You are on page 1of 24

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307875799

Bose-Einstein graviton condensate in a
Schwarzschild black hole

Article · September 2016

CITATION READS

1 21

3 authors, including:

Jorge Alfaro Luciano Gabbanelli
Pontifical Catholic University of Chile University of Barcelona
93 PUBLICATIONS 1,765 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Dark Matter and Dark Energy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Luciano Gabbanelli on 18 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Bose-Einstein graviton condensate in a Schwarzschild black hole
Jorge Alfaro
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile,

Domènec Espriu and Luciano Gabbanelli
arXiv:1609.01639v1 [gr-qc] 6 Sep 2016

Departament of Quantum Physics and Astrophysics and
Institut de Ciències del Cosmos (ICCUB), Universitat de Barcelona
Martı́ i Franquès, 1, 08028 Barcelona, Spain.

Abstract
We analyze in detail a previous proposal by Dvali and Gómez that black holes could
be treated as consisting of a Bose-Einstein condensate of gravitons. In order to do so
we extend the Einstein-Hilbert action with a chemical potential-like term, thus placing
ourselves in a grand-canonical ensemble. The form and characteristics of this chemical
potential-like piece are discussed in some detail. After this, we proceed to expand the
ensuing equations of motion up to second order around the classical Schwarzschild metric
so that some non-linear terms in the metric fluctuation are kept. We argue that the
resulting equations could be interpreted as the Gross-Pitaevskii equation describing a
graviton Bose-Einstein condensate trapped by the black hole gravitational field. Next we
search for solutions and, modulo some very plausible assumptions, we find out that the
condensate vanishes outside the horizon but is non-zero in its interior. Based on hints
from a numerical integration of the equations we formulate an ansatz and eventually find
an exact non-trivial solution for a mean-field wave-function describing the graviton Bose-
Einstein condensate in the black hole interior. Based on this we can rederive some of the
relations involving the number of gravitons N and the black hole characteristics, summa-
rized in its Schwarzschild radius, along the lines suggested by Dvali and Gómez. These
relations are parametrized by a single parameter —a dimensionless chemical potential.

August 2016
ICCUB-16-032

1

The √ mass of the BH is M ∼ N M P and its Schwarzschild radius therefore is given by rs ∼ NLP . Here we will adopt a more conservative approach. the ultimate nature of gravitons may be some type of fermionic degrees of freedom (such as e. LP being the Planck length. Therefore we will try to identify a consistent set of equations describing a BEC constructed 2 . Dvali. attempt to be more quantitative. If this view is correct. The main point of these works is that the physics of BH can be understood in this picture in terms of a single number N . First. and that therefore a BEC is impossible to sustain. Hawking radiation [4] could be understood as being due to evaporation (leakage as the authors put it) of the condensate. On the process we have separated slightly from the original line of thought of the authors. the absence of hair [6]. For a Schwarzschild BH rg = rs . up to various factors of the Planck mass everything is governed by N . in accordance with the uncertainty principle that dictates λ ≃ rs in the ground state of the quantum system. for instance. one may argue at once that gravitons do not have repulsive interactions. equal to the inverse of λ. nothing can classically escape from a BH so if we wish to interpret this in potential terms (which of course is not correct but serves us for the purpose of creating a picture of the phenomenon) it would correspond to a confining potential. all these results stem from the basic relation (unless otherwise stated we work in units where ~ = 1) N rg = (1) M that relates the number of gravitons N . repulsion is assured at some scale. To this objection one could reply in a twofold way. Then. The original approach of [1. the mass of the gravitating object M and its gravi- tational radius rg . the number of gravitons contained √ in the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC). We will assume the pre-existence of a classical gravitational field created by an unspecified source that generates the Schwarzschild metric. in the model suggested in [3]).1 Introduction In an interesting saga of papers. Secondly one might also answer that in theories of emergent gravity. Modulo some assumptions. Therefore.g.2] have put forward an intriguing suggestion: black holes (BH) could be understood as Bose-Einstein condensates of gravitons. thus agreeing with the Compton wavelength of the quantum gravitons λ. We found these results intriguing and we set up to try to understand them in a different language and. For sure there is a gravity quantum field present. at least in the case of vanishing angular momentum). they have a characteristic interaction strength αg ∼ 1/N (reminiscent of meson interactions in √large Nc gauge theories) and the leakage leads to a Hawking temperature √ of order TH ∼ 1/ N LP . hence gravitons (longitudinal gravitons that is). it is up to the equations to determine whether such a condensate is possible or not (we will see below that indeed it is. These condensed gravitons have a wave length λ ∼ N LP . 2] is not geometric at all. Besides. this picture brings new ideas about the Bekenstein entropy [5]. at least naively. if possible. As it is known. the number of intervening gravitons. There is no mention of horizon or metric. as well as the quantum nature of information storage and the possible information loss in BHs [7]. On and above this classical potential one can envisage a number of quantum fields being trapped. Of course. Gómez and others [1. this would reveal a deep quantum nature of such fascinating objects and could lead to an alternative understanding of some of the most striking features of BH. Continuing with our semi-classical analogy. these gravitons have had a long time to thermalize and it is therefore expected that they can form a Bose-Einstein condensate.

2. so gαβ = g̃αβ + hαβ . 3 . Perturbations above this background metric will be denoted by hαβ . We will use the Minkowskian metric convention ηαβ = diag(−1. As we will see the results depend to some extent on the prescription that is chosen. although the latter may trigger the former. We will see that remarkably enough the characteristics of the BEC are uniquely described in terms of the Schwarzschild radius of the BH and the value of a dimensionless parameter. interpreted as a chemical potential. (2)    0 0 r 2 0  0 0 0 r 2 sin2 θ We will now expand the perturbed Einstein tensor up to second order in hµν .on top of this classical field1 . It is therefore tempting to go one step beyond and reverse the order of the logical implication and eventually attempt to derive the classical field as a sort of mean field potential à la Hartree-Fock. Likewise for the corresponding √ volume element ( −g versus −g̃). that is we want to consider a quantum state —a condensate— having l = 0. In the subsequent we present the results of our investigations. 1 A classical field is not the same as a quantum condensate. This will allow us to retain the leading non-linearities. 1. where the Ricci tensor and scalar curvature are constructed with the metric gαβ in the usual way. 1. both angular components coincide when using the form Gα β for the Einstein tensor. Let us consider a spherically symmetric perturbation on the Schwarzschild metric. 2 Building up a condensate over a Schwarzschild background In what follows we shall adhere to the following notational conventions: Gαβ will be the Einstein tensor: Gαβ = Rαβ − 12 gαβ R. We will leave for later discussion whether the indices of hαβ have to be raised or low- ered with the background metric √ g̃αβ or the full one gαβ . 1). Four of the components of the Einstein tensor are non-null but only three are linearly independent. To initiate our program we should. However we will stop short of doing so here. The graviton condensate has necessarily to be described by a tensor field that in our philosophy has to be considered as a perturbation of the classical metric. every dimensionful quantity can be expressed as a function of the Schwarzschild radius rs = 2GM .1 Classical theory As we will see. Only spherically symmetric perturbations will be considered to keep things as simple as possible. identify an equation (or set of equations) that could provide a suitable description of a BEC in the present context. we have to find the appropriate generalization of the Gross-Pitaevskii equation to this case. A condensate appears not only to be possible but actually intimately related to the classical field that sustains it that determines its characteristics. We will denote by g̃αβ the background metric that in our case it will invariably be the Schwarzschild metric. first of all. Then   − 1 − rrs + htt  0 0 0 1  0 1− rrs + hrr 0 0  gµν = g̃µν + hµν =  . In other words.

