Quantum Field Theory in!

Curved Space-time

Marc Casals
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas, RJ, Brazil!
University College Dublin,Ireland

Ubu, Brazil, 2015!

 Index

• Introduction to CFT

• QFT in flat s-t I: formalism

• QFT in flat s-t II: Unruh effect

• QFT in curved s-t I: formalism

• QFT in curved s-t II: black holes

 Bibliography
- Birrell&Davies “Quantum fields in curved space”!
!
- Fabbri&Navarro-Salas “Modeling BH Evaporation”!
!
- Frolov&Novikov “BH Physics”!
!
- Fulling “Aspects of QFT in Curved S-t”!
!
- Mukhanov&Winitzki “Quantum Effects in Gravity”!
!
- Parker&Toms “QFT in Curved S-t”!
!
- Wald “QFT in Curved S-t and BH Thermodynamics”
Classical Field Theory
 Action Principle

• Line-element & metric of a curved s-t:

ds = gµ⇥ dx dx
2 µ ⇥ g det(gµ⇥ )

• Action functional for a tensor field

Lagrangian density
region of s-t

• Action principle: EOM for are given by extremizing the

action wrt :
 Example: GR
• Einstein-Hilbert action (the field is ):

Ricci scalar Cosmological const.

• Einstein-Hilbert action with matter action:

• Action principle:

Einstein field eqs.:

Stress-energy tensor:

T00 : energy density!

T0j : momentum density! (µ, ⇥ = 0, 1, 2, 3; j = 1, 2, 3)

Tij : (normal & shear) stress

 Stress-energy Tensor

• Bianchi identity

it must be:

• If is constructed from a Lagrangian which is a scalar and

the fields obey the matter EOM, then is conserved
 Example: Scalar Field

• For a real (minimally-coupled) scalar field of mass m:

K.E. P.E.

Klein-Gordon eq.: ⇤ m 2
=0

S/ g µ⇥
 Example: Scalar Field in Flat s-t
• Klein-Gordon eq. for a massive real scalar classical field in flat s-t:

⇤ m2 = 0 = 2
t
⇥
+⇥ 2

• Apply spatial Fourier transform:

The modes

satisfy the eq. for the simple harmonic oscillator:

d2 ⇥k
2
+ ⇥k
2
⇥
k =0
dt

oscillator frequency: k k 2 + m2
• The general solution may be expressed via the inverse Fourier
transform as

so that

Fourier coefficients

• The field may be viewed as an infinite set of decoupled simple

harm. oscs., one for each
• In particular, the Hamiltonian is that for a set of harm. oscs.:
QFT in Flat Space-time
I. Formalism
 Canonical Quantization

• A real scalar field may be viewed as an infinite collection of

simple harm. oscs., one for each

• In order to quantize the field (in the Heisenberg picture) we just

quantize the harm. oscs.:

: annihilation ops. : creation ops.

 Commutation Relations

• Define the canonical field momentum in CFT:

and quantize:

• Motivated by the commutation rlns. of QM: [q̂(t), p̂(t)] = i

we impose the equal-time commutation rlns.:

 QFT Divergences
• The equal-time comm. rlns. are equivalent to the comm. rlns.:

is an operator-valued distribution!

ˆ
• So products like (x) in T̂µ⇥ (x) are just formal expressions
2

and will plague the QFT with divergences

• Note: strictly, one should integrate it against a test-function

in order to get a well-defined operator:
 Hilbert Space

• The Minkowski vacuum state is defined via

⇤ 1 ⇥ ns
• Excited states | n1 , n2 , . . . = ⇤ +
â⌅ |M
s
ns ! ks
span a Hilbert space (Fock representation). They correspond to
states with ns quantum particles with momentum ⇥ ks s
 Scalar Product

• Define

- it is a scalar product

- if are slns. of K-G eq, then it is independent of

•The Minkowski modes are orthonormal:

 Quantization Procedure
(1) Choose a set of slns. of field eq. that is
complete and orthonormal:

(2) Then any op. sln. of the field eq. may be expanded as

where

(3) Then imposing comm. rlns. for is equivalent to

imposing comm. rlns. for

(4) Define a vacuum by

excited states by etc

 Hamiltonian

• Hamiltonian:

• Zero-point energy density:

M | Ĥ | M ⇥ per unit volume=

has ultra-violet divergence since there is an infinite

k
amount of harm. oscs., each with zero-point energy
2
• Origin: ˆ(x) is an operator-valued distribution
 Normal Ordering

• Renormalization: this infinite cannot be detected by

measuring transitions between states -> it can be subtracted
away by normal ordering: place all annihilation ops. to the
right of the creation ops.

