text:
# (Anti)proton and Pion Source Sizes and Phase Space Densities in Heavy Ion Collisions

## Abstract

NA44 has measured mid-rapidity deuteron spectra from $`AA`$ collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}18`$ GeV at the CERN SPS. Combining these spectra with published $`p`$, $`\overline{p}`$ and $`\overline{d}`$ data allows us to calculate, within a coalescence framework, $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ source sizes and phase space densities. These results are compared to $`\pi ^\pm `$ source sizes measured by Hanbury-Brown Twiss, HBT, interferometry and phase densites produced by combining pion spectra and HBT results. We also compare to $`pA`$ results and to lower energy (AGS) data. The $`\overline{p}`$ source is larger than the proton source at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=17.3`$ GeV. The phase space densities of $`\pi ^+`$ and $`p`$ are not constant but grow with system size. Both $`\pi ^+`$ and proton radii decrease with $`m_T`$ and increase with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$. Pions and protons do not freeze-out independently. The nature of their interaction changes as $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ and the $`\pi /p`$ ratio increases.

Relativistic heavy ion collisions provide a mechanism to heat and compress nuclear matter to temperatures and energy densities comparable to those of the early universe when it was still a plasma of quarks and gluons. Such a state may be fleetingly restored in these collisions where temperatures of $`T=168\pm 3`$ MeV and energy densities $`ϵ=3`$ GeV/fm3 are observed . These values are close to those of the phase transition found in lattice calculations . If such a hot and dense state were formed one would expect a large increase in entropy and possibly a saturation of the density of particles in phase space. The coalescence of nucleons into deuterons is sensitive to both their spatial and momentum correlations. In this paper we report $`p`$, $`\overline{p}`$ and $`\pi ^+`$ source sizes measured by coalescence and interferometry, and combine these with single particle spectra to derive phase space densities. The phase space densities depend on temperature, chemical potentials, and velocity fields in the system. This description of the final hadronic state serves as a boundary condition for models of possible quark gluon plasma production. We vary the total size of the system by studying $`PbPb`$, $`SPb`$, $`SS`$ and $`pPb`$ collisions. We also compare our results to lower energy AGS data where the $`\pi /p`$ ratio is much lower. This comparison shows that the freeze-out of pions and protons is coupled.

NA44 is a focusing spectrometer that uses conventional dipole magnets and superconducting quadrupoles to analyze the momentum of the produced particles and create a magnified image of the target in the spectrometer . The systematic errors on the deuteron yields range from $`14\%`$ for $`SPb`$ to $`9\%`$ for $`PbPb`$. The $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ spectra are corrected for feed-down from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ decays using a GEANT simulation with the ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }/p`$) and ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }/p`$) ratios taken from the RQMD model . The systematic error was estimated by varying these ratios by $`\pm 25\%`$. These errors are slightly correlated for $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$. Fig. 1 shows NA44 deuteron spectra and previously published proton spectra at $`y`$ = 1.9-2.3 as a function of $`m_T/`$A . The centrality is $`10\%`$ for $`SS`$, $`SPb`$ and $`PbPb`$. The spectra get flatter for the larger systems consistent with a higher temperture and/or stronger sidewards flow. As expected from coalescence, the slopes are similar for protons and deuterons. This was also found for lower energy data, . The deuteron inverse slopes (in $`m_T`$) and yields are listed in Table 1. A comprehensive analysis of all NA44’s proton and light clusters spectra will be given in a later paper.

The model of deuteron production by final state coalescence of protons and neutrons with small relative momenta states that the production of deuterons with a certain velocity is proportional to the number of protons and neutrons that have similar velocities . This model successfully describes measured deuteron distributions in intermediate energy heavy ion collisions and high energy $`pA`$ collisions, . Near mid-rapidity, direct production of $`d\overline{d}`$ pairs is small due to the high $`d\overline{d}`$ mass threshold of 3.75 GeV/$`c^2`$, and pre-existing deuterons are unlikely to survive the many collisions required to shift them to mid-rapidity. Since coalescence depends on the distribution of nucleons, one can determine a nucleon source size from the ratio

$$B_2(p)\frac{\frac{E_pd^3N_p}{dp^3}\frac{E_nd^3N_n}{dp^3}}{\frac{E_dd^3N_d}{dP^3}}$$
(1)
where the deuteron momentum $`P`$ is twice the proton momentum $`p`$ . Since we do not measure neutrons we assume that the spectra have the same shape and take the $`n/p`$ ratio to be $`1.06\pm .04`$ from RQMD . At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=4.9`$ GeV the measured $`n/p`$ ratio is $`1.19\pm .08`$ independent of $`m_T`$ . RQMD is in reasonable agreement with this result.

To facilitate comparison with NA44’s pion interferometry results, we assume a Gaussian distribution of the proton source. If one also assumes a Gaussian wave-function one can solve for the source size analytically

$$(R_G^2+\frac{\delta ^2}{2})^{3/2}=\frac{3\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}(\mathrm{}c)^3}{2m_pB_2}$$
(2)
where $`m_p`$ is the proton mass and $`\delta =2.8`$ fm accounts for the size of the deuteron. In reality the deuteron wave function is not Gaussian but is more accurately represented by the Hulthen form

$$\varphi (r)=\sqrt{\frac{\alpha \beta (\alpha +\beta )}{2\pi (\alpha \beta )}}\frac{e^{\alpha r}e^{\beta r}}{r}$$
(3)
with $`\alpha =0.23`$ fm-1 and $`\beta =1.61`$ fm-1 . The convolution of such a wave function with a gaussian source cannot be done analytically but is straightforward numerically to solve for the source radius $`R_H`$, . Note our $`R_H`$ is the $`R_0`$ of . Figure 2 shows a comparison of $`R_H`$ and $`R_G`$ versus the coalesence parameter $`B_2`$.

Since $`R_H`$ is sensitive to both the transverse and longitudinal size of the source, when comparing to HBT results it is best to compare to $`(R_{}^2R_{})^{\frac{1}{3}}`$ (Eqn. 6.3 of ), where $`R_{}`$ and $`R_{}`$ parametrize the extent of the source perpendicular and parallel to the beam . NA44 has published HBT results in the Pratt-Bertsch frame in which the sum of the longitudinal momentum of each pion pair is zero. In this scheme the radius in the sidewards direction $`R_s=R_{}`$ and the longitudinal radius $`R_lR_{}`$ . In this paper we will therefore compare $`R_H`$ to $`(R_s^2R_l)^{\frac{1}{3}}`$. These parameters can be thought of as “lengths of homogeneity” of the source . One can think of the radii as lengths scales of the velocity and/or temperature gradients. They represent snapshots of the hadronic system at freeze-out which may occur at different times for $`\pi ^+`$ and protons. However since the cross sections for $`\pi \pi `$, $`p\pi `$ and $`pp`$ collisions are comparable the freeze-out times should be close.

A particle’s phase space density is defined as

$$f(𝐩,𝐱)(2\pi \mathrm{}c)^3\frac{d^6N}{dp^3dx^3}.$$
(4)
For a system in chemical equilibrium at a temperature $`T`$ and chemical potential $`\mu `$

$$f(E)=\frac{1}{e^{(E\mu )/T}\pm 1}$$
(5)
where E is the energy and $`\pm 1`$ selects bosons or fermions. For a dilute system, i.e. $`f1`$, Eqn. 5 gives

$$f_de^{(E_dmu_p\mu _n)/T}.$$
(6)
Since $`E_d=E_n+E_p`$, Eqn. 6 implies that

$$f_d(𝐏,𝐱)=f_p(𝐩,𝐱)f_n(𝐩,𝐱).=\frac{n}{p}f_p(𝐩,𝐱)^2$$
(7)
A more general form of this relation was derived in Eqn. 3 of  assuming only that the system is hot and large compared to the deuteron. Averaging $`f_p`$ over $`𝐱`$ gives

$$f_p=\frac{1}{3}\frac{E_d\frac{d^3N_d}{dP^3}}{E_p\frac{d^3N_p}{dp^3}}\frac{p}{n}$$
(8)
where the factor of 3 accounts for the spin of the particles. For pions NA44 has measured the source size in 3 dimensions with HBT, as well as single particle spectra. Some of the pions come from the decay of long-lived resonances such as $`\eta ,\eta ^{}`$ and $`\omega `$. These pions reduce the strength of the correlation function $`\lambda `$, which typically is $`<1`$. The fraction of pions which do not come from resonances is $`\sqrt{\lambda }`$, . This has been shown experimentally for $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions and for RQMD simulations of $`PbPb`$ collisions . Dividing $`\sqrt{\lambda }d^3N_\pi /dp^3`$ by the Lorentz invariant volume,  gives

