3.7) M M +M 1. (3.8) As x increases from 0 to infinity, V(x) begins with infinity, monotonically decreases to a local minimum at x = x m c 1 4, monotonically increases to infinity. The shell motion is restricted to the region x x x + the effective potential is non-positive. Here x ± b± b 4c, (3.9) have been obtained as the positive solutions of V(x) = 0, ( b µ µ ) 16 + M +E = 4 E +M. (3.30) We will call a limit µ 0 M 1 M M with E = (constant) 0 test shell limit. In the test shell limit, the effective potential of the shell (3.7) is obtained as V(x) = x M E + c x, (3.31) it takes the same form as the effective potential of a particle (.18). IV. DUST THIN SHELL COLLISION IN THE BTZ SPACETIME In this section, we investigate the collision of two dust thin shells in the BTZ spacetime. We assume that shell 1 shell are on an inner hypersurface Σ 1 an outer hypersurface Σ, respectively. These two hypersurfaces divide the BTZ spacetime into an interior domain D 1, a middle domain D, an exterior domain D 3. We assume that every domain D A (A = 1,, 3) is the BTZ spacetime with the same l for simplicity. From Eq. (3.1), all the domains have the same angular momenta J. See Fig.. When J lm A, M A is a mass in D A, is satisfied, the position of the event horizon is obtained as x = x H A, x H A M A + MA 4c. (4.1) We assume M 1 < M < M 3. We consider five cases according to the value of J as shown in Table I: case I (II) for J < lm 1 (J = lm 1 ), case III for J = lm, case IV (V) for J = lm 3 (J > lm 3 ). case D 1 D D 3 J X I S S S J < lm 1 X < 0 II E S S J = lm 1 X < 0 III O E S J = lm X = 0 IV O O E J = lm 3 X > 0 V O O O J > lm 3 X > 0 TABLEI.Fivecases ofthespacetime accordingtothevalueof J. Symbols S, E, O denote the sub-extremal, extremal, over-spinning spacetimes, respectively. X is defined as the minimum value of f (x). The effective potential of shell a (a = 1 ) is given by V a (x) = Za +f(x), (4.) Z 1 µ 1 4 E 1, (4.3) Z µ 4 +E, (4.4) f(x) f (x) = x M + c x. (4.5) As x increases from 0 to infinity, V a (x) begins with infinity, monotonically decreases to a local minimum V a (x m ) = Za +X, (4.6) X f(x m ) = c M, (4.7)

6 6 A. Center-of-Mass energy The CM energy E cm (x) of two shells at a collisional point is given by [51, 53] Ecm (x) g µν(µ 1 U µ 1 +µ U µ )(µ 1U1 ν +µ U ν ) ) = µ 1 +µ +µ 1µ (f(x) T 1 T Ṙ1Ṙ f(x), (4.13) g µν is the metric in D, U a µ = ( T a,ṙa,0) is the 3-velocity of shell a, FIG.. Schematic picture of the BTZ spacetime divided into three domains D 1, D, D 3 by hypersurfaces Σ 1 Σ. Domain D A (A = 1,, 3) is the BTZ spacetime with a mass M A the same angular momentum J. A thin shell a (a = 1 ) on the hypersurfaces Σ a has a proper mass µ a specific energy E a (M a+1 M a)/µ a. at x = x m c 1 4, monotonically increases to infinity. Note that x m for shells 1 are the same. A motionof shell a is restricted to the regionx a x x + a, the effective potential V a (x) is non-positive. Here x ± a is given by x ± a b a ± b a 4c, (4.8) b a Z a +M. (4.9) In order for such the region to exist, a condition X Z a, (4.10) must be satisfied. For a comparison with a particle satisfying the critical condition (.3), one might have an interest in a shell with V 1 (x H ) = V 1(x H ) = 0. We can show easily that is satisfied if only if V 1 (x H ) = V 1 (xh ) = 0, (4.11) Z 1 = 0, (4.1) J = lm are satisfied. Therefore, we call the condition Z 1 = 0 critical condition for shell 1 T a f(x) Va (x), (4.14) f(x) Ṙ a σ a Va (x), (4.15) σ a sgn(ṙa) = ±1. We will concentrate on the rear-end collision of two dust thin shells. In this case, we should choose σ 1 = σ = 1 the CM energy is expresses as Ecm (x) = µ 1 +µ +µ Z 1 Z V 1 (x)v (x) 1µ. f(x) (4.16) We notice E cm (x) = µ 1 +µ when Z 1 = Z is satisfied. The shells must satisfy a relation Ṙ1(x) Ṙ(x) to collide at the point. It implies V 1 (x) V (x), Z 1 Z, or x + 1 x+. 1. Cases I, II, III In the cases I, II, III, we concentrate on the region x H x x + 1 as in particle collisions. As x increases from x H to x+ 1, the CM energy begins with ( E cm (x H ) = µ 1 +µ +µ Z 1µ Z 1 + Z ) 1,(4.17) Z monotonically increases to E max cm E cm (x + 1 ) = Emax cm, (4.18) µ 1 +µ +µ 1µ Z Z 1. (4.19) Here we have used l Hopital s rule to calculate E cm (x H ). In a critical limit Z 1 0, both E cm (x H ) E cm (x + 1 ) arearbitrarilylargex + 1 coincideswith xh. Theevent horizon, however, moves from x H to x H 3 because of the self-gravity of shell. Thus, the arbitrarily large CM energy cannot be seen by an observer outside the event horizon x H 3.