M |: Ĥ :| M ⇥ = 0 in agreement with experiments

• Normal-ordering is equivalent to subtracting the exp.val. in

Minkowski vacuum:
ˆ 2 ˆ
⇥⇥ |: (x) :| ⇥⇤ = ⇥⇥ | (x) | ⇥⇤
2 ˆ
⇥M | (x) | M ⇤
2
 Bogolyubov Transformations
• Consider two complete and orthonormal sets of slns. of the field
eqs.: and

• Then

and, since form a complete set,

Bogolyubov transf.

Bogolyubov coeffs.:
 Vacuum States

• The relationship between the creation/annihilation ops. is then

• Different choices of complete sets yield different ‘vacuum’

quantum states of the matter field:

and

• The number of quantum v-particles of mode-type r in the

u-vacuum is
QFT in Flat Space-time
II. Unruh Effect
 Rindler Observers

• Consider 2-D flat s-t:

null coords.:

where t is the proper time of inertial observers

• Rindler obs.: obs. with uniform acceleration

and proper time . They have

(hyperbola)
 Rindler Frame

• Coordinate transf. to Rindler coords. :

conformal factor

• Rindler obs. are at

• Range only cover : the right Rindler

wedge. Similar transformations can be used to cover the whole s-t
 t observer ( = 0)

lig
ht
co
n e = const

L: left Rindler
R: right Rindler
wedge
wedge
ne
co
ht
lig

• Rindler obs. ‘perceive an event horizon’ at the Killing horizons

at
 Wave Eq.
• K-G eq. in the inertial frame:

These modes:

- are pos. freq. modes wrt :

- form a complete set in the whole s-t:

• K-G eq. in the Rindler frame:

in R

in L

These modes:

- are pos. freq. modes wrt :

- form a complete set in R only -> We can also find the mode slns.:

in L

in R
• Together they form a complete set in the whole s-t:

• Vacuum states:

- Minkowski vacuum:

- Rindler vacuum:

• How many Rindler particles does the Minkowski vacuum

contain? Unruh’76
• The Minkowski modes

are analytic and bounded in the lower half of the complex

u- and v-planes

• Any lin.comb. of pos. freq. (wrt ) modes (ie, trivial

Bogolyubov transf. ) will have this property but it won’t
if any negat. freq. mode is included -> characterization of
Minkowski pos.freq. modes: they are analytic and bounded in the
lower u- and v-planes

• Rindler modes for :

are not analytic

• But it can be shown that the modes

are analytic and bounded in the lower half of the u- and v-planes

• For they are concentrated in R, so also construct

which are also analytic and bounded in the lower half of the u- and
v-planes, and, for , they are concentrated in L
• We can expand

then

• We have explicitly constructed the Bogolyubov transf.:

• Therefore the number of Rindler particles contained in the

Minkowski vacuum is

this is a thermal Planck spectrum of Rindler particles with

temperature
• It can be shown that the ‘renormalized’
diverges at the Killing horizons (in the regular inertial frame)

• Therefore, the Rindler vacuum is an unphysical state

• A ‘quantum particle detector’ sees as a vacuum state that state
which is defined using pos.freq. modes wrt its proper time
[Unruh’76,Brown&Ottewill’83,Grove&Ottewill’83] (also true in
curved s-t)

• So, if the field is in the Minkowski vacuum,!

!
- an inertial observer detects no particles!
!
- a Rindler observer detects particles as if he were in a thermal
bath at the Unruh temperature

• Unruh effect not currently measurable, eg,

for we need
QFT in Curved Space-time

I. Formalism
 Semiclassical Einstein Eqs.
• Semiclassical theory of Quantum Gravity

matter fields are quantized (in some appropriate state ) but

gravitational field is not. We will keep the grav. background
classical and fixed

• This is valid in the limit that the length and time scales of the
physical processes Planck length and time
⇥
3 1/2
⇥
5 1/2
G /c 10 cm and
33
G /c 10 s44
 Renormalization

• However, | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ suffers from ultraviolet divergences

since ˆ(x) is an operator-valued distribution

• So we need to renormalize: ⇥ | T̂µ⇥ | ⇤ ⇥ | T̂µ⇥ | ⇤ren

• Energy now creates s-t curvature via Einstein eqs., so we cannot

renormalize by simply subtracting constant infinities like we did
in flat s-t
• Classically:!