$$f_\pi =\frac{\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}(\mathrm{}c)^3}{3}\sqrt{\lambda }\frac{d^3N_\pi }{dp^3}\frac{1}{R_s\sqrt{R_o^2R_{long}^2R_{ol}^4}}.$$
(9)
Again the factor of 3 accounts for the pion’s spin degeneracy. Here $`R_l`$ is the extent of the source along the beam direction; $`R_o`$ the extent in the outward direction, ie towards the observer and $`R_s`$ measures the source in the sidewards direction, perpendicular to both the beam axis and the line of sight to the observer. The $`R_{ol}`$ term is the “out-longitudinal” cross term . For $`PbPb`$ collisions setting $`R_{ol}=0`$ in the HBT fit increases $`f_\pi `$ by $`9\%\pm 10\%`$, . For $`pPb`$, $`SS`$ and $`SPb`$ we assume $`R_{ol}=0`$ but add a systematic error of $`13\%`$ to $`f_\pi `$. For $`pPb`$ deuteron spectra are not available and $`f_p`$ was calculated using Eqn. 9, replacing the last term with $`\frac{1}{R_{inv}^3}`$. $`R_{inv}`$ was determined from $`pp`$ HBT data . For $`PbPb`$ $`R_H`$ and $`R_{inv}`$ agree within their errors of $`5\%`$, .

We can test the usefulness of these coalesence methods using RQMD, coupled with a coalesence afterburner, . Figure 3 shows a comparison of $`f_p`$ and $`R_H`$ for both data and RQMD for $`SS`$ and $`PbPb`$. For the data both $`f_p`$ and $`R_H`$ are larger in $`PbPb`$ but for RQMD only $`R_H`$ increases from $`SS`$ and $`PbPb`$ while $`f_p`$ stays constant. This invariance of $`f_p`$ may be an artifact of the coalesence mechanism used, which ignores the requirement of a third particle. Since $`f_p`$ is constant in the model the increase in proton multiplicity from $`SS`$ to $`PbPb`$ is accommodated by a large increase in $`R_H`$. However, $`R_H`$ is less than the average transverse radius of freezeout, 5.4 fm for $`SS`$ and 10.3 fm for $`PbPb`$, indicating that coalesence is not sensitve to the full size of the source. A similar situation occurs in pion interferometry where correlations between position and momentum cause the observer to only “see” the side of the source closest to her, . Since these correlations get stronger as the particles get faster the size of the source drops with $`m_T`$, .

Figure 4 shows the system dependence of the phase space densities and source radii for $`\pi ^\pm `$, $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$. The $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ radii for $`PbPb`$ are consistent with coalescence data at $`p_T=0`$, and $`pp`$ interferometry results . The $`\pi ^+`$ and $`p`$ phase space densities generally increase with system size. We find that

$$f_{\overline{p}}f_pf_{\pi ^+}<f_\pi ^{}1$$

For $`SPb`$ and $`PbPb`$ $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ was calculated in  using a similar equation to Eqn. 9. However a parametrization of the pion spectrum was used rather than the spectrum itself. The authors of  concluded that the pion phase density was universal at freeze-out but this is not the case, since $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ is considerably smaller for $`pPb`$ and $`SS`$ than for $`SPb`$ and $`PbPb`$.

For pions $`(R_s^2R_l)^{\frac{1}{3}}`$ increases steadily with the number of participants and for $`PbPb`$ there is a rapid increase in the radii parameters with multiplicity, . At low $`p_T`$ $`R_H`$ does not change much from $`SS`$ to $`PbPb`$ (nor with centrality for $`PbPb`$) despite the increase in the proton multiplicity by $`3`$, see Fig. 1(a). However the $`m_T`$ dependence of $`R_H`$ is weaker for $`PbPb`$ than for $`SS`$, see Fig 3. The extra protons mainly increase the proton phase space density $`f_p`$.

Because of their large annihilation cross-section, one might expect that antiprotons (particularly those at low $`p_T`$) would be emitted only from the surface of the system and would have a larger RMS freeze-out radius than protons. Our data are consistent with this idea. An alternative view assumes that proton and antiprotons are produced in the same volume but that antiprotons are suppressed in the interior of the source . Applying this idea to our data would imply that antiprotons are emitted only from within $`1.0\pm 0.2`$ fm of the surface . Recent $`AuPt`$ and $`AuPb`$ results from E864 at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=4.9`$ GeV and low $`p_T`$ imply that $`R_H^p=(4.0\pm 0.2)`$ fm, $`R_H^{\overline{p}}=(2.2\pm 0.9\pm 0.6)`$ fm and $`f_{\overline{p}}=(4.0\pm 1.9)10^6`$ . At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=4.9`$ GeV antiprotons are mainly produced in primary nucleon-nucleon collisions and so they may have a smaller source size than protons. Since $`R_H`$ is a gaussian radius it is necessary to multiply it by $`\sqrt{5}`$ in order to compare it to a hard sphere with the same RMS radius, . If this is done the antiproton source is roughly equal to the size of the colliding $`Au`$ nuclei at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=4.9`$ GeV.

In order to study the energy dependence of freeze-out we compare our $`PbPb`$ data at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=17.3`$ GeV to AGS $`AuAu`$ data at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=4.9`$ GeV. Since our data are not at mid-rapidity but at y=2 we have compared results at the same scaled rapidity $`y=\frac{1}{3}y_{beam}`$. Figure 5 shows the phase space densities and source radii for $`PbPb`$ and $`AuAu`$ collisions as a function of $`m_T`$. At a given $`m_T`$, $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ increases with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ while $`f_p`$ decreases. Fitting $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ to Eqn. 5 gives $`\mu _\pi ^+=0`$, within errors, for both energies while $`\mu _p/T`$ decreases with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$. Since $`E=m_Tcosh(y)`$, Eqn. 5 also implies that $`f`$ be exponential in $`m_T`$ for $`f1`$. However if the system is boosted due to transverse flow, $`f(m_T)`$ will become flatter . This effect is proportional to mass. The data support this scenario since the $`f_p`$ distributions are much flatter than the $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ ones. The $`m_T`$ distribution of $`f_p`$ becomes flatter as $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ increases because of an increase in flow and/or freeze-out temperature. However in general the velocity profile cannot be determined without knowing the density profile and so a determination of a mean velocity from $`f_p`$ is beyond the scope of this work, .

Several hydrodynamical models have interpreted the HBT source radii as “lengths of homogeneity” which should decrease with increasing $`m_T`$ and this is consistent with our data . Both pion and proton radii increase with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$. However $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ increases with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ while $`f_p`$ drops. Since $`\overline{p}/p1`$ at both SPS and AGS energies , we know that most protons observed near mid-rapidity are remnants of the target or projectile that were slowed down by multiple collisions. At the higher energy the protons occupy a somewhat larger volume and they are spread over a larger momentum (i.e. $`y,m_T`$) range. Therefore $`f_p`$ drops with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$.

For pions the situation is different. At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 4.9 GeV, they are outnumbered by protons and so their freeze-out is driven by that of the nucleons. At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 17.3 GeV, they are the most numerous particle and control freeze-out. Since $`\sigma _{\pi \pi }<\sigma _{p\pi }`$ $`f_{\pi ^+}`$ increases with $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$. Note that the ratio $`f_{\pi ^+}/f_p`$ increases by a factor of about 16 from $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 4.9 GeV to 17.3 GeV while the $`\pi /p`$ ratio only increases by a factor of 7.

Using the (anti)deuteron as a measure of the nucleon-nucleon correlations we have used a coalescence formalism to make the first measurements of $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ source radii and phase space densities as a function of $`m_T`$ at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=17.3`$ GeV. At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 4.9 GeV the antiproton source is smaller than the proton source while at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}=17.3`$ GeV it appears to be larger. We have compared the proton data to our $`\pi ^+`$ radii and phase space densities derived from HBT and single particle results as a function of system size and $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$. This comparison reveals a linkage between proton and pion freeze-out that changes as the $`\pi /p`$ ratio increases. At $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 4.9 GeV the hadronic system is held together by protons while at $`\sqrt{s_{nn}}`$ = 17.3 GeV it is held together by pions.

