1: \documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{article}
2: %\documentclass[12pt,draft]{article}
3: %use pdflatex:
4: \pdfoutput=1
5: \usepackage{color}
6: \definecolor{MyDarkBlue}{rgb}{0,0.08,0.45}
7: \usepackage{hyperref}
8: \hypersetup{
9: colorlinks=true,
10: citecolor=MyDarkBlue,
11: linkcolor=MyDarkBlue,
12: urlcolor=MyDarkBlue,
13: pdfauthor={Kevin Goldstein and Hossein Yavartanoo},
14: pdftitle={A note on non-linear electrodynamics, regular black holes and the entropy
15: function},
16: pdfsubject={hep-th,gr-qc}
17: }
18:
19: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
20: \usepackage{graphicx}
21: \numberwithin{equation}{section}
22: %\usepackage{cite}
23: \usepackage[numbers,sort&compress]{natbib}
24: \usepackage{hypernat}
25: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
26: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
27: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
28: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}
29: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}
30: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\p}{\partial}
32: \newcommand{\refeq}[1]{\stackrel{(\ref{#1})}{=}}
33: \newcommand{\F}{\mathcal{F}}
34: \newcommand{\G}{\mathcal{G}}
35:
36: \usepackage[cm]{fullpage}
37: \usepackage{ifpdf}
38: \ifpdf
39: \DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf}
40: \else
41: \DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.eps}
42: \fi
43:
44:
45:
46: \begin{document}
47:
48: \begin{flushright} \small
49: SPIN-07/47\\ ITP-UU-07/61
50: \end{flushright}
51: \bigskip
52:
53: \begin{center}
54: {\LARGE\bfseries A note on non-linear electrodynamics, regular black holes and the entropy function.}
55: \\[10mm]
56: %
57: \textbf{ Kevin
58: Goldstein\footnote[1]{\tt k.goldstein [at] uu.nl}
59: and Hossein
60: Yavartanoo\footnote[2]{\tt yavar [at] phya.snu.ac.kr}
61: }\\[5mm]
62: %
63: {$^{1}$\em Institute for Theoretical Physics,\\ Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands}\\[3mm]
64: $^{2}$ {\em Center for Theoretical Physics and BK-21 Frontier Physics Division, \\
65: Seoul National University, Seoul 151-747 KOREA}
66: \end{center}
67:
68: \vspace{5mm}
69:
70: %\hrule
71: \bigskip
72: \centerline{\bfseries Abstract}
73: \medskip
74: \noindent
75: We examine four dimensional magnetically charged extremal black holes in certain
76: non-linear $U(1)$ gauge theories coupled to two derivative gravity. For a given coupling,
77: one can tune the magnetic charge (or vice versa) so that the curvature singularity at the
78: centre of the space-time is cancelled. Since these solutions have a horizon but no
79: singularity, they have been called regular black holes. Contrary to recent claims in the
80: literature, we find that the entropy function formalism reproduces the near horizon
81: geometry and gives the correct entropy for these objects.
82: \bigskip
83: %\end{titlepage}
84:
85: %\tableofcontents
86: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
87:
88: \section{Introduction}
89: \label{intro}
90:
91:
92:
93: The Penrose cosmic censorship hypothesis states that, if singularities predicted by
94: General Relativity occur in nature, they must be dressed by event horizons
95: \cite{Hawking:1973uf}. Behind the veil of an event horizon, there is no causal contact
96: from the interior to the exterior of a black hole, so the pathologies occurring at the
97: singular region can have no influence on an external observer. However, the converse of
98: the hypothesis is apparently not true --- a horizon does not necessarily hide a
99: singularity. Solutions with a horizon but no singularity have been called regular black
100: holes.
101:
102: The holographic principle, \cite{gr-qc/9310026,9409089}, states that the number of
103: degrees of freedom describing the black hole is bounded by the area of the horizon. A
104: stronger statement is that degrees of freedom living on the horizon can describe the
105: physics of the interior completely. While the holographic principle is essentially a
106: proposed feature of quantum gravity, one might wonder whether having a classically regular
107: or singular solution has any quantitative or qualitative effect on the entropy and the
108: physics at the horizon.