. We obtain A A2 + 2Ars 2A3 + 3rs A2 + 3rs2 A 5A4 + 8rs A3 + 6rs2 A2 + 4rs3 A hrr = + + + r r2 r3 r4 (5) 14A5 + 25rs A4 + 20rs2 A3 + 10rs3 A2 + 5rs4 A + + .e. It is well known that Birkhoff’s theorem [8] guarantees that any spherically symmetric solution of the vacuum field equations must be static and asymptotically flat. hence a perturbation in itself it can only be produced by an alteration of this radius and therefore a change in its mass. In conclusion. . imposing the following ansatz for the components of the perturbation ∞ ∞ X B(n) X A(n) htt = . Taking into account that Gt t (g̃µν ) = 0. a spherically symmetric gravitational field should be produced by some massive object at the origin characterized by the Schwarzschild radius. r r r r2 r r2 M̄ being the new mass associated to the BH and r̄s = 2GM̄ the perturbed Schwarzschild radius. So this means that the solution of the equations Gα β (g̃ + h) = 0 with g̃αβ being the Schwarzschild’s metric. must necessarily be of the Schwarzschild type again. Stating this in other words.. However it is interesting to note that any perturbation hµν (i. we have  r 2 − rs2 r 3 − 2rs r 2 + rs2 r ′ Gt t g̃µν + hµν = 4 hrr + hrr r r4 (3) r 3 − 3rs2 r + 2rs3 2r 4 − 6rs r 3 + 6rs2 r 2 − 2rs3 r − 5 hrr 2 − hrr hrr ′ = 0 r r5 and analogous equations for the radial and angular components (they are given in Appendix A). (6) r r 12r 4 60r 5 Taking into account the accuracy of the expansion in hµν the components of the metric become   ! rs A 2GM̄ g̃tt + htt ≃ − 1 − + =− 1− r r r ! (7) rs rs2 A A2 + 2Ars 2GM̄ (2GM̄ )2 g̃rr + hrr ≃ 1 + + 2 + + =1+ + . . A A3 5A4 + 8rs A3 67A5 + 75rs A4 + 60rs2 A3 htt = +0+ 3 + + + . 4 .. hrr = (4) rn rn n=1 n=1 and substituting hrr in (3) is possible to obtain the coefficients for each term of the radial expansion. But if A 6= 0 the rest of the coefficients of the expansion are fixed once A is given.. a perturbation of a Schwarzschild metric in vacuum must end in another Schwarzschild metric but taking into account a change in the parameters responsible of inducing the perturbation. Now we will use similar techniques in the ‘quantum’ case and as we will see the results are dramatically different. r5 where A = A(0) . Indeed. It is obvious that A = 0 is a solution as implies no perturbation of the metric at all. The same happens for htt using the radial equation (53) given in Appendix A. each ‘graviton’) has associated a certain amount of energy that is reflected in a change of the BH mass.

the number of gravitons in the BEC condensate with µ = µ̃/Mp2 . the chemical potential would have dimensions of [energy]2 . They are already non-linear and while there is no confining potential explicitly in- cluded (as befits a relativistic theory) they do confine particles. Still. 3 We shall be somewhat more precise about this in Section 5. the perturbed Einstein equations already contain most of them. an equation of motion that contains self-interactions (hence the non-linearity). dV ) however this is not the only possibility to obtain diff-invariant equations.e.e. 4 √ In order to get Einstein’s equations. for instance MP2 −g̃R(g) also could yield a covariant set of equations. By construction these equations are non-linear (we keep only the leading non-linearities. but a field that propagates over the background. It is only natural to select the Einstein-Hilbert action expanded around the classical Schwarzschild background g̃αβ to describe fluctuations of the metric in a reparametrization √ invariant way. As we shall see below the ‘natural’ quantity to be identified with a chemical potential will in fact be the dimensionless combination µ(r)r 2 that will be conjugate to N . Still. The actual equations of motion derived from the previous action may take slightly different forms depending on the choice of volume elements. the new term is completely covariant as can be seen in Appendix B. = − d x −g̃µ̃hαβ h = − (8) 2 2 that is conjugate the quantity h2 ≡ hαβ hαβ . as defined. let us take the simplest 2 Here we choose to formulate the fluctuations of the metric on a fixed background —later on we shall revise this approach. the usual −g measure associated to the full metric has to√be taken (i. to keep the formalism simple and analytically tractable as we will see later). namely the equivalent of the chemical potential. After scaling the two powers of MP . a completely covariant perturbative expansion for hµν is obtained. One can then expand the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian MP2 −gR(g). which should be related to the graviton density of the condensate inside a differential volume element dṼ 3 . This is because the field hµν does not have the canonical dimension. (8) is that. because if the selected background corresponds to a Schwarzschild BH. with gαβ = g̃αβ + hαβ in powers of hµν up to the desired order (where MP 2 = ~G−1 N is the Planck mass). the strong gravitational field classically traps particles inside the horizon. For the time being.2. Irrespective of this chemical potential term an appropriate action has to be chosen for the field hαβ . there is one ingredient still missing. at least classically. the field that has canonical dimensions is ĥµν ≡ MP hµν . We note that the usual Gross-Pitaevskii equation [9] employed to describe Bose-Einstein condensates is a non-linear Schrödinger equation. µ̃ has dimensions of [energy]4 .pot. Among all these ingredients. these are not quite the correct dimensions for a chemical potential. However. Note that we assume that the chemical potential is r-dependent. Taking into account that h is not directly interacting with the background. Therefore we have to extend the formulation of perturbations around a classical BH solution to the grand-canonical ensemble by adding to the appropriate action a chemical potential term such as2 1 1 Z Z 4 dṼ µ̃h2 . 5 . a confining potential for the atoms or particles constituting the condensate. 4 An oddity of Eq. it may seem reasonable to take the volume element as the one corresponding to the background.2 Quantum theory: Einstein equations as Gross-Pitaevskii equations Perturbing the metric as gµν = g̃µν + hµν . i. p αβ ∆Schem. and a chemical potential that is conjugate to the number of particles or atoms contained in the condensate.

