Black Hole Entropy

Stefan van der Sterren

6192416
Supervisor Dr. Sebastian de Haro
Amsterdam university College

ABSTRACT
Since Karl Schwarzschild in 1915 discovered that the distance from the center of an object,
where all the mass of the object were compressed within a symmetrically sphere, the escape
speed from the surface would equal the speed of light. This distance is known as the
Schwarzschild radius. Such an object – further called black hole – would be formed from the
collapse of at least 3 solar masses, and would not allow anything to come out of it, not even
light. In the seventies Jacob Bekenstein and Stephen Hawking calculated the entropy of such
a black hole. Hawking also proposed that black holes actually radiate, and eventually
evaporate. In the nineties string theory could also be used to calculate black hole entropy.
The entropy of a black hole is a gauge for the number of arrangements (states or also called
information) of matter that was trapped in the black hole. It turns out that entropy is related to
surface area of the black hole. So, all information can be found on this boundary. Initially a
formula for entropy was established based on parallels between thermodynamics, information
and black holes by Bekenstein. It is therefore that we first visit thermodynamic entropy and
information entropy, followed by some metrics of a Schwarzschild black hole, as it is
important to know how a particle behaves around the event horizon. This event horizon will
also be looked at in some more detail and the penrose energy extraction process will also be
treated. After the basics for thermodynamic, information entropy and black holes are
established the links with black hole entropy will become apparent. These relations will be
used to derive black hole entropy like Bekenstein did, but also via Hawking radiation and in
short via string theory.
Even though several methods to derive black hole entropy have been established, not all
questions surrounding the topic have been answered. For example a black hole can
potentially evaporate till only an elementary particle remains or can reach an immense size,
like the suspected black hole in the center of galaxies, calculations become more cumbersome
in these extreme situations and have raised questions for further research. 2
Contents
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................
............. 3
1. Entropy ............................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 Multiplicity tends to increase ................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Entropy change ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.3 Information entropy ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 Entropy of an information source ................................................................................. 10
1.3.2 Entropy of a tossing event ............................................................................................ 12
1.3.3 Information loss ............................................................................................................ 14
2. Black hole ...................................................................................................................................... 15
2.1 Origination of a black hole .................................................................................................... 15
2.2 Escape velocity ...................................................................................................................... 17
2.3 Black hole size ....................................................................................................................... 17
2.4 Black hole classification ........................................................................................................ 19
2.5 Penrose-Hawking singularity theorem(s).............................................................................. 20
2.6 Schwarzschild solutions ........................................................................................................ 20
2.6.1 Schwarzschild metric..................................................................................................... 20
2.6.2 Other coordinates to enhance/extend the Schwarzschild solution ............................. 23
2.7 Horizons and the Penrose process ........................................................................................ 29
2.7.1 Event horizons ............................................................................................................... 30
2.7.2 Killing horizons .............................................................................................................. 32
2.7.3 Kerr horizons ................................................................................................................. 35
2.7.4 Penrose process ............................................................................................................ 36
3. Entropy of a black hole ................................................................................................................. 43
3.1 Four laws of black holes ........................................................................................................ 43
3.2 Calculating entropy ............................................................................................................... 44
3.3 Hawking radiation ................................................................................................................. 47
3.4 Application of string entropy to black holes ......................................................................... 51
4. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 53
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 55
References ............................................................................................................................................ 55 3
Introduction
Already in 1783 John Michell realized that gravity could be so overwhelming strong that
nothing could escape: not even light. It has been investigated further by Laplace in 1796.
Later many scientists were inspired by this phenomenon, but it took some time before the
existence of a black hole could be proved. In the early 20th century Schwarzschild made much
progress by calculating the gravitational field of stars, using Einstein’s field equation.
Originally black holes were assumed to be the remainder of gravitational collapsed stars and
they were characterized by the fact that you can enter them, but nothing at all comes out of it.
The most important feature of the black hole is therefore the event. The event horizon seems
to demarcate a point of no return. Schwarzschild calculated the radius of the event horizon,
what is today known as the ‘Schwarzschild radius’.
In 1972 Bekenstein noted that there are a number of similarities between black hole physics
and thermodynamics. He was the first to suggest that black holes have a well-defined entropy
– based on the surface area of the black hole – and generalized the second law of
thermodynamics to apply to black holes. In 1974 Hawking proposed the existence of
Hawking radiation and affirmed Bekenstein’s work. The result of this radiation is that it
seems black holes do release information after all. Over the last decades many scientists
entered the subject of black hole entropy to prove, enhance, add, or counter theorems and
postulations. Many arguments were about the event horizon. As entropy is related to this
horizon it is important to learn more about the metrics of the event horizon and the various
ways to calculate to entropy.
This paper will discuss black hole entropy based on a study of the literature. The first section
explains both thermodynamic entropy and information entropy. The second section is about
black holes; the metrics of a Schwarzschild black hole, the event horizon and the 4
Penrose energy extraction process. In the last section we will discuss various ways of
deriving black hole entropy; Bekenstein’s method, via the Hawking radiation and in short via
string theory.

1. Entropy
Everyone will understand that if you separate the atoms a BMW and throw them together in
the air it is highly unlikely that the atoms will fall back such that your car looks brand new.
Perhaps if you would do it over and over again, you would eventually have something like an
automobile, but would it work? There are so many possible ways of assembling the atoms
that nearly all arrangements look like a pile of “something” [1].
The term entropy is often thought about as “disorder”. “Most people would agree that a
shuffled deck of cards is more disorderly than a sorted deck, and indeed, shuffling increases
the entropy because it increases the number of possible arrangements. However, many people
would say that a glass of crushed ice appears more disorderly than a glass of an equal amount
of water. In this case, though, the water has much more entropy, since there are so many
more ways of arranging the molecules, and so many more ways of arranging the larger
amount or energy among them” [2, p75].

1.1 Multiplicity tends to increase

Suppose you have 3 true coins each with a head and tail side. A true coin is defined as when
tossing there is a 50-50 percent chance coming up with head (H) or tail (T). With 3 coins
there are 8 possible outcomes, ‘microstates’: TTT, TTH, THT, THH, HTT, HTH, HHT and
HHH. There are four possible macrostates:

• 3 x H, has 1 microstate (HHH)

• 2 x H, has 3 microstates (THH, HTH, HHT)

• 1 x H, has 3 microstates (TTH, THT, HTT)

• 0 x H, has 1 microstate (TTT)

The number of microstates of a certain macrostate is called multiplicity.

Ω( x )
The chance of being in macrostate 𝑥 is where Ω (x) is the multiplicity of 𝑥. Being in a
Ω(all)
certain macrostate means being in one of the microstates associated with that macrostate.
Often only macrostates can be observed. Thus the more microstates associated with one
macrostate (=multiplicity) the greater the uncertainty there is about being in which
microstate.

Figure 1: gas molecules in a container (no inside membranes or walls)

Suppose the gray area depicts gas molecules in a container. What is the probability of
finding the configuration shown in figure 1? With N gas molecules, out of all the allowed
N
microstates, only 1 in 2 microstates has all the molecules in the left half. Thus, the
-N
probability of this arrangement is 2 [2]. Since multiplicity can be a very large number the
J
[ ]
Boltzmann constant 𝑘 is used. This also gives it units K , which helps it relate to
temperature as a higher temperature generally means a higher entropy. Entropy is denoted
as

S=kln Ω

In words: entropy is the logarithm of the number of ways of arranging things in a system.
Generally the more particles in a system and the more energy it contains, the greater its
multiplicity and thus 𝑆. Other possibilities to increase entropy are for example:

Increasing the space the system is in

• Breaking large particles into smaller ones
• Interaction of substances, which were initially separated (mixing)
In general particles and energy tend to rearrange themselves until the multiplicity is at (or
very near) its maximum value. This seems to be true for any system, provided that it contains
enough particles and units of energy for the statistics of very large numbers to apply. In this
respect the second law of thermodynamics is defined as follows:
“Any large system in equilibrium will be found in the macrostate with the greatest
multiplicity, aside from fluctuations that are normally too small to measure.” [2, p74]
1.2 Entropy change
Entropy change can be calculated as follows, provided the process is quasi static:

Q=Tds

If two different monoatomic ideal gases (A and B), each with the same energy, volume and
number of particles are in a container, separated by a partition, are being mixed by
removing the partition the entropy increases [2].

Figure 2: Two different gases separated by a partition.

When, in figure 2. The partition is removed each gas expands to fill the whole container,
mixing the two gasses and as a result creating entropy. This increase in entropy is called
“entropy of mixing”. The entropy increase of gas A can be calculated as follows:
 Vf
ΔSA = Nk ln =Nk ln 2
Vi

As the entropy of gas B increases by the same amount, the total entropy increase is:

Δ St otal = ΔSA + ΔSB = 2 Nk ln 2

There is only an increase in entropy if the gases are different. If they are the same, the
entropy doesn’t increase when the partition is removed. The term 2𝑁𝑘 ln2 is called ‘the
entropy of mixing’.
The Sackur-Tetrode equation explains the entropy of mixing monatomic ideal gas in more
detail:
3
V 4 πmU 2 5
[
𝑆=𝑁𝑘 ln〈 N ( 3 N h 2 ¿ ¿ + 2 ]

1.3 Information entropy

The word information can mean many things, such as “’I think your information is wrong”,
“For your information ….” or “You can find the information …..” [1]. Suppose a small piece
of paper contains a text of 10 characters and someone’s keyboard holds approximately 100
symbols (including upper and lower case, numbers and punctuation marks), the number of
possibilities to organize the “message” is 10010≈ 270. The piece of paper is said to contain
rounded 70 bits of information, as an information bit is defined as [1]: log 2 2𝑛=𝑛 𝑏𝑖𝑡𝑠
Shannon [3] defined information entropy as a quantity that measures how much information
and at what rate information is produced.