109:
110: Earlier work on regular black hole models can be found in
111: \cite{bardeen1968pg,Barrabes:1995nk,gr-qc/9403049,Mars:1996np,Cabo:1997rm} These regular
112: solutions are referred to as “Bardeen black holes” \cite{Borde:1996df}. In addition,
113: regular black hole solutions to Einstein equations with various physical sources were
114: reported in \cite{AyonBeato:1998ub} and \cite{Magli:1997mw}. Among known regular black
115: hole solutions, are the solutions to the coupled equations of
116: nonlinear electrodynamics and general relativity found by Ay\'on-Beato and Garci\'a
117: \cite{hep-th/9911174} and by Bronnikov \cite{gr-qc/0006014}. The latter describes
118: magnetically charged black hole, and provides an interesting example of the system that
119: could be both regular and extremal. In this note we are specially interested in the near
120: horizon geometry of an extremal magnetically charged black hole non-linearly coupled to a
121: $U(1)$ gauge field. For a given magnetic charge, one can tune the non-linear coupling so
122: that the solution is regular.
123:
124: In \cite{gr-qc/0403109}, Matyjasek found the near horizon, $AdS_2\times S^2$ geometry of a
125: particular magnetically charged extremal black hole. The entropy function formalism of
126: Sen \cite{hep-th/0506177,hep-th/0508042}, is particularity useful for discussing the
127: entropy of extremal black holes especially when non-linear or high derivative terms make a
128: full analysis difficult. Since, the formalism is equivalent to solving Einsteins equations
129: for the near horizon region, a priori, and assuming the near horizon geometry decouples,
130: one would expect to be able to reproduce the results of \cite{gr-qc/0403109} using Sen's
131: approach. This issue has been studied recently, \cite{0705.2478,0707.1933}, and
132: authors reported that, even at the level of two derivative gravity, the entropy function
133: approach does not lead to the correct Bekenstein-Hawking. To account for this discrepancy,
134: they claim that the entropy function approach is sensitive to whether the nature of the
135: central region of the black hole is regular (linear) or singular (nonlinear).
136:
137: Contrary to the claims of, \cite{0705.2478,0707.1933}, in this note we find that a straight
138: forward application of the entropy function formalism reproduces the results of
139: \cite{gr-qc/0403109}. The equation of motion derived from extremizing the entropy
140: function are exactly the same as equation of motion at horizon found by extremizing
141: the action, since the entropy function (up to Legendre transformation) is the Lagrangian
142: at the horizon. The fact that the entropy is the value of entropy function at its extremum
143: is derived from the Wald entropy formula, using the near horizon symmetries. Both of these
144: results, just coming from careful consideration of the near horizon symmetries and have
145: nothing to do with the regularity of the solution inside the horizon.
146: Further more, we find that by varying the non-linear coupling, the regular solution can be
147: smoothly connected to the
148: extremal Reisner-Nordstrom solution of Einstein-Maxwell theory.
149:
150: The paper is organised as follows. In section~\ref{rbh} we review a particular regular
151: black hole solution of interest. Then, in section~\ref{sec:ent}, we review the entropy
152: function formalism and apply it to Einstein gravity coupled to non-linear
153: electrodynamics. In section~\ref{sec:rbh:E} we consider the special case of the formalism
154: applied to a regular black hole solution. Finally we end with the conclusion in
155: section~\ref{sec:conc}, having relegated some technical details about the large charge,
156: small coupling expansion of the entropy to appendix~\ref{sec:a1}.
157:
158: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
159: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
160: \section{Regular Black holes}
161: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
162: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
163: \label{rbh}
164:
165: In this section we review a magnetically charged regular black hole solution of Einstein gravity coupled to
166: non-linear electrodynamics and its extremal limit
167: \cite{hep-th/9911174,gr-qc/0006014,gr-qc/0403109,hep-th/0606185}, mainly following
168: \cite{gr-qc/0403109} with slightly different notation.
169:
170: We consider an action given by,
171: \begin{equation}
172: \label{Lag}
173: S= \frac{1}{16\pi} \int d^4x \sqrt{-g}({R} - {\mathcal L}_{F}(F^2))\; ,
174: \end{equation}
175: where $F^2= F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}$ and the non-linear $U(1)$ gauge field Lagrangian,
176: ${\mathcal L}_{F}$,
177: is,\footnote{The coupling $a=\sqrt{\lambda}$ is commonly used in the literature. With out
178: loss of generality, we can take $\lambda>0$.}
179: \begin{equation}
180: \label{lm}
181: {\mathcal L}_{F} = F^2 \cosh^{-2}\left((\lambda^{2}F^2/2)^{1/4} \right) \;.
182: \end{equation}
183:
184: The equations of motion corresponding to the metric and gauge field and the Bianchi
185: identity are,
186: \begin{eqnarray}
187: && R_{\mu\nu} -\frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu} R
188: = \frac{\partial {\mathcal L}_{F}}{\partial (F^{2})}2 F_{\mu\lambda}F_{\nu}^{\phantom{\nu}\lambda}
189: -\frac{1}{2} {\mathcal L}_{F} g_{\mu\nu} \; , \\
190: && \partial_{\mu} \left(\sqrt{-g} \frac{\partial {\mathcal L}_{F}}{\partial (F^{2})} F^{\mu\nu}\right) =0 \; , \\
191: && \partial_{[\mu}F_{\alpha\beta]} =0 \;.