We thank the NA44 collaboration for permission to publish deuteron spectra and much valuable input. Thanks also to G. Bertsch, U. Heinz, S. Mrówczyński and S. Pratt for helpful discussions.


format: text

text:
# String propagation near Kaluza-Klein black holes: an analytical and numerical study

## I Introduction

String theories  possess a much richer set of symmetries than theories of relativistic point particles. Classically, string theory is defined in any number of dimensions, but quantum considerations require it to be formulated in higher dimensions - 26 for bosonic strings and 10 for superstrings. To make a connection with physical four-dimensional physics, the extra dimensions are compactified. The mechanism of this compactification is an important issue in string theory, and needs to be studied using a variety of approaches.

The energy scales at which string theory is formulated are of the order of the Planck scale. However, it is not unreasonable to expect that there would be some residual effect at low energies, i.e. energies low compared to the Planck scale, but higher than any energies currently accessible at particle accelerators. One possible approach, in this spirit, could be to study string dynamics in curved spacetime  (see also ). The investigation is important in the context of understanding string quantisation in curved spacetime.

The string equations of motion are complicated and various ansatze and approximation schemes have been proposed to solve them. One such scheme is the null string expansion , which is suitable to describe string propagation in strong gravitational fields. A possible application of this investigation could be to study the dynamics of a string probe near a black hole where the extra dimensions are expected to contribute nontrivially.

Solving the higher dimensional string equations of motion is technically involved. An in-between approach is provided by studying a five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein background instead of the full $`D`$-dimensional spacetime (For a review of Kaluza-Klein theories, see ). It would be interesting to observe how the extra dimension appears from the point of view of a string falling into the black hole. An attempt in this direction was made by solving the string equations of motion in Kaluza-Klein black hole backgrounds . It was shown that, even at the classical level, the extra compact dimension contributes nontrivially to string propagation. In this paper, we present a more detailed study of strings near Kaluza-Klein black holes. Our main tool is the null string expansion which is used to solve for the string coordinates . The major results of the zeroth order investigations have already been reported in Refs. . This paper provides the technical details involved in obtaining those results; in addition, we present for the first time some analysis of the first order equations.

In Section II, black hole solutions to five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein theory are reviewed. Section III reviews string propagation in curved spacetime, with string coordinates expanded in a perturbation series around the worldsheet velocity of light. Section IV is devoted to the study of string propagation in electrically and magnetically charged Kaluza-Klein black hole backgrounds. Section V presents analytical results for string propagation near extremal magnetically charged black holes. In Section VI, the analysis of Section IV and Section V is extended up to the first order in the perturbation expansion and some preliminary results presented. The concluding Section VII contains the summary and some remarks. Some technical details are presented in Appendix A.

## II Kaluza-Klein Black Holes

Stationary Kaluza-Klein solutions with spherical symmetry were studied systematically by Chodos and Detweiler  and Dobaish and Maison . These black holes are characterised by the mass, the electric charge and the scalar charge. It was shown by Gross and Perry  and in independent works by Pollard  and by Sorkin  that five-dimensional magnetic monopoles (electrically neutral) exist as solutions to five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein theories. The solutions in Ref.  were generalised by Gibbons and Wiltshire  to those with four parameters. It was shown that, in general, Kaluza-Klein black holes possess both electric and magnetic charge, with the solutions mentioned above as special cases (see also ).

We consider the metric background as given in

$`ds^2=e^{4k\frac{\phi }{\sqrt{3}}}(dx_5`$ $`+`$ $`2kA_\alpha dx^\alpha )^2`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`e^{2k\frac{\phi }{\sqrt{3}}}g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta ,`$ (2)
where $`\phi `$ is the dilaton field, $`k^2=4\pi G`$; $`x_5`$ is the extra dimension and should be identified modulo $`2\pi R_0`$, where $`R_0`$ is the radius of the circle about which the coordinate $`x_5`$ winds.

The demand that the black hole solutions be regular in four dimensions (changing to units where $`G=1`$ ) implies

$`e^{4\phi /\sqrt{3}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B}{A}},`$ (3)
$`A_\alpha dx^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{B}}(r{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\sqrt{3}}})dt+P\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi ,`$ (4)
and

$`g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{\sqrt{AB}}}dt^2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{AB}}{f^2}}dr^2`$ (5)
$``$ $`\sqrt{AB}\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right),`$ (6)
where $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`f^2`$ depend on $`r`$ and are given by

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`(r{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\sqrt{3}}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{2P^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Sigma }\sqrt{3}M}},`$ (7)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`(r+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\sqrt{3}}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{2Q^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Sigma }+\sqrt{3}M}},`$ (8)
$`f^2`$ $`=`$ $`(rM)^2(M^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }^2P^2Q^2).`$ (9)
If $`P=Q=0`$, we regain the usual Schwarzschild black holes.

The black hole solutions are characterised by the mass $`M`$ of the black hole, the electric charge $`Q`$, the magnetic charge $`P`$ and the scalar charge $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Out of the charges, only two are independent . The constant parameters are constrained by the relation

$$\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{\Sigma }=\frac{Q^2}{\mathrm{\Sigma }+\sqrt{3}M}+\frac{P^2}{\mathrm{\Sigma }\sqrt{3}M},$$
(10)
where the scalar charge is defined by

$`k\phi \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{r}+O\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)`$ as $`r\mathrm{}.`$

Eq. 10 is invariant under the duality transformation

$$QP,PQ,\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Sigma }.$$
(11)
which relates ”electric-like” and ”magnetic-like” black holes. It is worth noting that physically distinct black holes are related by the duality.

The black hole solutions listed by Gibbons and Wiltshire include the much studied Pollard-Gross-Perry-Sorkin (PGPS) extremal magnetic black hole. Recently, it was shown that the PGPS monopole arises as a solution of a suitable dimensionally reduced string theory . This provides an additional motivation to study such black hole backgrounds in the context of string theory. One way is by finding out stringy corrections to the five-dimensional black hole backgrounds . A complementary approach is to study string propagation in Kaluza-Klein black hole backgrounds, which is the subject of this paper.

## III Null String Expansion

We start with the bosonic string worldsheet action  given by

$$S=T_0𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma \sqrt{detg_{ab}},$$
(12)
where $`g_{ab}=G_{\mu \nu }(X)_aX^\mu _bX^\nu `$ is the two-dimensional worldsheet metric; $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$ are the worldsheet coordinates.

The classical equations of motion are given by

$$_\tau ^2X^\mu c^2_\sigma ^2X^\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \rho }^\mu \left[_\tau X^\nu _\tau X^\rho c^2_\sigma X^\nu _\sigma X^\rho \right]=0,$$
(13)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \rho }^\mu `$ are Christoffel symbols for the background metric.

The constraint equations are

$$_\tau X^\mu _\sigma X^\nu G_{\mu \nu }=0$$
(14)
$$[_\tau X^\mu _\tau X^\nu +c^2_\sigma X^\mu _\sigma X^\nu ]G_{\mu \nu }=0.$$
(15)
String propagation in curved spacetime has been investigated in a number of papers  . Several simplifying ansatze exist to solve the highly nonlinear string equations of motion. We follow the approach of de Vega and Nicolaidis , which uses the worldsheet velocity of light as an expansion parameter. The scheme involves systematic expansion in powers of $`c`$. The limit of small worldsheet velocity of light corresponds to that of small string tension. If $`c<<1`$, the coordinate expansion is suitable to describe strings in a strong gravitational background (see ). Here the derivatives w.r.t. $`\tau `$ overwhelm the $`\sigma `$ derivatives. In the opposite case ($`c>>1`$), the classical equations of motion give us a stationary picture as the $`\sigma `$ derivatives dominate. The expansion for $`c=1`$ corresponds to the centre of mass expansion of the string.

We restrict ourselves to the case where $`c`$ is small, our interest being to probe the dynamical behaviour of the extra dimensions. Using this expansion scheme, the string coordinates are expressed as

$$X^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )=X_0^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )+c^2X_1^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )+c^4X_2^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )+$$
(16)
The zeroth order $`X_0^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )`$ satisfies the following set of equations:

$`\ddot{X}_0^\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \rho }^\mu \dot{X}_0^\nu \dot{X}_0^\rho `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (17)
$`\dot{X}_0^\mu \dot{X}_0^\nu G_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (18)
$`\dot{X}_0^\mu X_0^\nu G_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
It is clear from the above equations that every point on the string moves along a null geodesic; thus the zeroth order equations describe the motion of a null string.

