1st Reading

March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
International Journal of Modern Physics A 1
Vol. 22, No. 00 (2007) 1–24
c World Scientific Publishing Company 3
ON (2 + 2)-DIMENSIONAL SPACE TIMES,
STRINGS AND BLACK HOLES 5
C. CASTRO
Center for Theoretical Studies of Physical Systems, 7
Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, GA 30314, USA
castro@ctsps.cau.edu 9
J. A. NIETO
Facultad de Ciencias F´ısico-Matem´ aticas de la Universidad Aut´ onoma de Sinaloa, 11
80010, Culiac´ an Sinaloa, M´exico
nieto@uas.uasnet.mx 13
Received 9 November 2006
Revised 5 January 2007 15
We study black hole-like solutions (space–times with singularities) of Einstein field equa-
tions in 3 + 1 and 2 + 2 dimensions. We find three different cases associated with 17
hyperbolic homogeneous spaces. In particular, the hyperbolic version of Schwarzschild’s
solution contains a conical singularity at r = 0 resulting from pinching to zero size r = 0 19
the throat of the hyperboloid H
2
and which is quite different from the static spherically
symmetric (3 + 1)-dimensional solution. Static circular symmetric solutions for metrics 21
in 2+2 are found that are singular at ρ = 0 and whose asymptotic ρ →∞limit leads to
a flat (1 +2)-dimensional boundary of topology S
1
×R
2
. Finally we discuss the (1 +1)- 23
dimensional Bars–Witten stringy black hole solution and show how it can be embedded
into our (3+1)-dimensional solutions. Black holes in a (2+2)-dimensional “space–time” 25
from the perspective of complex gravity in 1 + 1 complex dimensions and their quater-
nionic and octonionic gravity extensions deserve furher investigation. An appendix is 27
included with the most general Schwarzschild-like solutions in D ≥ 4.
Keywords: Strings; black holes; 2 + 2 dimensions; general relativity. 29
PACS numbers: 04.60.-m, 04.65.+e, 11.15.-q, 11.30.Ly
1. Introduction 31
Through the years it has become evident that the 2 + 2 signature is not only
mathematically interesting
1,2
(see also Refs. 3–5) but also physically. In fact, the 33
2 +2-signature emerges in several physical context, including self-dual gravity a la
Plebanski (see Ref. 6 and references therein), consistent N = 2 superstring theory 35
as discussed by Ooguri and Vafa,
7,8
N = (2, 1) heterotic string.
9–12
Moreover, it has
been emphasized
13,14
that Majorana–Weyl spinor exists in space–time of 2+2 signa- 37
ture. Even cosmologically there is a wisdom
15
that the 2+2 signature is interesting.
1
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
2 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
In Refs. 23–26 it was shown how a N = 2 supersymmetric Wess–Zumino– 1
Novikov–Witten model valued in the area-preserving (super)diffeomorphisms group
is self-dual supergravity in 2 +2 and 3 +1 dimensions depending on the signatures 3
of the base manifold and target space. The interplay among W

gravity, N = 2
strings, self-dual membranes, SU(∞) Toda lattices and SU

(∞) Yang–Mills instan- 5
tons in 2 + 2 dimensions can be found also in Refs. 23–26.
More recently, using the requirement of the SL(2, R) and Lorentz symmetries it 7
has been proved
16
that 2+2 target space–time of a 0-brane is an exceptional signa-
ture. Moreover, following an alternative idea to the notion of worldsheets for world- 9
sheets proposed by Green
17
or the 0-branes condensation suggested by Townsend
18
it was also proved in Ref. 16 that special kind of 0-brane called quatl
19,20
leads 11
to the result that the 2 + 2-target space–time can be understood either as 2 + 2-
worldvolume space–time or as 1 + 1 matrix-brane. 13
Another recent motivation for a physical interest in the 2 + 2 signature has
emerged via Duff’s
21
discovery of hidden symmetries of the Nambu–Goto action. In 15
fact, this author was able to rewrite the Nambu–Goto action in a 2+2 target space–
time in terms of a hyperdeterminant, reveling apparently new hidden symmetries 17
of such an action. More recently the Duff’s observation has been linked with the
matrix-brane idea.
22
19
Considering seriously the possibility that the (2 +2)-dimensional “space–time”
is an exceptional signature one may wonder what is the connection between 21
(2 + 2)-dimensional “space–time” and other exceptional structures in physics such
as black-holes. In this respect it becomes convenient to discuss black-holes physics 23
from modern perspective. In particular, it become convenient to clarify the many
subtleties behind the introduction of a true point-mass source at r = 0
39
and the 25
admissible family of radial functions R(r) in the static spherically symmetric solu-
tions of Einstein field equations
29–38
(see also Refs. 42–45). 27
We begin by writing down the class of static spherically symmetric (SSS) vacuum
solutions of Einstein’s equations
46
studied by Refs. 29–32, 52–58, 42–45 and 72,
among many others, given by a infinite family of solutions parametrized by a family
of admissible radial functions R(r) (in c = 1 units)
(ds)
2
=

1 −
2G
N
M
o
R

(dt)
2

1 −
2G
N
M
o
R

−1
(dR)
2
−R
2
(r)(dΩ)
2
, (1.1)
where the solid angle infinitesimal element is
(dΩ)
2
= (dφ)
2
+ sin
2
(φ)(dθ)
2
. (1.2)
This expression of the metric in terms of the radial function R(r) (a radial gauge)
does not violate Birkoff’s theorem since the metric (1.1), (1.2) expressed in terms 29
of the radial function R(r) has exactly the same functional form as that required
by Birkoff’s theorem and 0 ≤ r ≤ ∞. Metrics of the form (1.1) were employed 31
by Ref. 94 based on the nonperturbative renormalization group flow and running
Newtonian coupling G = G(r) in quantum Einstein gravity.
90–93
33
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 3
There are two interesting cases to study based on the boundary conditions 1
obeyed by R(r): (i) the Hilbert textbook (black hole) solution
49–51
based on the
choice R(r) = r obeying R(r = 0) = 0, R(r → ∞) → r. And (ii) the controversial 3
(erroneous) Abrams–Schwarzschild radial gauge based on choosing the cutoff R(r =
0) = 2G
N
M such that g
tt
(r = 0) = 0 which apparently seems to “eliminate” the 5
horizon and R(r → ∞) → r. This was the original solution of 1916 found by
Schwarzschild. However, the choice R(r = 0) = 2GM has a serious flaw and is: how 7
is it possible for a point-mass at r = 0 to have a nonzero area 4π(2G
N
M)
2
and a
zero volume simultaneously? so it seems that one is forced to choose the Hilbert 9
gauge R(r = 0) = 0 and retain only those metrics that are diffeomorphic to the
Hilbert textbook black hole solution only. 11
Nevertheless there is a very specific radial function (never studied before to our
knowledge) R(r) = r+2G
N
MΘ(r)
36
that yields a metric which is not diffeomorphic 13
to the Hilbert textbook solution based on the Heaviside step function
a
which is
defined Θ(r) = 1 when r > 0, Θ(r) = −1 when r < 0 and Θ(r = 0) = 0 (the 15
arithmetic mean of the values at r > 0 and r < 0). The Heaviside step function
behavior at r = 0 given by Θ(r = 0) = 0 will ensure us that now we can satisfy 17
the required condition R(r = 0) = r = 0, consistent with our intuitive notion that
the spatial area and spatial volume of a point r = 0 has to be zero. Since r = 19
±

x
2
+y
2
+z
2
, a negative r branch is mathematically possible and is compatible
with the double covering inherent in the Fronsdal–Kruskal–Szekeres
60–62
analytical 21
continuation in terms of the u, v coordinates. Each point of space–time inside
r < 2G
N
M is represented twice (black hole and white hole picture). However there 23
is a fundamental difference (besides others) with the Fronsdal–Kruskal–Szekeres
extension into the interior of r = 2GM, their metric description is no longer static 25
in r < 2GM, whereas in our case the metric is static for all values of r.
Thus the scalar curvature associated to the point mass delta function source 27
−2G
N
Mδ(r)/R
2
(dR/dr)
39
does not always remain invariant of the radial gauge
chosen. In the very special case chosen by Schwarzschild in 1916 given by R
3
= 29
r
3
+(2G
N
M)
3
the scalar curvature and measure remains the same as in the Hilbert
textbook choice R(r) = r due to the relation R
2
dR = r
2
dr. But this was a his- 31
torical fluke. An unfortunate accident which has impeded the progress for 90 years
because many were misled into thinking that any radial gauge choice was always 33
equivalent to a naive radial reparametrization r →r

of the Hilbert metric. It is not
because having a family of nondiffeormorphic metrics, parametrized by a family of 35
inequivalent radial gauges belonging to different gauge orbits, is not the same thing
as having a family of naive radial changes of coodinates r →r

