These horizons model black holes which are themselves in equilibrium, but in possibly dynamical
space-times [12, 13
, 25
, 15
]. For early references with similar ideas, see [156, 106]. A useful example is
provided by the late stage of a gravitational collapse shown in Figure 1
. In such physical situations, one
expects the back-scattered radiation falling into the black hole to become negligible at late times so that the
‘end portion’ of the event horizon (labelled by
in the figure) can be regarded as isolated to an excellent
approximation. This expectation is borne out in numerical simulations where the backscattering effects
typically become smaller than the numerical errors rather quickly after the formation of the black hole (see,
e.g., [33
, 46
]).
The key idea is to extract from the notion of a Killing horizon the minimal conditions which are necessary
to define physical quantities such as the mass and angular momentum of the black hole and to establish the
zeroth and the first laws of black hole mechanics. Like Killing horizons, isolated horizons are null,
3-dimensional sub-manifolds of space-time. Let us therefore begin by recalling some essential features
of such sub-manifolds, which we will denote by
. The intrinsic metric
on
has
signature (0,+,+), and is simply the pull-back of the space-time metric to
,
, where
an underarrow indicates the pullback to
. Since
is degenerate, it does not have an
inverse in the standard sense. However, it does admit an inverse in a weaker sense:
will
be said to be an inverse of
if it satisfies
. As one would expect, the
inverse is not unique: We can always add to
a term of the type
, where
is a
null normal to
and
any vector field tangential to
. All our constructions will be
insensitive to this ambiguity. Given a null normal
to
, the expansion
is defined as
Definition 1: A sub-manifold
of a space-time
is said to be a non-expanding horizon
(NEH) if
The motivation behind this definition can be summarized as follows. Condition 1 is imposed for
definiteness; while most geometric results are insensitive to topology, the
case is physically the
most relevant one. Condition 3 is satisfied by all classical matter fields of direct physical interest. The key
condition in the above definition is Condition 2 which is equivalent to requiring that every cross-section of
be marginally trapped. (Note incidentally that if
vanishes for one null normal
to
, it
vanishes for all.) Condition 2 is equivalent to requiring that the infinitesimal area element is Lie dragged by
the null normal
. In particular, then, Condition 2 implies that the horizon area is ‘constant in time’.
We will denote the area of any cross section of
by
and define the horizon radius as
.
Because of the Raychaudhuri equation, Condition 2 also implies
where The zeroth and first laws of black hole mechanics require an additional structure, which is provided by
the concept of a weakly isolated horizon. To arrive at this concept, let us first introduce a derivative
operator
on
. Because
is degenerate, there is an infinite number of (torsion-free) derivative
operators which are compatible with it. However, on an NEH, the property
implies that the
space-time connection
induces a unique (torsion-free) derivative operator
on
which is compatible with
[25
, 137
]. Weakly isolated horizons are characterized by the
property that, in addition to the metric
, the connection component
is also ‘time
independent’.
Two null normals
and
to an NEH
are said to belong to the same equivalence class
if
for some positive constant
. Then, weakly isolated horizons are defined as
follows:
Definition 2: The pair
is said to constitute a weakly isolated horizon (WIH) provided
is
an NEH and each null normal
in
satisfies
It is easy to verify that every NEH admits null normals satisfying Equation (5
), i.e., can be made a
WIH with a suitable choice of
. However the required equivalence class is not unique, whence an NEH
admits distinct WIH structures [15
].
Compared to conditions required of a Killing horizon, conditions in this definition are very weak. Nonetheless, it turns out that they are strong enough to capture the notion of a black hole in equilibrium in applications ranging from black hole mechanics to numerical relativity. (In fact, many of the basic notions such as the mass and angular momentum are well-defined already on NEHs although intermediate steps in derivations use a WIH structure.) This is quite surprising at first because the laws of black hole mechanics were traditionally proved for globally stationary black holes [184], and the definitions of mass and angular momentum of a black hole first used in numerical relativity implicitly assumed that the near horizon geometry is isometric to Kerr [5].
Although the notion of a WIH is sufficient for most applications, from a geometric viewpoint, a stronger
notion of isolation is more natural: The full connection
should be time-independent. This leads to the
notion of an isolated horizon.
Definition 3: A WIH
is said to constitute an isolated horizon (IH) if
While an NEH can always be given a WIH structure simply by making a suitable choice of the null
normal, not every WIH admits an IH structure. Thus, the passage from a WIH to an IH is a
genuine restriction [15
]. However, even for this stronger notion of isolation, conditions in the
definition are local to
. Furthermore, the definition only uses quantities intrinsic to
;
there are no restrictions on components of any fields transverse to
. (Even the full 4-metric
need not be time independent on the horizon.) Robinson–Trautman solutions provide
explicit examples of isolated horizons which do not admit a stationary Killing field even in an
arbitrarily small neighborhood of the horizon [66
]. In this sense, the conditions in this definition
are also rather weak. One expects them to be met to an excellent degree of approximation in
a wide variety of situations representing late stages of gravitational collapse and black hole
mergers2.