Shannon says further: “Suppose we have a set of possible events whose probabilities of
occurrence are 𝑝1,𝑝2 ,… ,𝑝𝑛. Then all we know about these events is their probability of taking
place, which does not seem much. The question that then occurs is can we find a measure, 𝐻,
indicating how much “choice” there is or how uncertain we are of the outcome?“
Further, if there is such measure 𝐻=(𝑝1,𝑝2,… ,𝑝𝑛) than it follows based on three additional
requirements that 𝐻 should be:.
n
𝐻 = −𝐾 ∑ pi log pi
i=1

𝐾 is a positive constant. These three requirements are the following

1. 𝐻 is to be continuous in the pi . As 𝐿𝑜𝑔 (𝑥) is defined for every possible value pi, where
0 < pi ≤1, this requirement holds
1
2. If all 𝑝𝑖 are equal to pi= , then 𝐻 should be a monotonically increasing function of n.
n

1
As pi= for 𝑖=1,2,…,𝑛 and since 𝑝1= 𝑝2=⋯=𝑝𝑛
n
It follows
 n

∑ pi =n . pi =n . 1n =1
i−1

And so (leaving K out of the equation)

n
𝐻 = − ∑ pi log pi
i−1
This leads to

1
𝐻= − log pi= − log = log 𝑛
n
Thus

log 𝑛 < log (𝑛+1)

From this it follows that this requirement holds as being a monotonically increasing function
means 𝑓(𝑥+1)>𝑓(𝑥), where f is some function.
3. “If a choice be broken down into two successive choices, the original H should be the
weighted sum of the individual values of 𝐻” [3, p10]. The meaning of this will become clear
in the following example.

Figure 3: Decomposition of a choice of 3 possibilities.

1 1 1
The graph on the left hand side shows three possibilities p1= , p = , p = . On the right
2 2 3 3 6
1
hand side we need to choose first between 2 possibilities, each with probability . Following
2
2 1
the lower branch we can make another choice with probabilities , . The final results of the
3 3
two graphs are the same. We thus require that
 𝐻 ( 1 1 1
2 3 6 ) ( )
1 1
2 2
1
2
2 1
, , =𝐻 , + 𝐻 , .
3 3 ( )
1
The coefficient is because this second choice only occurs half of the time.
2
Generalized, this gives (see figure 4):

𝐻(1−𝑥,𝑎𝑥,𝑏𝑥,𝑐𝑥) = 𝐻(1−𝑥,𝑥) + 𝑥 𝐻(𝑎,𝑏,𝑐)

= (1−𝑥)log (1−𝑥) + 𝑎𝑥 log (𝑎𝑥) + 𝑏𝑥 log (𝑏𝑥) + 𝑐𝑥 log(𝑐𝑥) =(1−x) log(1−𝑥)+𝑎𝑥log( 𝑎)
+𝑎𝑥log(𝑥)+𝑏𝑥 log(𝑏)+𝑏𝑥log(𝑥)+𝑐𝑥 log (𝑐)+𝑐𝑥log(𝑥) =(1−x) log (1−𝑥)+𝑥(𝑎log(𝑎)+𝑏log(𝑏)
+𝑐log(𝑐))+(𝑎+𝑏+𝑐) 𝑥 log (𝑥)

Figure 4: Decomposition in more general

As 𝑎+𝑏+𝑐=1 it follows
=(1−x) log (1−𝑥)+𝑥log𝑥+𝑥(𝑎log(𝑎)+𝑏 log (𝑏)+𝑐 log (𝑐))
=𝐻(1−𝑥)+𝐻(𝑥)+𝑥 𝐻(𝑎,𝑏,𝑐)

1.3.1 Entropy of an information source

Some stochastic processes are mathematically known as discrete Markoff processes and will
be briefly discussed next, using two examples by Shannon.

For each possible state 𝑖 there will be a set of probabilities pi(𝑗) of producing the various
possible (text) symbols 𝑗. There is an entropy H ifor each state. The entropy of the source is
the weighted average of H i. This is the entropy of the source per symbol of text.

𝐻=∑
i
Pi H i

If the Markoff process is performed at a definite time rate there is also an entropy per
second, where f iis the average number of symbols produced per second.

t
H = ∑ f i Hi
i
H t measures the amount of information generated by the source per symbol or per second. If
the logarithmic base is 2, H t will represent bits per symbol or per second.
Figure 5 shows a graphical presentation of a typical Markoff process. If. A happens, there is a
chance of 50% that A happens again and 20% chance for B to occur and 30% for C. A
possible outcome of the process would be: ABAACACBAA. The process would have H =
1.49 bits.

Figure 5: Typical Markov process

Figure 6: Markov process with more choices.

Figure 6 shows an example of a Markov process with more choice. The following
probability table can be set up.
A B C H A =1.49

A 0.5 0.3 0.2 H B =1.16 P A = 0.2

PB =0.2
B 0.1 0.2 0.7 H C =1.30 PC =0.4

0.5 0.1 0.3 𝐻=1.34

C
1.3.2 Entropy of a tossing event

Let’s look at the event table below where we have 3 true coins.

Macrostate Number of Occurrence Probability

head mircostates
0 1 (T,T,T) 1
8
1 3 (T,T,H), (T,H,T), (H,T,T) 3
8
2 3 (T,H,H), (H,T,H), (H,H,T) 3
8
3 1 (H,H,H) 1
8

We can calculate entropy in two ways: according the Statistical Mechanics [2] or by
information entropy [3].

𝑆=𝑘log𝛺 ............................ (1)

n
𝐻 = −𝐾 ∑ pi log pi .................................(2)
i=1

The calculated entropy (leaving the constants k/K out) is 1.585 (applying 1) while the
second is 1.811 (applying 2).

Some remarks:
• H is basically a measure of uncertainty
• Similarity H/S is zero when Ω/p = 1
• Both S and H have an extreme (maximum) S when the probability of that macrostate is
highest and H when the uncertainty is highest
• For both H and S this could be seen as a measure of ‘equality’ as the state furthest from both
extremes gives the highest entropy
This can be further illustrated by the following. Taking a case of two possibilities with
probabilities p and q = 1 – p. This gives 𝐻= −(𝑝 log(𝑝)+𝑞log(𝑞))

Which can be plotted as shown in figure 7.

Figure 7: Entropy in the case of two possibilities with probabilities p and (1 – p)
The difference between Thermodynamic Entropy and Information Entropy is that the value of
S doesn’t depend on the multiplicity of the other macrostates, while H depends on the
multiplicities of (all) other marcostates.

1.3.3 Information loss

Wheeler [4] suggested that information is fundamental to the physics of the universe.
Wheeler believed that all material objects are composed of bits of information. A bit is as
small as the smallest possible size; the fundamental quantum of distance discovered by Max
Planck. According to this "it from bit" doctrine, all things physical are information-theoretic
in origin. If you could read the code – at any point in time – you could understand what was
going on in that particular space of the universe. As entropy tends to increase, meaning
patterns change with time and so does the ‘code’; the information flows. There are some
comments to be made to this doctrine.
The first law of Thermodynamics says that energy is conserved [2], but what about
information conservation? Suppose you know the present with perfect precision, you can
predict the future for all time. Reversely you could also be absolutely sure about the past.
However conservation implies in this respect that the process, transferring information from
one state to the other, is fully understood and doesn’t hide any uncertainty.
The Second law of thermodynamics says that the total entropy of the world always increases.
The change of potential, kinetic, chemical, and other forms of energy into heat always favors
more heat and less of those organized, non-chaotic forms of energy. Thus organized energy
degrades to heat, not the other way around [2]. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty.
Principle is interesting in this respect. He says that you cannot measure the exact position of a
particle and at the same time its exact velocity. So if information flows how can you be
absolutely sure about the present, past and future arrangements of information?
Initially black holes were considered reservoirs of hidden information as nothing came out of
it. Indeed they are most densely packed information storage containers in nature, but
nowadays it seems black holes can decay and radiate away. So they release information after
all.