associated to a fixed 37
and given fiduciary metric.
The reason why there are metrics which are not diffeomorphic to the Hilbert 39
textbook solution is due to the fact that there are orbits obtained by exponentiation
a
We thank Michael Ibison for pointing out the importance of the Heaviside step function and the
use of the modulus |r| to account for point mass sources at r = 0.
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
4 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
of generators of diffeomorphisms that yield diffeomorphisms which are not connected 1
to the identity and which still may act trivially at infinity (Marsden theorem). The
identity element of the diffs group is in our case related to the Hilbert textbook 3
trivial radial gauge-function R(r) = r. Consequently, there are radial gauges which
are not obtained by a naive radial reparametrization r →r

of the Hilbert textbook 5
metric and correspond to metrics which are not physically equivalent to it. More-
over, Donaldson showed that in D = 4 one has an infinite number of inequivalent 7
differential structures, i.e. manifolds that are homeomorphic (topologically equiva-
lent) but are not diffeomorphic. The presence of matter (singularity) at r = 0 and 9
the different choices of inequivalent radial gauges should single out the particular
differential structure in D = 4. 11
There is an essential technical subtlety required in order to generate δ(r) terms
in the right-hand side of Einstein’s equations. One must replace everywhere r →|r| 13
as required when point-mass sources are inserted. A rigorous mathematical treat-
ment of Colombeau’s theory of nonlinear distributions can be found in Refs. 63–66. 15
The Newtonian gravitational potential due to a point-mass source at r = 0 is given
by −G
N
M/|r| and is consistent with Poisson’s law which states that the Laplacian 17
of the Newtonian potential −GM/|r| is 4πGρ where ρ = (M/4πr
2
)δ(r) in Newto-
nian gravity. However, the Laplacian in spherical coordinates of (1/r) is zero. For 19
this reason, there is a fundamental difference in dealing with expressions involving
absolute values |r| like 1/|r| from those which depend on r like 1/r.
59
Therefore 21
the radial gauge must be chosen by R(|r|) = |r| + 2G
N
MΘ(|r|). Had one not use
|r| in the expression for the metric, one will not generate the desired δ(r) terms in 23
the right-hand side of Einstein’s equations R
µν

1
2
g
µν
R = −8πG
N
T
µν
= 0, and
one would get an expression identically equal to zero (consistent with the vacuum 25
solutions in the absence of matter) instead of the δ(r) terms.
39
To sum up, by using R(|r|) = |r| + 2G
N
MΘ(|r|), we safely have that R(|r|) = 27
|r| + 2G
N
M, when r > 0 and the horizon can the be displaced from r = 2G
N
M
to a location as arbitrarily close to r = 0 as desired r
Horizon
→ 0. To be more 29
precise, the horizon actually never forms since at r = 0 one hits the singularity.
Also, R ∼ r for r 2G
N
M and one recovers the correct Newtonian limit in the 31
asymptotic regime. It is now, via the Heaviside step function, that we may maintain
the correct behavior R(|r|) = |r|, when r = 0, and such that we can satisfy the 33
required condition R(r = 0) = r = 0, consistent with our intuitive notion that
the spatial area and spatial volume of a point r = 0 has to be zero. The metric 35
is smooth and differentiable for all r > 0 and one will have R
µν
= R = 0 (in the
region r > 0 empty of matter and radiation). The metric is discontinuous only at 37
the location of the point mass singularity r = 0 whose worldline which may be
thought of as the boundary of space–time. The scalar curvature is infinite at r = 0 39
due to the delta function point mass source at r = 0, it jumps from zero to infinity
at r = 0. 41
And most importantly, a radial reparametrization r → r

(r) leaves invariant
the scalar curvature and the measures associated with a given choice of the radial
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 5
function R
1
(r):
4πR
2
1
(r)dR
1
(r)dt = 4πR
2
1
(r

)dR

1
(r

)dt , (1.3a)
R
1
(r) = −
2G
N
M
R
2
1
(r)(dR
1
/dr)
δ(r) = R

1
(r

)
= −
2G
N
M
R
2
1
(r

)(dR

1
(r

)/dr

)
δ(r

) . (1.4a)
Choosing a different radial function R
2
(r) gives under a radial reparametrization
r →r

(r):
4πR
2
2
(r)dR
2
(r)dt = 4πR
2
2
(r

)dR

2
(r

)dt , (1.3b)
R
2
(r) = −
2G
N
M
R
2
2
(r)(dR
2
/dr)
δ(r) = R

2
(r

)
= −
2G
N
M
R
2
2
(r

)(dR

2
(r

)/dr

)
δ(r

) . (1.4b)
1
In the same manner that one must not confuse active and passive diffeomor-
phisms we have
R(r) = r

(r) ⇒R(r) = −
2G
N
M
R
2
(dR/dr)
δ(r) = −
2G
N
M
R
2
(r)
δ(R(r))
= −
2G
N
M
r
2
(r)(dr

/dr)
δ(r) = −
2G
N
M
r
2
(r)
δ(r

(r)) . (1.5)
Because the scalar curvature is an explicit function of the radial function R(r)
given by this expression: −2GMδ(r)/R
2
(r)(dR/dr) = −2GMδ(R(r))/R
2
(r) we 3
can see that the scalar curvature does not remain invariant of the infinite number
of possible choices of the radial functions R(r), except in the anomalous case when 5
R
3
= r
3
+(2GM)
3
(the radial gauge chosen by Schwarzschild in 1916) that leads to
−2GMδ(r)/r
2
, and which accidentally happens to agree with the scalar curvature 7
in the Hilbert gauge R(r) = r.
What remains invariant of the choices R(r) is the action
S = −
1
16πG
N


2G
N
M
o
R
2
(dR/dr)
δ(r)

(4πR
2
dRdt)
= −
1
16πG
N


2G
N
M
o
r
2
δ(r)

(4πr
2
dr dt) . (1.6)
The Euclideanized Einstein–Hilbert action associated with the scalar curvature
delta function is obtained after a compactification of the temporal direction along a
circle S
1
giving an Euclidean time coordinate interval of 2πt
E
and which is defined
in terms of the Hawking temperature T
H
and Boltzman constant k
B
as 2πt
E
=
(1/k
B
T
H
) = 8πG
N
M
o
.
S
E
=
4π(G
N
M
o
)
2
L
2
Planck
=
4π(2G
N
M
o
)
2
4L
2
Planck
=
Area
4L
2
Planck
. (1.7)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
6 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
It is interesting that the Euclidean action S
E
(in units) is precisely the same as 1
the black hole entropy S in Planck area units. This result holds in any dimensions
D ≥ 3. This is not a numerical coincidence. Furthermore, the action is invariant of 3
the choices of R(r), whether or not it is the Hilbert textbook choice R(r) = r or
another. The choice of the radial function R(r) amounts to a radial gauge that leaves 5
the action invariant but it does not leave the scalar curvature, nor the measure of
integration, invariant. Only the action (integral of the scalar curvature) remains 7
invariant.
The action–entropy connection has been obtained from a different argument, 9
for example, by Padmanabhan
40
by showing how it is the surface term added to
the action which is related to the entropy, interpreting the horizon as a boundary 11
of space–time. The surface term is given in terms of the trace of the extrinsic cur-
vature of the boundary. The surface term in the action is directly related to the 13
observer-dependent-horizon entropy, such that its variation, when the horizon is
moved infinitesimally, is equivalent to the change of entropy dS due to the vir- 15
tual work. The variational principle is equivalent to the thermodynamic identity
TdS = dE + p dV due to the variation of the matter terms in the right-hand side. 17
A bulk and boundary stress energy tensors are required to capture the Hawking
thermal radiation flux seen by an asymptotic observer at infinity as the black hole 19
evaporates.
With these modern developments at hand one may proceed to find “black-hole” 21
type solutions of the Einstein field equations for a (2 + 2)-dimensional “space–
time.” In Sec. 2 we present static hyperbolic solutions in a (2 + 2)-dimensional 23
“space–time” and describe its differences with the corresponding solution in 3 + 1
dimensions. In Secs. 3 and 4, we present the straightforward computations of the 25
static circular symmetric solutions of Einstein field equations in 2 + 2 dimensions.
Finally, in Sec. 5 we show how the 1 + 1 Bars–Witten stringy black-hole solution 27
can be embedded into the (3 +1)-dimensional solution of the appendix and discuss
the “stringy” nature behind a point-mass. Black holes in a (2 + 2)-dimensional 29
“space–time” from the perspective of complex gravity in 1 +1 complex dimensions
and its quaternionic and octonionic gravity extensions deserve furher investigation. 31
In the appendix we construct Schwarzschild-like solutions in dimensions D ≥ 4.
2. Static Hyperbolic Symmetric Solution in 2 + 2 Dimensions 33
Consider the vacuum static spherically symmetric solutions of Einstein field equa-
tions in a space–time of (3 + 1)-signature
R
µν
= 0 (2.1)
of the form
ds
2
= −e
µ(r)
(dt
1
)
2
+e
α(r)
dr
2
+R
2
(r)dΩ
2
, (2.2)
where
dΩ
2
= dφ
2
+ sin
2
φdθ
2
. (2.3)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 7
The solutions are
ds
2
= −