Then the equations (9) associated to Gt t . ∇ν Gµν = 0 =⇒ (µhµν ).ν = 0 . imposing this as a boundary condition. the chemical potential of the theory may not be arbitrary at all. The main difference is that this constrains are implicit in a GR theory. As Lagrange multipliers have constraint equations. 3 Outside the horizon In this section it will be shown that even after the inclusion of µ there is not other normalizable solution outside the black hole horizon than the trivial solution for the perturbation previously discussed. We certainly expect that the graviton condensate will disappear quickly in the outside region as r ≫ rs and. It must satisfy binding conditions with hµν .1 Power law ansatz In the limit r → ∞.possibility Gµ ν (g̃αβ + hαβ ) = µhµ ν . Gr r and Gθ θ in this 6 . Actually Eq. it would be necessary to take it into account when performing variations to derive the equations of motion. Hereinafter. the external field µ̃ is introduced in the theory as some kind of Lagrange multiplier. We will return to this point later. Therefore. were µ̃ not an external field. On the contrary. This should be the way of introducing the chemical potential. we will proceed to find acceptable solutions of these equations and interpret them. Under these considerations this term resembles the chemical potential term of the Gross-Pitaevskii equation. in particular.ν hµν + µhµν .e. It is important to keep in mind the following: in the chemical potential part µ̃ is considered in the grand canonical ensemble. it is independent of hµν . An equation of motion would be obtained for µ̃ and this equation would nullify automatically the perturbation as well as the chemical potential itself. We will separate the possible solutions into two regions: outside and inside the BH horizon. The restriction of µ̃ is through the general covariance conditions for the action. this implies that this magnitude is an external field and does not vary in the action. the diffeomorphism covariance implies the covariant conservation of the Einstein tensor. i. 3. Otherwise. so δµ̃/δhµν = 0. for these equations of motion. (9) where indices are assumed to be raised with the background metric only. one needs only to keep the terms that are dominant in the Einstein equations (3). hµν = 0 and µ̃ = 0. we will see that in fact the condensate is identically zero on this side of the horizon. a unique non-trivial solution will be found in the interior of the BH. and this in itself entails the same for the chemical potential term. (9) can be derived from the action we have chosen only if we neglect terms of the form µ O(hαβ 2 ). In other words.ν = µ. (10) This differential equation of motion for the latter potential is valid up to every order in perturbation theory. (53) and (54).

µ= . the perturbation must be a square-integrable function. (14) 0 0 r For this to happen. r r The requirement of the solution being square-integrable exclude that α and β could be zero. g̃rr 2 −−−→ 1. if a power law ansatz at infinity is imposed. ρ > 0 .limit are. p p d x −g̃ h ≡ (13) 0 0 2 r→∞ As in the Schwarzschild metric g̃tt . (12) rα rβ rρ Before proceeding. i. namely. This implies automatically the neglection of the terms proportional to the Schwarzschild 5 Here and in successive equations in this perturbative treatment possible terms of the form µh2 will be neglected as we are interested in the simplest approximation to a Gross-Pitaevskii equation.e. β. hrr = . with α. r r r r As we want a vanishing perturbation at infinity. the following ansatz is imposed in the faraway region for its components and for the chemical potential: A B C htt = . Then the three equations in (11) are B B2 AC (1 − β) − (1 − 2 β) = r β+2 r 2β+2 r α+ρ A2 B2       rs A B rs rs AB BC + α α+2 − β+2 + +α 2α+2 − + α α+β+2 + 2β+2 = β+ρ r r r r r r r r r (15) A2 4 B2         rs 2A rs 2B 2rs rs + α2 + −β + + 3α2 − − β r r α+2 r r β+2 r r 2α+2 r r 2β+2   rs AB − (2 + β) + 2 α2 + α β α+β+2 = 0 . respectively5 1 1 1 2 2 hrr + hrr ′ − 2 hrr 2 − hrr hrr ′ = µ htt r r r r rs 1 1 rs 1 rs 1 1 3 htt − htt ′ − 2 hrr + 3 htt 2 − htt htt ′ − 3 hrr htt + hrr htt ′ + 2 hrr 2 = µ hrr r r r r r r r r (11) 2rs 2 2rs 2 2rs 4rs 2 htt + htt ′ + 2 htt ′′ + 3 hrr + hrr ′ + 3 htt 2 − 3 hrr 2 + htt htt ′ + 2 htt htt ′′ r3 r r r r r r 2r s 2 r s 4 +htt ′2 − 3 hrr htt − hrr htt ′ − 2hrr htt ′′ + 2 hrr ′ htt − hrr ′ htt ′ − hrr hrr ′ = 0 . the integral should fulfill Z ∞   Z ∞ dr 2 2 2 4π dr r htt + hrr < = ∞ (Logarithmic divergence) . 7 . an additional consideration is needed. Z ∞ Z ∞   2 3 2 d3 x −g̃ htt 2 g̃tt + hrr 2 g̃rr 2 < ∞ . The form of these terms depends on which convention is chosen for the volume element and to raise/lower indices. β > 3/2. the exponents must obey α.

1]. as this numbers α and β are positive and larger than 3/2. as B is proportional to A. The numerical integration will run between z ∈ [0. Even more. this would nullify A (or B). at infinity (z = 0) it is expected for the perturbation to vanish (hµν = 0). i.radius. On the one hand. 3. fix B = 0 (or A = 0) and C = 0. It is well known that Schwarzschild space-time is asymptotically flat. X(z) = µ(r)r 2 (20) r in Eqs.2 Numerical solution Finally. Let us see how we can proceed. (18) r α+2 Then from the second equation in (16). let us turn to the numerical integration of the equations in the outer part of the BH. the following change of variables rs z= . so as r = ∞ is transformed into the finite boundary z = 0 (and r = rs into z = 1). so they are universal as rs and µ are the only physical parameters. therefore. (17) r α+2 r From the angular equation (17). this redefinition allows rewriting the relevant equations in terms of dimensionless quantities. (16) r β+2 r r α+2 r β+2 r 2 A α2 2B β − β+2 = 0 . the equations are singular at z = 0 and we have to settle for a point z ∼ 0 but z 6= 0 to set up boundary conditions for the numerical integration procedure to start. This condition modifies the angular equation (17) as 2α (A α − B) =0 =⇒ Aα = B . On the other hand.e h = µ = 0. the equations are difficult to deal with because they are singular. is mandatory for both terms to contribute at infinity. In spite of these simplifications. it is not possible to isolate the higher order derivative at z = 0 or z = 1. maps the exterior part into a compact interval. − = β+ρ .e. the following relationship can be read 1 BC (A α − B) =0= . If this is not the case. and then. the following asymptotic identities result B AC Aα B BC (1 − β) = α+ρ . Likewise it can be seen that a much faster Gaussian decay is also excluded (not reported here). via both equations in (16). Likewise setting hrr = 0 at an arbitrary value for z. The competition of both terms of the angular equation is possible if and only if α = β. As mentioned before. decrease this initial value until the numerical routine becomes 8 . even if z ≃ 0 immediately triggers divergences at the first step of the routine. (19) r α+2 r α+ρ This automatically leads to a null chemical potential as the only possible solution for this region with the proposed ansatz. (9). This is due to the fact that if B = 0. then A is also zero. In Appendix C we explore the possibility of exponentially vanishing chemical potential when r → ∞ with analogous conclusions. Therefore we take a “small” initial value for the perturbation in a point near infinite (z = 0) and then. i.