192: \end{eqnarray}
193: For a magnetically charged black hole, the equation of motion for the gauge field and the
194: Bianchi identity can be solved by,
195: \begin{equation}
196: \label{MF}
197: F_{\theta\phi} = P \sin\theta,
198: \end{equation}
199: where $P$ is the magnetic charge of the black hole. A static, spherically symmetric ansatz for the metric:
200: \begin{equation}
201: ds^2= -a^{2}(r) dt^2 + \frac{dr^2}{a^{2}(r)} + r^2 d\Omega_2^2\; ,
202: \end{equation}
203: can solve Einstein equations with,
204: \begin{equation}
205: a^{2}(r) = 1-\frac{2m(r)}{r} \; ,
206: \end{equation}
207: where,
208: \begin{equation}
209: m(r)= m_\infty- \frac{|P|}{2|\lambda/P|^{1/2}} \tanh \frac{ |\lambda/P|^{1/2}}{r/|P|}.
210: \end{equation}
211: The parameter, $m_\infty$, is an integration constant which can be fixed by employing the boundary
212: condition $m(\infty)=M$, where $M$ is the black hole mass. Moreover demanding of the
213: regularity of the line element as $r\rightarrow 0 $, yields,
214: \begin{equation}
215: \label{reg:cond}
216: M=\frac{|P|}{2|\lambda/P|^{1/2}},
217: \end{equation}
218: and
219: consequently, $m(r)$ reads,
220: \begin{equation}
221: m(r)=M\left(1-\tanh \frac{P^2}{2Mr}\right)
222: = \frac{|P|}{2|\lambda/P|^{1/2}}\left(1- \tanh \frac{ |\lambda/P|^{1/2}}{r/|P|}\right) \;.
223: \end{equation}
224: The location of the inner and outer horizons, $r_{\pm}$, which are given by equation $a(r)=0$, can be expressed in terms
225: of the real branches of the Lambert function, $W_i(x)$, as follows,
226: \begin{equation}
227: \frac{r_+}{M} = -\frac{p^2}{W_0(-e^{p^2/4} p^2/4 )-p^2/4} \; ,
228: \quad \frac{r_-}{M} = -\frac{p^2}{W_{-1}(-e^{p^2/4} p^2/4 )-p^2/4}\;,
229: \end{equation}
230: where, $p = P/M$, is the magnetic charge-to-mass ratio.
231: The Lambert function\footnote{See \cite{lamb} for a nice review of the properties of the
232: Lambert function.}, is defined by the
233: formula,
234: \begin{equation}
235: \label{lambf}
236: e^{W(x)}W(x)=x \;.
237: \end{equation}
238: This function has two real branches, called $W_0$ and $W_{-1}$, with the branch point at
239: $x=-1/e$. Since the value of the principal branch of the Lambert function, $W_{0}$, at $1/e$, plays an
240: important role in our discussion, we define $w_0 = W_{0}(1/e)$.
241:
242: When $p =p_{ext} = 2 w_0^{1/2}$, $r_{+}=r_{-}$, and the two horizons merge into a
243: degenerate horizon giving an extremal solution. Since we will be considering the near
244: horizon geometry, we will eliminate the mass from our formulae as it is defined asymptotically.
245: Using (\ref{reg:cond}) we can express the condition for extremality and
246: regularity, $p_{ext} = 2 w_0^{1/2}$, as,
247: \begin{equation}
248: \label{eq:reg:cond2}
249: \frac{\lambda}{P} = w_{0}.
250: \end{equation}
251: In other words for an extremal black hole to be regular we must tune the charge to
252: coupling ratio to a particular value. A generic extremal, but not necessarily regular,
253: solution to (\ref{Lag}) will still have a degenerate horizon but presumably with a different charge to coupling ratio.
254:
255: One can write the near horizon limit, found by \cite{gr-qc/0403109} as:
256: \begin{equation}
257: \label{nh1}
258: ds^2= v_1\left(-\rho^2 dt^2 + \frac{d\rho^2}{\rho^2}\right) + v_2 \left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2\right)\;.