1 −
α
R

(dt
1
)
2
+
(dR/dr)
2
(1 −α/R)
dr
2
+R
2
(r)dΩ
2
, (2.4)
where α is a parameter that has mass dimensions. Several remarks are now in order
pertaining whether or not a Wick rotation of the metric (2.4) furnishes solutions
to the vacuum field equations for the signature 2 +2. A naive Wick rotation of the
angle coordinate φ →iφ = χ in the above solutions (2.4) yields
sin
2
(φ) →sin
2
(iφ) = −sinh
2
(χ) , dφ
2
→−dχ
2
, (2.5)
and due to the two sign changes in (2.5) one would have a 1 + 3 signature instead 1
of a split 2 + 2 signature.
A Wick rotation of θ → iθ = χ, (dθ)
2
→ −(dχ)
2
yields a 2 + 2 signature but
since the range of the only remaining angle φ is [0, π], instead of [0, 2π], and one
will no longer cover the space completely. Furthermore, since there is a signature
change (a sign change in one of the metric components g
θθ
) the connection and
curvature expressions will be modified accordingly and there is no reason now why
the vacuum field equations should be satisfied. In the next section we will find
explicit solutions in the static circular symmetric case:
ds
2
= −e
˜ µ(R(ρ))
(dt
1
)
2
−e
˜ ν(R(ρ))
(dt
2
)
2
+e
˜ α(R(ρ))
(dR(ρ))
2
+ (R(ρ))
2

2
,
where the rho function R(ρ) is now a function of ρ, the radius of a circle ρ
2
= x
2
+y
2
. 3
In order to construct solutions with topology H
3
× R where H
3
is a three-
dimensional pseudosphere (a hyperboloid) of radius R parametrized by the coordi-
nates ψ, θ, χ as
x = Rcoshχcos θ , y = Rcoshχsinθ ,
t
1
= Rsinh χcos ψ , t
2
= Rsinh χsinψ ,
(2.6)
where −∞ ≤ χ ≤ ∞ and 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π; 0 ≤ ψ ≤ 2π such that the flat space–time
metric in 2 + 2 dimensions is
ds
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+ (dx)
2
+ (dy)
2
= (dR)
2
+R
2
[cosh
2
χ(dθ)
2
−sinh
2
χ(dψ)
2
−(dχ)
2
] . (2.7a)
From Eq. (2.6) we infer that the three-dimensional pseudosphere H
3
is repre-
sented analytically by
−(t
1
)
2
−(t
2
)
2
+x
2
+y
2
= R
2
. (2.7b)
The curved space–time metric we are interested involve the two functions Σ =
Σ(R) and
˜
f =
˜
f(Σ(R)) = f(R) such that
ds
2
= e
˜
f(Σ)
(dΣ)
2
+ Σ
2
[cosh
2
χ(dθ)
2
−sinh
2
χ(dψ)
2
−(dχ)
2
]
= e
f(R)


dR

2
(dR)
2
+ Σ
2
(R)[cosh
2
χ(dθ)
2
−sinh
2
χ(dψ)
2
−(dχ)
2
]
= e
µ(R)
(dR)
2
+ Σ
2
(R)[cosh
2
χ(dθ)
2
−sinh
2
χ(dψ)
2
−(dχ)
2
] , (2.8)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
8 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
where we have defined e
µ(R)
≡ e
f(R)
(dΣ/dR)
2
. The flat space–time metric (2.7) is 1
recovered from (2.8) in the limit R →∞ such that µ(R) →0 and Σ(R) ∼ R.
Another interesting parametrization r ≥ 0, and −∞≤ ξ ≤ ∞; 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π is
t
2
= r sinhξ , x = r coshξ cos θ , y = r coshξ sin θ , (2.9)
where r is the throat size of the two-dimensional hyperboloid H
2
defined in terms
of t
2
, x, y as
−(t
2
)
2
+x
2
+y
2
= r
2
(2.10)
and the flat space–time metric −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+ (dx)
2
+ (dy)
2
can be recast as
ds
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
+ (dr)
2
+r
2
[cosh
2
ξ(dθ)
2
−(dξ)
2
] . (2.11)
Notice that we have a 2+2 signature in Eq. (2.11), as one should, and that there is 3
a difference between the forms of the metric in Eqs. (2.7) and (2.11). The topology
corresponding to Eq. (2.7) is H
3
×R

where H
3
is a three-dimensional hyperboloid 5
(a three-dimensional pseudosphere); whereas, instead, the topology corresponding
to Eq. (2.11) is R×R

×H
2
. 7
R

is the half-interval [0, ∞] representing the values of the radial coordinates.
In Eq. (2.7) the three-dimensional hyperboloid (pseudosphere) of fixed radius R 9
is spanned by the three coordinates θ, ψ, χ as indicated by Eq. (2.6). Whereas
in Eq. (2.11), one temporal variable t
1
is characterized by the real line R and 11
whose values range from −∞, +∞, and the other temporal variable t
2
is one of the
three coordinates (t
2
, x, y) which parametrized the two-dimensional hyperboloid H
2
13
described by Eq. (2.10).
A curved space–time version of Eq. (2.11) is
ds
2
= −e
µ(r)
(dt
1
)
2
+e
ν(r)
(dr)
2
+ (R(r))
2
[cosh
2
ξ(dθ)
2
−(dξ)
2
] . (2.12a)
The metric in Eq. (2.12a) whose signature is 2 + 2 is the hyperbolic version of 15
the Schwarzschild metric. One can replace r → R(r) since Einstein’s equations do
not determine the form of the radial function R(r) as explained in the appendix. 17
The global topology of the solutions depends on the choices of R(r). We still must
determine what are the functional forms of µ(r) and ν(r). In order to go from 19
the solid angle (dΩ)
2
= sin
2
(φ)(dθ)
2
+ (dφ)
2
to cosh
2
ξ(dθ)
2
− (dξ)
2
one must first
perform the change of coordinates φ → π/2 + φ such that sin
2
φ → cos
2
(φ) and 21
then Wick rotate φ →φ = iξ so that cos
2
(φ) →cosh
2
ξ and (dφ)
2
= −(dξ)
2
.
In the appendix we find the solutions to Einstein’s vacuum field equations in D
dimensions for metrics whose signature is (D − 2) + 2 (two times) associated with
a (D − 2)-dimensional homogeneous space of constant positive (negative) scalar
curvature. In particular when D = 4 and the two-dimensional homogeneous space
H
2
has a constant positive scalar curvature, like two-dimensional de Sitter space,
the metric components, in natural units G = = c = 1, are given by
g
t1t1
= −

1 −
βM
R(r)

, g
rr
=
(dR/dr)
2
(1 −βM/R(r))
, β = const (2.12b)
23
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 9
which are almost identical to the components appearing in the Schwarzchild solu- 1
tions for signature 3 + 1. The two-dimensional hyperboloid defined by Eq. (2.10)
coincides with a two-dimensional de Sitter space of constant positive scalar curva- 3
ture. Anti-de Sitter space has a constant negative scalar curvature.
There is a physical singularity at r = 0, the location of the point mass source,
when the hyperboloid H
2
degenerates to a cone since the throat size r has been
pinched to zero. When the radial function is chosen to be R
3
= r
3
+(βM)
3
⇒R(r =
0) = βM then g
rr
(r = 0) = ∞ and g
t1t1
(r = 0) = 0. The proper circumference for
this choice R
3
= r
3
+ (βM)
3
is
C(r, ξ) = 2πR(r) cosh ξ

⇒C(r = 0, ξ) = 2πβM coshξ . (2.13)
The proper area for a given value of r is
A(r) = 2πR
2
(r)