2. Black hole
2.1 Origination of a black hole
Already in the late 18th century it was suggested by John Michell and Pierre-Simon Laplace
that black holes exist and that their gravity would be so strong such that no light can escape.
But how are black holes born?
“Black holes are thought to form from stars or other massive objects. If and when these
objects collapse under their own gravity, a black hole is formed. As the centre of such a black
hole is approached the density goes to infinity: in other words, a singularity. During most of a
star's lifetime, nuclear fusion in the core generates electromagnetic radiation, which includes
photons, the particles of light. This radiation exerts an outward pressure that exactly balances
the inward pull of gravity caused by the star's mass.
As the nuclear fuel is exhausted, the outward forces due to radiation diminish, allowing the
gravitation to compress the star. The contraction of the core causes its temperature to rise and
allows the remaining nuclear material to be used as fuel. The star is saved from further
collapse, but only for a while.
Eventually, all possible nuclear fuel is used up and the core collapses. How far it collapses,
into what kind of object, and at what rate, is determined by the star's final mass and the
remaining outward pressure that the burnt-up nuclear residue (largely iron) can muster. If the
star is sufficiently massive or compressible, it may collapse to a black hole. If it is less
massive or made of stiffer material, its fate is different: it may become a white dwarf or a
neutron star.” [5]:

2.2 Escape velocity

The escape velocity is defined as the minimal velocity that one (with mass M 2) needs,
without adding energy/propulsion, to escape a spherical object with mass M 1, while being at
a distance R from the centre of that object.
To escape to infinite distance we can use energy conservation. At infinite separation, the
gravitational potential energy is zero, and the minimum kinetic energy is also zero. Thus the
total energy with which a projectile can barely escape to infinity from an object’s
gravitational pull is zero. Energy conservation then implies:

1 2 M2G M1
M 2 v esc =
2 R

v esc =
√ 2G M1
R

If v esc=𝑐 , where c is light speed, then R = R s, where R s is the so-called Schwarzschild

Radius, which we will come back to later. Note that v escexceeds the speed of light if R <
R s [6].

2.3 Black hole size

Black holes are being ranked as follows, where AU is defined as Astronomical Unit (Earth-
6
Sun distance, being 149.6∗10 km):
Class Mass Size

Supermassive black hole ~105–109 MSun ~0.001–10 AU

Intermediate-mass black ~103 MSun ~103 km = REarth
hole
Stellar black hole ~10 MSun ~30 km

Micro black hole (also up to ~MMoon up to ~0.1 mm

called Primordial black
hole)

Supermassive black holes seem to evolve from stellar black holes and appear to exist in the
centre of galaxies. Stellar black holes are being formed from the collapse of at least 3 solar
masses and their density is only a little above of nuclear density (1018 𝑘𝑔/𝑚2). The micro
black holes have an extremely small radius (the mass of a big mountain would have a radius
of a nanometre). So what about an elementary particle?
According Jacobson [6] an elementary particle cannot be a black hole. Its Compton
λ
wavelength 𝜆𝑐 is much greater than its Schwarzschild radius (note for a proton ≈1039).
Rs
ℏ
The Planck mass is special because the reduced Compton wavelength (𝜆𝑐 = ), for this
Mc
mass, is equal to half of the Schwarzschild radius. This special distance is called the Planck
length. The Schwarzschild radius is proportional to the mass, whereas the Compton
wavelength is proportional to the inverse of the mass.

( )
1
ℏc 2 −8
Planck mass: M p= , 2.17644 ×10 Kg
G

( )
5 1
ℏc 2 19
Planck mass: E p = ,1.22 ×10 GeV
G

( ) ,1.616252 ×10
1
ℏG 2 −35
Planck mass: L p= 3
m
c

√ 2 GM 2GM 2GM ℏ
From 𝑣= it follows that 𝑅= 2 , while
Rs = and 𝜆𝑐 =
R v c 2
Mc

1
To find 𝑀𝑝 it follows: 𝜆𝑐 = R = Lp
2 s

ℏ GMp
= 2
Mpc c

2 ℏc
M p =¿
G

M p=
√ ℏc
G
 √ √
2GM 2G ℏc ℏG 1
When filling in it gives: R s = 2 = 2 =2 L L = Rs
3 = 2 p and so p
2
c c G c

2.4 Black hole classification

The no-hair theorem states that, once it achieves a stable condition/equilibrium, a black hole
has only three independent physical properties: mass, charge, and angular momentum (spin).
No-hair just expresses that anything that falls into the black hole disappears behind the black
event horizon and is inaccessible to external observers [1]. The simplest black holes have
mass but neither electric charge nor angular momentum.
Caroll [7 p.238]: “Stationary solutions are of special interest because we expect them to be
the end states of gravitational collapse. The alternative might be some sort of oscillating
configuration, but oscillations will ultimately be damped as energy is lost through the
emission of gravitational radiation; in fact, typical evolutions will evolve quite rapidly to
stationary configuration”.
A static spacetime is a stationary spacetime with a time reflection symmetry. Thus a spinning
black hole is stationary but not static.

The following grouping can be made:

Non-rotating ( 𝐽=0 ) Rotating ( 𝐽≠0 )

Uncharged ( 𝑄=0) Schwarzschild (of EF) Kerr
Charged ( 𝑄≠0) Reissner-Nordströ m Kerr-Newman

Explanation
• EF-metric: Unique static vacuum solution with event horizon
• Kerr metric: Stationary vacuum solution with event horizon, parameterised by M and J.
• RN (Reissner-Nordström) metric: Stationary vacuum solution with event horizon,
parameterised by M, Qe 𝑎𝑛𝑑 Q m (𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒) .
• Kerr-Newman metric: Unique stationary vacuum solution with J and Electromagnetic field.
Stable black holes can be completely described at any moment in time by eleven parameters:
• mass-energy M,
• linear momentum P (three components),
• angular momentum J (three components),
• position X (three components),
• electric charge Q.

2.5 Penrose-Hawking singularity theorem(s)

A singularity, a point of almost infinite density, in solutions of the Einstein field equations is:
1. Situation where matter is forced to be compressed to a point (a space-like singularity;
feature of uncharged non-rotating solutions) or

2. Situation where certain light rays come from a region with infinite curvature (time-like
singularity; feature of charged or rotating solutions)
Both have the property of geodesic incompleteness: Some light-paths or particle-paths cannot
be extended beyond a certain proper-time or affine-parameter (affine parameter is the null
analog of proper time). It is still an open question whether time-like singularities ever occur
in the interior of real charged or rotating black holes, or whether they are artifacts of high
symmetry and turn into spacelike singularities when realistic perturbations are added.

2.6 Schwarzschild solutions

In General Relativity (GR), the unique static spherically symmetric vacuum solution is the
Schwarzschild metric. Birkhoff’s theorem says basically the same and in particular that there
are no time-dependent solutions in this form.

2.6.1 Schwarzschild metric

The Schwarzschild metric, in spherical coordinates ( 𝑡,𝑟,𝜃,∅ ), is given by:

( ) ( )
−1
2 2GM 2 2GM 2 2 2
ds =− 1− dt + 1− dr +r d Ω ......(3)
r r

Where d Ω 2 is the metric on a unit two-sphere.

2 2 2 2
d Ω =d θ +sin θ dϕ

The constant M is interpreted as the mass of the gravitating object.

Some notes:
• if M →0, you get Minkowski space
• if 𝑟→0 (𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ dt 2) the metric coefficient becomes infinite
• 𝑟 →2𝐺𝑀 (=r s),𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ dr 2 , the metric coefficient also becomes infinite

For both 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀 and 𝑟=0 there are singularities or there is something wrong with the
metric. To find out whether these are real singularities we need a way to check whether the
curvature becomes infinite. The curvature can be measured with the Riemann tensor, but
both tensors and the metric are coordinate dependent. This means it cannot show if the
curvature really goes to infinity or that it is due to the choice of coordinates. Therefore we
need some scalar as scalars are coordinate independent. By constructing scalars from the
curvature we can figure out whether it is due to the choice of coordinates or whether we
have a real singularity. The simplest such scalar is the Ricci scalar 𝑅= g μν Rμν . We take the
following scalar.
2 2
μνρσ 48G M
R R μνρσ = 2
r

If this scalar goes to infinity, the curvature →∞, and it is a singularity. So it seems that 𝑟→0
represents a singularity. However 𝑟 →2𝐺𝑀 does not seem to be a singularity. When
we change to more appropriate coordinates the surface 𝑟 →2𝐺𝑀 is actually very well-
behaved in the Schwarzschild metric and in fact demarcates the event horizon of a black hole
[7].

Let us have a closer look at the Schwarzschild metric. Consider radial null curves, those for
which 𝜙 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝜃 are constant andds 2=0. So,

( ) ( )
−1
2 2GM 2 2GM 2
ds =0=− 1− dt + 1− dr
r r

which can be written as

( )
−1
dt 2 GM
=± 1−
dr r

This measures the slope of the light cones on a spacetime diagram in the 𝑡−𝑟 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒. For
dt
large 𝑟 the slope is ±1, as it would be in flat space, while as 𝑟 →2𝐺𝑀 it give →±∞, and
dr
the light cones “close up” as shown in figure 8 [7]. It means that when a light ray approaches
𝑟=2𝐺𝑀 it never seems to get there (at least in this coordinate system); instead it seems to
asymptote to this radius.

Figure 8: In Schwarzschild coordinates, light cones appear to close up as we approach 𝑟 →2𝐺𝑀.