259: \end{equation}
260: with,
261: \begin{align}
262: \label{result:rbh}
263: v_{2}&= \frac{4w_{0}}{(1+w_{0})^{2}}P^{2}\approx 0.68 P^{2}\;,\\
264: v_{1}&= \frac{8w_{0}}{(1+w_{0})^{3}}P^{2}\approx 1.07 P^{2}\;,\\
265: \frac{v_{2}}{v_{1}}&=\frac{1}{2}(1+w_{0})\approx 0.64\;,
266: \end{align}
267: and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is,
268: \begin{equation}
269: S_{BH}=\tfrac{1}{4}A=\pi v_{2}=\frac{4\pi w_{0}}{(1+w_{0})^{2}}P^{2}\;.
270: \end{equation}
271:
272:
273: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
274: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
275: \section{Entropy function Analysis}
276: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
277: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
278: \label{sec:ent}
279:
280: In this section we briefly review the entropy function formalism of Sen
281: \cite{hep-th/0506177,hep-th/0508042} and subsequently apply it to magnetically charged
282: extremal solutions of (\ref{Lag}).
283:
284: Assuming a gauge and diffeomorphism invariant Lagrangian and a near horizon
285: $AdS_{2}\times S^{2}$ geometry, the entropy function is defined as the Legendre transform,
286: with respect to the electric charges, of the reduced Lagrangian evaluated at the horizon:
287: \begin{eqnarray}
288: \label{EF}
289: {\mathcal E}({\vec u},{\vec v},{\vec Q}, {\vec P})
290: = 2\pi\bigg(e^{i}Q_{i}-f({\vec u},{\vec v}, {\vec e},{\vec P})\bigg)
291: = 2\pi\bigg(e^{i}Q_{i}-\int_{H}
292: d\theta d\varphi \sqrt{-G}{\cal L}\bigg),
293: \end{eqnarray}
294: where ${e^{i}}$ are the electric fields, $Q_{i}=\partial f/\partial e^{i}$, are the
295: electric charges conjugate to the electric field, $\vec u$ are the values of the scalar
296: moduli at the horizon, and $v_1$, $v_2$ are the sizes of the $AdS_2$ and $S^2$,
297: respectively. The near horizon equations of motion
298: for a black hole carrying electric charges $\vec Q$ and magnetic charges $\vec P$,
299: are equivalent to the extremisation of ${\cal E}$ with respect to $\vec u,\vec v$ and
300: $\vec e$:
301: \begin{eqnarray} \frac{\partial {\mathcal E}}{\partial \vec u}=0\,, \qquad
302: \frac{\partial {\mathcal E}}{\partial v_i}=0\,, \qquad
303: \frac{\partial {\mathcal E}}{\partial \vec e}=0\,.
304: \label{attractor}
305: \end{eqnarray}
306:
307: Furthermore, the Wald entropy associated with the black hole is given by ${\mathcal E}$ at
308: the extremum (\ref{attractor}). If ${\mathcal E}$ has no flat directions, then the
309: extremization of ${\mathcal E}$ determines ${\vec u}$, ${v_i}$, and ${\vec e}$, in terms
310: of ${Q}$ and ${P}$. The extremal value of the Wald entropy,
311: $S={\mathcal E}(\vec Q,\vec P)|_{extr}$, is independent of the asymptotic values of the
312: scalar fields. This neatly demonstrates the attractor mechanism,
313: \cite{Ferrara:1995ih,Strominger:1996kf, Ferrara:1996dd}, with out requiring
314: supersymmetry \cite{9702103}. The formalism can even be extended to rotating black holes which have less
315: near horizon symmetry \cite{0606244}. However, since it only involves the near horizon
316: geometry, a weakness of the formalism is that one implicitly assumes that the full
317: solution exists, which is not always the case \cite{0507096}.
318:
319:
320: We now specialise our discussion to the case of interest. Since the regular black hole
321: solution has an extremal limit, one can use the entropy function formalism to find the
322: near horizon geometry and the entropy. We take the near horizon $AdS_{2}\times S^{2}$
323: metric to be give by (\ref{nh1}).
324: From the definition (\ref{EF}), using the Lagrangian (\ref{Lag}), the entropy function
325: evaluates to,
326: \begin{equation}
327: \label{e}
328: {\cal E} = \pi
329: \left(
330: v_{2}-v_{1}+\tfrac{1}{2}v_{1}v_{2}{\cal L}_{F}(2P^{2}/v_{2}^{2})
331: \right)\; .
332: \end{equation}
333: By extremizing this entropy function with respect to $v_1$ and $v_2$, we find following
334: equations,
335: \begin{align}
336: \label{eom1:0}
337: 0&=-1+\frac{1}{2}v_{2}{\cal L}_{F}(2P^{2}/v_{2}^{2})\;,\\
338: 0&=1 +\frac{1}{2}v_{1}\frac{\p}{\p v_{2}}\left[v_{2}{\cal L}_{F}(2P^{2}/v_{2}^{2})\right]\;.