+∞
−∞
coshξ dξ = 2πR
2
(r)2 sinh ξ →∞ (2.14)
and diverges as ξ → ∞ because the two-dimensional hyperboloid is not compact. 5
If one chooses R(r) = r, then R(r = 0) = 0, so the proper circumference is zero
(for finite ξ) and the proper area corresponding to r = 0 is 0 ×∞= ∞ since sinh ξ 7
approaches infinity faster than r
2
approaches zero.
Another parametrization is
t
2
= r coshξ , x = r sinh ξ cos θ , y = r sinh ξ sinθ , (2.15)
where the thoat size r is defined in terms of t
2
, x, y as
−(t
2
)
2
+x
2
+y
2
= −r
2
(2.16)
which can be obtained from Eq. (2.10) by r
2
→ −r
2
. Equation (2.16) represents
analytically the two disconnected branches of a two-dimensional hyperboloid:
ds
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+ (dx)
2
+ (dy)
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dr)
2
+r
2
[sinh
2
ξ(dθ)
2
+ (dξ)
2
] . (2.17)
Notice the sign change −dr
2
in Eq. (2.15) as one must have if one persists in having 9
a 2 + 2 signature. In this case the coordinate r must be interpreted as a “radial
time.” 11
The curved space–time version of (2.17) would be
ds
2
= −e
α(r)
(dt
1
)
2
−e
β(r)
(dr)
2
+ (R(r))
2
[sinh
2
ξ(dθ)
2
+ (dξ)
2
] , (2.18)
where α(r) and β(r) are two functions to be determined by solving Einstein’s equa-
tions. The functional form of α(r), β(r) differs from the functions µ(r), ν(r) in 13
Eqs. (2.12a) and (2.12b) due to a crucial sign change in the g
rr
component of the
metric in Eq. (2.18). 15
Concluding, we have 3 interesting cases described by the metrics of 2 +2 signa-
ture given by Eqs. (2.8), (2.12) and (2.18). The 2 +2 hyperbolic-symmetric version 17
of Schwarzschild’s 3 + 1 solution is given by Eqs. (2.12a) and (2.12b).
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
10 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
3. Static Circular Symmetric Solution in 2 + 2 Dimensions 1
Let us look for a solution of the field equations of the form
ds
2
= −e
˜ µ(R)
(dt
1
)
2
−e
˜ ν(R)
(dt
2
)
2
+e
˜ α(R)
dR
2
+R
2

2
= −e
µ(ρ)
(dt
1
)
2
−e
ν(ρ)
(dt
2
)
2
+e
α(ρ)

2
+R
2
(ρ)dθ
2
, (3.1a)
where
˜ µ(R(ρ)) = µ(ρ) , ˜ ν(R(ρ)) = ν(ρ) , e
˜ α(R(ρ))

dR

2
= e
α(ρ)
. (3.1b)
The only nonvanishing Christoffel symbols are
Γ
1
31
=
1
2
µ

, Γ
2
32
=
1
2
ν

, Γ
4
34
=
R
R

, Γ
3
11
=
1
2
µ

e
µ−α
,
Γ
3
22
=
1
2
ν

e
ν−α
, Γ
3
44
= −e
−α
RR

, Γ
3
33
=
1
2
α

,
(3.2)
and the only nonvanishing Riemann tensor are
R
1
212
=
1
4
µ

ν

e
ν−α
, R
1
414
= −
1
2
µ

e
−α
RR

,
R
2
121
=
1
4
µ

ν

e
µ−α
, R
2
424
= −
1
2
ν

e
−α
RR

,
R
4
141
=
1
2
µ

e
µ−α
R

R
, R
4
242
=
1
2
ν

e
ν−α
R

R
,
R
1
313
= −
1
2
µ


1
4
µ
2
+
1
4
α

µ

, R
2
323
= −
1
2
ν


1
4
ν
2
+
1
4
α

ν

,
R
4
343
= −
R

R
+
1
2
α

R

R
, R
3
131
= e
µ−α

1
2
µ

+
1
4
µ
2

1
4
α

µ

,
R
3
232
= e
ν−α

1
2
ν

+
1
4
ν
2

1
4
α

ν

, R
3
434
= e
−α
R

1
2
α

R

−R

.
(3.3)
The field equations are
R
11
= e
µ−α

1
2
µ

+
1
4
µ
2
+
1
4
µ

ν


1
4
α

µ

+
1
2
µ

R

R

= 0 , (3.4)
R
22
= e
ν−α

1
2
ν

+
1
4
ν
2
+
1
4
µ

ν


1
4
α

ν

+
1
2
ν

R

R

= 0 , (3.5)
R
33
= −
1
2
µ


1
4
µ
2
+
1
4
µ

α


1
2
ν


1
4
ν
2
+
1
4
α

ν

+
1
2
α

R

R

R

R
= 0 , (3.6)
and
R
44
= e
−α
R


1
2
µ

R


1
2
ν

R

+
1
2
α

R

−R

= 0 . (3.7)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 11
From (3.7) we get
α

= µ

+
2R

R

. (3.8)
Substituting (3.8) into (3.4) and (3.5) we obtain
µ

µ

=

R

R


R

R

(3.9)
and
ν

ν

=

R

R


R

R

, (3.10)
respectively. Equations (3.9) and (3.10) can be integrated to give
µ

= a
R

R
(3.11)
and
ν

= b
R

R
, (3.12)
respectively, where a and b are constants. Substituting (3.11) and (3.12) into (3.8)
leads to
α

= a
R

R
+b
R

R
+
2R

R

. (3.13)
The expressions (3.11)–(3.13) can be solved. We get
µ = a ln R/c , (3.14)
ν = b ln R/d (3.15)
and
α = a ln R/c +b ln R/d + 2 lnR

+f , (3.16)
where c, d and f are arbitrary constants. If we substitute (3.14)–(3.16) into (3.6)
we find

1
2
a

R

R

R
2
R
2


1
4
a
2
R
2
R
2
+
1
4

a
R

R

a
R

R
+b
R

R
+
2R

R


1
2
b

R

R

R
2
R
2


1
4
b
2
R
2
R
2
+
1
4

b
R

R

a
R

R
+ b
R

R
+
2R

R

+
1
2

a
R

R
+b
R

R
+
2R

R

R

R

R

R
= 0 . (3.17)
This can be reduced to

a +
1
2
ab +b

R
2
R
2
= 0 . (3.18)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
12 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
Excluding the solutions
R = const (3.19)
Eq. (3.18) gives
a +
1
2
ab +b = 0 . (3.20)
Therefore we have shown why the form of R = R(ρ) can be completely arbitrary
while one must have the following constraint among the constants:
b = −
2a
(a + 2)
, (3.21)
where we assumed that a + 2 = 0. 1
A trivial solution of Eq. (3.20) is a = b = 0 which leads to µ = ν = 0 and
α = 2 ln(dR/dρ), when f = 0, yielding the metric
ds
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+dR(ρ)
2
+R
2
(ρ)dθ
2
, (3.22)
the flat space–time metric is attained when R(ρ) = ρ, and also for any function
R(ρ) with the asymptotic property such that for very large values of ρ it behaves 3
R ∼ ρ.
4. An Explicit Nontrivial Solution 5
We have seen that the trivial flat space–time solutions (3.22) are obtained when
a = b = f = 0 and when R(ρ) = ρ. In order to find interesting nontrivial solutions
we should have a nontrivial rho function R(ρ) = ρ. Let us consider two particular
cases of (3.21). In the first case taking a = 2 from Eq. (3.21) we get b = −1.
Similarly, in the second case by setting a = −1 in Eq. (3.21) implies b = 2. Thus in
the first case (3.14)–(3.16) become
µ = 2 lnR/c , (4.1)
ν = −lnR/d (4.2)
and
α = 2 lnR/c −ln R/d + 2 lnR

+f . (4.3)
While in the second case we find
µ = −ln R/c , (4.4)
ν = 2 lnR/d (4.5)
and
α = −lnR/c + 2 lnR/d + 2 ln R

+f . (4.6)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 13
An interesting possibility arises by setting c = d = M and f = 0. In the first case we
get that the metric in 2+2 dimensions ends up being expressed in the R-variable as
ds
2
= −

R
M
)
2
(dt
1
)
2

M
R

(dt
2
)
2
+

R
M

(dR)
2
+R
2
(dθ)
2
, (4.7)
while in the second case we obtain
ds
2
= −

M
R

(dt
1
)
2

R
M

2
(dt
2
)
2
+

R
M

(dR)
2
+R
2
(dθ)
2
. (4.8)
Notice that in both solutions (4.7) and (4.8) there is a kind of duality in the two 1
times t
1
and t
2
factors.
Equations (4.7) and (4.8) can be written as
ds
2
= −