It is obviously an illusion as a particle can reach the radius without issue. However an
observer far away could never tell. An observer at fixed 𝑟 and a beacon falling freely into a
black hole, sending signals at constant proper time intervals Δτ 1 . These signals will take
more and more time to reach the observer, see Figure 9 [7]. Thus we will never observe the
beacon vanish into the black hole.
Figure 9: An observer at fixed 𝑟 receives the signals at successively long time intervals Δτ 2

2.6.2 Other coordinates to enhance/extend the Schwarzschild solution

To solve the problem of the coefficient going to infinity we change to tortoise coordinate r ¿,
which is only useful if 𝑟≥2𝐺𝑀.

r ¿ =r +2 GM log ( 2 GM
r
−1 )

dr ¿
( ) ( ) ( )
−1 −1 −1
r 1 r 2 GM
= 1+2GM −1 . = 1+ −1 = 1−
dr 2GM 2 GM 2GM r

2 ¿
2

Writing 𝑑𝑟 (=1/dr ) leads to:

( ) dr
2
2 2 GM 2

𝑑𝑟 = 1−
¿
.................... (4)
r

Inserting this result in the Schwarzschild metric (3) gives:

( ) ( )( )
−1
2 2GM 2 2GM 2 GM 2 ¿ 2 2
2
ds =− 1− dt + 1− 1− dr +r d Ω
r r r

( ) ( )
1
2 2GM 2 2GM 2
ds =− 1− dt + 1− ¿
dr + r d Ω
2 2
r r

2GM
ds 2= 1− (
r )
(−dt 2 +dr ¿ ) +r 2 d Ω2
2
..................................(5)
The light cones do not close up anymore and the metric coefficient does not become infinite
at 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀, but the downside is that surface of interest, the event horizon, has been put to
infinity.
Eddington-Finkelstein built on the tortoise coordinates and came out with coordinates that
are naturally adapted to the null geodesic.
𝜈=𝑡+ r ¿
*
𝑢=𝑡− 𝑟
Infalling radial null geodesics are characterized by 𝜈=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 and the outgoing ones by
𝑢=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡.

¿ * 2

From 𝜈=𝑡+ r it follows t= ν− 𝑟 and t =ν −2 νr +r

2 2 ¿

From equation (4) it follows:

( ) ( )
−2 −1
22 GM ¿ 2 GM
dr = 1− dr and to dr =¿ 1− dr
¿ 2
. ....(6)
r r

When using the Schwarzschild equation (3) and replacing t 2 by ( ν 2−2 νr +r ¿ ), and r ¿ by r 2 ,
2 2

and for ease we use A = 1−

2 GM
r (
, the result is: )
ds 2=−( A ) ( dv2 −2 dv dr ¿ +dr ¿ )−( A ) dr 2 + r d Ω
2
−1 2 2

−1 −2 2 −1 2 2
ds 2=−( A ) dv 2+ ( A ) 2 dv ( A ) dr – ( A )( A ) dr +¿ ( A ) dr d Ω

ds 2=¿−( A ) dv 2 + 2 dv dr +r 2 d Ω2

Replacing A leads to:

2GM 2 2
ds =− 1−
r ( 2
dv + 2dvdr + r d Ω
2
)
Though the metric coefficient vanishes at 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀 there is no problem here as the
determinant of the metric is:
4 2
g=−r sin θ

In the Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates the condition for radial null curves is solved by:

{ ( )
−1
dv 0 , 2GM (infalling )
= 1−
dr 2 r ( outgoing )

In this coordinate the system light cones remain well behaved at 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀. Although the light
cones do not close up, like the Schwarzschild ones they do till over. This means that for
𝑟<2𝐺𝑀 all future-directed paths are in the direction of decreasing 𝑟: see figure 10 [7].
Figuur 10: Schwarzschild light comes in the (𝑣,𝑟) coordinates of (equation 7). In these
coordinates we can follow future-directed timeline paths past 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀.

In the (𝑣,𝑟) coordinate system we can cross the event horizon on future-directed paths, but
not on past-directed ones. If we would choose 𝑢 instead of 𝑣 a particle would be able to
pass through the event horizon, but this time only along past-directed curves. Therefore, a
combination of both 𝑢 and 𝑣 might solve this. We will now try to get to Kruskal coordinates.

Continuing with equation (5) and further leaving out 𝑑Ω2, which does not change under
coordinate transformation.

( 2GM
)
( −dt 2+ dr ¿ )
2

ds 2= 1−
r
*
𝑣=𝑡+𝑟
𝑢=𝑡−𝑟*
1 ¿ 1
t= ( v +u ) and r = ( v −u )
2 2
Thus,
−1 2 2
( v +u +2 vu ) + 1 ( v 2+ u2−2 vu )
2

−t 2+ r ¿ =
4 4

¿ ( 14 ) (−v −u −2 v u+ v + u −2 vu )= 14 (−4 vu )
2 2 2 2

2
2 ¿
−t + r =−vu

−dt 2 +dr ¿ =−dvdu

Plugging (10) in (8) gives:
2GM
r
ds 2=− 1−
( dvdu ) ( )
Where 𝑟 is defined implicitly in terms of 𝑢 and 𝑣 by:
1
2
( v −u )=r + 2GM ln
r
2 GM
−1 ( )
For convenience we write: 𝑟𝑠=2𝐺𝑀. Using this gives:

1
2
r
( v −u )=r + r s ln −1
rs ( )
Dividing by 𝑟𝑠 and rearranging:

ln
( rr −1)= 21r ( v−u )− rr
s s
1
s
r

( rr −1)=e
( v−u)
2 rs rs

( )( )
r s 21r ( v−u) −rr r s r r
.e s
.e = −1 = 1− s s

r r rs r

Plugging the left part of (12) in (11) gives:

2 −r s −u2r
−r
r
ds = . e . e dudv s s

Changing coordinates and rearranging:

( u v =−e )
−u v v−u
'
u =−e
2rs and v' =e 2 r s ' ' 2rs

−u v
'1 2r ' 1 2r
du = e du and dv =
s
e dv s

2 rs 2 rs

v−u
' 1 2r
'
So, du dv = 2
e dv s

4rs

v−u
2 ' ' 2 rs
4 r s du dv =e dudv
Plugging this result in (13) gives:

3 r
2 −4 r s r ' '
ds = e du dv s

1 1
T = ( u' +v ' ) and R= ( u' −v ' )
2 2

T 2- R2 = vu and dT 2- dR 2 =du ' dv '

Plugging this in (14) gives then:

−4 r s3 rr
e ( dT −dR )
2 2 2
ds = s

∗
Like the (𝑡,𝑟 ) coordinates, the radial null curves look like they do in flat space:
𝑇=± 𝑅+𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
The event horizon is however not infinitely far away; it is defined by:
𝑇=± 𝑅

If 𝑟=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡,𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛T 2- R2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡. Thus they appear as hyperbolae in the R-T plane. The
surfaces of constant t are given by:

T
R
=tanh (t
4 GM )
which defines straight lines through the origin with slope tanh ( 4 GM
t
). If 𝑡→±∞ than
𝑇=± 𝑅 and therefore 𝑡→±∞ represents the same surface as 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀.
Range of T, R is such that singularity at 𝑟=0 cannot be reached. The allowed region is therefore:

−∞ ≤ R ≤ ∞

2 2
T < R +1

A spacetime diagram in the T-R plane is known as the Kruskal diagram. See figure 11. [7]
Figure 11: Kruskal diagram – the Schwarzschild solution in Kruskal coordinates, where all light
comes in at ±45°.

Kruskal divided the diagram in 4 regions. See figure 12.

Figure 12: Regions of the Kruskal diagram.

1. Region I: 𝑟>2𝐺𝑀,
2. Following future directed null lines => Region II
3. Following past-direct null lines => Region III
4. Follow space-like geodesics => Region IV
Region II is seen as the black hole. Everything going from region I to region II cannot go back. It
is even such that when inside the black hole, the particle will keep on moving in the direction of
reducing r until the singularity at 𝑟=0 is reached.
The region III is actually the reverse of region II. It is named a white hole. Everything leaves it,
but nothing can reach it. The boundary of region III is the past event horizon, while the boundary
of region II is the future event horizon.
Region IV cannot be reached either. It is thought of as being connected to region I by a wormhole
(Einstein-Rosen bridge).

2.7 Horizons and the Penrose process

“In most physical theories we hope to have a well-defined initial value problem, so that
information about a state at any one moment of time can be used to predict (or retrodict) the
state at any other moment of time. As a consequence, any two states that are connected by a
solution to the equations of motion should require the same amount of information to be
specified. But in GR, it seems, we take a very complicated collection of matter, collapse it
into a black hole, and end up with a configuration described completely by mass, charge and
angular momentum. In classical GR this might not bother us so much, since the information can
be thought of as hidden behind the event horizon rather than truly being lost. But when
quantum field theory is taken into account, we find that holes evaporate and eventually
disappear, and the information seems to be truly lost. Conceivably, the outgoing Hawking
radiation responsible for the evaporation somehow encodes information about what state was
originally used to make a black hole, but how that could happen is completely unclear.
Understanding this “information loss paradox” is considered by many to be a crucial step in
building a sensible theory of quantum gravity.” [7, p239]

2.7.1 Event horizons

The most important feature of a black hole is the event horizon. “An event horizon is a
hypersurface separating those spacetime points that are connected to infinity by a timelike path
from those that are not [connected to infinity]” [7 p239]. Therefore, we first define being at
‘infinity’. Infinity could be defined as the spacetime sufficiently far away from the black hole
±
such that it is no longer affected by the black hole. When infinity (past, future null infinity 𝜑
and spatial infinity 𝑖0 ) can be approximated by Minkowski space, we say that the whole space is
asymptotically flat. [7]. See figure 13 and 14.