339: \label{eom2:0}
340: \end{align}
341: Substituting (\ref{eom1:0}) into (\ref{e}) gives,
342: \begin{equation}
343: \label{eq:bh}
344: {\cal E}=\pi v_{2}=\tfrac{1}{4}A\; ,
345: \end{equation}
346: which is just the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy. This result, which is independent
347: of the form of ${\cal L}_{F}$, is to be expected, since, in the
348: absence of higher derivative terms, the Bekenstein-Hawking and Wald entropies coincide.
349:
350: Now, the
351: equations of motion allow us to determine $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ in terms of $P$ and the
352: coupling $\lambda$. The first equation, (\ref{eom1:0}), determines $v_{2}$, and consequently the entropy, in terms of
353: $P$ (and $\lambda$). Having found $v_{2}$, (\ref{eom2:0}) allows us to determine $v_{1}$ in terms of
354: $v_{2}$. Consequently, we see that extremising the entropy function completely determines
355: the entropy and near horizon geometry in terms of $P$ (and $\lambda$).
356:
357: We now consider explicitly finding $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ for a particular Lagrangian.
358: Using the Lagrangian (\ref{lm}), (\ref{eom1:0}) and (\ref{eom2:0}) become,
359: \begin{align}
360: \label{eom1}
361: 0&=-1+(P^{2}/v_{2})\cosh^{-2}(\sqrt{\lambda P/v_{2}})\;,\\
362: 0&=1 -v_{1}\left({P/v_{2}}\right)^{2}\cosh^{-2}(\sqrt{\lambda P/v_{2}})
363: \nonumber\\
364: &+ v_{1}\sqrt{\lambda}\left({P/v_{2}}\right)^{5/2}\cosh^{-3}(\sqrt{\lambda P/v_{2}})
365: \sinh(\sqrt{\lambda P/v_{2}})\;,
366: \label{eom2}
367: \end{align}
368: which agrees with the near horizon equations of motion found directly in \cite{gr-qc/0403109}.
369:
370: To solve (\ref{eom1}), it is
371: convenient to rewrite it as,
372: \begin{equation}
373: \label{eq:x}
374: \cosh\xi = \gamma\xi,
375: \end{equation}
376: where,
377: \begin{equation}
378: \label{eq:def:u:gamma}
379: \xi = \sqrt{\lambda P/v_{2}},\qquad \gamma = (\lambda/P)^{-1/2}\;.
380: \end{equation}
381: One can then graphically solve (\ref{eom1}) by finding the intersection of $\cosh\xi$ and
382: $\gamma\xi$ for various values of $\gamma$. We illustrate this procedure in
383: figure~\ref{fig:1}. It is not hard to see that as we increase $\gamma$, there are either
384: zero, one or two solutions to (\ref{eq:x}). One can also see from figure~\ref{fig:1},
385: that, as $\lambda/P\rightarrow0$ (i.e. $\gamma\rightarrow\infty$) , the two possible values for $\xi$ are,
386: \begin{equation}
387: \label{eq:branches}
388: {\xi}|_{\frac{\lambda}{P}\rightarrow 0}\rightarrow
389: \left\{
390: \begin{array}{c}
391: \infty \\ 0
392: \end{array}
393: \right..
394: \end{equation}
395: Notice that, since $\cosh x \geq 1 $, (\ref{eom1}) also implies, \begin{equation}
396: \label{eq:ineq}
397: v_{2}\leq P^{2}.
398: \end{equation}
399: \begin{figure}[hbtp]
400: \centering
401: \includegraphics[width=0.70\textwidth]{fig1}
402: \caption{\small This figure illustrates the graphical solution of (\ref{eq:x}) which is given
403: by the intersection of $\cosh\xi$ and $\gamma\xi$. As we increase the gradient,
404: $\gamma=\sqrt{P/\lambda}$, one obtains either no solutions, a tangential point
405: (denoted by a red square above) or two solutions. The first point of a double
406: intersection, labelled with a brown dot, corresponds to a point on what we call, for
407: reasons that will be clear later, the
408: large branch and the second intersection, labelled with a green triangle, is on the small
409: branch.}
410: \label{fig:1}
411: \end{figure}
412:
413: Now, we can define a (multi-valued) function, $\F(x)$, by,
414: \begin{equation}
415: \label{eq:def:F}
416: \frac{{\cal F}(x)}{\cosh{{\cal F}(x)}}=\sqrt{x}\;,
417: \end{equation}
418: so that we can formally write down a solution to (\ref{eq:x}) as,
419: \begin{equation}
420: \label{eq:sol:u}
421: \xi={\cal F}(\gamma^{-2})=\F(\lambda/P)\;.