R
M

(dt
2
)
2
+

R
M

(dR)
2
+R
2
¸
(dθ)
2
−(dt
1
)
2
M
2

, (4.9a)
ds
2
= −

R
M

(dt
1
)
2
+

R
M

(dR)
2
+R
2
¸
(dθ)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
M
2

. (4.9b)
As announced earlier, the form of the rho function R(ρ) is undetermined. Any 3
arbitrary choice of R(ρ) solves Einstein’s equations.
A study reveals that a rho function R(ρ) given by
1
R
=
1
ρ
+
1
M
, (4.10)
in units of G = = c = 1 is an appropriate choice. When ρ = 0, R = 0 and when
ρ = ∞we have R(ρ = ∞) = M, so we do recover an asymptotically flat space–time
metric at spatial ρ = ∞ given by
ds
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+ (dR)
2
+R
2
(dθ)
2
= −(dt
1
)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
+M
2
(dθ)
2
. (4.11)
Asymptotic infinity is defined by the condition R(ρ = ∞) = M. It is the three- 5
dimensional asymptotic boundary of the (2+2)-space–time. It is a three-dimensional
manifold of topology S
1
×R
2
. The radius of S
1
is R = M. When ρ = 0 we have in 7
Eq. (4.7) that R(ρ = 0) = 0, so the metric component g
22
(ρ = 0) = ∞ and there is
a metric singularity at ρ = 0 as expected. Conversely, in Eq. (4.8) the singularity 9
occurs in the component g
11
(ρ = 0) = ∞, instead.
5. Stringy 1 + 1 Black Holes Embedded in 3 + 1 and 11
2 + 2 Dimensions
One of the main topics of the present work has been to link the 2+2 signature with 13
the black hole concept, i.e. space–times with singularities. We have shown that there
are many different interesting ways to do this. In Sec. 2 we presented three very 15
diferent cases associated with hyperboloids. In particular, in the static hyperbolic-
symmetric version of the Schwarschild case given by Eqs. (2.12a) and (2.12b), there 17
is singularity at r = 0 which is associated with the conical geometry resulting from
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
14 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
having pinched to zero size r = 0 the throat of the hyperboloid H
2
and which 1
is quite different from the spherically symmetric case in 3 + 1 dimensions. In the
static circular symmetric case developed in Secs. 3 and 4 we obtained solutions with 3
singularties at ρ = 0 and whose asymptotic ρ → ∞ limit leads to a flat (1 + 2)-
dimensional boundary of topology S
1
×R
2
where the radius of S
1
is R(ρ = ∞) = M. 5
One further interesting possibility may arise if we split the 2 + 2 metric as the
diagonal sum of two 1 + 1 metrics in the form
ds
2
= g
ab
(x)dx
a
dx
b
+g
mn
(y)dy
m
dy
n
, a, b = 1, 2 , m, n = 3, 4 . (5.1)
In this case one may look for solutions like
ds
2
=
du dv
1 −uv
+
dwdz
1 −wz
, (5.2)
where we have set the value of the mass parameter 2M = 1. Such mass parameter is
required on physical grounds and also because the denominators in Eq. (5.2) must 7
be dimensionless.
The metric of Eq. (5.2) can be understood as the diagonal sum of two 1 + 1
black holes solutions
95–97
and whose singularities are located at uv = 1 and wz = 1
respectively. There are two horizons. The region outside the first horizon is indicated
by u ≥ 0 ≥ v and v ≥ 0 ≥ u; and the region inside the first horizon is indicated
by 1 ≥ uv ≥ 0 and u, v ≥ 0. Similar considerations apply to the second horizon by
exchanging u ↔w and v ↔z. The lightcone coordinates are defined by
u =
1
2
exp[x +t
1
+ log(1 −e
−2x
)] = X +T
1
,
v = −
1
2
exp[x −t
1
+ log(1 −e
−2x
)] = X −T
1
,
(5.3a)
w =
1
2
exp[y +t
2
+ log(1 −e
−2y
)] = Y +T
2
,
z = −
1
2
exp[y −t
2
+ log(1 −e
−2y
)] = Y −T
2
.
(5.3b)
Conformally flat solutions of the form
ds
2
= e
Υ(x,y,t1,t2)
[(dx)
2
−(dt
1
)
2
+ (dy)
2
−(dt
2
)
2
] , (5.4)
where Υ(x, y, t
1
, t
2
) has a similar singularity structure as the metric in Eq. (5.2) 9
are worth exploring also.
The Bars–Witten black hole (1 + 1)-dimensional metric (setting 2M = 1) is
ds
2
= (dr)
2
−tanh
2
(r)(dt)
2
= −
du dv
1 −uv
(5.5)
with
u =
1
2
exp[r +t + log(1 −e
−2r
)] ,
v = −
1
2
exp[r −t + log(1 −e
−2r
)] .
(5.6)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 15
The Euclidean analytical continuation of the metric in Eq. (5.5) is obtained by 1
setting θ = it, such that the metric is ds
2
= dr
2
+ tanh
2
r dθ
2
and its Euclidean
geometry has the shape of a semiinfinite cigar that asymptotically approaches R
1
× 3
S
1
for r → ∞. We should notice that the Lorentzian metric of Eq. (5.5) has a
singularity at a complex value r = 0 + iπ/2 (setting 2M = 1) since tanh
2
(iπ/2) = 5
−tan
2
(π/2) = −∞ which is consistent with the singularities at the location where
uv = −
1
4
e
2r
(1−e
−2r
)
2
= 1, when r = 0+iπ/2, and a horizon at r = 0, since uv = 0 7
when r = 0.
However this is not the end of the story. The Bars–Witten black hole in (1+1)-
dimensional is obtained from a gauged Sl(2, R)/U(1) WZNW model with central
charge c = 2+6/k and is a consistent bosonic string background solution in a 1+1
target background given by the two-dimensional coset Sl(2, R)/U(1). Namely, the
CFT corresponding to the gauged Sl(2, R)/U(1) WZNW model with central charge
c = 2 + 6/k is a solution of equations derived from the vanishing beta functions
required by conformal invariance of the nonlinear sigma model. For example, the
relevant massless bosonic closed-string fields in a (D = 26)-dimensional target back-
ground (a different CFT) are the antisymmetric tensor B
µν
(X
ρ

a
)); the dilaton
Φ(X
ρ

a
)) and the gravitational field g
µν
(X
ρ

a
))); where σ
a
= σ
1
, σ
2
are the
worldsheet variables. The conditions for the vanishing of the one loop beta func-
tions, required by Weyl invariance of the nonlinear sigma model, to leading order
in the string tension α

turn out to be
99
R
µν
+
1
4
H
λρ
µ
H
νλρ
−2D
µ
D
ν
Φ = 0 , (5.7a)
D
λ
H
λ
µν
−2(D
λ
Φ)H
λ
µν
= 0 , (5.7b)
4(D
µ
Φ)
2
−4D
µ
D
µ
Φ +R+
1
12
H
µνρ
H
µνρ
= 0 , (5.7c)
where
H
µνρ
= ∂
µ
B
νρ
+∂
ρ
B
µν
+∂
ν
B
ρµ
, (5.7d)
is the third rank antisymmetric tensor field strength that is invariant under the 9
transformations δB
µν
= ∂
µ
Λ
ν
− ∂
ν
Λ
µ
. For details of quantum nonlinear sigma
models, conformal field theory, supersymmetry, black holes and strings we refer to 11
the monograph by Ketov.
98
The only consistent (2+2)-dimensional gravitational backgrounds on which N = 13
2 strings
7,8
(strings with worldsheet supersymmetry) can propagate are those that
are self-dual and which solve the Plebanski heavenly equations in 2+2 dimensions. 15
Self dual gravitational backgrounds in four dimensions are Ricci flat whose metric
is given in terms of a Kahler potential. However, the metric in Eq. (5.2) is not 17
Ricci flat since the (1 + 1)-dimensional black hole metric is not Ricci flat. Such
metric in Eq. (5.5) is not a solution of the vacuum Einstein field equations, it is 19
a solution of Eqs. (5.7) (without Kalb–Ramond fields B
µν
) where the role of the
dilaton Φ = ln(1 −uv) is essential. 21
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
16 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
Nevertheless, we will show how the Bars–Witten (1 +1)-dimensional black hole
metric can be embedded into the (3 +1)-dimensional solutions of the appendix, up
to a conformal factor e
Υ
, since the latter metrics were Ricci flat by construction.
The embedding of the (1+1)-dimensional metric (5.5) into the conformally rescaled
(3+1)-dimensional solutions of the appendix are obtained by introducing the mass
parameter 2M (in units of G = c = 1) in the appropriate places in order to have
consistent units, and by writing
e
Υ(r)

1 −
2M
R(r)