• Semiclassically: we define an effective action and Lagrangian

s.t.

• The divergences in | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ can be traced back

to divergences in Lef f
• Before removing the divergences, one must use a
regularization scheme to make sense of ˆ2 (x)
ˆ
Eg, point-splitting lets temporarily ! (x)
2 ˆ(x) ˆ(x )
then remove the divergences and afterwards take the limit x x

How to calculate ?

• Using certain regularization schemes (like that in point-

splitting) one can show that the divergences of Lef f :

(a) only depend on the background gµ⇥ (they are

independent of | )

and...
(b) can be expressed as terms which are either:!

(b1) proportional to R! renormalize

R
Recall:! L grav
+Lef f
= +L ef f
=
16 G 8 G
⇤ ⌅
R ⇥
+ ‘div. prop. to R’ + Lef f ‘div. prop. to R’
⌥16 G ⌃⇧ 8 G
R
16 Gren
(b2) constant renormalize
⇥ ⇥
R
grav
L +Lef f
= + ‘div. prop. to R’ + + ‘const. div.’ +
⇧16 G ⌅⇤ ⌃ ⇧8 G ⌅⇤ ⌃
R ren
16 Gren 8 Gren
⇥
L ef f
‘div. prop. to R’ ‘const. div.’
The finite, renormalized values Gren and ren (which have
‘absorbed’ the divergences) are given by experiments.!

(b3) 4th (adiabatic) order A priori, Einstein eqs. might

in derivatives of !gµ⇥ include terms of 4th order in
R2 , R;µ⇥ , R, Rµ⇥ , . . . derivatives of gµ⇥ !!
 The resulting | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ren , which is constructed from Lef f
after the removal of the above divergences, satisfies Wald’s
axioms (Wald’77): the renormalized | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ren should
satisfy:!

(1) covariant conservation | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ren ;⇥

= 0 so it can be on!
rhs of Einstein eqs. (true because derived from scalar lagrangian)
(2) causality: only depends on metric at pts.!

(3) If | ⇥ = 0 , then | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥ren = | T̂µ⇥ | ⇥

(this is because it’s finite, so no need to do anything)
(4) In flat s-t with R4 topology: M | T̂µ⇥ | M ⇥ren = 0
‘Uniqueness’: If two different energy-momentum tensors satisfy
(1)->(3), their difference can be ‘absorbed’ by the renormalization
procedure mentioned.!
 Scalar product

• Consider a globally hyperbolic s-t -> Cauchy surfaces

labelled by a parameter t. Then

- defines a scalar product

- is independent of the Cauchy surface if i are slns. of the
Klein-Gordon eq.
 Quantization Procedure: like in flat s-t
(1) Choose a set of slns. of field eq. that is
complete and orthonormal:

ie, have positive norm

(2) Then any op. sln. of the field eq. may be expanded as

where
(3) Then

(4) Define a vacuum by

excited states by etc

 Choice of modes

• Suppose is a timelike Killing vector, then

- s.t. it is the proper time of an observer with 4-velocity
parallel to
- complete set of slns. s.t.
(pos. freq. modes wrt )

• Remember: an observer sees as empty a quantum state which is

defined using pos.freq. modes wrt its proper time.
So the obs. with 4-velocity would see as empty the state
defined using
• In a non-stationary s-t, it is ‘natural’ to choose modes which are
pos. freq. wrt the tlike Killing vector (supposing there’s one) in the
asymptotic past & future

• The K-G scalar product is positive definite for pos. freq. modes ->
it is an inner product for the vector space of pos. freq. slns. (one-
particle Hilbert space)
QFT in Flat Space-time
II. Black Holes
 Eternal Schwarzschild BH
• Line-element for a static, spherically-symmetric black hole of
mass M (Schwarzschild):
⇤ ⌅ ⇤ ⌅ 1
2M 2M ⇥
ds =
2
1 dt + 1
2
dr + r d + sin d⇥
2 2 2 2 2
r r
Event horizon at r = 2M
• Killing vectors: slike (axisymmetry) and tlike (stationarity)

• Null coords.:
r ⇥
r ⇥ r + 2M ln 1 ⌅ ( ⇤, ⇤) for r ⌅ (2M, ⇤)
2M
Radially in/outgoing null geodesics are at u,v=const.
• Kruskal coords. to cover beyond EH:
1 surface gravity=force done at infinity to hold unit
4M mass above horizon
Similar transformations to cover whole s-t
 T
r = 0 (singularity) <- Schwarzschild

t = const

r = const
t

= const

flat/Rindler ->
• Compactify s-t via

L R

Maximally extended Schwarzschild s-t

 Scalar Field

• Massless Klein-Gordon eq., = 0 , separates by variables:

Gral. sln.:

Field modes:

normalization const. spherical harmonics

• Radial eq.: 2nd order linear ODE -> choose 2 lin. indep. slns.

r*
-20 -10 10 20
 Modes
• ‘in,R’ modes

L
• ‘up,R’ modes

L
• ‘in&up,L’ modes

in,L in,R
 Boulware State

• On the maximally extended Schwarzschild s-t,

form a set that is:

- orthonormal:

- complete:

• Boulware state is defined via

[ Remember: an observer sees as empty a quantum state which is
defined using pos.freq. modes wrt its proper time]

• Boulware state is defined using modes that are pos. freq. wrt
it is seen as empty by static obs. (ie, r, , ⇥ = const )
 Gravitational Collapse
• Astrophysical BH’s are not eternal, they are formed from
gravitational collapse of a star

• Hawking’75 showed that modes

at

behave like
ie, they are pos. freq. modes
wrt , as they leave the star,
leading to the ‘evaporation’ of
the BH via emission of
quantum Hawking radiation
 Unruh State
• So instead of using in eternal BH s-t, we could model
BH evaporation by using modes that are pos. freq. wrt on

• Eg, we could directly use but in order to obtain

Bogolyubov coeffs. Unruh’76 instead used the modes:

Same rln. as between Rindler&Minkowski modes in flat s-t!

Remember:

they define
they define
• Similarly define modes with in

• On the maximally extended Schwarzschild s-t,

form a set that is:

- orthonormal
- complete:

• Unruh state is defined via

• It can be shown that are pos. freq. wrt
on

• It is defined using modes that are pos. freq. wrt affine parameter
on and affine parameter on Unruh state is
seen as empty by free-falling obs. in those regions
 Hartle-Hawking State
• We can also define the IN version of the UP modes as:

defined like with

• On the maximally extended Schwarzschild s-t,

•
form a set that is:

- orthonormal

- complete:

• Hartle-Hawking state is defined via

 • It can be shown that are pos. freq. wrt
on

• It is defined using modes that are pos. freq. wrt affine parameter
on and affine parameter on it is seen as empty
by free-falling obs. on
 States’ Properties (Candelas’80)

• RSET
- goes to zero like as

- diverges on in a free-falling frame

Expected, since it is defined using inertial frame ,

which diverges on EH [similar to Rindler state defined using
Rindler frame {⇥, } , which diverges on Killing horizons]

• Remember: Boulware state is seen as empty by static obs.,

which are accelerated obs. in Schwarzschild s-t [so similar to
Rindler state seen as empty by accelerated obs. in flat s-t]
• Boulware state:

- is the equivalent of the Rindler state in flat s-t

- models a cold star

 ⌫
• RSET h U | T̂ µ |U iren

- diverges at H
- is regular at H+
- has a flux of thermal Hawking radiation at I + :
0 1
1 1 0 0
L B B 1 1 0 0 C
C, r ! 1
⇠ @ A µ, ⌫ = {t, r, ✓, '}
4⇡r 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
! : ‘greybody’
Z 1 factor
1 !· !
Luminosity: L = d!
2⇡ 0 e!/TH 1
1
Hawking temperature: TH =
8⇡M
Expected, since UP - up modes (though not for ingoing modes)
relationship same as between Rindler&Minkowski modes in flat s-t
• Unruh state models an evaporating BH
• RSET
- has a bath of thermal radiation at :

µ, ⌫ = {t, r, ✓, '}
Expected, since UP - up and IN - in modes relationship same as
between Rindler&Minkowski modes in flat s-t

- is regular at (and everywhere else)

Expected, since it is defined using Kruskal frame ,

which is regular in the whole s-t [similar to Minkowski state
defined using inertial frame, regular in the whole flat s-t]

- is invariant under symmetries of BH s-t

• Remember: H-H state is seen as empty by free-falling obs. on ,
[similar to Minkowski state seen as empty by inertial obs. in flat s-t]

• Hartle-Hawking state:

- is the equivalent of the Minkowski state in flat s-t

- models a BH in thermal (unstable) equilibrium with its own
radiation
 Kerr Space-time

• Rotating black hole with angular momentum per unit mass a and
mass M

⇥ 2 ⇤2 ⌃ sin2 ⇥
✓ ⇤2
ds =
2
dt a sin ✓d'
2
+ dr + ⌃d✓ +
2 2
r2 + a2 d' adt
⌃ ⌃
⌘ r2 2M r + a2 ⌃ ⌘ r2 + a2 cos2 ✓

p
• Event-horizon: r h = M + M 2 a2

a
• Angular velocity: ⌦ = r2 + a2
h
 Killing Vectors
• Axisymmetric s-t @' is a spacelike killing vector

• Stationary s-t @t is a spacelike killing vector

• Any lin. comb. of @t and @' is a Killing vector. In particular,

⌘ @t + ⌦@' is a Killing vector that is the null generator

of the horizon
• However, there is no Killing vector which is timelike everywhere
outside the horizon:

- @t is timelike from infinity down to the stationary limit surface:

where obs. cannot be static anymore (they must rotate)
- is timelike from just outside the horizon up to the speed-of-
light surface: where obs. cannot rotate at anymore (veloc.=c)
 Hypersurfaces
⌦
stationary
2
>0 (@t )2 > 0 limit surface

ergosphere
=0
2

speed-of-light event-horizon =0
2

surface ⌘ @t + ⌦@'
a0.3 a0.6
a0.9 2
stationary
lim.
1 a0.6
a0.9 a0.3

–3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3

–1

speed- event-horizon
of-light –2
 QFT in Kerr for Bosons
• Field eq.: separates by variables

= R⇤ (r)S⇤ (✓)eim' i!t ⇤ ⌘ {`, m, !}

Mode slns.: ⇤
⇤ ⌘ {`, m, !}

• Suppose is a complete set of slns., then you

may expand the field operator as X
ˆ= †
â⇤ ⇤ + â⇤ ⇤
⇤

• If ( ±⇤ , ±⇤0 ) =± ⇤,⇤0 positive norm wrt a scalar product

negative
h i
†
then commutation rlns. â⇤ , â⇤0 = ⇤,⇤0 follow from the equal

time commutation rlns.

 QFT in Kerr for Fermions
• Dirac field eq.

Dirac matrices Dirac 4-spinors

Spinor connection matrices

The Dirac field eq. in Kerr separates by variables and decouples

for the different spinor components
• Suppose is a complete set of slns., then you
may expand the field operator as
X
ˆ= â⇤ ⇤ + †
b̂⇤ ⇤
⇤
 ⇣ ⌘
† 0
• There is a conserved current J = 1˜
µ µ
2

rµ J = 0µ

which we can use to constract an inner product as:

Z
( 1, 2) = J dSt
t=const

• If ( ±⇤ , ±⇤0 ) = ⇤,⇤0 all positive norm wrt inner product

n o n o
† †
then anticommutation rlns. â⇤ , â⇤0 = b̂⇤ , b̂⇤0 = ⇤,⇤0

follow from
 Modes

• We will define in/up/UP/IN modes in Kerr similarly to the way

we did in Schwarzschild, with two differences:

- We will only consider the outer region of the BH

- The radial eq. has the Schrodinger-like form:

with

but

˜⌘!
! m⌦
Pos. freq. modes: when Fourier-decomposed, the modes only have
positive frequency
‘in’ ‘up’

H +
I + H+ I+

H I H I

‘in’: p.f. at I wrt null coord. v in

@v ⇤ ⇠ i! in
⇤ 8! > 0
up up
‘up’: p.f. at H wrt null coord. u @u ⇤ ⇠ i˜
! ⇤ !>0
8˜

‘IN’: p.f. at H+ wrt Kruskal coord. V 8! 2 R

!2R
‘UP’: p.f. at H wrt Kruskal coord. U 8˜
 Classical: Boson Modes

• We are constrained to choosing the in/up modes as follows

- ‘in’ modes are pos/negat norm for pos/negat !

So for ‘in’ modes involves only

- ‘up’ modes are pos/negat norm for pos/negat

So for ‘up’ modes involves only

 Classical: Boson Modes
• Classical superradiance for ! !˜ < 0 H +
I+
2 ˜
! 2
1 |R| = |T | T R
!
• 1st law of b-h thermodynamics:
✓ ◆ I
A H
dM = TH d + ⌦dJ
4 1
✓ ◆
dM ! ˜
! A
Send wavepacket in with
dJ
=
m
! !
dM = TH d
4

Area th.: dA > 0 if weak-energy cond. is satisfied (ie, energy

density measured by an obs. is non-negat)

) dM < 0 for ! !
˜<0
 Classical: Fermion Modes

• All modes are positive norm 8! 2 R

-> freedom in choice of pos.freq. modes
2 2
• No classical superradiance: 1 |R| = |T |
+ +
H I
T R

I
H 1

• Fermions do not satisfy the weak-energy condition -> Area

th. does not apply
 Classical stability for bosons
Mirror outside ergosphere Mirror inside ergosphere
I+ I+
(@t )2 > 0
stable
unstable
I (Friedman’78)
I

Mirror inside SOL Mirror outside SOL

H+ H+ 2
>0
stable
unstable
H H (Duffy&Ottewill’08)
 Classical stability for fermions

stable in all cases!

(In preparation)
 States in Kerr - bosons

˜ for ‘up’ modes (because

Defined as in Schwarzschild but ! ! !
of positive norm)

• Boulware

[s=0: Unruh’74; Ottewill&Winstanley’00; s=1: Casals&Ottewill’05]

Properties:
- irregular at , regular elsewhere

- empty at I and H
- has Unruh-Starobinsky radiation at I + from superradiant modes
- there is no state empty at I±
• Unruh

Properties as in Schwarzschild:

- irregular at but regular elsewhere

- empty at I

- Hawking radiation at I +
rh2 a2
at Hawking temperature: TH =
4⇡rh (rh2 + a2 )
 States in Kerr for Bosons

• Hartle-Hawking

- Remember: in Schwarzschild, this state was regular

everywhere, satisfied the symmetries of the s-t, contained a
thermal bath at infinity, modeled a BH in thermal eq. with its
own radiation

- This state, therefore, is the relevant one for, eg, the laws of BH
thermodynamics; AdS/CFT correspondence, etc
 - The attempt by Frolov&Thorne’89 is ill-defined everywhere
due to a pole at !
˜ = 0 [Ottewill&Winstanley’00]
X Z 1 2
⌦ ↵ |T |
U ˆ2 U hF T | ˆ2 |F T i ⇠ d! , r ! rh
`,m 0 ! e!˜ /TH 1

- Candelas, Chrzanowski & Howard’81 constructed a H-H-like

state where modes are thermalized wrt their ‘natural energy’ (ie,
‘in’ modes wrt and ‘up’ modes wrt )
Casals&Ottewill’05: CCH is regular everywhere but does not
satisfy symmetries of space-time

D ECCH B
T̂t+ '+
1e–06 SOL
SL

ZAMO
0

Carter
–1e–06

–2e–06

–3e–06

2.2
2 RRO
1.8 –1
–0.5
r 1.6 0
1.4 0.5 x
1
• Kay&Wald’91: in a globally-hyperbolic s-t with a bifurcate
Killing horizon, if there exists a state which is regular everywhere
and has symmetries of spacetime then it is thermal (ie, Hartle-
Hawking).

They prove that such a state does not exist in Kerr for bosons
using superradiance....but what about fermions?
 States in Kerr - fermions

[Casals,Dolan,Nolan,Ottewill,Winstanley’12]

Remember: ‘in’ & ‘up’ have positive norm 8! 2 R

• Boulware: similar as for bosons. Eg, it has Unruh-Starobinsky

radiation (even if fermions have no classical superradiance) at I +

However, one may define:

in
â⇤ |Bi = 0 8! > 0
up
â⇤ |Bi = 0 ! > 0)
8! > 0 (for bosons: 8˜

Expected to be empty at I ±
• Unruh: Similar as for bosons

•‘Hartle-Hawking’ is now well-defined!

but where is it regular?

 Boulware for Fermions

Particle number D EU B Expectation value of Jr : U- - B

current ˆ
J r 4

Properties: 2 ergosphere

- Empty at radial 1

infinity y/M
0

- Regular on and outside -1

SOL
-2

- Divergence in SOL
-3
ergosphere
-4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
x/M
 H-H for Fermions

H - (U-)
4
Properties:
3
ergosphere
2

- It is well-defined 1

y/M
0

- Divergence on SOL due to large- -1

modes: ` -> thermal bath rotating -2

with horizon? -3
SOL
-4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
x/M
 Conclusions in Kerr
• For bosons:

- No ‘Boulware empty at infinity

- Hartle-Hawking is ill-defined

• For fermions we can construct:

- A state (‘Boulware') empty at infinity, though div. in ergosphere

- A state (‘Hartle-Hawking’) that is in thermal though divergent on

SOL

Obrigado