422: \end{equation}
423: Then letting,
424: \begin{align}
425: {\cal G}(x)=\frac{x}{\F^{2}(x)} \label{eq:def:ga}
426: \refeq{eq:def:F}\frac{1}{\cosh^{2}(\F(x))}\;,
427: \end{align}
428: and using and (\ref{eq:def:u:gamma}), we can write,
429: \begin{equation}
430: \label{eq:def:g}
431: v_{2}=\frac{\left(\frac{\lambda}{P}\right)}{\xi^{2}}P^{2}= {\cal G}\left(\frac{\lambda}{P}\right)P^{2}.
432: \end{equation}
433: which is of the generic form expected by dimensional analysis.
434: Since (\ref{eq:x}) may have two solutions, ${\cal F}$ and ${\cal G}$ both have
435: two branches. Substituting (\ref{eq:branches}) into (\ref{eq:def:ga}) we find that,
436: in the limit that the non-linear coupling goes to zero (or the charge becomes very large),
437: \begin{equation}
438: \label{eq:g:branches}
439: {\cal G}(0)=1/\cosh^{2}({\cal F}(0))=\left\{
440: \begin{array}{ll}
441: 0 & \mbox{(small branch, $\G_{S}$)}\\ 1& \mbox{(large branch, $\G_{L}$)}
442: \end{array}
443: \right..
444: \end{equation}
445: We call the two branches of ${\cal G}$, the small and large branch. While it seems
446: challenging to find an analytical expression for $\G$, it is very easy to evaluate it
447: numerically. We have plotted $\G$, or in other words $v_{2}/P^{2}$, as a function of
448: $\lambda/P$ in figure~\ref{fig:2}. We note that $\G$ decreases monotonically on the large
449: branch, so that, for a fixed charge, the $\lambda=0$ solution is the most entropic.
450: \begin{figure}[hbtp]
451: \centering
452: \includegraphics[width=0.70\textwidth]{fig2}
453: \caption{\small This figure shows $v_{2}$ as a function of $\lambda$ and $P$ found by
454: numerically solving (\ref{eq:x}). Specifically we plot,
455: $v_{2}P^{-2}=\xi^{-2}\gamma^{-2}={\mathcal G}(\lambda/P)$. The large branch,
456: ${\cal G}_{L}$, is plotted in brown and the small branch, ${\cal G}_{S}$, is plotted
457: in green. We should exclude the shaded region, defined by
458: $\gamma{^2}\xi^{2}-\gamma^{2}<1$ , in which, using (\ref{eq:sol:v1b}), $v_{1}$ is
459: negative. Since it is entirely contained within the shaded region, the small branch
460: is unphysical. The regular black hole, denoted by a blue dot, is found on the big
461: branch at $\lambda/P=w_{0}$. At the place where the branches meet, denoted by a
462: red square, $v_{1}\rightarrow\infty$ (or $-\infty$ if we approach from below). }
463: \label{fig:2}
464: \end{figure}
465:
466:
467: Having determined $v_{2}$ (at least in principle), we can find $v_{1}$ by substituting (\ref{eom1}) into
468: (\ref{eom2}) and using (\ref{eq:def:g}), we get,
469: \begin{align}
470: \label{eq:sol:v1}
471: v_{1} &= v_{2}(1-\gamma^{-1}\sqrt{\xi^{2}\gamma^{2}-1})^{-1}\\
472: \label{eq:sol:v1b}
473: &= v_{2}(1-[\lambda/P]^{1/2}\sqrt{{\cal G}^{-1}(\lambda/P)-1})^{-1}\;,
474: \end{align}
475: with (\ref{eq:ineq}) ensuring reality.
476:
477:
478: For $v_{1}$ to be positive and finite, on sees that from (\ref{eq:sol:v1}), we require
479: $\xi^{2}\gamma^{2}-1> \gamma^{2}$. Now, at the branch point, the function
480: $f(\xi)=\cosh\xi - \gamma\xi$ has a single zero, so we require that $f'(\xi)=0$ when
481: $f(\xi)=0$. In other words, in addition to (\ref{eq:x}) the branch point is determined by,
482: \begin{equation}
483: \label{eq:fdash}
484: \sinh\xi = \gamma.