= tanh
2

r
2M

, e
Υ(r)
(dR/dr)
2
1 −2M/R(r)
= 1 , (5.8)
leading to the solutions for Υ(r) and R(r) respectively
e
Υ
=
1
1 −2M/R(r)
tanh
2

r
2M

, (5.9a)
where

dR
1 −2M/R
= R + 2M ln

R −2M
2M

=

dr
tanh r/2M
= 2M ln
¸
sinh
r
2M

. (5.9b)
This last equation (5.9b) yields the functional form R(r) (tortoise radial variable)
in implicit form for the radial function R(r). From Eq. (5.9b) one can infer that
R(r = 0) = 2M , R(r →∞) →R ∼ r . (5.10)
The radial function R has a lower (ultraviolet cutoff) bound given by 2M. The fact 1
that the “point” r = 0 can have a nonzero proper area but zero volume seems to
indicate a “stringy” nature underlying the very notion of a point-mass itself. The 3
string worldsheet has area but no volume. Aspinwall
27,28
has studied how a string
(an extended object) can probe space–time “points.” 5
Notice that if we allow for complex values of r, like r = 0 + i2M(π/2), that
furnish singularities in the metric (5.5), one must include a constant of integration
R
0
= 2M(1 +iπ/2) to the solution in Eq. (5.9b):
R −2M

1 +

2

+ 2M ln

R −2M
2M

= 2M ln
¸
sinh
r
2M

(5.11)
such that when one plugs in the value r = 0 + i2M(π/2) in the right-hand side of
Eq. (5.11), it coincides with the left-hand side of (5.11) when the value of the radial 7
function R(r = 0 + i2Mπ/2) = 2M(1 + iπ/2), after an analytical continuation
into the complex plane is performed. This is just a consequence of the relation 9
ln[sinh(iπ/2)] = ln[i sin(π/2)] = ln i = iπ/2.
This complex analytical continuation into regions where r, R are complex-valued 11
roughly speaking amounts to looking into the “interior” of the point-mass. Having
complex coordinates to probe into the “interior” of a point-mass is not so farfetched. 13
This suggests that quantum space–time might be intrinsically fractal , meaning that
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 17
the Hausdorff topological dimension of an object (let us say of a point) does not 1
coincide with the fractal dimension. For a throrough and profound treatment of
complex dimensions, fractal strings and the zeros of Riemman zeta function see 3
Ref. 100. The interplay among nonextensive statistics, chaos, complex dimensions,
logarithmic periodicity in the renormalization group and fractal strings see Ref. 101. 5
The conformal factor is
e
Υ
=
1
1 −2M/R(r)
tanh
2

r
2M

, (5.12)
where R(r) is given implicitly by (5.10). Notice that from the conditions in (5.10)
the conformal factor e
Υ
becomes unity at r = ∞ as it should if one wishes to
have asymptotic flatness. When r = 0 the conformal factor (5.12) is
0
0
undefined.
A careful study reveals that the conformal factor e
Υ
at r = 0 is zero so that
e
Υ(r=0)
R
2
(r = 0) = 0 and the conformally rescaled proper area at r = 0 is zero.
Therefore, at r = 0 the conformally rescaled interval ds
2
is zero consistent with the
fact that the (1+1)-dimensional metric exhibits a null horizon at r = 0. Concluding,
in this fashion, we have shown how one can embed the (1 + 1)-dimensional Bars–
Witten stringy black hole solution into the conformally rescaled (3+1)-dimensional
solutions of section of the appendix and are given by
ds
2
= −tanh
2

r
2M

(dt)
2
+ (dr)
2
+e
Υ(r)
R
2
(r)dΩ
2
. (5.13)
Notice that the conformally rescaled metric (5.13) is not Ricci flat; it has singulari-
ties at complex values r = 0 +i2Mπ/2 ⇒e
Υ
= ∞; R = 2M(1 +iπ/2) upon using
Eq. (5.11). There is a difference between the metric (5.13) with the Ricci flat metric
(outside the singularity at the point mass source) given in the Fronsdal–Kruskal–
Szekeres coordinates by
ds
2
= −e
W(u,v)
du dv
1 −uv
+ (R

(u, v))
2
[sin
2
φ(dθ)
2
+ (dφ)
2
]
= −e
W(u,v)
du dv
1 −uv
+ (R

(u, v))
2
dΩ
2
, (5.14)
where W(u, v) and R

(u, v) are now two complicated functions of the two variables
u, v (since when one crosses the horizon the metric is no longer static). Whereas 7
in Eq. (5.13) one truly has a static metric everywhere and two functions of one
variable Υ(r), R(r) instead. 9
Before ending this work we will just add some remarks pertaining complex
gravity in 1 + 1 complex dimensions and its relation to ordinary gravity in 2 + 2 11
real dimensions. The properties of geometrical objects in the tangent space (at each
point of a curved space–time) associated to the complex, quaternionic and octo- 13
nionic algebra permits the construction of Einstein’s complexified, quaternionic and
octonionic gravity. In particular, gravity in 2 + 2 real dimensional can be studied 15
from the point of view of complex gravity in 1 + 1 complex dimensions. gravity in
4+4 real dimensional can be studied from the point of view of quaternionic gravity 17
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
18 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
in 1 +1 quaternionic dimensions, and gravity in 8 +8 real dimensional can be seen 1
as octonionic gravity in 1 + 1 octonionic dimensions.
102,103
To illustrate this, let us write the following complex line element in four complex-
dimensions:
ds
2
=
dz
1
dz
1
+d˜ z
1
d˜ z
1
1 −z
1
z
1
− ˜ z
1
˜ z
1
+
dz
2
dz
2
+d˜ z
2
d˜ z
2
1 −z
2
z
2
− ˜ z
2
˜ z
2
. (5.15)
Complex gravity requires that g
µν
= g
(µν)
+ ig
[µν]
so that now one has g
νµ
=
(g
µν
)

,
102–104
which implies that the diagonal components of the metric g
z1z1
=
g
z2z2
= g
˜ z1˜ z1
= g
˜ z2˜ z2
must be real, and which in turn implies that a real slice of
the 4-complex dimensional space spanned by the four complex variables z
1
, z
2
, ˜ z
1
,
˜ z
2
may be taken by imposing the following two constraints:
˜ z
1
= z

1
, ˜ z
2
= z

2
(5.16)
and upon doing so one ends up with a four real -dimensional space of signature 2+2
whose real line element is
ds
2
=
dz
1
dz
1
+dz

1
dz

1
1 −z
1
z
1
−z

1
z

1
+
dz
2
dz
2
+dz

2
dz

2
1 −z
2
z
2
−z

2
z

2
, (5.17)
where z
1
, z
2
are the complex coordinates of the 1 + 1 complex dimensional space–
time (2+2 real dimensional) while z

1
, z

2
are their complex conjugates, respectively.
After defining
z
1
=
1

2
(X +iT
1
) , z

1
=
1

2
(X −iT
1
) ,
z
2
=
1

2
(Y +iT
2
) , z

2
=
1

2
(Y − iT
2
) ,
(5.18)
the metric in Eq. (5.14) coincides precisely with the metric in Eq. (5.2) comprised of 3
the diagonal sum of two black hole solutions in 1 + 1 real dimensions. The quater-
nionic and octonionic versions of Eq. (5.16), in conjunction with the generalized 5
Einstein’s field equations, will be the subject of future investigations. The quater-
nionic analog of two-dimensional conformal field theory in four dimensions has been 7
studied by S. Vongehr.
105
It is interesting to see (if possible) how one can construct
four-dimensional quantum nonlinear sigma models within the context of quantum 3- 9
branes (conformal field theories in the four-dimensional worldvolume of the 3-brane)
and find the analog of the coupled equations (5.7) associated with the vanishing of 11
the beta functions in two-dimensional CFT; namely from the perspective of a four-
dimensional quaternionic conformally invariant field theory formulated on Kulkarni 13
four-folds (the four-dimensional analog of Riemann surfaces) corresponding to 3-
branes moving in curved target space–time backgrounds. The cancellation of the 15
four-dimensional conformal anomaly should constrain the type of backgrounds on
which 3-branes can propagate. 17
It is worth mentioning that black hole solutions in a two times context have
been considered by some authors. In particular Kocinski and Wierzbicki
107
con- 19
sidered Schwarzschild type solution in a Kaluza–Klein theory with two times. In
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 19
fact, using noncompactified Kaluza–Klein theory with internal signature of the 1
form 2 + 3 these authors determine a spherical symmetric solution. Vongehr
108
also considered examples of black holes within the context of the two-times physics 3
formulation of Bars (see Ref. 106 and references therein). Their basic examples
coreponds essentially to a solutions associated with the signatures 1 +1 and 2 +3. 5
Finally, the four-dimensional Kaluza–Klein approach to general relativity in
2 + 2 as a local product of a (1 + 1)-dimensional base manifold and a (1 + 1)- 7
dimensional fiber space
109,110
warrants further investigation in so far that 2 + 2
gravity can be described by a (1 + 1)-dimensional Yang–Mills gauge theory of dif- 9
feormorphims of the two-dimensional fiber space coupled to a (1 + 1)-dimensional
nonlinear sigma model and a scalar field; i.e. this formulation of 2 + 2 gravity 11
by
109,110
is more closely related to the stringy picture of the Bars–Witten black
hole in 1 + 1-dimensions. Thus, it seems interesting to pursue further research to 13
see the possible connection between the present work and these other approaches.
For example, to study black holes solutions in noncommutative geometry,
73
in par- 15
ticular Finsler spaces,
67–71,79,80
phase spaces
74–78,81,82
and the implications of the
minimal Planck scale
41
stringy uncertainty relations
83,84
in black holes physics.
86–89
17
Appendix A. Schwarzschild-like Solutions in Any Dimension D > 3
Let us start with the line element
ds
2
= −e
µ(r)
(dt
1
)
2
+e
ν(r)
(dr)
2
+R
2
(r)˜ g
ij

i
dξ . (A.1)
Here, the metric ˜ g
ij
corresponds to a homogeneous space and i, j = 3, 4, . . . , D−2.
The only nonvanishing Christoffel symbols are
Γ
1
21
=
1
2
µ

