Black hole entropy as a Noether Charge

haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
3,045
Reaction score
1,579
Hi folks, I have a question about a paper by Thomas Mohaupt, called
"Black hole entropy, special geometry and strings". It's available here:

http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=application%2Fpdf&identifier=oai%3AarXiv.org%3Ahep-th%2F0007195

My question concerns part 2.2.5 , page 18. I find it quite difficult to get a nice feeling for doing calculations like the ones in that part. Here the author defines entropy as a surface charge ( a method due to Wald ). He assumes that the Lagrangian depends on the Riemanntensor, the energy-momentum (E-M) tensor and the derivative of the E-M tensor ( the covariant, I presume? ). He then considers a variation of the E-M tensor and the metric, which I do understand ( they're defined via a general coordinate transformation, so you end up with a Lie-derivative ) So up to that it's okay.

First, I want to do the variation of the Lagrangian with respect to the Riemanntensor, and here I get some troubles. How do I write down such a variation ? It looks like

\delta S = \frac{\partial L }{\partial R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} } \delta R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}

Here L is the Lagrangian density.
If I want to rewrite this in terms of the variation with respect to the metric, can I use the usual chain rules for differentiation? Or should I do the differentiation explicitly with respect to the metric, and rewrite this in terms of the Riemanntensor?

Then they define a current J. Via Noethers theorem I know that one can define such a current as

J^{\mu} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi ,\mu} \delta \phi

where we sum over all fields phi. So my guess would be that the current which is written down there in section 2.2.5 is acquired via

J^{\mu} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial R_{\nu\lambda\rho\sigma},\mu} \delta R_{\nu\lambda\rho\sigma} + \frac{\partial L}{\partial \psi_{\nu\lambda},\mu} \delta \psi_{\nu\lambda}

Is this going into the right direction? In the variation of the metric and the E-M tensor they use a test function epsilon which is a function of the coordinates, but I don't see it in the current back. That's strange, because you can't divide the function out of the current ( we get derivatices of the test function ). Or can we put those terms to 0? Also I have some doubts about when to use partial derivatives in such calculations, and when to use covariant derivatives. Should I just replace al partial derivatives in such calculations by covariant derivatives?

And does any-one know a good text(book) in which all this is nicely explained? I've been searching on the internet, but without good results. A lot of questions, I hope some-one can help me. Many thanks in forward,

Haushofer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top