485: \end{equation}
486: Combining (\ref{eq:x})and (\ref{eq:fdash}) gives,
487: \begin{equation}
488: \gamma^{2}\xi^{2}-1=\gamma^{2}\;,
489: \end{equation}
490: which, using (\ref{eq:sol:v1}), implies that as we approach the branch point, $v_{1}\rightarrow\infty$ or in other
491: words the $AdS_{2}$ approaches flat space. From figure~\ref{fig:2}, we see that the small
492: branch lies entirely in the region $\gamma{^2}\xi^{2}-\gamma^{2}<1$, and consequently,
493: $v_{1}$ is always negative on it, making it unphysical. Discarding the small branch, we
494: have used~(\ref{eq:sol:v1b}) to plot $v_{2}/v_{1}$ as a function of $\lambda/P$ in
495: figure~\ref{fig:3}. We see that $v_{1}/v_{2}$ increases monotonically, eventually diverging
496: at the branch point.
497: \begin{figure}[hbtp]
498: \centering
499: \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig3}
500: \caption{\small This figure shows $v_{2}/v_{1}$ as a function of $\lambda/P$ found by
501: numerically solving (\ref{eq:x}) and using (\ref{eq:sol:v1}). For $\lambda/P$ small,
502: we have $v_{1}\approx v_{2}$. As we approach the branch point, denoted by a red
503: square, $v_{1}$ diverges and $v_{2}/v_{1}\rightarrow0$. The regular black hole, at
504: $\lambda/P=w_{0}$, is denoted by a blue dot. }
505: \label{fig:3}
506: \end{figure}
507:
508:
509: Finally, one can actually obtain a large charge, small coupling expansion for
510: $\G_{L}$. Assuming $\G_{L}$, has a nice Taylor expansion about zero, using
511: (\ref{eq:g:branches}) as a starting point, and by taking successive derivatives of
512: (\ref{eq:def:F}) and (\ref{eq:def:ga}) one can recursively expand $\G_{L}(x)$ about
513: zero. As discussed in appendix~\ref{sec:a1}, we find that,
514: \begin{align}
515: \G_{L}(x)&= 1-x-\tfrac{1}{3}x^{2}
516: +{\cal O}\left(x^{3}\right)\; ,
517: \label{taylor:L}
518: \end{align}
519: so that we can write a large charge, small coupling expansion for the entropy,
520: \begin{align}
521: {\cal E}= \pi P^{2}\left( 1-\frac{\lambda}{P}-\frac{1}{3}\frac{\lambda^{2}}{P^{2}}
522: +{\cal O}\left(\frac{\lambda^{3}}{P^{3}}\right)\right) \;.
523: \label{largeP}
524: \end{align}
525: For completeness, we mention that on the small branch, as discussed in appendix~\ref{sec:a1}, for $x$
526: small, we get,
527: \begin{equation}
528: \label{eq:gs:approx}
529: \G_{S}(x)\approx x{\left[ W_{-1}(-\tfrac{1}{2}\sqrt{x})\right]^{-2}}\;.
530: \end{equation}
531: where $W_{-1}$ is the non-principal real branch of the Lambert function.
532:
533: As a check we note that on the large branch, taking $\lambda\rightarrow0$,
534: we recover the usual near horizon extremal Einstein-Maxwell
535: Reisner-Nordstrom solution with,
536: \begin{align}
537: \label{result}
538: v_{1}=v_{2}= P^{2}\;.
539: \end{align}
540:
541:
542:
543: \section{Entropy function and the regular black hole}
544: \label{sec:rbh:E}
545:
546: In this section we confirm that the entropy function analysis of the regular black hole
547: reproduces the near horizon geometry of the known solution found in \cite{gr-qc/0403109}.
548: This merely entails considering the results of the previous section with the appropriate
549: value of $\lambda/P$.
550:
551: As discussed in section~\ref{rbh}, the regular black hole corresponds to the point
552: $\lambda/P={w_{0}}$, so that (\ref{eq:x}) becomes,
553: \begin{equation}
554: \label{eq:rbh:eom1}
555: \cosh\xi = {w_{0}}^{-1/2}\xi.
556: \end{equation}
557: One can analytically check, using the property $w_{0}e^{w_{0}}=e^{-1}$, that (\ref{eq:rbh:eom1}) has a
558: solution,
559: \begin{equation}
560: \label{u:rbh}
561: \xi=\frac{w_{0}+1}{2},
562: \end{equation}
563: or in other words $\F(w_{0})=\frac{1}{2}(w_{0}+1)$. We have plotted the position of the
564: regular solution as a blue dot in figures~\ref{fig:2} and~\ref{fig:3}, from which we
565: observe that it is on the large branch.