0008 0. the smaller this integral is. z runs between 0 and 1).0006 g h2 0. At the same order as before.0006 0.unstable. i.0002 0.e.0002 0. the horizon corresponds to z = 1 while r = 0 is mapped onto z = ∞. (21) In the new variables.0008 0.0004 0.0004 Ù dz 0. In Figure 1 the behaviour of the integral of h2 outside the BH is presented when the initial condition for the integration approaches zero at a fixed point near infinity.e. hrr (r) = (1 − z) γrr (z) . it is possible to compute the quantity dṼ h2 . This seems to confirm —also numerically— that 0. (13). the only possible solution in the outer region is the one with hµν = 0 and therefore X = 0 throughout the exterior of the BH. With the set of solutions for the components of hRµν obtained for each of the initial condition imposed.001 0.e. 9 . The closer the limit to an asymptotically flat space-time is (i. It is observed that this integral is invariably small and actually vanishes as the initial condition for hrr nullifies. the temporal. radial and angular equations read (2z + 1)(z − 1)2 γrr + z(z − 1)3 γrr ′ − (4z + 1)(z − 1)4 γrr 2 − 2z(z − 1)5 γrr γrr ′ = Xγtt (z − 1)γrr + zγtt ′ + zγtt γtt ′ − z(z − 1)2 γrr γtt ′ − (z − 1)3 γrr 2 = −X(z − 1)γrr 2z(z − 2)(z − 1)γrr + z(z − 2)(z − 1)2 γrr ′ − z(5z − 2)γtt ′ − 2z 2 (z − 1)γtt ′′ (22) −2z(z − 2)(z − 1)4 γrr γrr ′ + z(7z − 2)(z − 1)2 γrr γtt ′ − z(5z − 2)γtt γtt ′ 2 +z 2 (z − 1)3 γrr ′ γtt ′ − z 2 (z − 1)γtt ′ + 2z 2 (z − 1)3 γrr γtt ′′ −2z 2 (z − 1)γtt γtt ′′ = 0 . z ∼ 0. defined in Eq. decreasing the initial condition near infinity). and the integral extends over the exterior of the BH (i. hµν (r ∼ ∞) → 0. 4 Inside the horizon In order to study the behaviour of our equations when the horizon is crossed. it is convenient to keep working in the z = rs /r variable and redefine the perturbations as htt (r) = (1 − z) γtt (z) . In the new perturbation the equations become more compact. Decreasing initial condition Figure 1: Each point represent a magnitude proportional to the integral of h2 outside the event horizon. 0.

e. the first solution appears to be integrable. thus casting doubts on the relevance of the linearized equations. Let us now make the following ansatz γtt ∼ A(z − 1)α . B + αA = −XB . In case i) X = −1 while if ii) is taken as solution X = 0 (i. (29) (z − 1) (z − 1)3 In any case. no chemical potential at all). therefore.e. It is worth noting that if α − 1 = β + 1.1 Behaviour near the event horizon In order to get a feeling for possible solutions to these equations we consider their linearized approximation.4. while this is not the case for the second one. it is possible to eliminate X by combining the temporal and radial equation. (26) The system of equations is algebraic for the variable X (that as we have seen should behave as a constant as z → 1). respectively. at least one of the perturbations is divergent over the event horizon. α = β + 2. we obtain three equations for the coefficients B(1 + α) = XA . i. Let us examine this point 6 Solution ii) represents however a volume-preserving fluctuation at the linear order. 10 . Nonetheless. this determines the solutions up to a constant.6 However these solutions do not vanish when z → 1 (as one could perhaps have hoped). all the terms have a contribution as we get closer to the event horizon and X behaves as a constant. (27) Together with the angular equation. γrr and their derivatives are kept in the region z → 1. α[B + A(1 + 2α)] = 0 . Only terms linear in γtt . γrr ∼ B(z − 1)β . In this situation. That is 3(z − 1)2 γrr + (z − 1)3 γrr ′ = Xγtt (z − 1)γrr + γtt ′ = −X(z − 1)γrr (23) 2(z − 1)γrr + (z − 1)2 γrr ′ + 3γtt ′ + 2(z − 1)γtt ′′ = 0 . In the present ansatz this leads to B 2 (1 + α) + AB + A2 α = 0 . (24) The three equations take the following form B(3 + β)(z − 1)β+2 = XA(z − 1)α B(z − 1)β+1 + Aα(z − 1)α−1 = −XB(z − 1)β+1 (25) B(2 + β)(z − 1)β+1 + Aα(1 + 2α)(z − 1)α−1 = 0 . There are two possible solutions for this system A i) α=0 β = −2 A = −B =⇒ γtt = A γrr = − (28) (z − 1)2 A A ii) α = −1 β = −3 A=B =⇒ γtt = γrr = .

In order to proceed we start the integration procedure at a small distance ǫ from the origin and following (33) set γtt (ǫ) = A′ . we substitute the solution back in the non-linear equation and verify that the most singular terms are still satisfied. also in sign. (31) w3 w Let us now employ the ansatz γtt = A′ wα . γrr = B ′ wβ (32) while we leave X = X(w) as a free function. close to the origin it would appear as if γtt ≃ A′ . β = 2. which is integrable. (33) It remains to be seen if this solution matches with the one obtained in the inner vicinity of the horizon. i. (30) w w 2 1 γrr − 2 γrr ′ + γtt ′ − 2w γtt ′′ = 0 . one cannot determine in either point the value of the higher order derivatives because precisely at the origin and at the horizon they are multiplied by factors that vanish or diverge. The integration will be done in the variable w.and let us only take into consideration the solution i). In these variables the by now familiar three equations read in their linearized version7 2 1 3 γrr − 2 γrr ′ = Xγtt . We will use another dimensionless variable for this purpose: w = 1/z = r/rs .2 Behaviour near the origin of coordinates Next we consider the region r → 0. (34) 7 As before linearization is performed only in order to get a feeling of possible solutions.3 Numerical integration So far we have seen that the solution i) given in Eq. (28) satisfies not only the linearized approximation but also the full quadratic equations. leading to one equation that together with Gθ θ leads to several constraints involving the parameters of the ansatz. i. γtt ′ (ǫ) = 0 . this exercise gives one interesting result: X ≃ −(1 + A). In addition. Could it happen that the previous analysis misses some solution? To try to answer this question we have performed a numerical integration of the basic equations (9). γrr − w2 γtt ′ = −Xγrr .e. there is no a priori reason to expect a good description by doing so. 4. (3). This function can be eliminated by combining Gt t and Gr r . To make sure that this solution is little modified for z → 1 when non-linearities are switched on. Calculations are presented in Appendix D. 4. γrr (ǫ) = B ′ ǫ2 . 11 .e. Then. (53) or (54) the system of equations is singular at r = 0 and r = rs . Note that at the linear level we got X = −1 and the fact that the quadratic equation gives an O(A) correction to this result is consistent as we are implicitly assuming that |hαβ | ≪ |g̃αβ |. the one that gives the same weight to all terms in the equations is the one corresponding to α = 0. where A is so far arbitrary. Of all possibilities. It is impossible to start integrating from either w = 0 (the BH center) or w = 1 (the BH horizon) exactly because as can be seen from Eqs. γrr ≃ B ′ w2 . |A| ≪ 1.