-
Figure 13: future null infinity 𝜑+, spacelike infinity 𝑖0, and past null infinity 𝜑 . [7]
Figure 14: A normal Minkowski diagram.

A hypersurface Σ can be defined by 𝑓(𝑥) = constant for some function 𝑓(𝑥). A null hypersurface,
such as the event horizon, can be seen as a collection of null geodesics. If we take a piece of
paper lying on a flat table, draw a straight line on it, then curve the paper around a sphere for
example, the drawn line is a geodesic. It can be defined by the following equation

μ ν
dx dx
∈=−g μν
dλ dλ
Where 𝜖 is some constant, if 𝜖=0 it is a null geodesic and 𝜆 will not be fixed. Simply said, a
geodesic is a null geodesic if its tangent vector has norm null. For massive particles 𝜆=𝜏 and
𝜖=1; a timelike geodesic. The gradient of f(x), ∂ μ𝑓, is normal to Σ, as in 3d the gradient is a set of
points perpendicular to the surface. Another way of establishing whether it is a null
hypersurface is checking if the normal vector is null. It also happens to be that the tangent
𝜇
vectors 𝜉 to these geodesics are proportional to the normal vectors.

dx μ 𝜇𝜈
ξ μ =¿ =ℎ(𝑥)𝑔 ∂ ν𝑓
dλ

ℎ(𝑥) can be chosen in such a way that geodesics are affinely parameterized, so the tangent vectors
will obey:

ξ μ 𝜉𝜇=0, ξ μ ∇ μ τ 𝜉𝜇 =0

Cosmic censorship conjecture is defined as: “Naked singularity cannot form in gravitational
collapse from generic, initially nonsingular states in an asymptotically flat spacetime obeying the
dominant energy condition.” [7, p243]
In other words, a naked singularity is a singularity that is not hidden behind an event horizon. It
can also not be formed by the collapse of a star for example.

Hawking’s area theorem

“Assuming the weak energy condition and cosmic censorship, the area of future event horizon in
an asymptotically flat spacetime is non-decreasing.” [7, p243]
For Schwarzschild black holes the area depends monotonically on the mass, so this Hawking’s
area theorem implies that Schwarzschild black holes can only increase in mass. But for rotating
black holes this is no longer the case; the area depends on a combination of mass and angular
momentum, and we can actually extract energy from a black hole by decreasing its rotation (see
Penrose process section). It is also possible to decrease mass of a black hole through quantum-
mechanical Hawking radiation as quantum field theory in curved spacetime can violate the weak
energy condition.

2.7.2 Killing horizons

A killing vector implies that the one of the coordinates is independent of the other coordinates
of the metric. If X is the killing vector field then it obeys the killing equation.

∇ μ X ν + ∇ ν X μ=0

The Schwarzschild metric has 4 killing vectors due to its rotational invariance and time
independence.

𝑅=𝜕𝜑=−𝑦𝜕𝑥+𝑥𝜕𝑦
𝑆=𝑧𝜕𝑥−𝑥𝜕𝑧
𝑇=−𝑧𝜕𝑦+𝑦𝜕𝑧
𝐾=𝜕𝑡
A vector can be classified in three groups depending on its tangent vector. If X is the tangent
vector and g the metric with signature (-,+,+,+) then
𝑔(𝑋,𝑋)<0 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒
𝑔(𝑋,𝑋)=0 𝑁𝑢𝑙𝑙
𝑔(𝑋,𝑋)>0 𝑆𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒

It can also be written as 𝑔𝑖𝑗𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑗>0 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒). In the Schwarzschild metric, the Killing
vector goes from being timelike to spacelike at the event horizon. In general, if a Killing vector
𝜇 𝜇
field 𝜒 is null along some null hypersurface Σ, than Σ is a Killing horizon of 𝜒 .
𝜇
To every Killing horizon we associate a quantity called surface gravity. A Killing vector field 𝜒
𝜇
with Killing horizon Σ (where 𝜒 is a normal vector to Σ) obeys along the Killing horizon the
geodesic equation:

μ ν ν
X ∇ μ X =−k X

The parameter 𝜅 is the surface gravity and is constant over the horizon except for a
bifurcation two-sphere (e.g. in the center of the Kruskal diagram (figure 11).
In words the surface gravity could be defined as: “In a static, asymptotically flat spacetime,
the surface gravity is the acceleration of a static observer near the horizon, as measured by
a static observer at infinity” [7, p245].

To calculate the surface gravity for a Schwarzschild black hole (with mass M) is, we have

1
𝜅2=− (∇𝜇𝜒𝜈)(∇𝜇𝜒𝜈)
2

For a static observer it holds that its four-velocity 𝑈𝜇 is proportional to the time translation
killing field [7].
 𝜇 𝜇
𝐾 =𝑉(𝑥)𝑈

As the four-velocity is normalized to −1, the function 𝑉 is the magnitude of the killing vector

V=√−K μ K
μ

This 𝑉 relates to the frequency of a photon as seen by the static observer, therefore it is also
called the ‘redshift’ factor. Expressing the four-acceleration 𝑎𝜇=𝑈𝜎∇𝜎𝑈𝜇 in terms of the
redshift factor gives

𝑎𝜇=∇ μ ln V

The magnitude of this acceleration is

𝑎=𝑉−1√ ∇ μ V ∇ μ V

This acceleration goes to infinity close the event horizon of the black hole, which is an
killing horizon, as it takes an infinite acceleration to keep a particle out of the black hole.
However, an observer at infinity is never able to see a particle enter a black hole; he only
sees the acceleration redshifting by a factor V. Therefore, the surface gravity is
𝜅= 𝑉𝑎= √ ∇ μ V ∇ μ V
evaluated at the killing horizon Σ. Applying this to the Schwarzschild metric gives

[( ) , 0,0,0]
1
𝜇 𝜇 2 GM
𝐾 =(1,0,0,0) 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑈 = 1− 2
r
From this it results that

GM

√
V = 1−
2GM
r
and a= 2
r 1−(2GM
r )
1
2

This then results in the surface gravity being

1
𝜅=
4 GM

Thus it appears that the surface gravity decreases as the mass increases. In other words, the
surface gravity of a big black hole is actually weaker than that of a small black hole.

2.7.3 Kerr horizons

For rotating black holes (stationary) we have to look for a axial symmetry rather than
spherical symmetry (static) solution of the Einstein field equations. A solution was found by
Kerr with the following metric:

(
ds 2=− 1−
ρ 2
dt
)
2 gmr 2 2 gmar sin2 θ
−
ρ 2
( dt dϕ+ dϕdt ) +
ρ2 2
∆
dr + ¿ ρ2 dθ2
 2
sin θ 2 2 2 2
+
ρ
2 [ ( r + a ) −a ∆ sin2 θ ] d ∅2
Where,

Δ(𝑟)=𝑟2−2𝐺𝑀𝑟+𝑎2
And
𝜌2(𝑟,𝜃)=𝑟2+𝑎2𝑐𝑜𝑠2𝜃

As the Kerr-solution is stationary but not static, the event horizons at 𝑟± are not Killing
horizons. Figure 15 shows the horizon structure of the Kerr metric. [7]

Figure 15: Horizon structure of the Kerr metric (side view).

The event horizons are null surfaces that demarcate points past which it becomes
impossible to return to a certain region of space. The stationary limit surface, in contrast, is
timelike except where it is tangent to the event horizon (at the poles); it represents the
place past which it is impossible to be a stationary observer. This stationary limit surface is
𝜇
the place where 𝐾 𝐾𝜇=0. The ergosphere is the area between the stationary limit surface
and the outer event horizon. It is a region is where it is possible to enter and leave again, but
not to remain stationary.

2.7.4 Penrose process

Energy can be extracted from a black hole itself, if the hole is spinning or charged, by
classical processes. [6] Note: If quantum effects are included, then it turns out that one can
even extract energy from a non-rotating, neutral black hole, either by letting it evaporate via
Hawking radiation or by “mining” it [6].

