The time factor in the semi-classical approach
to the Hawking radiation
submitted to Phys. Rev. D ; arXiv:0904.4572v2
Author: Marco Pizzi
Speaker: Dr. Marco Pizzi
ICRAnet, University of Rome “La Sapienza’’
[email protected]
MGM XII, Paris, 12-18 July 2009
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
The semiclassical approximation
The probability of a pair creation during
the history of a field is:

W. Heisenberg, H. Euler. Z. Phys. 38, 714, (1936)
J. Schwinger. Phys. Rev. 82, 664, (1951).

In the Hawking-radiation case we need to calculate
rH =horizon

The semi-classical approximation consist in
evaluating the Lagrangian on the classical
trajectory only. V. Popov. Sov. Phys. JETP, 34, 709, (1972).
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
The simplest way to find ΔS

Let us consider the Schwarzschild metric:

Then, for a massive particle we have the two first integrals:
from which follows

Then it is immediate to write the action:
See e.g.
Feynman
Lectures
on Gravitation

Consequently:
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
Escaping
particles



The point is that for any trajectory with E>m , there
is no pole on the horizon in the action’s integrand
(contrary to what has been claimed in the most of
the paper after Parikh&Wilzcek, 2000).
The action S is an invariant, and also Eqn.(6) is an
invariant result.
The result is physically expected since the spacetime on rH is homeomorphic to Minkowski.
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
The Hamilton-Jacobi method




Since the metric is static, we can put:
Then from the HJ eqn one finds:
But S(r) is not yet found, indeed on the trajectory of
the motion t is linked to r by
, therefore:
The sum gives exactly Eqn.(5):
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
The overlooked factor

ΔS= -EΔt +ΔW
Many authors have considered only ΔW...
M. Angheben, M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo and S.
Zerbini,
JHEP; arXiv:hep-th/0503081, (2005).

...missing the temporal factor -EΔt:
Belinski, AIP proceedings, 2006.


-EΔt cancels exactly ΔW !
Note: ΔW(r) is not an invariant, and changes
changing the coordinates (“factor-2 problem”)
Painlevé coordinates
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
From the HJ eqn we have:
Then, again from
There is a pole on λ=1
, it follows:
Also here there is
a pole on λ=1
Therefore the action on the eqn of motion is again:
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
Massless limit (Painlevé coord.)
Parikh and Wilzcek, Phys. Rev. Lett.
(2000); arXiv:hep-th/9907001v3.



Considering the case in which the backreaction is
negligible:
Anyway the complete treatment of the massless
case is a delicate matter since a priori the action is
identically null on the trajectory.
On Friedmann-Robertson-Walker metric

Considering the interval:
then
the action for a massless particle can be written as
where k is a constant.

From the HJ Eqn we have:

Again, the key point is that:
from which follows that

And so the action is:
Final remarks: “A priori” considerations
1.
is evaluated in an infinitesimallysmall neighborhood of the horizon.
2. An infinitesimally-small neighborhood of the
horizon is Minkowski-homeomorphic.
3. The action of a test particle (with or without mass)
is an invariant.

From these three considerations it follows that
nothing of special can happens near the horizon:
in any coordinate system.
M.Pizzi, arXiv:0904.4572v2
Conclusions
The action is regular on the horizon, thus:
The Hawking radiation cannot be retrieved in
the semi-classical approximation.
 In Painlevé coordinates, as well as in any other
coordinate system, the result is the same.
 Mistakes in literature are due to the fact that it
was considered only the spatial part of the action
ΔW , ignoring the time factor, or considering it
in an incorrect way.
 This result brings into question also the physical
meaning of the original Hawking derivation,
supporting the analysis of

D.G. Boulware, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1404 -1423, (1975).
V. Belinski, Phys. Lett. A, 354,4, 249, (2006); arXiv:gr-qc/0607137.
.
Bibliography
M. Pizzi, The time factor in the semi-classical approach to the Hawking radiation,
submitted to Phys. Rev. D; arXiv:0904.4572v2.
1) R.P. Feynman. Lectures on Gravitation, (1963); re-edited by B.
Hatfield, (2003).
2) V. Popov. Sov. Phys. JETP, 34, 709, (1972).E.T. Akhmedov, T. Pilling,
and D. Singleton. arXiv:0805.2653v1 [gr-qc],
3) M. Parikh and F. Wilczek. Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 85, (2000).
4) M. Angheben, M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini. J. High Energy
Phys. 05, 014; arXiv:hep-th/0503081, (2005).
5) E.T. Akhmedov, T. Pilling, and D. Singleton. arXiv:0805.2653v1 [grqc], (2008).
6) D.G.Boulware, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1404 - 1423 (1975).
7) V. Belinski. AIP proceedings, 910, pag.270, Ed. M.Novello and S.
Bergliaffa, (2007). (Lectures delivered at the XII Brazilian School of
Cosmology and Gravitation, Rio de Janeiro, 10-23 September, 2006).
8) V. Belinski. Phys. Lett. A, 354,4, 249, (2006); arXiv:gr-qc/0607137.