The first order fluctuations can be obtained by retaining terms of order $`c^2`$ and the equations are given by

$`\ddot{X_1}^\rho +2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\kappa \lambda }^\rho \dot{X_0}^\lambda \dot{X_1}^\kappa `$ $`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\kappa \lambda ,\alpha }^\rho \dot{X_0}^\kappa \dot{X_0}^\lambda X_1^\alpha `$ (20)
$`=`$ $`X_0^{\prime \prime \rho }+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\kappa \lambda }^\rho X_0^\kappa X_0^\lambda ,`$ (21)
with the constraints being

$$\left(2\dot{X}_0^\mu \dot{X}_1^\nu +X_0^\mu X_0^\nu \right)G_{\mu \nu }+G_{\mu \nu ,\alpha }\dot{X}_0^\mu \dot{X}_0^\nu X_1^\alpha =0,$$
(22)
$$\left(\dot{X}_1^\mu X_0^\nu +\dot{X}_0^\mu X_1^\nu \right)G_{\mu \nu }+G_{\mu \nu ,\alpha }\dot{X}_0^\mu X_0^\nu X_1^\alpha =0.$$
(23)
A physically interesting quantity is the invariant or proper string size $`l`$, which is given by

$$dl^2=X^\mu X^\nu G_{\mu \nu }(X)d\sigma ^2.$$
(24)
The differential string size has the form of an effective mass for the geodesic motion . At the zeroth order, the proper string length is indeterminate. At the first order and higher orders, string length varies as a string propagates in curved spacetime.

The motion of null strings in curved backgrounds has been studied in cosmological and black hole backgrounds . Applying the formalism to FRW geometry, it was shown in  that the string expands or contracts at the same rate as the whole universe. Lousto and Sánchez  have made an extensive study of string propagation in conformally flat FRW spacetime and in black hole spacetimes. In the next Section we discuss propagation of a null string near Kaluza-Klein black holes.

## IV String propagation in Kaluza-Klein black hole backgrounds

The Kaluza-Klein black hole, in general, has both magnetic and electric charges along with a scalar charge. Out of these three charges, two are independent as clearly shown in Eq. (10). We seek to solve the equations of motion for the string coordinates in the exterior of the black hole. For simplicity, we consider the magnetically and electrically charged cases separately. The main results obtained in this section have been reported earlier ; however, it contains technical details which have not been presented before.

### A Magnetically charged black hole

The zeroth order equations of motion for the string coordinates are obtained by substituting the above metric in Eqs. (17). For an electrically neutral ($`Q=0`$) background the equations of motion are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2t}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`2\left({\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{B^{}}{2B}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}=0,`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2r}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{f^3}{2AB^2}}(B^{}f2f^{}B)\right]\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (26)
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}f2f^{}A}{2Af}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{f^2A^{}}{2A}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (27)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{2A^3}}(A^{}BB^{}A)\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2=0,`$ (28)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\varphi }{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}\right)=0,`$ (29)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2x_5}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B^{}}{B}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)=0.`$ (30)
and the constraint equation is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{B}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A}{f^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (31)
$``$ $`A\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{B}{A}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2=0.`$ (32)
Here we have taken the string to be propagating in the equatorial plane, i.e. $`\theta =\pi /2`$. Hence the equation of motion for the coordinate $`\theta `$ vanishes.

The functions $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`f`$, for the magnetically charged black hole case, are given by

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\left(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right)\left(r3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right),`$ (33)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`\left(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right)^2,`$ (34)
$`f^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right)\left(r2M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right).`$ (35)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=\mathrm{\Sigma }/\sqrt{3}`$.

The first integrals of motion are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_1B}{f^2}},`$ (36)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_2}{A}},`$ (37)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`c_3{\displaystyle \frac{A}{B}}`$ (38)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B}{A}}c_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{A^2}}c_2^2{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{B}}c_3^2,`$ (39)
where $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ are functions of $`\sigma `$. Since, at the zeroth order, only derivatives with respect to $`\tau `$ are present, we can treat $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ as constants. The constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ correspond respectively to the energy $`E(\sigma )`$ and the angular momentum $`L(\sigma )`$. The first three equations are obtained by direct integration of the $`t`$, $`\varphi `$ and $`x_5`$ equations. The constraint equation (32) is then used to obtain the equation for $`r/\tau `$.

Since $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`f^2`$ are all functions of $`r`$, it is convenient to change all the derivatives with respect to $`\tau `$ to those with respect to $`r`$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{d\varphi }{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}.`$ (40)
Here we have assumed that the trajectory can be written in the parametric form,

$$t=t(r)x_5=x_5(r),\varphi =\varphi (r)$$
(41)
From Eqs. (36) we have

$$r/\tau =\pm \sqrt{\frac{B}{A}c_1^2\frac{f^2}{A^2}c_2^2\frac{f^2}{B}c_3^2}$$

. We choose the negative sign as we consider an in-falling string.

This change of variables enables us to reduce the equations to quadratures:

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{B}{A}c_1^2\frac{f^2}{B}c_3^2}}},`$ (42)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_3Adr}{B\sqrt{\frac{B}{A}c_1^2\frac{f^2}{B}c_3^2}}},`$ (43)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_1Bdr}{f^2\sqrt{\frac{B}{A}c_1^2\frac{f^2}{B}c_3^2}}},`$ (44)
up to constants of integration which depend on $`\sigma `$. Here we have taken $`c_2=0`$, i.e. the string is falling in ‘head-on’. The quadratures can be solved numerically to obtain $`t`$, $`r`$, and $`x_5`$ as functions of $`\tau `$. It is clear from Eq. (10) that, for $`P^2`$ to be positive, we have

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }<0\mathrm{or}\mathrm{\Sigma }>\sqrt{3}M.`$ (45)
The integrals (42) are evaluated numerically and inverted to obtain the coordinates as functions of $`\tau `$. We confine ourselves to the region $`r>M`$ and we assume $`r>>\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, i.e., from the integrals we drop terms of $`O(\mathrm{\Sigma }^2/r^2)`$. The behaviour of $`r`$ as a function of $`\tau `$ is shown in Fig. 1 for different values of $`c_1`$ and $`c_3`$.

### B Electrically charged black hole

For the electrically charged ($`P=0`$) black hole, the equations of motion in the zeroth order take the form

$`AB[Af^2`$ $`+`$ $`12Q^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2]{\displaystyle \frac{^2t}{\tau ^2}}`$ (46)
$``$ $`[12A^{}BQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2+B^{}A^2f^2`$ (47)
$``$ $`4B^{}AQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^22f^{}A^2Bf`$ (48)
$``$ $`8ABQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)]{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}`$ (49)
$`+`$ $`4QAB[B^{}(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)B]{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0,`$ (50)
$`2A^3B^2f{\displaystyle \frac{^2r}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`f^3[4A^{}BQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2B^{}A^2f^2`$ (51)
$`+`$ $`4B^{}AQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2+2f^{}A^2Bf`$ (52)
$``$ $`8ABQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)]({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }})^2`$ (53)
$``$ $`8f^3B^2Q[A^{}(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)A]{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ (54)
$`+`$ $`A^2B^2[A^{}f2f^{}A]\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (55)
$``$ $`A^2B^2f^3A^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (56)
$`+`$ $`f^3B^2[A^{}BB^{}A]\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2=0,`$ (57)
$`AB^2[Af^2`$ $`+`$ $`12Q^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2]{\displaystyle \frac{^2x_5}{\tau ^2}}`$ (58)
$``$ $`4QA[A^{}Bf^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)B^{}Af^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)`$ (59)
$`+`$ $`4B^{}Q^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^3+2f^{}ABf(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)`$ (60)
$``$ $`ABf^24BQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2]{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}`$ (61)
$``$ $`B[A^{}ABf^2+12A^{}BQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2`$ (62)
$``$ $`B^{}A^2f^2+4B^{}AQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2`$ (63)
$``$ $`16ABQ^2(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)]{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0.`$ (64)
and the constraint equation is

$`\{{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{B}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4Q^2}{AB}}(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2\left\}\right({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }})^2`$ (65)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8Q}{A}}(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1){\displaystyle \frac{t}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{A}{f^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ (66)
$``$ $`A\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{B}{A}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2=0,`$ (67)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\sqrt{3}}`$.

In this case, the functions $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`f`$ (which appear in the metric) are

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2,`$ (68)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)(r+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1),`$ (69)
$`f^2`$ $`=`$ $`(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)(r2M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1).`$ (70)
The structure of the equations of motion, in this case, is such that they are not reducible to quadratures and we have to solve the differential equations numerically. Again, we consider an in-falling string in the region where $`r>>\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\theta =\pi /2`$.