2 0. The numerical solution reproduces the general features of the analytical study. Using the full metric to raise the index changes the numerical value. i. Γrr 2 0 0. yet. . In Figure 3.e. Even more. Namely. taking into account that —in the current approach— hµ ν = hµρ g̃ρν ). the qualitative conclusions do not change. A = A′ = B ′ . A′ and B ′ .4 0. (36) Actually raising an index with g̃ αβ or gαβ makes no qualitative difference at all because the solution for the perturbation hαβ turns out to be proportional to the initial background metric element itself.8 that implies γtt = −0. The results depend on an arbitrary constant as discussed in the text. turns out to be constant in the interior of the BH. and obviously they must be chosen in such a way that the solution near w = 1 (z = 1) and the one near w = 0 (z = ∞) match.8 and X = −0. For the plot we have taken A = −0. B ′ that make both solutions match. γtt as well as the function related to the chemical potential X. It turns out that there are unique values of A and A′ .e. Note that the numerical integration does not extend all the way to w = 0 and w = 1 because these are singular points in the differential equation. 12 .8 r w= rs Figure 2: γtt is represented by a black line. Changes in A appear as an overall factor in the solution.We could have equally started the numerical integration routine from a point close to w = 1.6 0. The constant A itself is arbitrary and is not determined by the structure of the equations. γrr by a dashed line and the dimensionless chemical potential X by a dotted line. a plot of the numerical solution reveals that to a very good approximation throughout the interior of the BH horizon ht t = hr r = constant . Γtt .2 inside the BH. (35) ǫ2 The respective remaining degrees of freedom are the constants A. γrr (1 − ǫ) = −A γtt ′ (1 − ǫ) = 0 . as can be seen from the results obtained in the previous section for γtt and γrr (even though these results in principle take into account the leading behaviour when z → 1). For a certain value of A the curves presented in Figure 2 are obtained. in the vicinity (the inner vicinity that is) of the horizon. 6 4 X . when the previous boundary conditions are assumed for the numerical integration. The boundary conditions according to (28) would then be (1 − ǫ)2 γtt (1 − ǫ) = A . considering hµν = (z − 1)γµν and then raising one index. It is most interesting to plot the results of the numerical integration for ht t and hr r (i.

0=0 (40) and a = b ≡ ϕ.0 0. hθ θ = hφ φ = 0 .4 Exact solution(s) Inspired by the previous numerical solution we reformulate our main equations derived at O(hµν 2 ) and write them in terms of the metric fluctuation with mixed indices (one covariant. (39) And the corresponding volume elements are r 2 / (1 − a)(1 − b) or r 2 / (1 + a)(1 + b).2 0.8 0. one contravariant). (1 + b)g̃rr .6 0. hrr 0. g̃rr . g̃φφ .4 0. (41) Therefore we are retrieving the solution found in the previous subsection: ϕ plays the role of the integration constant A. one obtains   gµν = diag (1 + a)g̃tt . Otherwise. g̃φφ .6 ht t . g̃θθ . (37) The full metric would become   1 1 gµν = diag g̃tt . as the solution in the previous subsec- tion suggests. In fact.4 0. as obtained by numerical integration of the O(hµν 2 ) equations. g̃θθ . are constant and equal. there are several possible solutions depending on how one chooses to treat the separation between background and fluctuation metrics.8 r w= rs Figure 3: The graph shows that ht t (represented by a gray solid line) and hr r (by a black dashed line). X = −1 + ϕ .2 0. 1.0 0. re- p p spectively. (1 − b)b = −Xa . if the background metric is used to raise and lower indices. Let us write ht t = a . Now let us see that the problem actually admits an exact solution if we assume that the solution is of the form ht t = hr r = ϕ with ϕ being a constant. If one assumes constant values for a and b. (38) 1−a 1−b if indices are lowered and raised with the full metric itself. hr r = b . 4. the corresponding O(hµν 2 ) equations simplify enormously and reduce to the three following ones (1 − b)b = −Xb . 13 .

undoing the redefinition of the components of the wave function (i. We see that the actual relation between ϕ and X depends from the precise way the fluctuations around the background metric are assumed to interact with the metric itself. one has to plug Eq. On the one hand −g̃ is replaced by −g. assuming that Eq. it is mandatory to make a comment on the covariant conservation of our equations. This can be computed numerically using the numerical data into the equation (13). Before moving on. In any case the qualitative result that there is a normalizable solution that can be interpreted as the collective wave function of a graviton condensate remains. because the indices of hαβ are raised with the full metric (that depends on hαβ itself). that depends on hαβ . The RHS of the √ equation also gets modified. deriving h2 w. As X = µ r 2 is a constant function. In Appendix E a short discussion of this equation is presented. However. Note that h2 = ht t2 +hr r2 = 2ϕ2 . it is natural to keep the volume element √ as the one given by −g. (9) holds exactly. (38) √ into the Einstein tensor). The dimensionful chemical potential is plotted also for comparison.e. At the end of Section 2. . gαβ being the full metric. Using the fact that X ≡ µr 2 .2 we have pointed out that the diffeomorphism invariance entails a differential equation for the chemical potential. µ ∝ 1/r 2 and it is not null over the event horizon.r. . On the other hand. . the resulting equation of motion for a constant ϕ is now ϕ 3 − 2 = µϕ − µϕ2 (44) r 2 that can be interpreted as a mean field-like Gross-Pitaevskii equation for the condensate wave function ϕ. If we decide to raise and lower indices with the full metric. . Of course it is simpler to represent just ϕ or h2 . γµν → hµν ) is mandatory. It is immediate to see that the solution found is of finite norm. which are just constants. Note that X = 0 implies ϕ = 0 but not the other way round. namely (10). (45) 1 − 2ϕ 2 The previous results are valid to all orders in the expansion. (42) 1 + ϕ r2 that agrees with the O(hµν 2 ) perturbative solution found above. in deriving the equations of motion we have actually neglected a possible con- tribution of the corresponding volume measures. All things considered. we (re)obtain that X is a constant and 1 3 X=− 3 ≃ −1 − ϕ + . (39) into the Einstein tensor and gets the following closed algebraic equation: −ϕ 1 = µϕ ⇒ X = −1 + ϕ + . as mentioned. . The LHS of the equation of motion now reads −ϕ Gt t = Gr r = 2 (43) r (this is obtained after substituting Eq. A unique relation is obtained between this (constant) wave function and a dimensionless chemical potential. The left graph in Figure 4 presents the curves for the two covariant components of the perturbation. hαβ is not totally immediate. Taking into account that the 14 . If one chooses to consistently raise and lower indices with the background metric only. 5 Interpreting the results In order to present a physical interpretation for the obtained results.t.

On the right plot. (47) 2 λ with λ being the graviton wave length.8 r r w= w= rs rs Figure 4: Curves for htt (black solid). This quantity should.4 0.2 0. a whole family of solutions are obtained. h2 would be related to its density in the BH interior that turns out to be constant. the number of gravitons.0 X . the dimensions of (46) are not appropriate to deliver to us the value of N .2 0.5 0 h2 1. The rest of relations can be basically derived from this. the integral is Z rs h i dr r 2 (ht t )2 + (hr r )2 ≃ h2 rs3 .4 0. At this point we should attempt to make contact with the results of [1. the quantity 1 1 ρĥ ≡ ĥαβ ĥαβ . h2 is shown.5 -10 0. hrr 1. Recall that hα α = ϕ is a constant that is entirely determined by the value of the dimensionless chemical potential X. One can simply trade this constant for the value of ϕ. How could we determine the value of N from our solution? Even after using a properly normalized ĥαβ = MP hαβ . in a way that we will discuss below. hrr (dashed) line and the dimensionful chemical potential µ (dotted line). This way. then 3 √ r 8π 2 2 2 1 N= MP rs h ⇒ rs = N LP (48) 3 |h| 8π that agrees nicely with [2] under the maximum packaging condition λ = rs . This also applies to ĥµν . Note that hαβ is dimensionless and that in order to have a properly normalized kinetic term we have to divide the Einstein-Hilbert action by MP2 . As it is well known since the early days of quantum field theory [10] there are no conserved currents or continuity equations for fundamental fields that are chargeless (such as a real Klein-Gordon field).6 0. Possibly our more striking results are that the dimensionless chemical potential X(w) = µ(r)r 2 stays constant and non-zero throughout the interior of the BH and that so does the quantity h2 previously defined. 15 . It is totally natural to interpret X as the variable conjugate to N .0 0. has the right ingredients to play the role of probability density in the present context. However. be related to the total number of gravitons of the condensate. perturbation hµν is null from the event’s horizon onwards. If we assume this. 5 2.6 0.8 0. (46) 0 Then the integral over the interior of the BH of h2 is given by 4π 3 2 3 rs h . As already emphasized. Note that in the BEC λ = rs . the endpoint on the integration limit can be chosen as the Schwarzschild radius. htt . 2]. parametrized by a real arbitrary constant.0 -5 0.

it is just 3/4πrs3 . Then one gets X = −1. While there is no formally conserved current. X = 0. 8 To determine the rate of variation of N we have to multiply the surface (4πrs2 ) times the flux. by analogy with the case of a massless neutral scalar field. without disturbing the √ BH geometry (i. We conclude that a BH produces necessarily a (trapping) non- zero chemical potential when the physical system is expressed in terms of the grand-canonical ensemble. (51) dt 2 N dt 2rs dt To estimate dN/dt (which is negative) we can use geometrical arguments to determine the flux. using M ∼ MP N: dM 1 dN 1 dN ≃ MP √ = . several questions concerning the long-standing issue of loss of infor- mation may arise as the outcoming state looks thermal [11] but apparently is not. i. (52) dt 2 rs This agrees with the results of [2] —for instance Eq. This value appears to be universal and independent of any hypothesis. Since the density of the mode is constant in the interior. The main result from the previous rather detailed analysis is that the BH is able to sustain a graviton BEC (and surely similar BEC’s made of other quanta). Let us now for a moment forget about the geometrical interpretation of BH physics and let us treat the problem as a collective many body phenomenon. As seen above the dimensionless chemical potential X has a rather peculiar behaviour. (50) 2 If the energy ε is a constant and given by 1/rs . This behaviour is summarized in Figure 5.e. But is that condensate really present? Our results do not answer that question. From this figure it is clear why gravitons are trapped behind the horizon: the jump of the chemical potential at r = rs would prevent the ‘particles’ inside to reaching infinity. Outside the BH. the integral of the graviton density in the interior of the BH. The approximations made in the discussion could only modify the coefficient by a numerical factor of O(1). the total energy of the system will be given. If we assume that for a given value of rs only one mode can get out (as hypothesized above) and that propagation takes place at the speed of light. Within this picture. (35)— and yields T ≃ 1/rs . or at least not totally so. However we shall refrain of dwelling on this any further at this point. then Eq. (13) has to be interpreted as the number of gravitons in the BEC. However this is not completely true as the picture itself suggests that one of the modes can scape at a time without paying any energy penalty if the maximum packaging condition √ is verified. assumed to be c = 1 in our units. keeping rs constant) this requires taking ϕ → 0 in a way that the ratio N /|ϕ| is fixed. elementary considerations8 lead to dM 3 1 ≃− 2. Let us do a semiclassical calculation inspired by this picture. Indeed within the present philosophy we assign to each graviton in the BEC an energy ε = 1/λ = 1/rs . but if we reflect on the case where the limit N → 0 is taken. 1 Z E=− dV φ∇2 φ (49) 2 by 1 Z Z 2 2 E= dV ε ĥ = dV ερĥ . 16 . It has a constant value inside the BH and it appears to be exactly zero outside. i. The metric is 100% Schwarzschild everywhere.e. the density of the mode times the velocity.e.

(48) would imply that after the emission of each graviton. the value of rs is readjusted. Let us emphasize that these results go beyond the second order perturbative expansion used in parts of this article. ϕ is now non- zero. but the reverse is not true. Each BH has associated a given constant value of X. X -2 -3 -4 0. We have used a number of different techniques to analyze these equations when the perturbation (i. In either case the metric in the BH interior is different from the Schwarzschild one. could be the following. One can have ϕ = 0 but this does not imply X = 0. Note that the metric is destabilized and becomes singular for ϕ = 1. that we disfavour. and the chemical potential departs from the value X = −1. it is directly proportional to N . 0 -1 Μ. the number of gravitons.5 2. hence of ϕ. If one sets X = 0 then necessarily ϕ = 0 and one gets the classical Schwarzschild solution everywhere. they are derived from the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian after adding a chemical potential-like term.0 0. As gravitons cross the horizon and are trapped by the BH classical gravitational field they eventually thermalize and form a BEC. The problem with this interpretation is that it would require a new dimensionless magnitude (X) to characterize a Schwarzschild BH. The key point of the theory is to identify the black hole with a Bose-Einstein condensate of gravitons. the tentative condensate) has spherical symmetry. Another way of reaching this conclusion is by taking a closer look to our exact equations in the previous section.0 1.0 r w= rs Figure 5: The behaviour of both chemical potentials.e. We have conjectured the set of equations that play the role of the Gross-Pitaevskii non- linear equation. µ in solid line and the dimensionless X in dashed line. Then Eqs. presumably increasing it. so surely this is an upper limit. The eventual energy surplus generated in this process is used to increase the mass and therefore √ the Schwarzschild radius of the BH. The purpose of this work was to have some insights in the refor- mulation of a quantum theory of black holes in the language of condensed matter physics. Yet another possible interpretation.5 1. In this case the jump at the horizon amounts to ∆X = ∆µ ≃ 0. across the horizon of the BH (dotted line). something that most BH practitioners would probably find hard to accept. As soon as ϕ 6= 0 the metric inside the BH is not anymore Schwarzschild (but continues to be Schwarzschild outside).2. 6 Conclusions and outlook We shall now conclude. but by doing a perturbative analysis around the BH 17 . The equations appear at first sight rather intractable.

The other one leads to a non-zero chemical potential in the interior of the BH that behaves as 1/r 2 . The work of J. Phys. but not its functional form. project number 246806. the dimensionless chemical potential X (related to the mean-field wave function of the condensate ϕ). Landau-Ginzburg Limit of Black Hole’s Quantum Portrait: Self Similarity and Critical Exponent. Lett. Surprisingly —or maybe not so— this solution modifies the coefficient of the tt and rr terms in the Schwarzschild solution. D. Acknowledgments We acknowledge the financial support of projects FPA2013-46570-C2-1-P (MINECO) and 2014SGR104 (Generalitat de Catalunya). it would be very interesting to see the similarities and differences with the case of quantum gravitons. On the contrary. We have seen that there is some ambiguity in the way the effect of the background metric is taken into account and probably more work is needed to produce a unique fully convincing answer.U.A. Dvali.Schwarzschild metric at quadratic order (i. Gómez and coworkers. N. Wintergerst. We have not explored this possibility in detail yet. The fact that the functional form of the metric per- turbation induced by the condensate is exactly the same as the original background. G. Therefore we favour the universal value X = −1 as discussed in the text. It is quite plausible that one could entertain the presence of condensates of other quantum fields inside the BH horizon (why only gravitons?). our approach is some- what different from the one developed in the initial papers by Dvali. Phys. including the leading non-linearities) we found that the chemical potential necessarily vanishes in the exterior of the BH. one of them has to be discarded as producing a non-normalizable result. 18 . if the former is non zero. C. in the interior we have found two set of solutions. Of course if there is no chemical potential at all. of course gives a lot of credence to the possibility of deriving the latter from the former in a sort of self-consistent derivation. These ambiguities get reflected in the relation between the number of gravitons and the Schwarzschild radius. Gomez. Black Hole’s 1/N Hair.e. Scrambling in the Black Hole Portrait. We find this somewhat strange as this would be a new black hole parameter. 240 (2012). Dvali and C. B 716. References [1] G. Phys. There is a finite jump of the chemical potential at the BH horizon. As should be obvious to the reader who has followed our discussion. Gomez. is partially supported by grants Fondecyt 1150390 and CONICYT-PIA-ACT14177 (Government of Chile). in accordance with well known theorems. G. most relations obtained in [1. This research was supported in part though the E. A. EPLANET exchange program FP7-PEOPLE-2009-IRSES. Pritzel. 124041 (2013). Dvali and C. While we do not expect much of a conceptual difference. Lett. the modification is also necessarily non-zero. the modification vanishes. The relation between the number of gravitons and the geometric properties of the BH involve an a priori independent and tuneable parameter. We assume from the start the existence of a classical geometry background that acts as confining potential for the condensate. D 88. Rev. where the value of the (constant) condensate enters. 419 (2013). 719. However. 2] can be rederived. Flassig. From the existence and knowledge of this solution. Gomez.

D. 463 (1999). Rev. Theory of Bose-Einstein con- densation in trapped gases. Bekenstein. Hawking. Phys.W. D 3. Langer.W. D 5. 61. 395 (1982). Dvali and C.D. 045018 (2010). Math. J. Espriu. Phys. and Superstrings. 28. Bekenstein. Gomez. Do Black Holes De- stroy Information? International Symposium on Black Holes. Hawking. Membranes. Alfaro. C 74.W. Commun. Rev. Phys. Black Hole’s Quantum N-Portrait. Puigdomènech. Mod.P. Black Holes and Entropy. Breakdown of predictability in gravitational collapse. Lett. Preskill.D. Phys. Hawking. Phys. 3292 (1974). D. Dvali and C. Hartle. Rev. Phys. Particle Creation by Black Holes. 87. D 5. Birkhoff and R. 452 (1972). Helv.D. [10] W. Relativity and Modern Physics (Harvard Univ. D 13. Rev. Math. 2403 (1972). Phys. Phys. Phys. Black Holes as Critical Point of Quantum Phase Transition. arXiv:hep-th/9209058. Rev.D. Alfaro. Phys. C. Phys. D 9. Pitaevskii and S. Bekenstein. 2333 (1973). Phys. Giorgini. Teitelboim. Bekenstein. Puigdomènech. D. Stringari. For an excellent review on information loss paradox. J. The emergence of geometry: a two-dimensional toy model. Rev. 1923). J. D 14 2460 (1976). 71. Rev. S. Black holes and thermodynamics. [2] G. Wormholes. Houston Advanced Research Center (1992). D 82. Bekenstein. D. Fortsch. [3] J. Rev. [4] S. Acta 7. 43.D. J. D 7. L. Rev. Phys. Gomez. J. [8] G. Phys. see. Commun. Rev. 19 . Rev. Press. [5] J. 742 (2013).W. [7] S. Hawking. J. Generalized second law of thermodynamics in black-hole physics. 1239 (1972). G. 2752 (2014). The Unpredictability of Quantum Gravity. Espriu. 191 (1976). D 5 (1972) 294. [11] S. 709 (1934). Spontaneous generation of geometry in four dimensions. Phys. J.D. [6] J. [9] F. Dalfovo. 2938 (1971). Weisskopf. Pauli and V. S. 199 (1975). Eur. Phys. Rev. Phys. D 86 025015 (2012).

the invariance under the gauge group of diffeomorphisms of the chemical potential term in the action (8) will be shown. (53) and (54).Appendix A Radial and angular components of the Einstein tensor The two remaining components of the Einstein tensor are  r 1 3 2 2   5 4 2 3  Gr (g̃µν + hµν ) = 6 r s r − r s r htt − r − 2rs r + rs r htt ′ r − 2rs r 5 + rs 2 r 4     − r 4 − 3rs r 3 + 3rs 2 r 2 − rs 3 r hrr + rs r 3 htt 2 − r 5 − rs r 4 htt htt ′     (53) − rs r 3 − 2rs 2 r 2 + rs 3 r hrr htt + r 5 − 3rs r 4 + 3rs 2 r 3 − rs 3 r 2 hrr htt ′    + r 4 − 4rs r 3 + 6rs 2 r 2 − 4rs 3 r + rs 4 hrr 2 = 0 and  1 5 2 4 3 3  Gϕ ϕ (g̃µν + hµν ) : 8 2r s r − 3r s r + rs r htt 4r − 12rs r 7 + 12rs 2 r 6 − 4rs 3 r 5     + 2r 7 − 7rs r 6 + 8rs 2 r 5 − 3rs 3 r 4 htt ′ + 2r 8 − 6rs r 7 + 6rs 2 r 6 − 2rs 3 r 5 htt ′′   + 2rs r 5 − 7rs 2 r 4 + 9rs 3 r 3 − 5rs 4 r 2 + rs 5 r hrr   + 2r 7 − 9rs r 6 + 16rs 2 r 5 − 14rs 3 r 4 + 6rs 4 r 3 − rs 5 r 2 hrr ′     + 2rs r 5 htt 2 + 2r 7 − 7rs r 6 + 5rs 2 r 5 htt htt ′ + r 8 − 2rs r 7 + rs 2 r 6 htt ′2     + 2r 8 − 4rs r 7 + 2rs 2 r 6 htt htt ′′ − 2rs r 5 − 6rs 2 r 4 + 6rs 3 r 3 − 2rs 4 r 2 hrr htt   (54) − 2r 7 − 8rs r 6 + 12rs 2 r 5 − 8rs 3 r 4 + 2rs 4 r 3 hrr htt ′   − 2r 8 − 8rs r 7 + 12rs 2 r 6 − 8rs 3 r 5 + 2rs 4 r 4 hrr htt ′′   + rs r 6 − 3rs 2 r 5 + 3rs 3 r 4 − rs 4 r 3 hrr ′ htt   − r 8 − 4rs r 7 + 6rs 2 r 6 − 4rs 3 r 5 + rs 4 r 4 hrr ′ htt ′   − 4rs r 5 − 18rs 2 r 4 + 32rs 3 r 3 − 28rs 4 r 2 + 12rs 5 r − 2rs 6 hrr 2    7 6 2 5 3 4 4 3 5 2 6 ′ − 4r − 22rs r + 50rs r − 60rs r + 40rs r − 14rs r + 2rs r hrr hrr = 0 . gµν and g̃µν . Let’s start by pointing out that both metrics. fixing it to zero. then we end up with Minkowski space-time in the three components of G: (3). Here ϕ stands for any of the angular coordinates: θ or φ. Appendix B General covariance of the action In the following part. the full metric gµν = 20 . It is worth to note that if a rescaling on the Schwarzschild radius rs = 2GM is done. In fact. transform covariantly. as well as the perturbation.