The Penrose process is related to the fact that if a particle with negative energy is inside the
ergosphere it must stay inside the ergosphere or be accelerated until its energy is positive
in order to escape. The reason is that in the outside of the ergosphere a particle must have
positive energy, while this is not necessary inside the ergosphere. In regular space both the
Killing vector 𝐾𝜇 and the four momentum 𝑃𝜇 are timelike. However, 𝐾𝜇 becomes spacelike
inside the ergosphere. It is therefore possible for particles to obey:

𝐸=− 𝐾𝜇𝑃𝜇 <0

𝜇 𝜇
As 𝑃 =𝑚𝑈 and 𝑈=(𝛾𝑐,𝛾𝑣𝑥𝑥,𝛾𝑣𝑦,𝛾𝑣𝑧) it follows that 𝑃0=𝐸

I will illustrate this with an example. If there is a person with rock moving along a geodesic
their momentum is 𝑃(0)𝜇, which is positive and conserved as you move along your geodesic.
When you enter the ergosphere and then throw the rock such that you (yourself) will start
to move on a geodesic leaving the ergosphere. When the rock is thrown very hard and
against the direction of rotation, the energy of the rock becomes negative. The fact that the
rock has to be thrown against the direction of rotation will be shown later on. As
momentum is conserved it follows that

𝑃(0)𝜇=𝑃(1)𝜇+𝑃(2)𝜇
with 𝑃(1)𝜇 your own momentum and 𝑃(2)𝜇 the momentum of the rock after the throw. Using
𝐸=−𝐾𝜇𝑃(0)𝜇 gives: 𝐸(0)=𝐸(1)+𝐸(2).

If 𝐸(2)<0 than 𝐸(1)>𝐸(0) , which means that you have gained energy. This gained energy is
extracted from the rotational energy of the black hole (thus decreasing the angular
momentum of the black hole). For Kerr killing horizon is a linear combination of the time-
translation and rotational Killing vectors and is represented by:

𝜒𝜇=𝐾𝜇+Ω H 𝑅𝜇

Ω H is the angular velocity of the horizon. The statement that a particle with momentum 𝑃(2)𝜇
crossing the horizon is:

𝑃(2)𝜇 χ μ ¿ 0

The angular momentum is given by:

μ
L = Rμ P

When plugging using reletion result is:

𝑃(2)𝜇 (𝐾𝜇+Ω H 𝑅𝜇)<0

𝑃(2)𝜇 𝐾𝜇 + 𝑃(2)𝜇 𝑅𝜇 < 0

−𝐸(2)+𝐿(2) Ω H )<0
Thus,

E(2)
(2)
𝐿 <
ΩH

As 𝐸(2) was arranged to be negative and Ω H positive the particle must have a negative
angular momentum and is thus thrown against the rotation direction. Also note that 𝐿(2)
becomes a limit on how much you can decrease the angular momentum. Once you have
escaped the ergosphere and the rock has fallen inside the event horizon, the mass and
angular momentum of the black hole are as before plus the negative contribution of the
rock:

𝛿𝑀=𝐸(2)
𝛿𝐽= 𝐿(2)
So, both M and J are limited. Rewriting gives:

δM
𝛿𝐽 <
ΩH
When we reach the limit it gives 𝛿𝐽=𝛿𝑀/Ω𝐻.
Taking into account the area theorem (the area of the event horizon is non-decreasing) we can
calculate the outer event horizon at, where 𝑎=𝐽/𝑀:

r +¿ ¿=𝐺𝑀+ √ G 2 M 2−a2 𝐺2𝑀2−𝑎2

Using Δ(𝑟)=𝑟2−2𝐺𝑀𝑟+𝑎2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟=r +¿ ¿ , this gives that

Δ(r +¿ ¿)= 𝐺2𝑀2+ 𝐺2𝑀2− 𝑎2+2𝐺𝑀 √ G 2 M 2−a2−2𝐺𝑀( GM + √G M −a )+ 𝑎2
2 2 2

=2 𝐺2𝑀2 - 2 𝐺2𝑀2 - 𝑎2 + 𝑎2 +2𝐺𝑀 +2𝐺𝑀 √ G 2 M 2−a2 −2𝐺𝑀( GM + √G 2 M 2−a2 )

=0

If we use the Kerr metric (16) and apply Δ=0 (cause 𝑟=r +¿ ¿) and 𝑑𝑡=0,𝑑𝑟=0 we get:

sin 2 θ
𝑑𝑠2=𝜌2𝑑𝜃2+ 2 ¿
ρ

As 𝜌2 (𝑟,𝜃)=r +a cos θ it follows that 𝜌2 (r +¿ ¿,𝜃)= r +¿ ¿+a cos θ .

2 2 2 2 2
2

When plugging in 𝜌2 (r +¿ ¿,𝜃)in (24) the results is:

𝑑𝑠2=¿ + ¿

The determinant is: |𝛾|=¿ ¿ sin 2 θ and can be proved as follows:

𝑑𝑠2=𝐸𝑑𝜃+2𝐹𝑑𝜙𝑑𝜃+𝐺𝑑𝜙

𝑑𝑠2=[ dϕdθ ] [ EF GF ][ ddθ∅]

The determinant is 𝐸𝐺−𝐹2.

Since F = 0 it leaves EG. So in (25) the terms for E and G are:

𝐸= ¿ and 𝐺=sin 2 θ ¿ ¿ ¿

As |𝛾|=𝐸.𝐺 it follows:

|𝛾|= ¿ ¿

√ ¿ γ ∨¿=¿ ¿ ¿
To calculate the horizon area we apply:
 2π π

𝐴 = ∫ ∫ √ ¿ γ ∨¿ dθdϕ ¿
0 0

Plugging in (26b) in (27) and solving the first integral first leads to:
π

∫¿ ¿
0

Solving the second integral leads to the horizon area A:

2π

𝐴 = ∫ 2 ¿¿ dϕ
0

𝐴=4𝜋 ¿

To show that the area does not decrease, it is convenient to work instead in terms of the
irreducible mass of the black hole, defined by:

A
M 2irr =
16 π G 2
2 2
𝐴 = 16 π G M irr

2
δA =32 π G M irr M irr

δA
δ M irr = 2
32 π G M irr

Proceeding with (28) and using 𝑎=𝐽/𝑀 and r +¿ ¿=GM + √G 2 M 2 −a2, gives:

𝐴=4𝜋 (𝐺2𝑀2+ 𝐺2𝑀2−𝑎2+2𝐺𝑀GM + √ G2 M 2 −a2+𝑎2)

=4𝜋 (2𝐺2𝑀2+2𝐺𝑀√ G 2 M 2−a2)

( √ )
2
= 4𝜋 2 G 2 M 2+ 2G G2 M 4 −M 2
J
M2
=8𝜋𝐺 (𝐺𝑀2+𝐺 G2 M 4 −J 2) √
Differentiating leads to:

𝛿𝐴=8𝜋𝐺 2 GMδM + ( 2 √ G M −J
2
1
4 2
.(4 G2 M 3 δM −2 JδJ )
)
=8𝜋𝐺 2 GM + ( 1
2 √G M −a M
2 4 2 2
2 3
)
4 G M δM −8 πG 2 J
( 1
2 √G M −a M
2 4 2 2 ) δJ
 ( ) ( )
2 2
2G M J 1
=8𝜋𝐺 2 GM + δM −8 πG . δJ
√G 2
M −a
2 2 M √ G M 2−a2
2

(( ) (√ ) )
2 2
2G M a
=8𝜋𝐺 2GM + δM − δJ
√G 2
M −a
2 2 2
G M −a
2 2

Ω H has been defined as:

ΩH= ( dϕdt ) and ¿

So, plugging in r +¿ ¿=𝐺𝑀+√ G 2 M 2−a2, leads to:

a 2G M +2 GM √ G M −a
2 2 2 2 2
Ω H =¿ and ΩH
−1
=
2G M +2 GM √ G M −a
2 2 2 2 2
a
2 2
a −1 2G M
Continuing with (30) and applying Ω𝐻 =2𝐺𝑀+ 2 2 2 gives:
√G 2 M 2−a2 √G M −a

𝛿𝐴=8𝜋𝐺 Ω H
(( −1

√G 2
a
M −a
2 2 ) (√δM + 2
a
G M −a
2 2 ) )
δJ

a
𝛿𝐴=8𝜋𝐺 ( Ω H −1 δM + δJ )
√G 2
M −a
2 2

Plug (31) in (29):

𝛿 M irr=
1
2
32 π G M irr
8 πG
a
√ G M −a
2 2(2
−1
( Ω H δM −δJ )
)
a −1
𝛿 M irr = (Ω H δM−δJ)
4 δ M irr √G M −a 2 2 2

a
Use 𝑋= to simplify:
4 δ M irr √ G2 M 2−a 2
1
𝛿 M irr = Ω H −1 δM−δJ
X

1
Ω H−1 δM=δJ + 𝛿 M irr
X
 δM
We earlier found: 𝛿𝐽< and thus:
ΩH

1
𝛿𝐽<δJ + 𝛿 M irr
X

This leads to:

𝛿 M irr >0

As the area is related to the irreducible mass, also the area has to increase under all
processes.

3. Entropy of a black hole

3.1 Four laws of black holes

The four laws of Black Hole thermodynamics are subsequently:
Zeroth law:
For stationary black holes, the surface gravity is constant on the horizon.
This law is not just true for spherically symmetric non-rotating black holes, but also for rotating
black holes that are not spherically symmetric [9]

First law:
For a rotating charged black hole, the First Law takes the form [6]:

k
dM= dA+ΩdJ+Φ𝑑Q
8 πG

Second law:
The area of the event horizon always increases [10].

Third law:
The surface gravity of the horizon cannot be reduced to zero in a finite number of steps, but it
does not always hold for extremal black holes [6].