In this limit, we drop terms of $`O(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1^2/r^2)`$ and obtain the following equations

$`(r^2`$ $``$ $`2Mr+26\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M){\displaystyle \frac{^2t}{\tau ^2}}`$ (71)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(Mr+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1r12\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M)}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}+4Q{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0,`$ (72)
$`(r^2`$ $``$ $`2Mr+26\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M){\displaystyle \frac{^2x_5}{\tau ^2}}`$ (73)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4Q(r+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}`$ (74)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(r^2+6Mr+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M)}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0,`$ (75)
with the constraint equation reducing to

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^3}}(r^34Mr^24M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1r+4M^2r`$ (76)
$`+`$ $`4M^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+12M^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }})^2`$ (77)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8Q}{r^3}}(r^22Mr+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1r4M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1){\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ (78)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(r^2+6\mathrm{\Sigma }_1r2Mr10\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M)\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2.`$ (79)
The leading-order analysis of Eqs.(71) and Eq.(76), which is required for numerical solution, is rather involved. Only the main results are presented here. Details can be found in Appendix A. To the leading order in powers of $`r`$, the equations can be written as

$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _1}{dr}}`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _1^3+3(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _1`$ (80)
$``$ $`4Q\sqrt{\psi _1^21}(\psi _11)=0,`$ (81)
$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _2}{dr}}`$ $``$ $`6\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\psi _2^3+(3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _2`$ (82)
$``$ $`4Q\sqrt{\psi _2^2+1}(\psi _2+1)=0,`$ (83)
where $`\psi _1=\frac{dt}{dr}`$, $`\psi _2=\frac{dx_5}{dr}`$ and $`\psi _1^2\psi _2^2=1`$. Only terms with highest power of $`r`$ are retained to find out the large $`r`$ behaviour of the solutions.

These decoupled equations can be solved to find

$`\psi _1{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{𝒜}\sqrt{2M/r+c_1}}},`$ (84)
$`\psi _2{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2M/r+c_2}}},`$ (85)
where $`𝒜`$ and $`c_1`$ are constants with $`c_1=\frac{1𝒜}{𝒜}`$, and consequently, substituting in Eq. (76), we have (see Appendix A)

$$\frac{r}{\tau }=I\frac{e^{M/r}}{(2M/r+c_1)^{1/2𝒜}}.$$
(86)
Therefore, the derivatives of $`t`$ and $`x_5`$ w.r.t $`\tau `$ (in leading order) can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I}{\sqrt{𝒜}\sqrt{2M/r+c_1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{M/r}}{(2M/r+c_1)^{1/2𝒜}}}f(r),`$ (87)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I}{\sqrt{𝒜}\sqrt{2M/r+c_2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{M/r}}{(2M/r+c_1)^{1/2𝒜}}}g(r).`$ (88)
The negative sign is because $`r`$ decreases with $`\tau `$ for an in-falling string.

The equations (71) are transformed to a convenient form by changing variables in the following manner

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`f_1(r)f(r),`$ (89)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`f_2(r)g(r).`$ (90)
Substituting in Eqs. (71) and defining $`u=1/r`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{df_1}{du}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(12Mu+26\mathrm{\Sigma }_1Mu^2)}}[4Qf_2{\displaystyle \frac{g}{f}}`$ (91)
$``$ $`2(M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_112\mathrm{\Sigma }_1Mu)f_1`$ (92)
$`+`$ $`(12Mu+26M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1u^2){\displaystyle \frac{df}{du}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_1}{f}}]`$ (93)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{df_2}{du}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(12Mu+26\mathrm{\Sigma }_1Mu^2)}}[4Q(1+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1u)f_1{\displaystyle \frac{f}{g}}`$ (94)
$`+`$ $`4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(1+6Mu+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1Mu^2)f_2`$ (95)
$`+`$ $`(12Mu+26M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1u^2){\displaystyle \frac{dg}{du}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_2}{g}}].`$ (96)
The set of Eqs. (91) and Eq. (76) have been solved numerically to obtain the coordinates as functions of $`\tau `$, the initial conditions for $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ being

$`f_1(u0)1,`$ (98)
$`f_2(u0)1.`$ (99)
Again we have a two-parameter family of solutions. Fig. 2 illustrates how $`r`$ varies as functions of $`\tau `$ for different choices of integration constants. Here, the constant $`c_1`$ is kept fixed at $`1`$ and $`c_2`$ is varied.

### C Kaluza-Klein radius

As mentioned earlier, the interest lies in seeing the effect of the extra dimension on string propagation. The behaviour of the extra dimension is different in the two cases . However, the picture is easier to interpret if we study the Kaluza-Klein radius, which is related to its asymptotic value $`R_0`$ as

$$R(r)=R_0\left(\frac{B}{A}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(100)
The radius $`R(r)`$ has an implicit dependence on $`\tau `$ through $`R(\tau )=R(r(\tau ))`$, and is hence a dynamical quantity.

The effect of the magnetic field is to shrink the extra dimension (as already indicated in ), i.e., as the string approaches the black hole, the value of the Kaluza-Klein radius which it sees becomes smaller than its asymptotic value. The presence of electric charge tends to expand the extra dimension. The opposite behaviour in the two cases was illustrated in Ref.  and it was shown that even at the classical level, there is a nontrivial contribution of the extra dimension on string propagation.

## V Analytical Results for Strings near Magnetic Black Holes

### A General Analytical Solutions for Magnetically Charged Black Hole

The quadratures (42) can be solved to obtain analytical counterparts of the solutions presented in the previous Section for the magnetically charged black hole. The integrals can be reduced to combinations of elliptical integrals, depending on the relative values of the constants $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ and $`M`$(see ). As an illustrative example we consider the case when $`c_1^2=c_3^2`$. We can then write the integrals as

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c_1}}{\displaystyle 𝑑r\frac{\sqrt{(r3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}{\sqrt{(r\alpha )}}}`$ (101)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑r\frac{(r3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)(r\alpha )}}}`$ (102)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑r\frac{(r+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^{3/2}\sqrt{(r3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}{(r2M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)\sqrt{(r\alpha )}}}`$ (103)
where $`\alpha =\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+3M)}{(3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)}`$.

As mentioned above, for $`Q^2`$ to be positive, the scalar charge $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ should either be negative or greater than $`M`$. We first study the magnetic background with a negative scalar charge. We write $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=e$$
(104)
where $`e`$ is positive. If $`\frac{e(e3M)}{(M3e)}<e`$, the solutions (modulo integration constants which depend on $`\sigma `$) are given by

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (105)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}e\sqrt{e}{\displaystyle \frac{(M+e)}{(M3e)}}\mathrm{E}(f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (106)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}e\sqrt{e}{\displaystyle \frac{(Me)}{(M3e)}}\mathrm{F}(f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (107)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (108)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8e+\sqrt{e}(5M11e)}{3(M3e)}}\mathrm{E}(f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (109)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4e\sqrt{e}(11M25e)}{(M3e)}}\mathrm{F}(f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (110)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (111)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\sqrt{e}}{3}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2e^2+11Me3M^2}{M3e}}\right]\mathrm{E}(f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (112)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{\sqrt{e}}}\mathrm{\Pi }({\displaystyle \frac{4e^2}{(M+2e)(M3e)}},f(r),{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M3e}})`$ (113)
where $`f(r)=\mathrm{Arcsin}\left[\sqrt{\frac{(r+3e)(3eM)}{2e^2}}\right]`$. In these expressions $`\mathrm{F}`$, $`\mathrm{E}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ are elliptical functions of the first, second and third kind respectively .

If $`\frac{e(e3M)}{(M3e)}>e`$, the solutions are

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (114)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}e^2}{\sqrt{3eM}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(M+e)}{(M3e)}}\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (115)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}e^2}{\sqrt{3eM}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(M+e)}{(M3e)}}\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (116)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (117)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8e\sqrt{2e}(5M11e)}{3(M3e)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3M5e}}{\sqrt{M3e}}}\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (118)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e\sqrt{2e}(13M23e)}{3(M3e)}}\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (119)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{(r+3e)(re)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{e(e3M)}{(3eM)}}\right)}`$ (120)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\sqrt{2e}}{3\sqrt{3eM}}}(3M^22e^211Me)`$ (121)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (122)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4e\sqrt{2}}{3\sqrt{3eM}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2e(e3M)}{(M3e)^2}}(e^216Me+3M^2)`$ (123)
$`+`$ $`12e^28Me12M^2\left]\mathrm{F}\right(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}})`$ (124)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M^2\sqrt{3eM}}{\sqrt{2e}}}\mathrm{\Pi }[{\displaystyle \frac{2e}{M2e}},g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{(M3e)}{2e}}],`$ (125)
where, $`g(r)=\sqrt{\frac{r+3e}{4e}}`$. The case $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1>M`$ can be treated in a very similar manner; we omit the general expressions. A specific example, for the extremal black hole with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=2M`$ is discussed in the next subsection.