7 7. Cases IV V In cases IV V, x H does not exist. Let us consider the region x 1 x x+ 1. The CM energy monotonically decreases from to E cm (x m ) = E cm (x 1 ) = Emax cm, (4.0) µ 1 +µ +µ Z 1 Z (Z1 1µ X)(Z X), X (4.1) as x increases from x 1 to xm it monotonically increases as from x m to x + 1 then it reaches E cm (x + 1 ) = Emax cm. (4.) In these cases, a critical shell with Z 1 = 0 is forbidden sinceitseffectivepotentialispositive. WhenV 1 (x m ) = 0, i.e., Z 1 = X, shell 1 can be only at x = x m = x ± 1. The CM energy there is given by E cm (x = x m = x ± 1 ) = µ 1 +µ + µ 1µ Z.(4.3) X B. Collision at x x H 3 Let us consider a shell collision at x x H 3 for the cases I-IV. An observer at x x H 3 in domain D 3 may see the parts of the products after the collision. A condition x H 3 x+ 1 must be satisfied for the existence of the inner shell1. FromEqs.(4.1)(4.8), theconditionx H 3 x + 1 is expressed as µ E Z 1. (4.4) Thefinite upperboundofthe CMenergyisgivenby, from Eqs. (4.18), (4.), (4.4), E cm (x = x H 3 = x+ 1 ) = µ 1 +µ + µ 1 µ (µ +4E ). E (4.5) This shows that the self-gravity caused by the colliding shells suppresses the CM energy. For an equal mass µ µ 1 = µ, the upperbound of the CM energy is given by E cm (x = x H 3 = x + 1 ) = µ3 4 E 1 4 it becomes, for a small mass µ E, ( E + ) µ, (4.6) E cm (x = x H 3 = x+ 1 ) 1/ E 1/4 µ 3/4. (4.7) C. Test shell limit Here we consider test shell limits for shells 1 µ 1 0 M 1 M M with E 1 = (constant) 0 µ 0 M M + M 3 with E = (constant) 0, respectively. Notice x H a x H a+1 in the test shell limit for shell a. From Eqs. (4.18) (4.19), the CM energy of the shells with the equal mass µ at x = x + 1 in the test shell limits for shells 1 is obtained as E cm(x + 1 ) µ = 1+ µ 4 +E µ 4 E 1 1+ E E 1. (4.8) We realize that it is corresponds to the CM energy (.6) (.7) of the particle collision at x = x + 1 with an equal mass m m 1 = m given by E cm (x+ 1 ) m = 1+ e e 1. (4.9) V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION We have considered the rear-end collision of two dust thin shells in the rotating BTZ spacetime to investigate the effects of the self-gravity of colliding objects on the high energy collision. The shells divide the BTZ spacetime into three domains the domains are matched by Darmois-Israel s method. From the junction condition, all the domains must have the same angular momenta J. The angular momenta imply that the shells domains corotate. We have revealed that there are two effects of the selfgravityof thin shells. First, we have shown that the mass of inner shell affects its critical condition (4.1). Second, the position of the event horizon changed from x H 1 to xh 3 because of the masses of two shells. We have considered the shell collision in five cases according to the value of J. The cases I (J < lm 1 ), II (J = lm 1 ), III (J = lm ) would be especially interesting cases because of following reasons. The case I is a usual astrophysical situation as a black hole subextremely rotates two objects collide near its event horizon. In case II, the black hole extremely rotates initially the collision of two falling shells corresponds with the BSW collision of two particles with an arbitrary high CM energy in the extremal black hole spacetime. In case III, inner shell 1 can be satisfied the critical condition (4.1) that the effective potential for shell 1 becomes V 1 (x H ) = V 1(x H ) = 0 on the extremal event horizon x = x H as with the BSW process in extremal black hole spacetimes [4, 5]. In cases I-III, the CM energy of the shells can be arbitrarily large if inner shell 1 satisfies the critical condition (4.1) if outer shell does not. However, an observer outside the event horizon x H 3