In thermodynamics, the zeroth law states that temperature is constant in a body in thermal
equilibrium. As stationary is comparable to equilibrium and if κ is like a temperature both
laws are nearly identical. The same holds for the first law. In thermodynamics this is
𝑑𝐸=𝑇𝑑𝑆−𝑃𝑑𝑉. We know that E=mc 2thus saying that m is similar to E makes perfect sense.
As we said κ is like a temperature, which means that A should be like entropy. That A is like
entropy is strengthened by the second law as both are to always increase.

However, saying that a black hole would have something as a temperature, meaning that it
would radiate, was initially considered strange as nothing can come out of a black hole [9].
In 1975 Hawking showed that a black hole does radiate black body radiation with a certain
temperature. We will come back on that later. There is more overlap. Most processes
increase the irreducible mass of the black hole, however only a few processes leave the
irreducible mass unchanged. These are the reversible processes. This is the same in
thermodynamics, where only processes that leave the entropy unchanged are reversible. As
we have seen A=16πMir ,which again shows the connection between thermodynamic
entropy and the area of a black hole [10]. Entropy is also related to degradation of energy,
as degradation of the quality of energy leads to an increase of entropy. Irreducible mass can
be viewed in the same light, as it represents that mass from which no more work can be
extracted, in other words the lowest quality of energy. The generalised version of the
second law was defined by Bekenstein [10, p7] and says: “When common entropy goes
down a black hole, the common entropy in the black hole exterior plus the black hole
entropy never decreases. This statement means that we must regard black-hole entropy as
a genuine contribution to the entropy content of the universe.

3.2 Calculating entropy

From an information point of view, the entropy of a black hole can be seen as the
inaccessibility of information about the internal configuration of the black hole. For
instance, there could be three black holes, which can be described with only three factors
(M,Q,J) according to the no-hair theorem. Those values could be the same for all three black
holes, but one could be born form a star collapsing, another from the collapse of a neutron
star andthe third from the collapse of a geon. From the viewpoint of information, we are
going to calculate black hole entropy.

A
We will use the rationalized area 𝛼= as a function of entropy. As we know that the area
4π
and also entropy, then, is always increasing, the function for entropy must therefore be a
monotonically increasing one Sbh =𝑓(𝛼). Sticking to simple options a possible choice for f is
𝑓(𝛼)∝√ α [10]. To verify that this is a real possibility, we imagine to have two separate black
holes with total entropy the sum of the individual black hole entropies Stotal = SbhA + Sbh B .
Then these two black holes will merge and as they reach equilibrium, the information about
each of their initial conditions is ‘lost’. Thus the new entropy should be bigger than the total
entropy mentioned before. The entropy in terms of irreducible mass is

√α=
√ A
4π
=√ 4 M 2ir = 2 M ir

This means that if we had two Schwarzschild black holes, 𝑀= M ir , that fused together increasing
the entropy, the mass of the new black hole would be bigger than the sum of the masses of the
individual black holes. This is not possible, as due to gravitational radiation the black hole mass
should decrease [10]. Thus this choice was not the right one.
The next choice is
𝑓(𝛼)=𝛾𝛼

where 𝛾 is a constant. In this case entropy in terms of irreducible mass and in terms of area
gives

A
α= =4 M 2ir
4π

Redoing the previous argument, we find out that when the total entropy is increased; the
mass of the new black hole does not need to become bigger than the mass of the individual
black holes together. It does require the area to increase, but this fits the area theorem by
Hawking just fine as that says that the area is always to increase. To get the right units
J
K [ ]
or[ ]
erg
K
in cgs, the meters need to be cancelled out, meaning that 𝛾 must have units[ M 2 ] .The

only fitting constant is ℏ−1. This might be a non-classical unit, but as entropy is related to
the number of (micro)states of a system and states often have a quantum nature, this makes
perfect sense [10]. We know get for our entropy formula

𝑓( 𝛼)= 𝜂ℏ−1𝛼

where 𝜂 is a dimensionless constant.

There is another way to calculate this. We take only one elementary particle that we send into a
black hole. Before it enters the black hole we ask only does the particle exist: yes or no. As this is
a very simplistic particle, this is the only question that we can ask about it. The answer to this
question is yes before it enters the black hole, but after it has entered we do not know whether it
still exists or not. As the question has only two possible answers, we could say, information wise,
that one bit of information got lost when the particle entered the black hole. The question now is
what did this most minimal loss of information do to the entropy of the black hole. Though based
on Christodoulou’s method, we will take a particle with a non-zero radius [10]. The minimal
change in rationalized area then is

∆ α min =μb

𝛼 is again the rationalized area, 𝜇 the rest mass of the spherical particle and 𝑏 its proper radius.
The absolute minimal radius of a particle is when the Compton wavelength ℏ μ−1 1 equals the
gravitational radius 2𝜇. This is when 𝜇=
√ℏ
2
, which gives∆ α min =2 ℏ . A particle whose dimension
is given by the Compton wavelength is a particle that can be regarded as not having an internal
structure, thus matching the information version [10]. We are now going to equate the entropy of
one bit of information loss with the minimal entropy increase.

df
The minimal entropy gain is given by ∆ S bhmin =2 ℏ and the entropy loss of one bit is −
dα

( 12 ln 12 + 12 ln 12 )=ln (2 ) Combined this gives

df
2ℏ =ln2
dα

Rewriting this gives

1
𝑑𝑓= ln 2ℏ−1𝑑𝛼
2

Integrating this to get a formula for entropy gives us

 1
Sbh= ln 2 ℏ−1 𝛼
2

This looks precisely like the formula for entropy that we obtained before, but with a value
for 𝜂. When written in cgs units it is

1 ln ( 2 ) k c 3 A
Sbh=
2 4 π Gℏ

As an analogy to the thermodynamic relation

1
T
=( )
∂S
∂E ν

the black hole version would be

T ( )
1 ∂ S bh
=
∂M L, Q
3.3 Hawking radiation
“In the classical theory black holes can only absorb and not emit particles. However it is shown
that quantum mechanical effects cause black holes to create and emit particles as if they were hot
ℏk M⊙
bodies with temperature ≈10−6 ( )°𝐾 where 𝜅 is the surface gravity of the black hole.
2 πk M
This thermal emission leads to a slow decrease in the mass of the black holeand to its eventual
disappearance: any primordial black hole of mass less than about 1015g should be
evaporated by now” [8, p199].

The Hawking temperature is given by:

K
𝑇=
2π

It requires some explanation how Hawking came to this temperature [6] [7] [8]. Assume that a
static observer is positioned at r i >2𝐺𝑀 outside a Schwarzschild black hole. The observer moves
along orbits of the timelike Killing vector 𝐾=∂t .

The redshift factor 𝑉 and acceleration 𝑎 is in this case given by:

√
𝑉= 1−
2GM
r

GM
𝑎=
r √ r −2GM

Note that for observers very close to the event horizon the acceleration becomes very large and
the redshift 𝑉 reaches 0.
“Thus, an observer moving with uniform acceleration through the Minkowski vacuum observes a
thermal spectrum of particles. This is the Unruh effect.” [7 p411]
 −aξ
ae
𝑇=
2π

So if we have two observers: Observer 1 very near to the event horizon and observer 2 at
infinity. They should detect thermal radiation redshifted to a temperature:

V1
𝑇2= T1
V2

V1 V 1 a1
So applying (32) leads to: 𝑇2= T1=
V2 V2 2π
At infinity we have 𝑉2→1, so the observed temperature is:

V 1 a1 k
𝑇= lim =
r1 → 2GM 2π 2 π

1
where 𝜅=lim (𝑉𝑎) is the surface gravity; For Schwarzschild 𝜅= . Note that 𝜅=𝑉𝑎 is
4 GM
then valid. Therefore the Hawking temperature of a Schwarzschild black hole, for which 𝜅=
1
can be written as (where 𝑀⊙is the mass of the Sun):
4 GM

𝑇=
1
8 πGM
=1.2× 1026 K
1g
M ( )
=6.0 × 10−8 K
M⊙
M ( )
Observers far from the black hole thus see a flux of thermal radiation emitted from the black hole
at a temperature proportional to its surface gravity. This is the Hawking effect, and the radiation
itself is known as the Hawking radiation.
Knowing the Hawking temperature we now can calculate the time it takes for a black hole to
evaporate. The area A of a sphere is 4𝜋r 2 . For Schwarzschild 𝑟=2𝐺𝑀 it follows:

𝐴=4𝜋( 2 GM )2=16𝜋G2 M 2

Stefan’s law [2] says that the power emitted from a black body is related to the surface area
and temperature to the fourth power: 𝑃=𝜎𝜀𝐴T 4. So the power of the Hawking radiation can
be written as follows, while plugging in (36) and (37):

ℏ c6 K ev
𝑃= 2 2
=¿ 2
15360 π G M M
6
ℏc
Where 𝐾𝑒𝑣= 2 is used for convenience. The energy outflow P can be defined, using
15360 π G
𝐸=𝑀C 2𝑎𝑛𝑑 (38), as:
 dE 2 dM K ev
𝑃=− =−c = 2
dt dt M

So –c 2 M 2 𝑑𝑀=𝐾𝑒𝑣 𝑑𝑡 and it follows:

0 t eν

−c
2
∫ M 2 dM =𝐾𝑒𝑣∫ dt
M0 0

1 2 3
c M 0 = K eν t eν
3

2 3
c M0
t eν=
3 K eν

For a body with mass comparable to the Sun it would take nearly 2.7 billion years for it to
evaporate.