The solutions reduce to elementary functions in the region where $`r`$ is very large compared to the scalar charge. We take for instance the case when $`c_1=c_3=1`$. Up to the first order in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1/r`$, the solutions are

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3\sqrt{2(M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}}\left\{r+{\displaystyle \frac{M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{M+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}\right\}^{3/2}`$ (126)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{2(M+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{3}}+\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{9\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{2}}\right)(r\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^{1/2}\right]`$ (127)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(7\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\alpha \right)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{2(M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}}\mathrm{tan}^1\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2(r3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}{\sqrt{7\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\alpha }}}\right\}`$ (128)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{2(M+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}}}\left[(r\alpha )\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{r}{3}}+2M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\right\}\right]`$ (129)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(2M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)^2}{\sqrt{2(M+3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)}\sqrt{\alpha 2M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}}`$ (130)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{tan}^1\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{r\alpha }}{\sqrt{\alpha 2M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}}\right\}`$ (131)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=\mathrm{\Sigma }/\sqrt{3}`$ and $`\alpha =\frac{3M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M}`$. These solutions are valid in the region outside the horizon but not asymptotically far from the black hole. The negative sign comes because we consider an in-falling string. These solutions match with the numerical solutions presented in the last section, for the corresponding values of $`c_1`$ and $`c_3`$ .

### B String Equations in Extremal Black Hole backgrounds

In the last sub-section, we discussed analytical solutions of the equations of motion of a string propagating in a magnetically charged black hole background. The solutions reduce to elementary functions in a suitable large distance approximation, i.e., the scalar charge is very small compared to the distance $`r`$. In fact, the black hole backgrounds in this case can be thought of as being small deviations from the Schwarzschild black holes. The numerical results of the previous Section were also obtained in this limit.

However, the integrals of motion (42) can be solved analytically without resorting to the limit $`r>>\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, if $`P=2M`$ and $`Q=0`$, i.e, for an extremal magnetically charged black hole. The constraint Eq. (10) implies that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=M`$ or $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=2M`$. The former case is that of the much-studied Pollard-Gross-Perry-Sorkin monopole . In that case, the metric reduces to the form reported in Ref.. The solutions are

$`\tau =t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}(r\beta M)^{1/2}(r+3M)^{1/2}`$ (132)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(3+\beta )M}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[(r\beta M)^{1/2}+(r+3M)^{1/2}\right]`$ (133)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}(r\beta M)^{1/2}(r+3M)^{1/2}`$ (134)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(11+\beta )M}{\sqrt{c_1^1c_3^2}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[(r\beta M)^{1/2}+(r+3M)^{1/2}\right]`$ (135)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16M}{\sqrt{\beta 1}\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}\left[\mathrm{arctan}{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{r\beta M}}{\sqrt{\beta 1}\sqrt{r+3M}}}\right]`$ (136)
where $`\beta =\frac{c_1^2+3c_3^2}{c_1^2c_3^2}`$. We choose $`c_1=1`$; the condition of reality of the solutions then forces $`c_3<1`$ and consequently $`\beta >1`$. Here the time coordinate $`t`$ is the same as the proper time $`\tau `$ of the string, as in this case $`f^2/B=1`$.

Fig. 3 shows a plot of $`r`$ versus $`\tau `$ for $`c_3=0.6`$. A comparison of Figs. 1 and 3 shows that the approach to the horizon is different in the two cases. In the PGPS case, the string decelerates as it approaches the horizon. This is not surprising, as the ‘repulsive’ or ‘anti-gravity’ effect of extremal black holes has been commented on in the literature (see, for example,  and ). The effect of the gauge field is opposite to that of gravity.

In addition to the above case, there is another extremal black hole solution (which has not been mentioned hitherto in the literature) corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=2M`$. The integrals can be solved in terms of elliptical functions, the solutions being

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{7M}}}\sqrt{(r6M)(r+2M)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{10M}{7}}\right)}`$ (137)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32M}{21\sqrt{7}}}\left[\left\{\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})4\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})\right\}\right]`$ (138)
$`x_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{7M}}}\sqrt{(r6M)(r+2M)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{10M}{7}}\right)}`$ (139)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32M}{21\sqrt{7}}}\left[\left\{22\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})4\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})\right\}\right]`$ (140)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{7M}}}\sqrt{(r6M)(r+2M)\left(r{\displaystyle \frac{10M}{7}}\right)}`$ (141)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{21\sqrt{7}}}\left[52\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})\right]`$ (142)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{21\sqrt{7}}}\left[59\left\{8M\mathrm{E}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})6M\mathrm{F}(g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})\right\}\right]`$ (143)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{21\sqrt{7}}}\left[63\mathrm{\Pi }({\displaystyle \frac{4}{7}},g(r),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{7}})\right],`$ (144)
where $`g(r)=\mathrm{arcsin}\left[\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{7}{6}}\sqrt{\frac{r+2M}{M}}\right]`$. We choose $`c_1=c_3=1`$.

## VI First Order Perturbations

The effect of the background geometry on the string probe itself is manifest at the first order and at higher orders. For the magnetically charged black hole background, the string equations of motion, to first order, are given by

$`\ddot{B}^0`$ $`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^0(\dot{A}^0\dot{B}^1+\dot{A}^1\dot{B}^0)+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01,1}^0\dot{A}^0\dot{A}^1B^1`$ (145)
$`=`$ $`A^{\prime \prime 0}+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^0A^0A^1`$ (146)
$`\ddot{B}^1`$ $`+`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^1\dot{A}^1\dot{B}^1\dot{B}^1+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{55}^1\dot{A}^5\dot{B}^5+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11,1}^1\dot{A}^{1^2}B^1`$ (147)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{55,1}^1\dot{A}^{5^2}B^1=A^{\prime \prime 1}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^1A^{1^2}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{55}^1A^{5^2}`$ (148)
$`\ddot{B}^5`$ $`+`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{51}^5(\dot{A}^5\dot{B}^1+\dot{A}^1\dot{B}^5)+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{51,1}^5\dot{A}^5\dot{A}^1B^1`$ (149)
$`=`$ $`A^{\prime \prime 5}+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{51}^5A^5A^1`$ (150)
and the constraints are

$`(2\dot{A}^0\dot{B}^0`$ $`+`$ $`A^{\prime \prime 0^2})G_{00}+(2\dot{A}^1\dot{B}^1+A^{\prime \prime 1^2})G_{11}`$ (151)
$`+`$ $`(2\dot{A}^4\dot{B}^5+A^{\prime \prime 5^2})G_{55}`$ (152)
$`+`$ $`G_{00,1}\dot{A}^{0^2}B^1+G_{11,1}\dot{A}^{1^2}B^1+G_{55,1}\dot{A}^{5^2}B^1=0.`$ (153)
$`(\dot{B}^0A^0`$ $`+`$ $`\dot{A}^0B^0)G_{00}+(\dot{B}^1A^1+\dot{A}^1B^1)G_{11}`$ (154)
$`+`$ $`(\dot{B}^5A^5+\dot{A}^5B^5)G_{55}+G_{00,1}\dot{A}^0A^0B^1`$ (155)
$`+`$ $`G_{55,1}\dot{A}^1A^1B^1+G_{55,1}\dot{A}^5A^5B^1=0.`$ (156)
Here, for convenience, we have defined $`AX_0`$ and $`BX_1`$. Since we confine the string to propagate in the equatorial plane and to fall in head-on, the $`B^2`$ and $`B^3`$ equations vanish.

At the first order in $`c^2`$, the equations of motion are second-order coupled partial differential equations. The right-hand sides of Eq. (145) involve $`\sigma `$-derivatives, while the left-hand sides, which contain the unknown functions $`B^\mu `$, involve $`\tau `$ derivatives. Thus in principle the equations can be solved like ordinary differential equations for a fixed $`\sigma `$. In this Section, we consider an illustrative example without attempting to numerically solve the equations of motion.

