# Derivation of uncertainty in mode number in curved spacetime

+ 0 like - 0 dislike
448 views

I began reading the original paper by Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes (1975, Commun. math. Phys  43, 199—220), but am a little confused by what he writes at the bottom of the second page. The idea is that there is some indeterminacy or uncertainty in the mode number operator $a_i a_i^\dagger$ in curved spacetime.

What Hawking does: He first chooses a point $p$ and locally goes into Riemann normal coordinates. These are valid in some region around $p$ up to some length scale, say $\ell$. In Hawking's language $\ell=B^{-1/2}$ where $B$ is a least upper bound on $|R_{abcd}|$, so $\ell$ is a radius of curvature and the flat space limit is given by $\ell\rightarrow \infty$. Next, since this is locally flat space, he is allowed to choose a basis of (approximately) positive frequency solutions to the wave equation, $\{f_i\}$. Finally, he writes that, when $\omega \gg 1/\ell$, there is an indeterminacy between choosing $f_i$ and its corresponding negative frequency solution $f_i^*$ which is of the order $\exp(-c \omega \ell)$. Here I have let $c$ be some constant, and $\omega$ is the (modulus) frequency of the mode in question.

My Question: I have a hard time understanding what he means by this final part. What does he mean precisely by 'indeterminacy'? Why is there an exponential involved?

My Intuition: I have the following picture: it follows from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that $\Delta E \Delta t \sim 1$. In units where $\hbar =1$ one has uncertainty $\Delta \omega = \Delta E \sim 1/\Delta t$. Since $\Delta t$ is bounded by $B^{-1/2}$ in the normal coordinates, we have a minimal uncertainty in frequency of order $\Delta \omega \sim B^{1/2}$.

So we can imagine two normal distributions, one for $f_i$ and one for $f_i^*$, centered at $\pm\omega$, each having standard deviation $B^{1/2}$.

There are two extreme cases:

1. When $\omega \gg B^{1/2}$, the two normal distributions are far apart and one is exponentially sure that a mode which is measured to have positive frequency really is a positive frequency mode.

2. When the two distributions are close, i.e. when $\omega \lesssim B^{1/2}$, one might expect increasingly equal probabilities (close to $1/2$).

In the former case one can use an asymptotic of the normal distribution to show that the probability of a negative frequency mode to be measured as positive is of order $\sim \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi} \alpha}e^{-\alpha^2}$ where $\alpha=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\omega B^{-1/2}$. Whilst qualitatively this is the same as Hawking's result, it differs quantitatively - I have an $\alpha^2$ in the exponent, whilst Hawking only has $\alpha$. What am I doing wrong, and what is Hawking doing?!

A bonus question: Does anyone know / can anyone give a more rigorous derivation of the uncertainty in the mode number?

Many thanks.

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:$\varnothing\hbar$ysicsOverflowThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). Please complete the anti-spam verification