The class of space-times admitting NEHs, WIHs, and IHs is quite rich. First, it is trivial to verify that any
Killing horizon which is topologically
is also an isolated horizon. This in particular implies that
the event horizons of all globally stationary black holes, such as the Kerr–Newman solutions
(including a possible cosmological constant), are isolated horizons. (For more exotic examples,
see [155].)
But there exist other non-trivial examples as well. These arise because the notion is quasi-local, referring
only to fields defined intrinsically on the horizon. First, let us consider the sub-family of Kastor–Traschen
solutions [126, 152] which are asymptotically de Sitter and admit event horizons. They are interpreted as
containing multiple charged, dynamical black holes in presence of a positive cosmological constant. Since
these solutions do not appear to admit any stationary Killing fields, no Killing horizons are known to exist.
Nonetheless, the event horizons of individual black holes are WIHs. However, to our knowledge, no one has
checked if they are IHs. A more striking example is provided by a sub-family of Robinson–Trautman
solutions, analyzed by Chrusciel [66]. These space-times admit IHs whose intrinsic geometry is isomorphic
to that of the Schwarzschild isolated horizons but in which there is radiation arbitrarily close to
.
More generally, using the characteristic initial value formulation [91, 161], Lewandowski [141] has
constructed an infinite dimensional set of local examples. Here, one considers two null surfaces
and
intersecting in a 2-sphere
(see Figure 3
). One can freely specify certain data on these two surfaces
which then determines a solution to the vacuum Einstein equations in a neighborhood of
bounded by
and
, in which
is an isolated horizon.
On IHs, by contrast, the situation is dramatically different. Given an IH
, generically
the Condition (6
) in Definition 3 can not be satisfied by a distinct equivalence class of null
normals
. Thus on a generic IH, the only freedom in the choice of the null normal is that of
a rescaling by a positive constant [15
]. This freedom mimics the properties of a Killing horizon
since one can also rescale the Killing vector by an arbitrary constant. The triplet
is said to constitute the geometry of the isolated horizon.
Next, let us consider the Ricci-tensor components. On any NEH
we have:
,
. In the Einstein–Maxwell theory, one further has: On
,
and
.
Let
be a spherical cross section of
. The degenerate metric
naturally projects to
a Riemannian metric
on
, and similarly the 1-form
of Equation (7
) projects to a
1-form
on
. If the vacuum equations hold on
, then given
on
, there
is, up to diffeomorphisms, a unique non-extremal isolated horizon geometry
such
that
is the projection of
,
is the projection of the
constructed from
,
and
. (If the vacuum equations do not hold, the additional data required is
the projection on
of the space-time Ricci tensor.)
The underlying reason behind this result can be sketched as follows. First, since
is
degenerate along
, its non-trivial part is just its projection
. Second,
fixes the
connection on
; it is only the quantity
that is not constrained by
,
where
is a 1-form on
orthogonal to
, normalized so that
. It is easy
to show that
is symmetric and the contraction of one of its indices with
gives
:
. Furthermore, it turns out that if
, the field equations completely
determine the angular part of
in terms of
and
. Finally, recall that the surface
gravity is not fixed on
because of the rescaling freedom in
; thus the
-component of
is not part of the free data. Putting all these facts together, we see that the pair
enables us to reconstruct the isolated horizon geometry uniquely up to diffeomorphisms.
On any non-extremal NEH, the 1-form
can be used to construct preferred foliations of
.
Let us first examine the simpler, non-rotating case in which
. Then Equation (9
)
implies that
is curl-free and therefore hypersurface orthogonal. The 2-surfaces orthogonal
to
must be topologically
because, on any non-extremal horizon,
. Thus,
in the non-rotating case, every isolated horizon comes equipped with a preferred family of
cross-sections which defines the rest frame [25
]. Note that the projection
of
on any
leaf of this foliation vanishes identically.
The rotating case is a little more complicated since
is then no longer curl-free. Now the idea is to
exploit the fact that the divergence of the projection
of
on a cross-section is sensitive to the
choice of the cross-section, and to select a preferred family of cross-sections by imposing a suitable
condition on this divergence [15
]. A mathematically natural choice is to ask that this divergence
vanish. However, (in the case when the angular momentum is non-zero) this condition does not pick
out the
cuts of the Kerr horizon where
is the (Carter generalization of the)
Eddington–Finkelstein coordinate. Pawlowski has provided another condition that also
selects a preferred foliation and reduces to the
cuts of the Kerr horizon:
In the asymptotically flat context, boundary conditions select a universal symmetry group at spatial infinity, e.g., the Poincaré group, because the space-time metric approaches a fixed Minkowskian one. The situation is completely different in the strong field region near a black hole. Because the geometry at the horizon can vary from one space-time to another, the symmetry group is not universal. However, the above result shows that the symmetry group can be one of only three universality classes.
| http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2004-10 |
© Max Planck Society and the author(s)
Problems/comments to |