To calculate the entropy of a black hole from this temperature is straightforward. The
dQ
entropy change can be defined as 𝑑𝑆= =8𝜋𝑀𝑑𝑀. This leads to
T

∫ dS=8𝜋∫ MdM
while using 𝐸=𝑀c 2 and Δ𝑄~Δ𝐸 it gives us

A A
S BH=4𝜋 M 2=𝜋r 2s =𝜋 =
4π 4

Scientist however, had some question marks about Hawking’s calculations, for example
1
Susskind [1]. First let’s have a look again at the temperature 𝑇= . Note that that the
8 πGM
larger the mass, the colder the black hole and vice versa. Susskind [1, p173] used the
example of a collapsed star (five time the mass of the Sun). The temperature of the black
hole would be 10−8𝐾. Susskind claims that there is nothing in the real world (interstellar or
intergalactic) that is this cold. As a black hole emits Hawking radiation and evaporates, the
mass decreases and the temperature rises. By the time it has reached Planck mass, its
temperature will have risen to 1032degrees. “The only time and place in the universe might
have been anywhere near that temperature was at the beginning of the Big Bang.”

The second is about the information loss. “So as a black hole radiates energy, it shrinks, until
it is no bigger than an elementary particle, and then it is gone” [1, p165]. As Hawking
claimed that every bit of information that went into the black hole would be permanently
hidden from the outside world, this would lead to the conclusion that the very last bit
(before the black hole is gone) would contain all the information of what went in previously.
So when the last bit is gone, where did the information go? [1]. “Once the black

hole has evaporated, we can no longer appeal to the event horizon as a way to hide
purported states of the black hole. There is no black hole anymore, just the Hawking
radiation it produced. The fact that this radiation is supposed to be precisely thermal (no
hidden correlations in the outgoing particles) means that it has no way of conveying the
vast amount of information needed to specify the states implied in our entropy calculation.
Thus if we assemble two very different original states and collapse them into two black
holes of the same mass, charge , and spin, they will radiate away into two indistinguishable
clouds of Hawking particles. The information that went into the specification of the system
before it became a black hole seems to have been erased; this is called the information loss
paradox”[7, p418]

3.4 Application of string entropy to black holes

According Horowitz [9] the string entropy is proportional to the mass in string units. It can be
illustrated by a simple model, assuming supersymmetry. The string can be seen as a random walk
with step size ls. “As result of the string tension, the energy in the string after n steps is
proportional to its length: ~n/ls. If one can move in k possible directions at each step, the total
number of configurations is kn, so the entropy for large n is proportional to n, i.e. proportional to
the energy” [9 p3].

Bekenstein [10] and Hawking [8] showed that black holes have entropy. Considering an
extremal (M=Q) charged black hole, the counted number of BPS1 states are:

N BPS =e S BH

Where,
There is a bound called BPS bound which states that 𝑀≥𝑄. States that saturate this bound are called BPS
states. It name BPS refers to the 3 scientists (Bogomol’nyi, Prasad, Summerfield) who discovered the
properties.

This is microscopic explanation of black hole entropy. Remarkably the number of states obtained
is related to the area of the black hole. Further successful research has been done for weakly
coupled systems of strings and D-branes. The entropy agrees for many black hole types, but what
about neutral black holes?
“Susskind (1993) suggested that there should be a one-to-one correspondence between ordinary
excited string states and black holes. Starting with a highly excited string with mass M, where
M2~N/ls2, and imagine increasing the string coupling g. Since ~g2ls2 , two effects take place.
First, the gravitational attraction of one part of the string on the other causes the string size to
decrease. Second, since G increases, the gravitational field produced by the string becomes
stronger and the effective Schwarzschild radius GM increases in string units. Clearly, for a
sufficiently large value of the coupling, the string forms a black hole. Conversely, suppose
one starts with black hole and decreases the string coupling. Then the Schwarzschild radius
shrinks in string units and eventually becomes of order the string scale. At this point the metric is
no longer well defined near the horizon. Susskind suggested that the black hole becomes an
excited string state.” [9, p5].
This looks strange as the string entropy is proportional to mass, while black hole entropy is the
mass squared. It can be explained as follows: “if one changes the string coupling g, the string
mass is constant in string units, while the black hole mass is constant in Planck units. Thus
𝑀𝑠=𝑀𝐵𝐻 depends on g. We expect the transition to occur when the curvature at the horizon of the
black hole reaches the string scale. This implies that the Schwarzschild radius 𝑟0 is of order string
scale. Setting M s ~ M BH when r 0 ~l s we find:

S BH~r 0 M BH ~l s M s~ Ss
So the entropies agree at this ‘correspondence point’. This agreement between string
entropy and black hole entropy applies essential to all black holes, including higher
dimensional Schwarzschild black holes, and charged black holes that are far from
extremality”[9, p6].

4. Conclusion
As we have seen, entropy in thermodynamics is denoted by 𝑆≡𝑘lnΩ. One way to look at this is
that it tells us the likeliness of something happening, where higher entropy signals higher odds.
Think about the example of the coins, where having 3 out of 5 heads has a higher chance of
occurring than no heads, thus also a higher entropy. We can also look at it from an information
point of view, saying that when we are in the macrostate with highest entropy there is most
uncertainty about the microstate we are in, presuming that only the macrostate can be observed.
Thus the more choice the higher the entropy, but also the odds matter. If there are two events, one
with probability 0.9 and the other with 0.1, then the entropy of this case is lower than when the
probability of both events would be 0.5. This can be explained by means of uncertainty, as in the
former case there is little uncertainty about which of the two events is going to take place,
however in the second case it is everyone’s guess. This uncertainty can then be expressed in
the form of an entropy
n
𝐻=−𝐾∑ Pi log Pi.
i=1

To understand the entropy of black holes, we reviewed some metrics of uncharged non-
rotating black holes and the properties of black holes. It turns out there is no way back once
a particle has past the event horizon and that there is also a singularity in the heart of a
black hole. Moreover energy can be extracted from a rotating black hole by means of the
penrose process, in the most extreme case this is 29% as the energy is extracted from the
rotational energy of a black hole. One can view the mass of a rotating black hole as the mass of a
non-rotating black hole with the same size plus the energy stored in its rotations. Thus when all
the rotational energy is extracted only a ‘normal’ black hole remains of which no energy can be
extracted. This remainder mass is therefore called the irreducible mass. It turns out that the
irreducible mass and the area of a black hole are related and that both can only increase.
The parallel with the second law of thermodynamics is then obvious. This, however, is not all,
conformity can also be found in the zeroth, first and third law. The third law, however, does not
always hold for extremal black holes. Using these parallels with thermodynamics but also
information entropy, where a black hole can be seen as a storage facility to hide information, one
can construct in two ways a formula for the entropy of a black hole.

−1 A ln ( 2 ) −1 A
Sbh =nℏ ≈ ℏ
4π 2 4π
In cgs units this is

ln ( 2 ) kA
Sbh =
2 4 π l 2p

Then Hawking discovered the hawking-radiation, which fixed the constant

kA
Sbh =¿ 2
4 lp
There are still new ways coming to derive the black hole entropy. One way is via string
theory, which shows great similarity to the statistical approach of counting states. However
there are still some open questions; when a black hole evaporates it gets smaller and hotter
and at some point it will reach the Planck size. This is the size of an ‘elementary particle’,
which cannot be a black hole according to Jacobson [6]. It might actually explode before it
gets that small, thus the question is what does actually happen to a black hole that when it
gets so small.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Sebastian for his help, for example with answering my many questions.
I would also like to thank my friends and family for their, sometimes simplistic, though very
helpful views and for their moral support.

References
1. Susskind, L (2009),”The black hole war”, Back bays book/Little,Brown and Company, paperback
edition.
2. Schroeder, D.V., (2010), “An introduction to Thermal Physics”, Addison Wesley Longon.
3. Shannon, C.E. (1948). "A Mathematical Theory of Communication". Bell System Technical
Journal 27(3): 379–423.
4. Wheeler, J.A., Sakharov revisited: “It from Bit”. Proceedings of the First International A D
Sakharov Memorial Conference on Physics, Moscow,USSR, 1991, May 27-31, Vol. 2 (Nova Science
Publishers; New York, 1991), S. 751
5. NCSA, web, http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/BlackHoleFormation.html,
University of Illinois.
6. Jacobson, T., (1996), “Introductory Lectures on Black Hole Thermodynamics”, Institute for
Theoretical Physics Utrecht of Utrecht.
7. Caroll, S.M., (2004), “An introduction to General Relativity Spacetime and Geometry”, Addison
Wesley.

8. Hawking, S.W., (1975), Particle creation by black hole, Commun. math. Phys. 43, 199-220.

9. Horowitz, G.T., (2007). ”Black Holes, Entropy, and information”, astro-ph > arXiv:0708.3680.

10. Bekenstein, J.D., (1972), “Black Holes and Entropy”, Phys.Rev. Vol7, N8.