, Γ
2
22
=
1
2
ν

, Γ
2
11
=
1
2
µ

e
µ−ν
,
Γ
2
ij
= −e
−ν
RR

˜ g
ij
, Γ
i
2j
=
R

R
δ
i
j
, Γ
i
jk
=
˜
Γ
i
jk
,
(A.2)
and the only nonvanishing Riemann tensor are
R
1
212
= −
1
2
µ


1
4
µ
2
+
1
4
ν

µ

,
R
1
i1j
= −
1
2
µ

e
−ν
RR

˜ g
ij
,
R
2
121
= e
µ−ν

1
2
µ

+
1
4
µ
2

1
4
ν

µ

,
R
2
i2j
= e
−ν

1
2
ν

RR

−RR

˜ g
ij
,
R
i
jkl
=
˜
R
i
jkl
−R
2
e
−ν

δ
i
k
˜ g
jl
−δ
i
l
˜ g
jk

.
(A.3)
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
20 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
The field equations are
R
11
= e
µ−ν

1
2
µ

+
1
4
µ
2

1
4
µ

ν

+
(D −2)
2
µ

R

R

= 0 , (A.4)
R
22
= −
1
2
µ


1
4
µ
2
+
1
4
µ

ν

+ (D −2)

1
2
ν

R

R

R

R

= 0 , (A.5)
and
R
ij
=
e
−ν
R
2

1
2

−µ

)RR

−RR

−(D−3)R
2

˜ g
ij
+
k
R
2
(D −3)˜ g
ij
= 0 , (A.6)
where k = ±1, depending if ˜ g
ij
refers to positive or negative curvature. From the
combination e
−µ+ν
R
11
+R
22
= 0 we get
µ

=
2R

R

. (A.7)
The solution of this equation is
µ +ν = ln R
2
+a , (A.8)
where a is a constant. 1
Substituting (A.7) into Eq. (A.6) we find
e
−ν

RR

−2RR

−(D −3)R
2
= −k(D−3) (A.9)
or
γ

RR

+ 2γRR

+ (D −3)γR
2
= k(D −3) , (A.10)
where
γ = e
−ν
. (A.11)
The solution of (A.10) for an ordinary D-dimensional space–time (one temporal
dimension) corresponding to a (D − 2)-dimensional sphere for the homogeneous
space can be written as
γ =

1 −
16πG
D
M
(D−2)Ω
D−2
R
D−3

dR
dr

−2
⇒ g
rr
= e
ν
=

1 −
16πG
D
M
(D −2)Ω
D−2
R
D−3

−1

dR
dr

2
, (A.12)
where Ω
D−2
is the appropriate solid angle in (D − 2)-dimensional and G
D
is the
D-dimensional gravitational constant whose units are (length)
D−2
. Thus G
D
M 3
has units of (length)
D−3
as it should. When D = 4 as a result that the two-
dimensional solid angle is Ω
2
= 4π one recovers from Eq. (A.12) the four- 5
dimensional Schwarzchild solution. The solution in Eq. (A.12) is consistent with
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 21
Gauss law and Poisson’s equation in D − 1 spatial dimensions obtained in the 1
Newtonian limit.
For the most general case of the (D − 2)-dimensional homogeneous space we
should write
−ν = ln(k −
β
D
G
D
M
R
D−3
) −2 lnR

, (A.13)
where β
D
is a constant. Thus, according to (A.8) we get
µ = ln

k −
β
D
G
D
M
R
D−3

+ const (A.14)
we can set the constant to zero, and this means the line element (A.1) can be
written as
ds
2
= −