Inserting this ansatz into a linearization of the Einstein equations partially evaluated at infinity (11)   t 1 1 Gt (r → ∞) = + β B eβ r = C eρ r A eα r (58) r2 r   r rs α 1 Gr (r → ∞) = − A eα r − B eβ r = C eρ r B eβ r (59) r3 r r2     ϕ 2 rs 2 2 αr 2 rs 2 Gϕ (r → ∞) = + α + 2α Ae + + β B eβ r = 0 .µ gνρ = Lǫ gµν .µ = ξ ρ gµν. Appendix C Exponentially decaying ansatz Let’s change the ansatz and impose an exponential decreasing solution for the perturbations at infinity: htt = A eα r . (56) As the perturbation is defined by hµν = gµν − g̃µν . and the chemical potential µ̃ behaves as a scalar under a general coordinate transformation. the parameters α. β. This is. ρ < 0 . ensure automatically the general covariance of the theory. under an infinitesimal displacement D in the coordinates of the form δD [ξ]xµ = ξ µ .ν hµρ + ξ ρ . δg̃µν = Lǫ g̃µν . (55) The same gauge transformation rules the background metric under the general coordinate transformation mentioned above. the linear order dominates in front of the higher ones. depending on the fact whether if α is bigger or not than β. (61) r In conclusion. The fact that the perturbation transforms in the same way than the metric tensor. In the angular equation there is no way for both terms to compete between each other eβ r Gϕ ϕ : −2 A α2 eα r − 2 B β = 0. changes as δgµν = ξµ. if A = 0. This allows one to neglect all the terms besides the principal ones inside each parenthesis.ν + ξν.µ hνρ = Lǫ hµν . (57) As before for this type of ansatz. hrr = B eβ r . µ = C eρ r with α. (60) r3 r r3 r As decreasing solutions are expected. under the same perturbation of the coordinate system. For the first case. the temporal equation eβ r Gt t : B β = A C e(α+ρ) r (62) r 21 .ρ + ξ ρ . The latter identity implies hµν has also a Lie derivative transformation. the following equality is obtained δhµν = δ(gµν − g̃µν ) = ξ ρ hµν. β and ρ must be not null. from the subtraction of (55) and (56).ν gµρ + ξ ρ .g̃µν + hµν . A = 0 or B = 0.ρ + ξ ρ .

radial and angular equations are 3(z − 1)2 γrr + (z − 1)3 γrr ′ − 5(z − 1)4 γrr 2 − 2(z − 1)5 γrr γrr ′ = Xγtt (63) (z − 1) γrr + γtt ′ + γtt γtt ′ − (z − 1)2 γrr γtt ′ − (z − 1)3 γrr 2 = −X(z − 1)γrr (64) 2(z − 1)γrr + (z − 1)2 γrr ′ + 3γtt ′ + 2(z − 1)γtt ′′ − 4(z − 1)3 γrr 2 − 2 (z − 1)4 γrr γrr ′ + 3γtt γtt ′ 2 −5(z − 1)2 γrr γtt ′ − 2(z − 1)3 γrr γtt ′′ − (z − 1)3 γrr ′ γtt ′ + 2(z − 1)γtt γtt ′′ + (z − 1)γtt ′ = 0. γrr = A − (z−1) 2 2 . the same equation Gt t nullifies A (as no null solutions for C are expected). if B = 0. Replacing the possible solution. However. hµν = 0. (z − 1) (z − 1) (z − 1) (z − 1) Therefore. the chemical potential disappears form the theory in this region. Near z ∼ 1 the full temporal. γtt = A —this eliminates any derivative of γtt — A and γrr = − (z−1)2 into these equations. Let us now plug this solution in the non-linear O(γ ) system and see if the solution survives or how could it get modified. A and B null. 22 . Appendix D O(γ 2) solution The solution of the linearized differential equations leads to the expressions γtt = A . (65) respectively. The only difference is that the dimensionless chemical potential is at this order X = −(1 + A) rather than X = −1 as suggested by the linearized approximation. quite surprisingly.fixes B = 0. no perturbation makes the chemical potential sense- less. To sum up. the linear solution is still an exact solution of the non-linear quadratic differential equations and we conclude that A γtt = A γrr = − (69) (z − 1)2 are solutions. we get in turn 3(z − 1)2 (−A) (z − 1)3 2A 5(z − 1)4 A2 2(z − 1)5 (−A) 2A + − − =XA (z − 1)2 (z − 1)3 (z − 1)4 (z − 1)2 (z − 1)3 (66) 2 2 2 =⇒ 3 A − 2 A + 5 A − 4 A = A + A = (1 + A)A = −X A (z − 1)(−A) (z − 1)3 A2 −A 2 − 4 = −X (z − 1) (z − 1) (z − 1) (z − 1)2 (67) A + A2 (1 + A)A XA =⇒ − =− = (z − 1) (z − 1) (z − 1) 2(z − 1)(−A) (z − 1)2 2A 4 (z − 1)3 A2 2 (z − 1)4 (−A)2 A + − − =0 (z − 1)2 (z − 1)3 (z − 1)4 (z − 1)2 (z − 1)3 (68) 2A 2A 4 A2 4 A2 =⇒ − + − + = 0. For the second case. this ansatz implies that the only solution at infinity is a null perturbation. Being both. and the disappearance of the chemical potential µ from the theory.

φ. the first term inside the brackets is null. ρ = t. (74) This value should coincide with the value of our constant dimensionless chemical potential X = µ0 = −1 + ϕ. θ. ht t = a = hr r = b = ϕ. r because m appears always in the perturbation and only exists in the temporal and radial components. (73) r The integration is direct and the only freedom is a boundary condition for the differential equation. Dropping all the null Christoffel symbols and the off-diagonal elements of the hµν matrix. r. 23 View publication stats . Covariant conservation of the Einstein tensor implies automatically the same for the RHS of our equations ∇ν Gρ ν = 0 = ∇ν µhρ ν = ∂ν µhρ ν + µ −Γm νρ hm ν + Γν νm hρ m     (70) In the last equality. θ. the covariant derivative is expressed in terms of the Christoffel symbols of the theory. and doing the same procedure with ν = t. Performing the sum in m = t. The Christoffel symbols. The latter equation is a set of 4 equations. a derivation of the differential equation for the chemical potential µ is pre- sented. µ = µ0 r −2 =⇒ X = µ0 .r = 1r makes our expression become 2µ (∂r µ) + = 0. Appendix E General covariance condition In this appendix. makes the equation reads as h   i 0 =∂r (µhr r ) + µ −Γt tr ht t − hr r + Γθ θr hr r + Γφ φr hr r (72) If the perturbations are equal and constant. Γθ θr = 12 gθθ gθθ. r.e. ρ = r.r = 1r and Γφ φr = 21 gφφ gφφ. The only non trivial equation is the radial one. i. φ the following relation is obtained h 0 =∂r µhρ r + µ −Γt tρ ht t + Γt tt hρ t + Γt tr hρ r + Γr rt hρ t − Γr rρ hr r + Γr rr hρ r  i (71) + Γθ θt hρ t + Γθ θr hρ r + Γφ φt hρ t + Γφ φr hρ r where we have taken into account that there is only radial derivatives. We are going to derive this equation for a theory where only the background metric is considered for the integration measure and to raise and lower indices.