We take the simplest case, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=M`$, i.e., the PGPS monopole. The first order equations, in this case, are

$`\ddot{B}^0=A^{\prime \prime 0},`$ (157)
$`\ddot{B}^1`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}\left\{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}\right\}\dot{B}^1`$ (159)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M(r+M)}{(rM)(r+3M)^3}}c_1^2B^1`$ (160)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16M^2}{(rM)^2(r+3M)^2}}c_3^2B^1{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(r+3M)^2}}c_3\dot{B}^5`$ (161)
$`=`$ $`A^{\prime \prime 1}{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}A^{1^2}{\displaystyle \frac{2M(rM)}{(r+3M)^3}}A^{5^2},`$ (162)
$`\ddot{B}^5`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}\left\{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}\right\}\dot{B}^5`$ (164)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)^2}}c_3\dot{B}^1`$ (165)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8M(r+M)}{(rM)^3}}c_3\left\{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}\right\}B^1`$ (166)
$`=`$ $`A^{\prime \prime 5}+{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}A^1A^5,`$ (167)
with the constraint Eq. (22) reducing to

$`2c_1\dot{B}^0`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(r+3M)}{(rM)}}\left\{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}\right\}\dot{B}^1`$ (169)
$``$ $`2c_3\dot{B}^5+{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}c_1^2B^1`$ (170)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8M}{(rM)^2}}c_3^2B^1+A^{0^2}{\displaystyle \frac{(r+3M)}{(rM)}}A^{1^2}`$ (171)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}A^{5^2}=0.`$ (172)
where $`r=A^1`$.

Rewriting Eqs. (132), including the integration constants explicitly, we have

$`\tau +I_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c_1}}(A^0+I_0)`$ (173)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}(A^1+3M)^{1/2}`$ (174)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(3+\beta )M}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}+(A^1+3M)^{1/2}\right]`$ (175)
$`x_5+I_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}(A^1+3M)^{1/2}`$ (176)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(11+\beta )M}{\sqrt{c_1^1c_3^2}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}+(A^1+3M)^{1/2}\right]`$ (177)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16M}{\sqrt{\beta 1}\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}}}\left[\mathrm{arctan}{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{A^1\beta M}}{\sqrt{\beta 1}\sqrt{A^1+3M}}}\right].`$ (178)
The constant $`c_1`$ corresponds to the energy $`E(\sigma )`$. We choose $`c_1`$ and $`c_3`$ to be constants independent of $`\sigma `$. The form of the equations depends on how the functions $`I_0`$, $`I_1`$ and $`I_5`$ depend on $`\sigma `$. We compute the derivatives of $`A^0`$, $`A^1`$ and $`A^5`$, viz.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^0}{\sigma }}`$ $`=`$ $`I_0^{}`$ (179)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^1}{\sigma }}`$ $`=`$ $`I_1^{}\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}{\displaystyle \frac{(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}}{(A^1+3M)^{1/2}}}`$ (180)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2A^1}{\sigma ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}I_1^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}}{(A^1+3M)^{1/2}}}`$ (181)
$`+`$ $`(c_1^2c_3^2)I_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{(3+\beta )M}{2(A^1+3M)^2}},`$ (182)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^5}{\sigma }}`$ $`=`$ $`I_5^{}+c_3I_1^{}{\displaystyle \frac{(A^1+3M)}{(A^1M)}}`$ (183)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2A^5}{\sigma ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`I_5^{\prime \prime }+c_3I_1^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{(A^1+3M)}{(A^1M)}}`$ (184)
$``$ $`c_3\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}I_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(A^1M)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(A^1\beta M)^{1/2}}{(A^1+3M)^{1/2}}}.`$ (185)
The right hand sides of Eqs. (157) are therefore determined in terms of derivatives of $`I_1`$ and $`I_5`$.

For convenience, we choose $`I_0^{}=0`$, $`I_1=\mathrm{cos}\sigma `$ and $`I_5=\mathrm{sin}\sigma `$. To simplify the equations of motion further, we fix $`\sigma =0`$. Using these values of $`I_1`$ and $`I_5`$ and substituting the constraint Eq. (22) in Eqs. (157), we obtain

$`\ddot{B}^1`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_1^24MB^1}{(r+3M)^3}}=\sqrt{c_1^2c_3^2}{\displaystyle \frac{(r\beta M)^{1/2}}{(r+3M)^{1/2}}}`$ (187)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2M(rM)}{(r+3M)^3}}`$
$`\ddot{B}^5`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}\dot{B}^5`$ (188)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)^2}}c_3\dot{B}^1+{\displaystyle \frac{8M(r+M)}{(rM)^3}}c_3\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(rM)}{(r+3M)}}c_1^2c_3^2}`$ (189)
$`=`$ $`c_3{\displaystyle \frac{(r+3M)}{(rM)}}`$ (190)
The equations of motion are now ordinary differential equations and can be solved to find the first order corrections to the null string configuration. Although the equation for $`B^1`$ is now decoupled, the numerical solution of these equations is highly nontrivial, even in the relatively simple case of a PGPS monopole. Moreover, in the above discussion, we have taken a particular value of $`\sigma `$. It would however be appropriate to make a more general ansatz for the functions $`I_0`$, $`I_1`$ and $`I_5`$, the above example being a first step.

The invariant string size is defined in Eq. (24) as,

$$dl^2=X^\mu X^\nu G_{\mu \nu }(X)d\sigma ^2.$$
(191)
Using Eq. (15), we have

$$\frac{dl^2}{d\sigma ^2}=\frac{1}{c^2}\dot{X}^\mu \dot{X}^\nu G_{\mu \nu }.$$
(192)
It is clear from the above that, using the above definition, the string length cannot be determined in the zeroth order, i.e., for the $`c0`$ limit. The first order correction to the invariant string length is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\frac{dl^2}{d\sigma ^2}\right)=(\dot{A}^\mu \dot{B}^\nu +\dot{A}^\nu \dot{B}^\mu )G_{\mu \nu }$$
(193)
Using the constraint Eq. (22), the first order correction is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\frac{dl^2}{d\sigma ^2}\right)=A^\mu A^\nu G_{\mu \nu }(X)+G_{\mu \nu ,\rho }\dot{A}^\mu \dot{A}^\nu B^\rho $$
(194)
In Ref. , the invariant string length is defined as

$$dl^2=\dot{X}^\mu \dot{X}^\nu d\sigma ^2,$$
(195)
which ignores the factor $`1/c^2`$ and is, therefore, not appropriate to describe null strings.

We calculate the string length for the simple case mentioned above. The first order correction to the invariant string length for the PGPS monopole is

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left({\displaystyle \frac{dl}{d\sigma }}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`c_1^2I_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{(r\beta M)}{(rM)}}c_3^2I_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{(3+\beta )M}{(rM)}}`$ (196)
$`+`$ $`c_3I_5^2{\displaystyle \frac{(r\beta M)}{(r+3M)}}+2I_0^{}I_5^{}`$ (197)
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}c_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{8M}{(rM)^2}}c_3^2\right)B^1,`$ (198)
which, for the choice of $`I_1`$ and $`I_5`$ given above and at the point $`\sigma =0`$, reduces to

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{dl}{d\sigma }}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`c_3I_5^2{\displaystyle \frac{(r\beta M)}{(r+3M)}}+({\displaystyle \frac{4M}{(rM)(r+3M)}}c_1^2`$ (199)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8M}{(rM)^2}}c_3^2)B^1.`$ (200)
Therefore, even with the simplistic approximations described above, there is a nontrivial contribution to the invariant string size which can be calculated once the first order equations are solved.

## VII conclusions

In this paper, the motion of a string near five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein black holes has been investigated. For simplicity, the electrically and magnetically charged cases have been considered separately. The equations of motion obtained from the string action are solved, numerically as well as analytically, to zeroth order in the null string expansion. The domain of interest is the region just outside the horizon and in the equatorial plane. In the magnetically charged black hole case the equations, although complicated, can be reduced to quadratures. The quadratures are solved analytically in terms of different combinations of elliptical integrals which depend on the relative values of the charges. There are some solutions where the elliptical integrals reduce to elementary functions. Detailed analytical as well as numerical investigation is carried out in a suitable large distance approximation, i.e. the scalar charge, in appropriate units, being much smaller than the distance from the black hole. However, for the electrically charged case, the equations cannot be reduced to quadratures and have to be solved numerically. The solutions express the string coordinates in terms of the proper time of the string. The extra coordinate behaves differently in the electric and magnetic cases. For a clearer picture, it is useful to define a quantity called the Kaluza-Klein radius, which is the radius of the circle around which the extra dimension winds. As the string approaches a magnetically charged black hole, the value of the Kaluza-Klein radius which it sees becomes smaller than its asymptotic value. The opposite effect is seen for an electrically charged black hole, where the extra dimension tends to expand.

One of the black hole solutions to five dimensional Kaluza-Klein theory is the well known Pollard-Gross-Perry-Sorkin (PGPS) monopole. It has been recently shown  that this monopole arises as a solution of a suitable dimensionally reduced superstring theory, thus providing an additional motivation for the present study. In this special case, the solutions to the string equation of motion are obtained analytically, even though the scalar charge is not small. The solution possesses an additional feature, namely, a decelerated fall of the string into the black hole. This can be understood as being due to the extremal nature of the black hole. The Kaluza-Klein theory possesses another extremal black hole solution not mentioned hitherto in the literature. The string equations of motion are solved in this background too and the solutions written in terms of elliptical integrals.

In the first order of the null string expansion, the effects of the background on the string become manifest in the form of shape changes. The problem is technically very involved. An illustrative calculation for the PGPS monopole case is presented to show how one may proceed to set up the equations for numerical solution. Although the approximations made are simplistic, it is shown that the invariant string size receives a nonzero contribution in the first order. However, one should solve the second order partial differential equations, work on which is in progress.

Our approach is complementary to finding out stringy corrections to the five-dimensional vacuum Einstein equations and their effect on the black hole metrics . We limit ourselves to studying only the classical picture. Although, in principle, quantum effects become dominant in the strong gravity regime, it seems plausible that the classical picture gives an intuitive idea of the compactification mechanism.

## acknowledgements

Part of this work has been in collaboration with the late R. P. Saxena. H. K. J. thanks Inter University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Pune for hospitality while this manuscript was being finalised. H. K. J. also thanks the University Grants Commission, India for financial support.

## A Leading Order Analysis of Equations of Motion

This Appendix displays some details of the leading order analysis of string equations of motion in electrically charged Kaluza-Klein black hole backgrounds. The equations of motion for an electrically charged black hole background (Eqs. (46)), unlike those for a magnetic black hole, do not reduce to quadratures. One has to therefore resort to solving them numerically. To find out the initial conditions for numerical solutions, one has to analyse the equations to leading order in powers of $`1/r`$.

The equations of motion, in the limit where $`r>>\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$, are given by Eqs. (71). Up to the leading order, the equations take the form

$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2t}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`2(M+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1){\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}+4Q{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0,`$ (A1)
$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2x_5}{\tau ^2}}`$ $``$ $`4Q{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}=0,`$ (A2)
$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2r}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`+`$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}\right)^2+4Q{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}`$ (A3)
$`+`$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)^2+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_5}{\tau }}\right)^2=0.`$ (A4)
with the constraint

$$\left(\frac{r}{\tau }\right)^2=\left(\frac{t}{\tau }\right)^2\left(\frac{x_5}{\tau }\right)^2.$$
(A5)
We make the reasonable assumption that the trajectories can be written in the parametric form $`t=t(r)`$, $`\theta =\theta (r)`$, $`\varphi =\varphi (r)`$ and $`x_5=x_5(r)`$. We can then change the derivatives w.r.t. $`\tau `$ to $`r`$ derivatives, i.e.,

$$\frac{t}{\tau }=\frac{dt}{dr}\frac{r}{\tau },\frac{x_5}{\tau }=\frac{dx_5}{dr}\frac{r}{\tau }.$$
(A6)
We have (considering only the $`t`$ and $`x_5`$ equations for the time being)

$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2t}{dr^2}}`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\left({\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}\right)^34Q\left({\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}`$ (A7)
$``$ $`2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\left({\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}+(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M){\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}+4Q{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}=0,`$ (A8)
$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x_5}{dr^2}}`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\left({\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}4Q{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}\right)^2`$ (A9)
$``$ $`(5\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M){\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\left({\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}\right)^34Q{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}=0.`$ (A10)
with the constraint equation simplifying to

$$\left(\frac{dt}{dr}\right)^2\left(\frac{dx_5}{dr}\right)^2=1.$$
(A11)
Defining

$`\psi _1`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}`$ (A12)
$`\psi _2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}`$ (A13)
the equations of motion are decoupled (Eqs. (80)) and are given by

$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _1}{dr}}`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _1^3+3(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _1`$ (A14)
$``$ $`4Q\sqrt{\psi _1^21}(\psi _11)=0,`$ (A15)
$`r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _2}{dr}}`$ $``$ $`6\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\psi _2^3+(3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _2`$ (A16)
$``$ $`4Q\sqrt{\psi _2^2+1}(\psi _2+1)=0,`$ (A17)
These equations are first order in derivatives of $`\psi _1`$ and $`\psi _2`$. The equation for $`\psi _1`$ can be solved to

$`{\displaystyle }`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _1}{(3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _1^33(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)\psi _14Q\sqrt{\psi _1^21}(\psi _1^21)}}`$ (A18)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}+I_c,`$ (A19)
where $`I_c`$ is an integration constant.

The left hand side of the equation is an integral of the type

$$\frac{dx}{ax^3+bx+c\sqrt{x^21}(x^21)},$$
(A20)
with $`a=3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M`$, $`b=3(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M)`$ and $`c=4Q`$. The electric charge $`Q`$ and the scalar charge $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ are related via the equation

$$Q^2=\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M).$$
(A21)
With a change in variable $`x=\mathrm{sec}\theta `$ followed by the substitution $`l=\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, and using Eq. (A21), the integral can be written as

$$\frac{1}{c}\frac{ldl}{l^3\frac{3}{2ϵ}l^2+\frac{1}{2ϵ}},$$
(A22)
where $`ϵ=\sqrt{\frac{2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{M}}`$ and $`\frac{b}{c}\frac{3}{4ϵ}`$ and $`\frac{a+b}{c}\frac{1}{2ϵ}`$.

The term $`l^3`$ is bounded between +1 and -1. We are interested in the limit of small scalar charge $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$, hence $`\frac{1}{ϵ}`$ is a large number. Therefore, the term $`l^3`$ in the denominator can be neglected with respect to the terms with factors $`\frac{1}{ϵ}`$. Solving the integral and resubstituting for $`\psi _1`$ we get the first equation in (84), viz.

$$\psi _1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{𝒜}\sqrt{2M/r+c_1}},$$
(A23)
where the negative sign is chosen for an in-falling string. A similar analysis for the equation for the coordinate $`x_5`$ gives the expression for $`\psi _2`$ which is given in Eqs. (84).

The equation of motion for $`r`$ (up to the leading order) is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2r}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}\right)^2`$ (A24)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4Q}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dx_5}{dr}}\right)^2\left\}\right({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{d\tau }})^2.`$ (A25)
The leading order behaviour of the derivatives of $`t`$ and $`x_5`$ is substituted in the above equation and we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2r}{\tau ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{𝒜(2M/r+c_1)}}`$ (A26)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4Q}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{𝒜(2M/r+c_1)(2M/r+c_2)}}}`$ (A27)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1M}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2M/r+c_2)}}\left]\right({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }})^2.`$ (A28)
The first integral of motion is then given by

$`\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+M}{2𝒜M}}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+c_1)`$ (A29)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{M}}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+c_2)+{\displaystyle \frac{M\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{r}}]`$ (A30)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4Q}{2\sqrt{𝒜}M}}[\mathrm{ln}r\mathrm{ln}(4M+c_1r+c_2r`$ (A31)
$`+`$ $`2\sqrt{(2M+c_1r)(2M+c_2r)})]`$ (A32)
In the above equation, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1/M`$ and $`4Q/2\sqrt{𝒜}M`$ are of $`O(ϵ^2)`$ and the terms can therefore be neglected. This implies,

$`\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2A}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+c_1\right){\displaystyle \frac{M}{r}},`$ (A33)
which can further be solved to

$$\frac{r}{\tau }=\frac{Ie^{M/r}}{(2M/r+c_1)^{1/2𝒜}}$$
(A34)
where $`I`$ and $`c_1`$ are integration constants. From the above values of $`dt/dr`$, $`dx_5/dr`$ and $`r/\tau `$, we can obtain Eqs. (87).

This equips us with the initial conditions for the numerical solutions of Eqs. (71). These equations can be solved to find the behaviour of $`t`$ and $`x_5`$ and the constraint equation can then be used to find out $`r`$ as a function of $`\tau `$.