8 8 cannot see the products of the collision with the arbitrary large CM energy because it occurs inside the event horizon x H 3. If a shell collision occurs in a region x x H 3, an observer who is outer than the collisional point may see products of the collision. We have obtained the finite upperbound of the CM energy of the collision there. Finally, we have concluded that the self-gravity of colliding objects suppresses its CM energy the observer can only see the suppressed collision. We have also found a test shell limit. We have shown that the CM energy the effective potentials for shells in the test shell limit are very similar to the ones of particles. The test shell limit would help us to underst the effect oftheselfgravityofthethin shellsonthecollisions. KAKENHI Grant No. 15H Appendix A: Rear-end collision in the over-spinning BTZ spacetime In this Appendix, we consider a rear-end collision of two particles with vanishing conserved momenta L 1 = L = 0intheover-spinningBTZspacetimewithJ > lm. From Eq. (.18), the effective potential of particle a takes the minimum value at x = x m as V a (x m ) = e a +X, X f(x m ) = J l M > 0. (A) (A1) Particle a with the non-positive effective potential V a (x) can be within a region x a x x + a if a condition ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X e a, (A3) The authors would like to express the deepest appreciation to N. Tanahashi for his insightful suggestions, comments, discussions. They thank also M. Kimura, J. V. Rocha, T. Harada, K. i. Nakao, O. B. Zaslavskii, A. Naruko, T. Kobayashi, T. Kokubu for valuable comments discussions. K. O. was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. 18J1075. They would also like to thank the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics at Kyoto University, this work was initiated during the YITP-X on Workshop on gravity cosmology for young researchers supported by the MEXT is satisfied. The CM energy monotonically decreases from (.7) to E max cm E cm (x m ) = m [e 1 +m +m 1 e ] (e 1 1m X)(e X), X (A4) as x increases from x a to x m. It monotonically increases reaches E max cm as x increases from xm to x + a. [1] T. Piran, J. Shaham, J. Katz, Astrophys. J., 196, 107 (1975). [] T. Piran J. Shaham, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1615 (1977). [3] R. Penrose, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 1, 5 (1969) [Gen. Rel. Grav. 34, 1141 (00)]. [4] M. Bañados, J. Silk, S. M. West, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, (009). [5] T. Harada M. Kimura, Class. Quant. Grav. 31, (014). [6] B. P. Abbott et al. [LIGO Scientific Virgo Collaborations], Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, (016). [7] E. Berti, V. Cardoso, L. Gualtieri, F. Pretorius, U. Sperhake, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, (009). [8] T. Jacobson T. P. Sotiriou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, (010). [9] S. T. McWilliams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, (013). [10] K. S. Thorne, Astrophys. J. 191, 507 (1974). [11] T. Harada M. Kimura, Phys. Rev. D 84, 1403 (011). [1] M. Patil, P. S. Joshi, K. i. Nakao, M. Kimura, T. Harada, EPL 110, (015). [13] T. Harada M. Kimura, Phys. Rev. D 83, 0400 (011). [14] T. Harada M. Kimura, Phys. Rev. D 83, (011). [15] T. Igata, T. Harada, M. Kimura, Phys. Rev. D 85, (01). [16] A. Galajinsky, Phys. Rev. D 88, (013). [17] S. Aretakis, Commun. Math. Phys. 307, 17 (011). [18] S. Aretakis, Annales Henri Poincare 1, 1491 (011). [19] S. Aretakis, J. Funct. Anal. 63, 770 (01) [0] S. Aretakis, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, (013). [1] S. Aretakis, Phys. Rev. D 87, (013). [] K. Murata, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, (013). [3] K. Murata, H. S. Reall, N. Tanahashi, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, (013). [4] S. Aretakis, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 19, 507 (015). [5] N. Tsukamoto, M. Kimura, T. Harada, Phys. Rev. D 89, 0400 (014). [6] M. Bejger, T. Piran, M. Abramowicz, F. Hakanson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, (01). [7] T. Harada, H. Nemoto, U. Miyamoto, Phys. Rev. D 86, 0407 (01), Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 86, (01)].