k −
β
D
G
D
M
R
D−3

(dt
1
)
2
+
(dR/dr)
2

k −
βDGDM
R
D−3
(dr)
2
+R
2
(r)˜ g
ij

i
dξ . (A.15)
One can verify, taking for instance (A.5), that Eqs. (A.4)–(A.6) do not determine 3
the form R(r). It is also interesting to observe that the only effect of the homo-
geneous metric ˜ g
ij
is reflected in the k = ±1 parameter, associated with a positive 5
(negative) constant scalar curvature of the homogeneous (D−2)-dimensional space.
Acknowledgments 7
We wish to thank the referee for his numerous and critical suggestions to improve
this work. J. A. Nieto thanks L. Ruiz, J. Silvas and C. M. Yee for helpful comments. 9
This work was partially supported by grants PIFI 3.2. C. Castro thanks M. Bowers
for hospitality and Sergiu Vacaru for many discussions about Finsler geometry and 11
related topics.
References 13
1. M. F. Atiyah and R. S. Ward, Commun. Math. Phys. 55, 117 (1977).
2. R. S. Ward, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 315, 451 (1985). 15
3. M. A. De Andrade, O. M. Del Cima and L. P. Colatto, Phys. Lett. B 370, 59 (1996),
hep-th/9506146. 17
4. M. A. De Andrade and O. M. Del Cima, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 11, 1367 (1996).
5. M. Carvalho and M. W. de Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D 55, 7574 (1997), hep-th/9612074. 19
6. H. Garcia-Compean, N = 2 string geometry and the heavenly equations, in Proc.
Conf. on Topics in Mathematical Physics, General Relativity and Cosmology in 21
Honor of Jerzy Plebanski, Mexico City, Mexico, 17–20 Sept. 2002, eds. H. Garc´ıa-
Compe´ an et al. (World Scientific, 2006), hep-th/0405197. 23
7. H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B 367, 83 (1991).
8. H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B 361, 469 (1991). 25
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
22 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
9. D. Kutasov, E. J. Martinec and M. O’Loughlin, Nucl. Phys. B 477, 675 (1996), 1
hep-th/9603116.
10. J. Martinec, Matrix theory and N = (2, 1) strings, hep-th/9706194. 3
11. D. Kutasov and E. J. Martinec, Nucl. Phys. B 477, 652 (1996), hep-th/9602049.
12. D. Kutasov and E. J. Martinec, Class. Quantum Grav. 14, 2483 (1997), hep- 5
th/9612102.
13. P. G. O. Freund, Introduction to Supersymmetry (Cambridge University Press, 1986). 7
14. S. V. Ketov, H. Nishino and S. J. Gates, Phys. Lett. B 307, 323 (1993), hep-
th/9203081. 9
15. J. A. Nieto, M. P. Ryan, O. Velarde and C. M. Yee, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 19, 2131
(2004), hep-th/0401145. 11
16. J. A. Nieto, Nuovo Cimento B 120, 135 (2005), hep-th/0410003.
17. M. B. Green, Nucl. Phys. B 293, 593 (1987). 13
18. P. K. Townsend, Phys. Lett. B 373, 68 (1996), hep-th/9512062.
19. J. A. Nieto, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 10, 3087 (1995), gr-qc/9508006. 15
20. J. A. Nieto, From the Quatl to the Ketzal of a generalized string theory, prepared
for 5th Mexican Workshop on Particles and Fields, Puebla, Mexico, 30 October–3 17
November 1995, published in Particles and Fields and Phenomenology of Fundamen-
tal Interactions, Puebla, 1995, 525-528.M. 19
21. J. Duff, Phys. Lett. B 641, 335 (2006), hep-th/0602160.
22. J. A. Nieto, The 2 + 2 signature and the 1 + 1 matrix-brane, hep-th/0606219. 21
23. C. Castro, J. Math. Phys. 35, 920 (1994).
24. C. Castro, J. Math. Phys. 35, 3013 (1994). 23
25. C. Castro, Phys. Lett. B 288, 291 (1992).
26. C. Castro, J. Math. Phys. 34, 681 (1993). 25
27. P. S. Aspinwall, J. High Enegy Phys. 0407, 021 (2004), hep-th/0312188.
28. P. S. Aspinwall, J. High Energy Phys. 0301, 002 (2003), hep-th/0203111. 27
29. L. Abrams, Can. J. Phys. 67, 919 (1989).
30. L. Abrams, Phys. Rev. D 20, 2474 (1979). 29
31. L. Abrams, Phys. Rev. D 21, 2438 (1980).
32. L. Abrams, Phys. Rev. D 21, 2941 (1980). 31
33. C. Castro, Phys. Lett. B 626, 209 (2005).
34. C. Castro, Found. Phys. 35, 971 (2005). 33
35. C. Castro, Progr. Phys. 2, 86 (2006).
36. C. Castro, Exact solutions of Einstein’s equations in the presence of delta function 35
point mass source, submitted to Found. Phys.
37. C. Castro, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 17, 2095 (2002). 37
38. C. Castro, On dark energy, Weyl geometry and different derivations of the vacuum
energy density, to appear in Found. Phys., 2007. 39
39. C. Castro, On novel static spherically symmetric solutions of Einstein equations and
the cosmological constant problem, CTSPS preprint, May 2006. 41
40. T. Padmanabhan, Dark energy: Mystery of the millennium, astro-ph/0603114.
41. L. Nottale, Fractal Spacetime and Microphysics: Towards Scale Relativity (World 43
Scientific, Singapore, 1992).
42. P. Fiziev, Gravitational field of massive point particle in general relativity, gr- 45
qc/0306088.
43. P. Fiziev and S. V. Dimitrov, Point electric charge in general relativity, hep- 47
th/0406077.
44. P. Fiziev, The gravitational field of massive non-charged point source in general 49
relativity, gr-qc/0412131.
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
On (2 + 2)-Dimensional Space–Times, Strings and Black Holes 23
45. P. Fiziev, On the solutions of Einstein equations with massive point source, gr- 1
qc/0407088.
46. A. Einstein, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Berlin II, 831 (1915). 3
47. K. Schwarzschild, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Berlin I, 189 (1916) [English transla-
tions: S. Antoci and A. Loinger, physics/9905030]. 5
48. M. Brillouin, J. Phys. Rad. 23, 43 (1923) [English translation: S. Antoci,
physics/0002009]. 7
49. D. Hilbert, Nachr. Ges. Wiss Gottingen Math. Phys. K 1, 53 (1917).
50. H. Weyl, Ann. Physik (Leipzig) 54, 117 (1917). 9
51. J. Droste, Proc. Ned. Akad. West, Ser. A 19, 197 (1917).
52. A. Loinger, On Black Holes and Gravitational Waves (La Goliardica Pavese, 2002), 11
129 pages.
53. A. Loinger and T. Marsico, On the gravitational collapse of a massive star, 13
physics/0512232.
54. S. Crothers, Progr. Phys. 1, 68 (2005). 15
55. S. Crothers, Progr. Phys. 2, 3 (2005).
56. S. Crothers, Progr. Phys. 3, 7 (2005). 17
57. N. Stavroulakis, Progr. Phys. 2, 68 (2006).
58. M. Pavsic, Obzornik za Matematiko in Fiziko 28, 5 (1981) [English translation: Grav- 19
itational field of a point source].
59. M. Ibison, private communication. 21
60. C. Fronsdal, Phys. Rev. 116, 778 (1959).
61. M. Kruskal, Phys. Rev. 119, 1743 (1960). 23
62. G. Szekers, Publ. Mat. Debreca 7, 285 (1960).
63. J. F. Colombeau, New Generalized Functions and Multiplcation of Distributions 25
(North Holland, Amsterdam, 1984).
64. J. F. Colombeau, Elementary Introduction to Generalized Functions (North Holland, 27
Amsterdam, 1985).
65. J. Heinzke and R. Steinbauer, Remarks on the distributional Schwarzschild geometry, 29
gr-qc/0112047.
66. M. Grosser, M. Kunzinger, M. Oberguggenberger and R. Steinbauer, Geometric 31
Theory of Generalized Functions with Applications to Relativity, Kluwer Series on
Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 537 (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2001). 33
67. S. Vacaru, P. Stavrinos, E. Gaburov and D. Gonta, Clifford and Riemann–Finsler
structures in geometric mechanics and gravity, to appear in Book Title (Geometry 35
Balkan Press), 693 pages.
68. S. Vacaru, Phys. Lett. B 498, 74 (2001). 37
69. S. Vacaru, J. Math. Phys. 46, 042503 (2005).
70. S. Vacaru, J. Math. Phys. 46, 032901 (2005). 39
71. S. Vacaru, J. Math. Phys. 47, 093504 (2006).
72. S. Antoci and D. E. Liebscher, Reinstating Schwarzschild’s original manifold and its 41
singularity, gr-qc/0406090.
73. J. Wess, Einstein–Riemann gravity on deformed spaces, hep-th/0611025. 43
74. M. Born, Proc. R. Soc. A 165, 291 (1938).
75. E. Caianiello, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 32, 65 (1981). 45
76. G. Lambiase, G. Papini and G. Scarpetta, Phys. Lett. A 263, 147 (1999).
77. M. Toller, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 29, 963 (1990). 47
78. V. Nesterenko, Class. Quantum Grav. 9, 1101 (1992).
79. H. Brandt, Contemp. Math. 196, 273 (1996). 49
80. H. Brandt, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 10, 267 (199???).
1st Reading
March 9, 2007 10:44 WSPC/139-IJMPA 03619
24 C. Castro & J. A. Nieto
81. C. Castro, Found. Phys. 35, 971 (2005). 1
82. C. Castro, Progr. Phys. 1, 20 (2006).
83. D. Amati, M. Ciafaloni and G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B 197, 81 (1987). 3
84. D. Gross and P. Mende, Phys. Lett. B 197, 129 (1987).
85. C. Castro, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39, 14205 (2006). 5
86. K. Nozari and S. Mehdipour, Failure of standard thermodynamics in Planck scale
black hole system, hep-th/061007. 7
87. L. Colatto, A. Penza and W. Santos, Noncommutative geometry induced by spin
effects, hep-th/0512266. 9
88. F. Nasseri and S. Alavi, Schwarzschild black hole in noncommuttaive spacetime,
hep-th/0508051. 11
89. A. Lewis, Coulomb potential of a point mass in theta noncommutative geometry,
hep-th/0605140. 13
90. A. Bonanno and M. Reuter, Renormalization group improved black hole spacetime,
hep-th/0002196. 15
91. M. Reuter and J. M. Schwindt, A minimal length from cutoff modes in asymptotically
safe quantum gravity, hep-th/0511021. 17
92. M. Reuter and J. M. Schwindt, Scale-dependent structures and causal structures in
quantum Einstein gravity, hep-th/0611294. 19
93. A. Bonanno and M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 73, 0830005 (2006), hep-th/0602159.
94. C. Castro, A. Nieto and J. F. Gonzalez, Running Newtonian coupling and horizonless 21
solutions in Quantum Einstein Gravity, to appear in Quantization in Astrophysics,
Brownian Motion and Supersymmetry, eds. F. Smarandache and V. Christianato 23
(MathTiger Publishers, Chennai, India, 2006).
95. I. Bars, Lecture at Strings 91, Stonybrook, June 1991. 25
96. E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D 44, 314 (1991).
97. E. Witten, On black holes in string theory, Lecture given at Strings 1991 Conf., 27
Stony Brook, New York, Jun 1991, hep-th/9111052.
98. S. Ketov, Quantum Non-Linear Sigma Models, Conformal Field Theory, Supersym- 29
metry, Black Holes and Strings (Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2000).
99. M. Green, J. Schwarz and E. Witten, Superstring Theory (Cambridge University 31
Press, 1986).
100. M. Lapidus and M. Frankenhuysen, Complex Dimensions and the Zeros of the Zeta 33
Functions (Birkhauser, New York, 2000).
101. C. Castro, Physica A 347, 184 (2005). 35
102. S. Marques and C. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D 36, 1716 (1987).
103. K. Borchsenius, Phys. Rev. D 13, 2707 (1976). 37
104. J. Moffat and D. Boal, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1375 (1975).
105. R. Zucchini, J. Geom. Phys. 27, 113 (1998). 39
106. I. Bars, The standard model of particles and forces in the framework of 2T-physics,
hep-th/0606045. 41
107. J. Kocinski and M. Wierzbicki, Rel. Grav. Cosmol. 1, 19 (2004), gr-qc/0110075.
108. S. Vongehr, Examples of black holes in two time physics, hep-th/9907077. 43
109. J. H. Yoon, 4-dimensional Kaluza–Klein approach to general relativty in 2+2 space-
times, gr-qc/9611050. 45
110. J. H. Yoon, Algebraically special class of spacetimes and 1 + 1-dimensional field
theories, hep-th/9211129. 47

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful