text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In a recent paper Daghigh, Kapusta and Hosotani  proposed a new type of a black hole in the theory of general relativity coupled to a non-linear scalar field with a potential. A quartic non-symmetric potential was assumed to have one minimum of positive energy (false vacuum) and another of zero energy (true vacuum). In the false vacuum state, a possible solution is the de Sitter metric, while for the scalar field at the true vacuum one can assume the Schwarzschild metric. The ‘false vacuum black hole’ was suggested to be given by the Schwarzschild solution outside the event horizon and the de Sitter solution inside the black hole. The scalar field was supposed to have a constant false vacuum value inside the black hole and a constant true vacuum value outside with a finite jump at the horizon. Direct matching of de Sitter spacetime with the Schwarzschild solution on the horizon had been suggested earlier  and shown to be incorrect . However, it was argued in  that the matching of these solutions can be achieved within a more general parameterization of the static metric by two different functions due to the jump of the product $`g_{tt}g_{rr}`$. If correct, this proposal could lead to intriguing physical implications like new kinds of black hole remnants or the possibility that we live inside an enormous black hole.

Meanwhile, the problem of incorporating the de Sitter metric inside the black hole is by no means new. The idea that sigularitities can be avoided by matter with an ‘inflationary’ equation of state was forwarded by Gliner  long before the inflation scenario was proposed in cosmology. It was also suggested that the limiting curvature principle of Markov  may be realized in the black hole context as the appearence of a de Sitter world instead of the singularity . A similar issue was discussed using the idea of vacuum polarisation  and in the ‘cutoff’ curvature approach . Some phenomenological matter sources were suggested ensuring a de Sitter nucleus inside the black hole . It was also shown that, under perturbations, the de Sitter metric emerges inside a charged black hole in the development of an instability of the internal Cauchy horizon, a phenomenon called mass-inflation with an exponential growth of the local mass function . Such a growth has also been observed inside static Einstein-Yang-Mills black holes when the singularity is approached . A closely related subject – the avoidance of singularities inside black holes not neccessarily related to the de Sitter solution – has attracted much attention recently. Such a possibility was described by Bardeen in 1968  as a modification of the Reissner-Nordström metric. Recently a non-linear electrodynamics lagrangian was found producing a Bardeen type metric . Phenomenological sources for non-singular black holes were discussed in . In addition, we mention some investigations on the dynamics of time-dependent bubbles with false vacuum inside (and hence de Sitter metric inside) and a black hole metric outside (for a recent discussion see ). Thus, the main surprise of the paper  is a claim that an internal de Sitter metric can be accommodated to a black hole as a static solution within such a simple model as the scalar theory with a non-symmetric potential.

Here we investigate the problem of matching the de Sitter and the Schwarzschild metrics in the context of this model in more detail. First we show that the piecewise solution suggested in  cannot be interpreted in terms of distributions and is likely to demand additional singular matter sources at the horizon. Then we discuss the possibility of more complicated smooth solutions assuming more general positive non-symmetric potential with two minima. First, using only a local analysis we explore the possibility of matching the internal and external solutions at the horizon attached to the local maximum of the potential. It turns out that both inside and outside the black hole one encounters timelike regions (with $`_t`$ spacelike). Finally, we discuss the problem from a global viewpoint, in the spirit of no-hair theorems. We prove a no-go theorem by extending the no-hair argument to the black hole interior and showing that the model does not admit smooth solutions in which the scalar field starts at the false vacuum at the origin and comes to the true vacuum at infinity with one or several horizons at finite values of the radii of spherical sections. Some open possibilities for false vacuum black holes are then briefly discussed.

## 2 The model

Consider general relativity coupled to a real scalar field theory

$$S=\frac{1}{4\pi }\left(\frac{R}{4}+\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi V(\varphi )\right)\sqrt{g}d^4x$$
(1)
with a smooth potential $`V`$ for which we assume a general behavior as shown in Fig.1. In what follows the potential is not necessarily quartic. We need only that near minima, $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$, it can be approximated by parabolae

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`V_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k_1(\varphi +\varphi _1)^2+O((\varphi +\varphi _1)^3),`$ (2)
$`V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k_2(\varphi \varphi _2)^2+O((\varphi \varphi _2)^3),`$ (3)
with positive constants $`V_1,k_1,k_2`$, and the local maximum is at $`\varphi =0`$, with $`V(0)=V_0>0`$. We assume that the potential goes to infinity as a finite power of $`|\varphi |`$ as $`\varphi \pm \mathrm{}`$, and that the derivative

$$V_\varphi =\frac{dV}{d\varphi }.$$
(4)
is finite for finite $`\varphi `$.

Assuming spherical symmetry and staticity we write the metric in the curvature gauge

$$ds^2=\sigma ^2Ndt^2\frac{dr^2}{N}r^2d\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(5)
where $`\sigma `$ and $`N`$ are functions of $`r`$. For $`N`$ we will also use the following two parametrizations:

$$N=1\frac{2m}{r}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{r},$$
(6)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=r2m`$. The equations of motion following from the action (1) read

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }}`$ $`=`$ $`r\varphi ^2,`$ (7)
$`m^{}`$ $`=`$ $`r^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N\varphi ^2+V\right),`$ (8)
$`\left(r^2N\sigma \varphi ^{}\right)^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma r^2V_\varphi .`$ (9)
The variable $`\sigma `$ can be excluded from the Eq. (9) using Eq. (7). Denoting $`\xi =r\varphi ^{}`$, one can rewrite the equations of motion as a system of three first order equations for $`\varphi `$, $`\xi `$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$

$`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{r}}\xi ^2+U,`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\xi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`r^2V_\varphi \xi U,`$ (11)
$`\varphi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi }{r}},`$ (12)
where

$$U=12r^2V,$$
(13)
and an equation for $`\sigma `$, i.e. Eq. (7), which can be solved once the solution of the system (10-12) is found.

A mechanical analogy is useful for the scalar field equation (9) regarding $`r`$ as the mechanical time. Then the role of the potential will be played by $`V`$ in the spacelike region ($`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$) and by $`V`$ in the timelike region ($`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, if any). Thus, a ‘particle’ departing from one of the vacua will be forced to climb the barrier if $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, but will be turned back if $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$.

One trivial solution to the system (10-12) corresponds to the scalar field sitting at the left local minimum of the potential (false vacuum):

$$\varphi \varphi _1,\sigma 1,N=1\frac{r^2}{r_c^2}.$$
(14)
This is the de Sitter spacetime with the cosmological horizon at

$$r=r_c=\sqrt{\frac{3}{2V_1}}.$$
(15)
Another trivial solution is the Schwarzschild metric. This corresponds to the true vacuum

$$\varphi \varphi _2,\sigma 1,N=1\frac{M}{r},$$
(16)
with finite mass $`M`$. Note that any constant value of the metric function $`\sigma `$ may be rescaled to unity by a time scaling.

## 3 Piecewise solution

Let us try, following , to construct a piecewise solution to the Eqs. (10-12) assuming for the scalar field a step-like behaviour

$$\varphi =\varphi _1\theta (r_hr)+\varphi _2\theta (rr_h),$$
(17)
i.e., the false vacuum value inside the black hole and the true vacuum value outside. Similar matching within the parameterization of the metric by a single function of the radial variable was discussed earlier in  and shown to lead to instabilities. Our current model differs in that the metric functions $`g_{tt}`$ and $`g_{rr}`$ are independent, so these results do not apply directly.

The field equations will be satisfied for $`r<r_h`$ with the de Sitter metric

$$\sigma =\sigma _0,m=\frac{r^3}{2r_h^2},$$
(18)
(where the constant value $`\sigma _0`$ can be removed by a rescaling of time), and for $`r>r_h`$ with the Schwarzschild metric

$$\sigma =\sigma _{\mathrm{}},m=\frac{r_h}{2},$$
(19)
the event horizon coinciding with the de Sitter cosmological horizon. This suggests the following representation for the metric functions:

$`\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _0\theta (r_hr)+\sigma _{\mathrm{}}\theta (rr_h),`$ (20)
$`m`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r^3}{2r_h^2}}\theta (r_hr)+{\displaystyle \frac{r_h}{2}}\theta (rr_h).`$ (21)
However, an attempt to check whether this solution remains true at the horizon $`r=r_h`$ in the sense of distributions fails because the system (10-12) is highly non-linear. This could be expected: distribution-valued metrics and curvature can be introduced in general relativity only under special conditions (see, e.g., ). Perhaps more satisfactory results could be obtained in the framework of the generalized functions approach by Colombeau , but it will be enough for our purposes here to use a simple regularization for the delta-function

$$\delta (x)=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\delta _\epsilon (x),\delta _\epsilon (x)=\frac{\epsilon }{\pi (x^2+\epsilon ^2)}.$$
(22)
Differentiation of Eq. (17) gives

$$\xi =r_h(\varphi _1+\varphi _2)\delta (x),x=rr_h,$$
(23)
while for the derivative of $`m`$ we obtain

$$m^{}=\frac{3(1+x)^2}{2}\theta (x).$$
(24)
Near $`x=0`$ one also has

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=x\left[\theta (x)2\theta (x)\right],$$
(25)
therefore at the right hand side of the Eq.(8) one encounters a product $`x\delta ^2(x)`$. Its regularized version

$$x\delta _\epsilon (x)^2=\frac{\epsilon ^2}{\pi ^2}\frac{x}{(x^2+\epsilon ^2)^2}$$
(26)
vanishes at $`x=0`$. Moreover, it can be checked that for any ‘good’ function $`\phi (x)`$ one has:

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi (x)x\delta _\epsilon ^2(x)𝑑x=0.$$
(27)
Dropping therefore the first term in the right hand side of Eq. (8) one can verify the validity of this equation at $`x=0`$ in view of the formula

$$V=\frac{3}{2r_h^2}\theta (x).$$
(28)
However, the situation with other equations is less satisfactory. For the solution under consideration $`V_\varphi =0`$, while the left hand side of the Eq. (9) contains a delta-singularity. Then Eq. (7) shows that the jump of $`\sigma `$ at $`x=0`$ is infinite:

$$\mathrm{ln}\sigma |_{r_h0}^{r_h+0}=r_h(\varphi _1+\varphi _2)^2\delta (0),$$
(29)
(this is easy to check using the regularization (22)). The structure of other singularities in the Einstein tensor is likely to exhibit the presence of extra matter at the horizon surface. The Einstein tensor for the metric (5) reads:

$`G_t^t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2m^{}}{r^2}},`$ (30)
$`G_r^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}\left(m^{}\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }}\right),`$ (31)
$`G_\theta ^\theta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r}}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }+2\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^{\prime \prime }}{\sigma }}+\left(3\mathrm{\Delta }^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{r}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }}\right),`$ (32)
while the right hand side of the Einstein’s equations for the scalar field is given by

$`8\pi T_t^t`$ $`=`$ $`N\varphi ^2+2V,`$ (33)
$`8\pi T_r^r`$ $`=`$ $`N\varphi ^2+2V,`$ (34)
$`8\pi T_\theta ^\theta `$ $`=`$ $`N\varphi ^2+2V.`$ (35)
The $`tt`$-equation coincides with the Eq.(8) and it is satisfied at the horizon. The $`rr`$-equation is satisfied as well after omitting the products $`x\delta ^2(x)`$ as we argued above. But the situation is more complicated with the $`\theta \theta `$-equation. Indeed, differentiating (25) one obtains a delta-term

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }=3\delta (rr_h),$$
(36)
which is not canceled by other terms in this equation. The same is true for the singular term containing $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\sigma ^{}/\sigma `$. All this looks like showing the presence of extra matter at the horizon. This is not very surprising: the piecewise model emerges when the scalar theory is treated like a vacuum theory with a step-like cosmological constant. But if the cosmological constaint is variable, the Bianchi identities require additional matter to be invoked .

Therefore it is hard to adopt the piecewise metric (20), (21) as a true solution to the Einstein equations with a scalar source.

## 4 An attempt of a smooth matching at $`\varphi =0`$

One can imagine that a true solution with similar properies exists which is deformed from the above simple form in the vicinity of the horizon. Here we perform a purely local analysis of the behavior of the presumed smooth solution near the horizon assuming that the latter corresponds to a ‘natural’ point $`\varphi =0`$, i.e., to the local maximum of the potential shown in Fig. 1. Then $`V_\varphi (r_h)=0`$ and we get from the Eqs. (10,11)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_h^{}=U_h,\xi _hU_h=0.$$
(37)
(Here we also used the fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\xi ^2`$ vanishes at the horizon, this remains true even if $`\xi `$ diverges, see the next section). So either

$$i)U_h=0,\xi _h\text{arbitrary},$$

or

$$ii)\xi _h=0,U_h\text{arbitrary}.$$

Consider first the case i). Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }_h^{}=0`$ and the horizon is degenerate ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has a zero of the second order). Therefore near the horizon

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{\alpha }{2}x^2+O(x^3),$$
(38)
where $`x=rr_h`$, and $`\alpha `$ should be positive to ensure the timelike character of the Killing vector $`_t`$ outside the horizon. Now expand the Eq. (10) to linear order in $`x`$. Equating the linear terms one gets:

$$\alpha =U_h^{},$$
(39)
with $`U_h^{}`$ being the value of the derivative of (13) at the horizon. It can be represented as

$$U_h^{}=4r_hV_h2r_h^2V_\varphi |_{r_h}\varphi _h^{},$$
(40)
where, by the assumption that the horizon is at the maximum of the potential,

$$V_\varphi |_{r_h}=0,$$
(41)
and by the assumption i)

$$2r_h^2V_h=1.$$
(42)
It follows that

$$\alpha =\frac{2}{r_h},$$
(43)
therefore $`_t`$ is spacelike outside the horizon. By definition, the event horizon is the largest root of the equation $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, so this solution can not describe a black hole.

Consider now the case ii). If $`\xi _h=0`$ and $`U_h0`$ an expansion for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ will contain a linear term

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=U_hx+\frac{\alpha }{2}x^2+O(x^3),$$
(44)
while $`\xi `$ starts as

$$\xi =\xi _h^{}x+O(x^2).$$
(45)
Now, collecting linear terms in the Eq. (10) we get again Eq. (43) for $`\alpha `$, so the expansion of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ will read

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{1}{r_h}\left(x\frac{1}{2}U_hr_h\right)^2+\frac{1}{4}U_h^2r_h+O(x^3).$$
(46)
Now the region with the timelike $`_t`$ is between the horizons, while outside it $`_t`$ is spacelike again.

So the result of our attempt is disapointing: one cannot smoothly match the solutions with both interior and exterior spacelike metrics at the event horizon attached to the ‘natural’ point $`\varphi =0`$.

It is worth noting that the matching of de Sitter and Reissner-Nordström metrics is possible along the interior Cauchy horizon for some special choice of parameters .

## 5 No-go theorem

Now we would like to study the problem in a more general setting: whether a static spherically symmetric smooth solution to the model (1) exists which is locally de Sitter near the origin (with $`_t`$ timelike) and asymptotically Schwarzschild with one or several regular horizons in the intermediate region. More precisely, we will assume that near the origin the space-time is flat:

$$N(0)=1,\sigma (0)=\sigma _00,$$
(47)
(the constant value $`\sigma _0`$ can be eliminated locally by rescaling of time), and the scalar field is at the false vacuum

$$\varphi (0)=\varphi _1;$$
(48)
while at infinity the solution is asymptotically flat

$$N=1\frac{2M}{r}+O\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right),\sigma (\mathrm{})=1,$$
(49)
and the scalar field is at the true vacuum:

$$\varphi (\mathrm{})=\varphi _2.$$
(50)
We will give a non-existence proof in two steps: first we invoke the no-hair argument for the exterior region, and then we extend it to the black hole interior. The exterior no-hair theorem for an Abelian Higgs model was proven by Adler and Pearson  (for an improved version see ). In  the Goldstone model was also considered for the Mexican hat potential. Here we deal with the real scalar field with a more general positive potential, so it is worth giving the no-hair proof explicitly.

The finiteness of the ADM mass $`M`$ imposes restrictions on the first subleading term in the asymptotic expansion of the scalar field at infinity. Integrating the Eq. (8) from the event horizon (the maximal root of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) to infinity we find for the ADM mass

$$M=\frac{r_h}{2}+_{r_h}^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{1}{2}N\xi ^2+r^2V\right)𝑑r,$$
(51)
where the first term is the ‘bare’ mass, and the second one is the contribution of the scalar hair. Both terms in the integrand are positive semidefinite, so each of them should be integrable. For convergence of the second term at infinity it is necessary that $`V`$ as a function of $`r`$ decays faster than $`r^3`$. In view of the Eq. (3) this translates to

$$\varphi =\varphi _2+o\left(\frac{1}{r^{3/2}}\right),$$
(52)
as $`r\mathrm{}`$. This implies

$$\xi =o\left(\frac{1}{r^{3/2}}\right),$$
(53)
so the first term in Eq. (51) is also integrable at infinity. From the Eq. (7) it then follows that at infinity

$$\sigma =1o\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right),$$
(54)
with a negative subleading term, where the constant was set to unity in conformity with the assumption (49). With this normalization, an integration of the Eq. (7) gives

$$\sigma =\mathrm{exp}\left(_r^{\mathrm{}}\xi ^2\frac{dr}{r}\right),$$
(55)
so $`\sigma `$ is bounded to the interval

$$0<\sigma 1.$$
(56)
Here the lower bound $`\sigma =0`$ could be reached at a point where the integral in the exponential diverges. However in view of the assumption (47) $`\sigma `$ remains non-zero at the origin, and being a non-decreasing function, remains strictly positive elsewhere.

We now discuss the behaviour of the solution near the event horizon. An assumption of regularity implies that the mixed components of the energy-momentum tensor (33-35) are finite, so $`\xi `$ should satisfy

$$\underset{rr_h}{lim}N\xi ^2=C^2,$$
(57)
with some $`C0`$, while $`\varphi `$ should not diverge in view of our assumptions about the potential $`V`$ (also implying the finiteness of the derivative $`V_\varphi `$). These conditions ensure the convergence of the integral (51) at the horizon. One can obtain a stronger condition on $`C`$ using the field equations. From the Eqs. (10,11) one derives

$$(rN\xi )^{}+\frac{N}{r}\xi ^3=r^2V_\varphi .$$
(58)
Substituting here $`\xi `$ from the Eq. (57) we obtain in the right vicinity of the horizon

$$\frac{CN^{}r_h}{2\sqrt{N}}+\frac{C^3}{\sqrt{N}}+\text{finite terms}=r^2V_\varphi .$$
(59)
The right-hand side of this equation remains finite as $`rr_h`$, while the first two terms on the left-hand side are positive semidefinite (recall that $`N_h^{}0`$ ) and diverge (for a degenerate horizon only the second term diverges). Therefore $`C=0`$, i.e. we get a stronger condition on $`\xi `$:

$$\underset{rr_h}{lim}N\xi ^2=0.$$
(60)
(An alternative proof of this relation follows from the convergence of the integral in the exponential in the Eq. (55).) From the Eq. (57), a weaker condition also holds

$$\underset{rr_h}{lim}N\xi =0.$$
(61)
Now we can give a no-hair proof similar to that of Adler and Pearson .From the Eqs. (9), (10) and (7) one derives the following identity:

$$\frac{d}{dr}\left[\sigma \left(2r^2V\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\xi ^2}{r}\right)\right]=\sigma \left[\frac{\xi ^2}{r}\left(1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{r}\right)+4rV\right].$$
(62)
Integrating it from the horizon to infinity and taking into account the condition (60), boundedness of $`\sigma `$, and the relations valid at $`r\mathrm{}`$

$`r^2V`$ $`=`$ $`o\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\right),`$ (63)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi ^2\mathrm{\Delta }}{r}}`$ $`=`$ $`o\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^3}}\right),`$ (64)
which follow from the Eqs. (3), (52) and (53), we obtain

$$_{r_h}^{\mathrm{}}\sigma \left[\frac{\xi ^2}{r}\left(1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{r}\right)+4rV\right]𝑑r=2r_h^2V_h\sigma _h,$$
(65)
where $`V_h`$ is the value of the potential at the event horizon. Since $`\sigma `$ is strictly positive, the potential is positive semidefinite, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$ everywhere in the integration region, it follows that both the left hand side and the right hand side of this equation are strictly zero, which implies

$$\varphi \varphi _2$$
(66)
for all $`rr_h`$. Thus the event horizon should correspond to the absolute minimum (true vacuum) of the potential. Consequently, the black hole is exactly Schwarzschildean for an external observer.

Now let us look to the interior of the black hole. Since we assume that the Killing vector $`_t`$ is timelike in the vicinity of the origin, there are two possibilities: either there exist an internal Cauchy horizon at some $`r=r_{}`$ (more generally an odd number of internal horizons), or the event horizon at $`r=r_h`$ is degenerate. The second possibility is a limiting case of the first, so we assume that there are two solutions $`r=r_\pm `$ of the equation $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ such that $`r_{}r_+=r_h`$ (the generalization of the following proof to a finite odd number of internal horizons is straightforward). Generalizing the condition (61) we find

$$\underset{rr_\pm }{lim}N\varphi ^{}=0.$$
(67)
At the origin $`\varphi `$ has a finite limit $`\varphi _1`$ and is (by assumption) a smooth function, therefore

$$\underset{r0}{lim}r^2\varphi ^{}=0.$$
(68)
Then, integrating the Eq. (9) form the origin to $`r_{}`$, and taking into account boundedness of $`\sigma `$ we get the relation

$$r^2\sigma N\varphi ^{}|_0^r_{}=0=_0^r_{}\sigma r^2V_\varphi 𝑑r.$$
(69)
It follows that either

$$i)\varphi (r)=\varphi _1\text{for all}r[0,r_{}],$$

i.e. the solution is exactly de Sitter up to $`r=r_{}`$ in which case $`r_{}=r_c`$ given by the Eq. (15), or

$$ii)\varphi (r_{})(0,\varphi _2],$$

i.e. the inner horizon is attached to the right wing $`(0,\varphi _2]`$ of the potential curve, see Fig.1.

The case i) means that there is a global solution such that $`\varphi `$ is identically constant in the finite interval $`[0,r_{}]`$, $`\varphi `$ is equal to a different constant along the semi-axis $`[r_+,\mathrm{})`$, but $`\varphi `$ is varying in the interval $`(r_{},r_+)`$. Impossibility of a smooth solution of such a kind can be made clear from a mechanical analogy: the particle sitting at the bottom of the potential well for a finite time cannot start moving unless it is pushed, since all the derivatives of $`\varphi `$ at the initial moment are zero by continuity. To get an idea how this follows from the field equations, consider a vicinity of the event horizon $`r=r_+`$, where $`V=0`$ and hence $`U=1`$, while $`\mathrm{\Delta }=rr_+=x`$. Then the leading terms in the Eq. (11) give the following equation for $`\xi `$:

$$x\xi ^{}=\xi .$$
(70)
The singular solution $`\xi =1/x`$ for $`x<0`$ can not be matched to $`\xi 0`$ for $`x>0`$ (and does not satisfy (60)), therefore the correct solution is $`\xi =0`$.

Now consider the case ii). Integrating the Eq. (9) from $`r_{}`$ to $`r_+`$ we obtain

$$r^2\sigma N\varphi ^{}|_r_{}^{r_+}=0=_r_{}^{r_+}\sigma r^2V_\varphi 𝑑r.$$
(71)
Here $`V_\varphi 0`$, and therefore $`V_\varphi 0`$ in $`[r_{},r_+]`$ which implies

$$r_{}=r_+,\varphi (r_{})=\varphi _2,$$
(72)
that is the event horizon is degenerate. But then we come back to the step like solution (17) which faces the problems discussed in the Sec. 2 and should be ruled out by the smoothness assumption. This completes the proof.

## 6 Conclusion

Our results are the following. First, we have shown that the piecewise false vacuum black hole presented in  can not be interpreted in terms of distributions and apparently is not a solution to the Einstein-scalar field equations without additional matter sources. Second, we have extended the no-hair argument to the black hole interior and have shown that there are no smooth solutions to the scalar model with a non-symmetric potential which interpolate from the false vacuum inside (in the region with the timelike Killing vector $`_t`$) and the true vacuum outside through the horizon(s).

One could ask whether it is possible to weaken some of the assumptions made in order to reopen the possibility of such or similar configurations. The first assumption is the positivity and the shape of the potential. In fact, for static spherically symmetric configurations one can invert the roles of the scalar field $`\varphi `$ and the potential $`V(\varphi )`$: one chooses the desired behavior of $`\varphi `$ determining afterwards the potential through the equations. In such a way some potentials were found for which scalar hair does exist . The main problem here is, of course, whether these potentials are physically reasonable. The second assumption is asymptotic flatness. It was found  that in an asymptotically de Sitter spacetime scalar hair does exist within a similar model. Finally one could consider a non-minimal coupling where no-hair theorems also get modified .

Acknowledgements

The authors thank anonymous referees for indicating the references  and useful comments. D.G. is grateful to CENTRA/Instituto Superioro Técnico (Lisbon) and GTAE for hospitality and support in August 2000 when this paper was written. His work was also partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research under the grant 00-02-16306. JPSL acknowledges a grant from FCT through the project ESO/PRO/1250/98, and thanks Observatório Nacional - Rio de Janeiro for hospitality.


format: text

text:
# Off Resonant Pumping for Transition from Continuous to Discrete Spectrum and Quantum Revivals in Systems in Coherent States

## I Introduction

Parametrically driven systems have been studied extensively in quantum and nonlinear optics. Such systems have resulted in the production of twin beams of photons with high degrees of entanglement. These beams of light have been used extensively in many applications such as in connection with Bell’s inequalities and EPR paradox , quantum cryptography , teleportation , quantum imaging  and in general, in connection with the subject of quantum information processing . The standard Hamiltonian describing such a parametric interaction is known to have continuous spectrum which then results in the exponential growth of (say) the energies in the signal and idler modes. The state of the system at any given time is, in fact, the so-called Perelomov coherent state .

In this communication, we report unusual features in the dynamics of systems in coherent states. We show how changing the detuning of the field pumping the system can cause a transition from a continuum energy spectrum of the system to a discrete one. This transition from continuum spectrum to discrete spectrum results in quantum revivals of the initial state.

This study has been motivated primarily by recent work on the optical realization of Bloch oscillations and Wannier-Stark ladders . These have been recently observed in ultracold atoms trapped in optical potentials , and in fields propagating in waveguide arrays with a linear bias so that the refractive index of a guide is proportional to its spatial location . Even the effect of nonlinearities in the waveguide on Bloch oscillations has been studied. The underlying mathematical equation which leads to Bloch oscillations has the structure

$$i\dot{C}_n=n\mathrm{\Delta }C_n+\beta (C_{n+1}+C_{n1})$$
(1)
In the absence of the term $`n\mathrm{\Delta }C_n`$, an initial excitation in one of the $`C`$’s gets delocalized , i.e, it spreads over all the other sites. However, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, then the system returns to the original site. The linear dependence on the site index in the term $`C_n`$ is very critical for the revival of the initial state. In the waveguide example, the linear bias produces the linear $`n`$ dependence of the term $`n\mathrm{\Delta }C_n`$. The optical realization of analogs of Bloch oscillations is based on situations where the dynamics could be described by equations like (1). We note that many coherently driven systems have dynamics characterized by equations like (1). Thus, remarkably enough, systems in coherent states can exhibit analog of Bloch oscillations. In the case of the radiation field, the index $`n`$ would refer to the occupation number of a given Fock state. Thus the standard measurement of the photon number distribution can be used to study the analog of Bloch oscillations. Clearly this opens up the possibility of studying Bloch oscillations in a very wide class of driven systems. It is however important to have $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, that is that the pumping should be off-resonant. Note also that the quantum revivals considered in this paper should be distinguished from the well studied quantum revivals in the nonlinear wavepacket dynamics of many systems such as Rydberg atoms  and coherent states propagating in a Kerr medium .

## II Parametrically driven systems

Consider a very commonly used system in optical physics. The Hamiltonian describing the parametric interaction of two modes $`a`$ and $`b`$ with frequencies $`\omega _a`$ and $`\omega _b`$ respectively, is given by

$$H=\mathrm{}(Ga^{}b^{}+G^{}ab).$$
(2)
Here $`G`$ is the coupling constant which depends on the nonlinearity of the medium and the amplitude of the pump. It is assumed that the pump frequency $`\omega _p=\omega _a+\omega _b`$. The operators $`a`$ and $`b`$ satisfy Bosonic commutation relations. If the modes $`a`$ and $`b`$ are in vacuum state at time $`t=0`$, then the state at time $`t`$ is

$$|\psi (t)=\mathrm{exp}\{it(Ga^{}b^{}+G^{}ab)\}|0,0$$
(3)
which is the so-called Perelomov coherent state or the squeezed vacuum state . As is well known, the Heisenberg operator $`a`$, for example, evolves as

$$a(t)=a(0)\mathrm{cosh}(|G|t)ib^{}(0)\frac{G}{|G|}\mathrm{sinh}(|G|t)$$
(4)
and thus the energy in the mode $`a`$ continues to grow: $`a^{}(t)a(t)=\mathrm{sinh}^2(|G|t)`$. The probability $`p_0(t)`$ of finding the system in the initial state is

$`p_0(t)`$ $`=`$ $`|0,0|\mathrm{exp}\{it(Ga^{}b^{}+G^{}ab)\}|0,0|^2`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{cosh}^2(|G|t)4e^{2|G|t},\text{as }t\mathrm{}\text{.}`$ (6)
Thus the probability of returning to the initial state decreases monotonically and becomes exponentially small in the long-time limit (Fig. 1). Clearly, there is no quantum revival of the initial state.

The corresponding probability $`p_n(t)`$ ($`n0`$) of finding the system in a state with $`n`$ photons in each mode, is given by

$$p_n(t)=\mathrm{cosh}^2(|G|t)\mathrm{tanh}^{2n}(|G|t);n0.$$
(7)
Note that for $`n0`$, $`p_n(t)`$ increases with $`t`$ initially and peaks at $`|G|t=\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{n/(n+1)}`$. The peak value of $`p_n(t)`$ has the expression

$$p_n(t)_{\mathrm{peak}}=\frac{n^n}{(n+1)^{n+1}},$$
(8)
which depends only on $`n`$ and decreases monotonically with $`n`$.

The exponential growth of energies in the signal and idler modes and the subsequent absence of quantum revival for the initial state are connected with the fact that the Hamiltonian (2) admits a continuum of eigenvalues. The corresponding eigenstates are delta function normalizable and signify scattering states :

$`H|\psi (\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda |\psi (\lambda )`$ (9)
$`\psi (\lambda ^{})|\psi (\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\lambda \lambda ^{});\lambda \text{}\lambda ^{}\text{ real.}`$ (10)
$`|\psi (\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}d_n|n,n,`$ (11)
where the coefficients $`d_n`$ are expressed as hypergeometric functions of the form $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c,z)`$.

Writing $`|\psi (t)=_nC_n(t)|n,n`$ and substituting in the Schrodinger equation $`i\mathrm{}|\dot{\psi }=H|\psi `$ with $`H`$ as given in (2), we get

$$i\dot{C}_n=GnC_{n1}+G^{}(n+1)C_{n+1}.$$
(12)
Thus in terms of Fock states we have nearest-neighbor coupling with the coupling itself depending on the index $`n`$. The solutions (5)and (7) imply that with increasing time, an initial excitation in the $`n=0`$ state spreads over all the states, or in the language of solid state physics, the excitation delocalizes.

We now consider an important physical situation where the Hamiltonian (2) is modified to

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}(a^{}a+b^{}b)+\mathrm{}(Ga^{}b^{}+G^{}ab).$$
(13)
This will be the case if the pump field is detuned, i.e, $`\omega _p\omega _a+\omega _b`$. The amplitudes will satisfy Eq. (12) with an extra term $`n\mathrm{\Delta }C_n`$ on the right. The state at time $`t`$ can be obtained by using the general disentangling theorem  for the SU(1,1) operators $`K_+=a^{}b^{}`$, $`K_{}=ab`$ and $`K_3=(a^{}a+b^{}b+1)/2`$:

$`\mathrm{exp}\{it(GK_++G^{}K_{}+\mathrm{\Delta }K_3)\}`$ (15)
$`=\mathrm{exp}(itG\mathrm{\Gamma }_+K_+)\mathrm{exp}\{(\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }_3)K_3\}\mathrm{exp}(itG^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}K_{})`$
where

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_3`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{cosh}\beta i{\displaystyle \frac{t\mathrm{\Delta }}{2\beta }}\mathrm{sinh}\beta \right)^2,`$ (16)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pm `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{sinh}\beta }{2\beta \mathrm{cosh}\beta it\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sinh}\beta }},`$ (17)
$`\beta ^2`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _0^2t^2,`$ (18)
$`\beta _0`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }^2/4|G|^2}.`$ (19)
The probabilities are now given by $`p_0(t)=|\mathrm{\Gamma }_3|`$ and $`p_n(t)=|\mathrm{\Gamma }_3||\mathrm{\Gamma }_+|^{2n}`$ where

$`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_3|`$ $`=`$ $`\left[1+\left(|G|/\beta _0\right)^2\mathrm{sin}^2\beta _0t\right]^1,`$ (20)
$`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_+|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta _0t}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta _0t+(\beta _0/|G|)^2}}`$ (21)
if the detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the coupling constants are such that $`\beta _0`$ (defined by Eq. (16)) is real. Clearly the survival probability of the initial state is now an oscillatory function of time $`t`$ and $`p_0(t)`$ is unity whenever $`\beta _0t`$ is an integer multiple of $`\pi `$, i.e.

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }^2/4|G|^2)t^2=n^2\pi ^2,\text{where }n\text{ is an integer}.$$
(22)
That is, for these times, the system returns to the original state $`|0,0`$ up to an overall phase factor and there is a quantum revival (Fig. 2).

We thus find the important result that our parametric system exhibits analog of Bloch oscillation under the condition of non-zero detuning such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }>2|G|`$ and that the survival probability becomes unity for times defined by Eq. (22).

It is interesting to note that the peak values of $`p_n(t)`$ ($`n0`$) are still given by Eq. (8) although their locations, at $`\beta _0t=\mathrm{sin}^1(\sqrt{n}\beta _0/|G|)`$, will now depend on the detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Under the condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }>2|G|`$, the Hamiltonian (13) admits a discrete set of eigenvalues given by

$$_{qm}=\mathrm{}\beta _0(q+2m+1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Delta }/2;m=0\text{}1\text{}2\text{, …}$$
(23)
where $`q=a^{}ab^{}b`$ is an integer constant of motion. Thus the periodic behavior is connected with a transition in the nature of energy levels, i.e, the system has gone from a continuous spectrum to a discrete spectrum whose energy levels are equidistant. Note that the level separation is $`2\mathrm{}\beta _0`$ which further validates our earlier observation that the revival period is given by $`\pi /\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }^2/4|G|^2}`$ (see Eq. (22)). Comparison with the standard Bloch problem suggests that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plays the role of the electric field whereas the magnitude of $`G`$ determines the coupling to the nearest neighbors.

## III Oscillator driven by a detuned coherent field

All the above has analogs in the theory of coherent states for a single mode of the radiation field. In fact, coherent states will exhibit some new interesting physics if the detuning is nonzero. Consider the behavior of an oscillator driven by a detuned coherent field:

$$H=\mathrm{}(\mathrm{\Delta }a^{}a+ϵa^{}+ϵ^{}a).$$
(24)
If the system is in a vacuum state at $`t=0`$, then the state at time $`t`$ is a coherent state:

$`|\psi (t)=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i|ϵ|^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Delta }t\right)\right]`$ (26)
$`\times |iϵ\left({\displaystyle \frac{1e^{i\mathrm{\Delta }t}}{i\mathrm{\Delta }}}\right)`$
Consider first the case of zero detuning, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$. In this case, the amplitude $`iϵt`$ of the coherent state continues to increase as $`t`$ increases. The peak of the photon number distribution continues to move away from zero as $`t`$ increases and the probability of being in the initial state decreases continuously and becomes exponentially small: $`p_0(t)=\mathrm{exp}(|ϵ|^2t^2)`$.

For non-zero detuning, on the other hand, one obtains

$`p_n(t)`$ $`=`$ $`|n|\psi (t)|^2,n0;`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`e^{|\alpha |^2}{\displaystyle \frac{|\alpha |^{2n}}{n!}},|\alpha |=|ϵ|t\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }t/2)|}{\mathrm{\Delta }t/2}}\right].`$ (28)
Note that the peak of $`p_n(t)`$ occurs at $`n=|\alpha |^2=(2ϵ/\mathrm{\Delta })^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\mathrm{\Delta }t/2)`$ which is an oscillatory function of time and vanishes whenever $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is an integer multiple of $`2\pi `$. At such times, $`p_n(t)=\delta _{n,0}`$, i.e, the system returns to the initial state $`|0`$ (Fig. 3) up to a phase factor. Note that the period does not depend on the strength of the driving field.

We also note that for $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian (24) are equally spaced discrete states with energies

$$_n=n\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{}|ϵ|^2/\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(29)
The spacing is independent of $`ϵ`$ which leads to a periodic behavior independent of $`ϵ`$. On the other hand, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, then $`H=\mathrm{}(ϵa^{}+ϵ^{}a)`$ has a continuum of eigenvalues with the eigenfunctions satisfying the usual delta function condition $`\psi (x)|\psi (x^{})=\delta (xx^{})`$. Thus here again we see the transition from continuum eigenvalues to the discrete set and this transition is responsible for the revival of the initial state.

## IV Quantum Revivals in ion traps

We now show that this simple behavior can be easily probed, as for example, for a trapped ion like the one used by Wineland and co-workers . Consider an ion in a deep trap cooled to its ground state. Let it interact with two Raman fields $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ with frequencies $`\omega _1`$ and $`\omega _2`$ such that $`\omega _1\omega _2\nu 0`$ (Fig. 4).

In such a case the effective Hamiltonian describing the ionic motion will be of the form $`E_1E_2^{}a\mathrm{exp}\{i(\omega _1\omega _2\nu )t\}+h.c`$. This Hamiltonian is equivalent to (24). Here $`a`$ is the annihilation operator for the vibrational motion of the ion. A measurement of the vibrational distribution will exhibit the analog of Bloch oscillation provided $`\omega _1\omega _2\nu 0`$ and the ion would return to its ground state whenever $`(\omega _1\omega _2\nu )t=2\pi n`$, where $`n`$ is an integer.

## V Conclusion

In conclusion, we have introduced off-resonant pumping of coherent systems as a new mechanism for the optical analog of Bloch oscillations. In our scheme, such oscillations occur in Fock space. We showed that for parametrically driven systems and systems in coherent states, the detuning of the pump changes the energy spectrum of the system from continuum to discrete , and revives the initial state. Finally, we proposed a scheme for inducing Bloch oscillations in trapped ions.


text:
# Polytropes: Implications for Molecular Clouds and Dark Matter

## 1. Introduction

Understanding star formation requires understanding the interstellar molecular clouds out of which stars form. These molecular clouds are objects of fascinating dynamical complexity, exhibiting highly supersonic motions while at the same time being gravitationally bound (Zuckerman & Evans 1974; Larson 1981). The nonthermal motions help support the clouds against the force of gravity; thermal pressure and magnetic fields also contribute. As is characteristic of turbulent motions, the amplitude of the nonthermal motions increases with scale (Larson 1981). Since the nonthermal motions are largest on the scale of the cloud itself, they lead to substantial changes in the shape of the cloud over time (Ballesteros-Paredes, Vazquez-Semadeni, & Scalo 1999). Attempting to model such a complex system is a daunting task that is only now beginning to be tackled numerically (see Vazquez-Semadeni et al 2000).

In order to treat the structure of molecular clouds analytically, it is necessary to make a number of approximations. First, we assume that the cloud is in a steady state. The steady-state approximation is plausible since the lifetime of molecular clouds is typically about an order of magnitude greater than their free-fall time (Blitz & Shu 1980). For example, Williams & McKee (1997) have shown that massive stars will destroy a cloud of mass $`M10^6M_{}`$ by photoionization in $`3\times 10^7`$ yr; smaller clouds live longer. By comparison, the typical cloud of that mass has a mean density $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}84M_6^{1/2}`$ cm-3 (Solomon et al 1987), corresponding to a free-fall time $`t_{\mathrm{ff}}=1.37\times 10^6(\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}/10^3`$ cm$`{}_{}{}^{3})^{1/2}`$ yr $`=4.7\times 10^6(M/10^6M_{})^{1/4}`$ yr. Clouds of mass $`M<10^6M_{}`$ thus live $`>6t_{\mathrm{ff}}`$. The steady-state assumption is quite approximate, however, since the process of destroying the cloud by photoionization is very violent.

Since molecular clouds are approximately in a steady state and they are gravitationally bound, it follows that, when averaged over time, they are approximately in hydrostatic equilibrium. For example, the majority of cores in high latitude cirrus clouds observed by Turner (1993) are consistent with being in hydrostatic equilibrium.

Next, we assume that the time-averaged cloud is spherical. Some effects that could lead to non-spherical clouds, including tidal gravitational fields (Scoville & Sanders 1987) and rotation (Goodman et al 1993), are observed to be relatively weak. Some molecular clouds are observed to be highly filamentary (e.g., Alves et al 1998), and it has been suggested that this can be explained by helical magnetic fields (Fiege & Pudritz 2000). Many molecular clouds are not highly filamentary, however; for example, only about 15% of the clouds in the catalog of Solomon et al (1987), which is based on 13CO observations, have aspect ratios exceeding 2.

## 2. Polytropes

Molecular clouds in the Galaxy are observed to be gravitationally bound, and we are approxmating them as being spherical and in hydrostatic equilibrium. Just as in the case of stars, it is convenient to model them as polytropes, which satisfy the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium

$$\frac{dP}{dr}=\frac{GM\rho }{r^2},$$
(1)
with

$$P(r)=K_p\rho ^{\gamma _p}.$$
(2)
The structure of a polytrope is determined by the polytropic index

$$\gamma _p1+\frac{1}{n},$$
(3)
where $`n`$ is the index used to characterize polytropes in the theory of stellar structure. The stability of a polytrope is determined by $`\gamma _p`$ and the adiabatic index $`\gamma `$ that describes how the pressure of a mass element responds to a density perturbation,

$$\delta \mathrm{ln}P\gamma \delta \mathrm{ln}\rho .$$
(4)
Polytropes provided the first quantitative model for stars. In order to have zero pressure at the boundary, which is assumed to be at a finite radius, it is necessary to have $`\gamma _p>6/5`$. Stars are stable against gravitational collapse for $`\gamma >4/3`$. Since the dynamical timescale for a star is short compared to the heat flow time, the entropy is constant in each mass element during a dynamical perturbation; such perturbations are described as locally adiabatic by McKee & Holliman (1999; hereafter MH).

Lynden-Bell & Wood (1968) modeled globular clusters as bounded, isothermal gas spheres ($`\gamma _p=1`$). Since there are no internal degrees of freedom, the adiabatic index is $`\gamma =5/3`$; as a result, the “gas” is non-isentropic. Globular clusters are globally adiabatic (MH) since the heat flow time is comparable to the dynamical time of the cluster. As Lynden-Bell & Wood (1968) showed, a pressure-bounded cloud with $`\gamma _p=1,\gamma =5/3`$ is subject to core collapse when the density contrast between the center and the surface is too large, $`\rho _c/\rho _s>389.6`$ (MH).

## 3. Polytropic Models of Molecular Clouds

Molecular clouds are supported by three pressure components, thermal, magnetic, and turbulent. Lizano & Shu (1989) developed the first model that accounted for these three pressure components. They assumed that the gas is isothermal and that the turbulent pressure scales as the logarithm of the density (a “logatrope”); the magnetic field was assumed to be axisymmetric.

MH developed the theory of multi-pressure polytropes in which each pressure component has arbitrary values of $`\gamma _p`$ and $`\gamma `$. Clouds with $`\gamma <\gamma _p`$ are convectively unstable, and were not considered. Holliman (1995) showed that the effects of an axisymmetric magnetic field in which the flux is frozen to the gas could be approximated by a gas with $`\gamma =4/3`$. For a flux-to-mass distribution corresponding to a uniform field in a spherical cloud, $`\gamma _p=4/3`$; ambipolar diffusion reduces $`\gamma _p`$ below 4/3. For the turbulent pressure, MH focused on the case of Alfvénic turbulence, which (at least when it is weak) can be modeled with $`\gamma _p=1/2,\gamma =3/2`$ (McKee & Zweibel 1995). Since $`\gamma _p<1`$ for Alfvén waves, the velocity dispersion $`\sigma \rho ^{(\gamma _p1)/2}`$ increases with scale, as observed (Larson 1981). However, since the Alfvén waves are globally adiabatic, they are less effective at providing stability than would be expected for $`\gamma =3/2`$; in fact, they have the same stability properties as a locally adiabatic component with $`\gamma <1`$. The equation of state for molecular clouds is therefore soft: These clouds usually have $`\gamma _p<6/5`$ unless the magnetic field has $`\gamma _p>6/5`$ and is sufficiently strong. Furthermore, all the pressure components have $`\gamma 4/3`$ (in the case of Alfvén waves, this is the equivalent locally adiabatic index). As a result, stable molecular clouds must be confined by the pressure of the ambient medium, and their properties are determined by conditions at the surface. For example, stable clouds with $`\gamma _p<4/3`$ satisfy

$$M4.555\frac{\sigma _s^4}{(G^3P_s)^{1/2}}$$
(5)
for any value of $`\gamma `$, where $`\sigma _s`$ is the 1D velocity dispersion at the cloud surface. For $`\gamma _p=1`$, the coefficient 4.555 is reduced to 1.182, the value for the Bonnor-Ebert sphere. The mean pressure in molecular clouds is limited by the surface pressure: For $`\gamma _p1`$, it is less than $`4P_s`$. However, the central pressure can become arbitrarily large compared to the surface pressure if $`\gamma `$ is sufficiently greater than $`\gamma _p`$. Holliman (1995) showed that multi-pressure polytropes could successfully account for a number of the observed properties of molecular clouds.

The molecular cloud cores in which low-mass stars form often exhibit central regions that are supported primarily by the pressure of an isothermal gas, with nonthermal motions becoming important only in the envelopes. To model this two component structure it is convenient to introduce composite polytropes (Curry & McKee 2000) of the type used for stars many decades ago (e.g., Milne 1930). Curry & McKee (2000) showed that composite polytropes are very promising as models for low-mass cores: In particular, it is possible to have an isothermal core with a non-isentropic ($`\gamma >\gamma _p`$) polytropic envelope in which the central temperature and the surface pressure are fixed (as they generally are in practice), but in which the mass is arbitrarily large. Such models are consistent with observations of small NH3 cores in large 13CO envelopes. Curry (in preparation) has made detailed comparisons of composite polytrope models with the observations.

## 4. Molecular Clouds as Dark Matter

A number of authors have suggested that self-gravitating clouds of cold molecular gas could account for the dark matter in the Galactic halo (Pfenniger, Combes, & Martinet 1994; Pfenniger & Combes 1994; De Paolis et al 1996, 1998; Gerhard & Silk 1996; Combes & Pfenniger 1997). Henriksen & Widrow (1995) and Walker & Wardle (1998; hereafter WW98) went on to suggest that such clouds would have ionized surfaces and could therefore account for the “extreme scattering events” (ESEs) observed by Fiedler et al (1994).111The intensity of the interstellar ionizing radiation field is quite weak (Reynolds 1984; Slavin, McKee, & Hollenbach 2000), however, and to date there is no physically self-consistent calculation that demonstrates that the surfaces of these clouds can be sufficiently ionized to account for the ESEs. Henriksen & Widrow (1995) pointed out that such clouds could cause gravitational microlensing if the clouds had masses of order 0.1 $`M_{}`$. Draine (1998) showed that gas clouds can also act as optical lenses and thereby mimic microlensing.

The clouds considered in the papers by Pfenniger, Combes and Martinet are assumed to be turbulent, with a hierarchical internal structure that terminates on the smallest scale in “clumpuscules” of mass $`10^3M_{}`$ and radius $`30`$ AU. If the clumpuscules exist near the edge of the cloud, so that they are exposed to typical interstellar conditions, then they are subject to the difficulties described below. In any case, the simulations reviewed in Vazquez-Semadeni et al (2000) show that turbulent, isothermal clouds dissipate their internal kinetic energy in about a dynamical time ($`10^3`$ yr), far less than the $`>1`$ Gyr cloud lifetimes assumed by these authors.

Gerhard & Silk (1996) have shown that clouds embedded in non-baryonic halos can be in stable hydrostatic equilibrium even in the absence of a confining medium. Here we shall argue that it is unlikely that highly pressured, self-gravitating clouds without such halos can exist in the Galactic halo. Valentijn & van der Werf (1999) claim to have detected enough molecular hydrogen in the nearby spiral NGC 891 to account for the dark matter within the optical disk of that galaxy; the densities they infer ($`n_\mathrm{H}<10^3`$ cm-3) are orders of magnitude less than those in the models discussed above, however, and do not violate the arguments presented here.

The argument is strongest if the clouds can be represented as single component polytropes. First consider the case in which $`\gamma _p1`$. This includes the case of isothermal clouds ($`\gamma _p=1`$), such as those considered by DePaolis et al (1998) and by Wardle & Walker (1999).222Wardle (private communication) has pointed out that he and Walker did not assume that the clouds are isothermal, but rather that they could be characterized by a mean temperature. However, since the temperatures they considered are so close to that of the microwave background radiation, which sets a floor on the temperature of each part of the cloud, their models are in fact quite close to being isothermal. Such clouds must have a mean pressure less than 4 times the ambient pressure (MH). Now, the ambient pressure in the halo is less than that in the disk of the Galaxy, which is $`P/k2\times 10^4`$ K cm-3 (Boulares & Cox 1990; I have omitted the pressure due to cosmic rays, since they penetrate into the cloud). For a given value of the mean cloud density $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}`$, a lower limit on the mean pressure of the cloud is given by assuming that the cloud is composed of molecular hydrogen (plus a cosmic abundance of helium) and has a temperature equal to that of the cosmic microwave background, 2.73 K: $`\overline{P}/k>0.6\times 2.73\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}`$. The constraint that this be less than $`4\times 2\times 10^4`$ K cm-3 gives an upper limit on the mean cloud density, $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}<5\times 10^4`$ cm-3. (This constraint is comfortably satisfied by galactic molecular clouds—see §1.) If the clouds are polytropes with $`\gamma _p<1`$, this constraint rules out the model of WW98, who assumed $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}10^{12}`$ cm-3. It also rules out much of the parameter space considered by DePaolis et al (1998), $`10^4`$ cm-3 $`<\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}<10^8`$ cm-3.

Next, consider polytropes with $`1<\gamma _p<6/5`$. For such clouds, $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}/n_s`$ increases toward infinity as $`\gamma _p6.5`$, but the ratio remains modest unless $`\gamma _p`$ is very close to 6/5. For example, for $`\gamma _p=1.15`$ one finds $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}/n_s<13.6`$. Hence, unless $`\gamma _p`$ is extremely close to 6/5, such polytropes cannot describe the dense clouds proposed to account for the dark matter.

Finally, consider polytropes with $`\gamma _p6/5`$. Such polytropes can have zero pressure at the boundary, like stars do, so the above constraint does not apply. Nonetheless, there are two significant difficulties. First, since $`T\rho ^{\gamma _p1}`$, the large ratio of the mean density to the surface density in these clouds implies a correspondingly large temperature ratio. The maximum density at the surface is for a molecular gas at 2.73 K, as described above; this gives $`n_s1.2\times 10^4`$ cm-3. Draine (1998) has calculated polytropic models for clouds of mean density $`\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}=6\times 10^{10}`$ cm-3 with a range of polytropic indexes from $`\gamma _p=11/91.222`$ (just above the critical value of 6/5) to $`\gamma _p=5/3`$. For $`\gamma _p=11/9`$, the cloud is very centrally concentrated: It has a central density $`n_c=6190\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}=3.7\times 10^{14}`$ cm-3, corresponding to a central to surface temperature ratio of $`T_c/T_s214`$. In the opposite case of $`\gamma _p=5/3`$, the cloud is much less centrally concentrated ($`n_c/\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}=6.0`$), but the temperature ratio is much larger because of the greater value of $`\gamma _p`$, $`T_c/T_s0.97\times 10^5`$. Setting $`T_s=2.73`$ K gives $`T_c580,2.6\times 10^5`$ K for $`\gamma _p=11/9,6/5`$, respectively. (These values are larger than Draine’s since he did not impose the requirement that $`T_s2.73K`$; to make his models consistent with this constraint, one would either have to drop the assumption that the cloud is a single-component polytrope \[see below\] or increase $`M/RT`$ significantly.) Over the entire range of polytropic indexes considered by Draine (1998), it is difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the high central temperatures required.

The dominant heating mechanisms that have been suggested for these clouds are cosmic rays and X-rays (DePaolis et al 1998 have also suggested heating by embedded binaries, but we shall not consider that mechanism here). In both cases, the heating decreases inward, making it difficult to have a polytropic structure in which the temperature increases inward, as it does for $`\gamma _p>1`$. More significantly, the column density to the center of a polytrope with $`\gamma _p6/5`$ is so large that the heating rate is substantially reduced there. Cosmic rays are more penetrating that X-rays, so I shall focus on them. For the $`\gamma _p=5/3`$ model, I find $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c_0^R\rho 𝑑r=59`$ g cm-2. A lower limit on the interaction cross section of the cosmic rays is the nuclear cross section; for relativistic cosmic rays this is about 0.02 cm2 g-1 (Webber, Lee, & Gupta 1992). Thus, in this case (which has already been eliminated by its extremely high central temperature), the cosmic ray intensity is reduced by at least a factor $`e`$. The case with the lowest central temperature ($`\gamma _p=11/9`$) is much more centrally concentrated, and as a result it has such a large central column density ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c=5000`$ g cm-2) that it is impossible for cosmic rays to reach the center. We conclude that it is impossible for dense, but non-stellar, gas clouds that obey a polytropic equation of state to exist in the diffuse ISM, much less the Galactic halo.

This conclusion can be circumvented by dropping the assumption that the cloud is a single-component polytrope. A composite polytrope in which the core (with most of the mass) has $`\gamma _p>6/5`$ but the envelope (with most of the volume) is isothermal can be developed that is consistent with Draine’s model and has $`T_s>2.73`$ K (Draine, private communication). The central column density of these models is similar to that of the single component models, however, so one is restricted to cases with $`\gamma _p`$ close to 5/3 if cosmic rays are to be able to heat the central regions of the cloud. Whether such a contrived model is physically realizable remains to be seen.

We see that the condition of hydrostatic equilibrium places severe constraints on the viability of models of dense gas clouds that have been advanced to account for dark matter. Simple polytropic models can be ruled out, but detailed calculations of the structure of such clouds with accurate heating and cooling are necessary to determine if they can exist at the low pressures characteristic of the diffuse ISM.

### Acknowledgments.

I wish to thank Charles Curry, Bruce Draine, David Hollenbach, Chris Matzner, and Mark Wardle for helpful comments. My research is supported in part by NSF grant AST95-30480 and by a grant from NASA to the Center for Star Formation Studies.

## References

Alves, J., Lada, C. J., Lada., E. A., Kenyon, S. J., & Phelps, R. 1998, ApJ, 506, 292

Ballesteros–Paredes, J., Vazquez–Semadeni, E., & Scalo, J. 1999, ApJ, 515, 286

Blitz, L., & Shu, F. H. 1980, ApJ, 238, 148

Boulares, A., & Cox, D. P. 1990, ApJ, 365, 544

Combes, F., & Pfenniger, D. 1997, A&A, 327, 453

Curry, C. L., & McKee, C. F. 2000, ApJ, 528, 734

De Paolis, F., Ingrosso, G. Jetzer, P., & Roncadelli, M. 1996, Ap&SS, 235, 329

De Paolis, F., Ingrosso, G. Jetzer, P., & Roncadelli, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 59

Draine, B. T. 1998, ApJ, 509, L41

Dyson, J. E. 1968, Ap&SS, 1, 388

Fiedler, R., Dennison, B., Johnston, K. J., Waltman, E. B., & Simon, R. S. 1994, ApJ, 430, 581

Fiege, J., & Pudritz, R. 2000, MNRAS, 311, 85

Gerhard, O., & Silk, J. 1996, ApJ, 472, 34

Goodman, A. A., Benson, P. J., Fuller, G. A., & Myers, P. C. 1993, ApJ, 406, 528

Henriksen, R. N., & Widrow, L. M. 1995, ApJ, 441, 70

Holliman, J. H., II 1995, Thesis, University of California at Berkeley

Larson, R. B. 1981, MNRAS, 194, 809

Lizano, S., & Shu, F. H. 1989, ApJ, 342, 834

Lynden-Bell, D., & Wood, R. 1968, MNRAS, 138, 495

McKee, C. F., & Holliman, J. H., II 1999, ApJ, 522, 313 (MH)

McKee, C. F., & Zweibel, E. G. 1995, ApJ, 440, 686

Milne, E. A. 1930, MNRAS, 91, 4

Pfenniger, D., Combes, F., & Martinet, L. 1994, A&A, 285, 79

Pfenniger, D., & Combes, F. 1994, A&A, 285, 94

Reynolds, R. J. 1984, ApJ, 282, 191

Scoville, N. Z., & Sanders, D. B. 1987, in Interstellar Processes, ed. D. J. Hollenbach & H. A. Thronson (Dordrecht: Reidel), 21

Slavin, J. D., McKee, C. F., & Hollenbach, D. J. 2000, ApJ, in press

Solomon, P. M., Rivolo, A. R., Barrett, J. W., & Yahil, A. 1987, ApJ, 319, 730

Turner, B. E. 1993, ApJ, 405, 229

Valentijn, E. A., & van der Werf, P. P. 1999, ApJ, 522, L29

Vazquez–Semadeni, E., Ostriker, E., Passot, T., Gammie, C., & Stone, J. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. Boss, & S. Russell (Tucson: University of Arizona Press), 3

Walker, M., & Wardle, M., 1998, ApJ, 498, L125 (WW98)

Wardle, M., & Walker, M. 1999, ApJ, 527, L109

Webber, W. R., Lee, M. A., & Gupta, M. 1992, ApJ, 390, 96

Williams, J.P., & McKee, C.F. 1997, ApJ, 476, 166

Zuckerman, B., & Evans, N. J., II 1974, ApJ, 192, L149