9 9 [8] J. D. Schnittman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 6110 (014). [9] E. Berti, R. Brito, V. Cardoso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, (015). [30] E. Leiderschneider T. Piran, arxiv: [grqc]. [31] E. Leiderschneider T. Piran, Phys. Rev. D 93, (016). [3] K. Ogasawara, T. Harada, U. Miyamoto, Phys. Rev. D 93, (016). [33] T. Harada, K. Ogasawara, U. Miyamoto, Phys. Rev. D 94, (016). [34] K. Ogasawara, T. Harada, U. Miyamoto, T. Igata, Phys. Rev. D 95, (017). [35] K. i. Nakao, H. Okawa, K. i. Maeda, PETP 018, 013E01 (018). [36] M. Patil P. S. Joshi, Class. Quant. Grav. 8, 3501 (011). [37] S. W. Wei, Y. X. Liu, H. Guo, C. E. Fu, Phys. Rev. D 8, (010). [38] Y. Li, J. Yang, Y. L. Li, S. W. Wei, Y. X. Liu, Class. Quant. Grav. 8, 5006 (011). [39] K. Lake, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 1110 (010), Erratum: [Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, (010)]. [40] J. Yang, Y. L. Li, Y. Li, S. W. Wei, Y. X. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys. 014, (014). [41] I. Hussain, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 7, (01). [4] J. Sadeghi, B. Pourhassan, H. Farahani, Commun. Theor. Phys. 6, 358 (014). [43] S. Ferno, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 3, (017). [44] N. Tsukamoto, K. Ogasawara, Y. Gong, Phys. Rev. D 96, 0404 (017). [45] A. Abdujabbarov, N. Dadhich, B. Ahmedov, H. Eshkuvatov, Phys. Rev. D 88, (013). [46] O. B. Zaslavskii, Phys. Rev. D 90, (014). [47] J. An S. Gao, arxiv: [gr-qc]. [48] O. B. Zaslavskii, JETP Lett. 9, 571 (010) [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 9, 635 (010)]. [49] C. Lanczos, Phys. Zeits. 3, 539 (19). [50] C. Lanczos, Ann. Phys. 74, 518 (194). [51] M. Kimura, K. i. Nakao, H. Tagoshi, Phys. Rev. D 83, (011). [5] M. Patil, P. S. Joshi, K. i. Nakao, M. Kimura, Phys. Rev. D 86, (01). [53] K. i. Nakao, M. Kimura, M. Patil, P. S. Joshi, Phys. Rev. D 87, (013). [54] V. De La Cruz W. Israel, Phys. Rev. 170, 1187 (1968). [55] A. Krasinski, Ann. Phys. 11, (1978). [56] D. McManus, Class. Quant. Grav. 8, 863 (1991). [57] R. B. Mann, J. J. Oh, M. I. Park, Phys. Rev. D 79, (009). [58] J. Crisostomo R. Olea, Phys. Rev. D 69, (004). [59] T. Delsate, J. V. Rocha, R. Santarelli, Phys. Rev. D 89, (014). [60] J. V. Rocha, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 4, (015). [61] M. Bañados, C. Teitelboim, J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1849 (199). [6] M. Bañados, M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim, J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. D 48, 1506 (1993), Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 88, (013)]. [63] N. Cruz, C. Martinez, L. Pena, Class. Quant. Grav. 11, 731 (1994). [64] J. V. Rocha V. Cardoso, Phys. Rev. D 83, (011). [65] J. P. S. Lemos, F. J. Lopes, M. Minamitsuji, J. V. Rocha, Phys. Rev. D 9, (015). [66] J. P. S. Lemos, M. Minamitsuji, O. B. Zaslavskii, Phys. Rev. D 95, (017). [67] J. P. S. Lemos, M. Minamitsuji, O. B. Zaslavskii, Phys. Rev. D 96, (017). [68] G. Darmois, Les équations de la gravitation Einsteinienne, vol. XXV of Mémorial des sciences mathématiques (Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 197). [69] W. Israel, Nuovo Cim. B 44, 1 (1966), Erratum: [Nuovo Cim. B 48, 463 (1967)]. [70] E. Poisson, A Relativist s Toolkit: The Mathematics of Black-Hole Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 004).