566:
567: Finally, one can check that substituting the solution, (\ref{u:rbh}), into (\ref{eq:def:g}) and
568: (\ref{eq:sol:v1}) reproduces (\ref{result:rbh}) and we are done.
569:
570: \section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}
571:
572: In this paper we examine entropy function formalism for regular magnetically charged black
573: hole solution in Einstein-Hilbert gravity coupled with a certain non-linear $U(1)$ gauge
574: field. The mass and charge of the full solution can be tuned so that it has no curvature
575: singularity at the centre. In the extremal limit this corresponds to a particular charge
576: to non-linear coupling ratio with an $AdS_2\times S^2$ near horizon
577: geometry. Unsurprisingly we find that the entropy function analysis match with the exact
578: solution found by solving the full Einstein equations. This is in contrast with the claim
579: in the recent papers \cite{0705.2478,0707.1933}.
580:
581: Indeed in the entropy function formalism, the equation of motion, which follow from
582: extremizing the entropy function, are exactly the same as equation of motion at horizon
583: found by extremizing the action, simply because the entropy function (up to Legendre
584: transformation) is the Lagrangian at the horizon. The fact that the entropy is the value
585: of entropy function at its extremum is derived from Wald entropy formula, using the near
586: horizon symmetries. Both of these results apparently have nothing to do with the regularity of the
587: solution inside the horizon.
588:
589: \bigskip {\bf Acknowledgements:} We would like to thank Ashoke Sen for helpful
590: comments. The work of K.G. is, in part, supported by the EU-RTN network contract
591: MRTN-CT-2004-005104 and INTAS contract 03-51-6346. The work of H.Y is supported by the
592: Korea Research Foundation Leading Scientist Grant (R02-2004-000-10150-0) and Star Faculty
593: Grant (KRF-2005-084-C00003).
594:
595:
596: \appendix
597:
598: \section{Large charge/small coupling expansion of the entropy}
599: \label{sec:a1}
600:
601: In this appendix we discuss the expansion of $\G(x)$ about zero.
602:
603: Taking the derivative of (\ref{eq:def:F}) with respect to $x$ and solving for $\F'$ we
604: find,
605: \begin{equation}
606: \label{eq:a1}
607: \F'(x)=\frac{\cosh (\F(x))}{2 \sqrt{x} \left(\sqrt{x} \sinh (\F(x))-1\right)}\;,
608: \end{equation}
609: while taking of derivative of (\ref{eq:def:ga}) gives,
610: \begin{equation}
611: \label{eq:a2}
612: \G'(x)=-2 \text{sech}^2(\F(x)) \tanh (\F(x)) \F'(x)\;.
613: \end{equation}
614: Now using (\ref{eq:def:F}) and (\ref{eq:a1}) we can rewrite (\ref{eq:a2}) as,
615: \begin{equation}
616: \label{eq:a3}
617: \G'(x)= \frac{\tanh (\mathcal{F})}{\mathcal{F} (\mathcal{F} \tanh (\mathcal{F})-1)}\;,
618: \end{equation}
619: and using (\ref{eq:branches}) and taking the limit $x\rightarrow0$, we get,
620: \begin{equation}
621: \label{eq:a4}
622: {\cal G}'(0)=\left\{
623: \begin{array}{ll}
624: 0 & \mbox{(small branch)}\\ -1& \mbox{(large branch)}
625: \end{array}
626: \right..
627: \end{equation}
628: Taking another set of derivative, after some algebra we obtain,
629: \begin{equation}
630: \label{eq:a5}
631: \G''(x)
632: = \frac{\mathcal{F}\cosh (2 \mathcal{F})-\cosh (\mathcal{F}) \sinh (\mathcal{F})}
633: {2 \mathcal{F}^3 (\mathcal{F} \tanh (\mathcal{F})-1)^3}\;,
634: \end{equation}
635: and once again taking the $x\rightarrow0$ limit, we get,
636: \begin{equation}
637: \label{eq:a6}
638: \G''(0)=
639: \left\{
640: \begin{array}{ll}
641: \infty & \mbox{(small branch)}\\ -\tfrac{2}{3}& \mbox{(large branch)}
642: \end{array}
643: \right. \;.
644: \end{equation}
645: We found that the second order Taylor expansion of $\G_{L}(x)$, (\ref{taylor:L}), agrees well
646: with our numerical plot for $x$ small. For example, at $x=w_{0}$, we find that they differ
647: by about $2\%$.
648:
649: On the other hand, we see that the small branch does not have a nice Taylor expansion
650: about the origin. However, on the small branch, we see from figure~\ref{fig:1}, that when $\xi$ is
651: large, $\gamma$ is also large and consequently, $\lambda/P=\gamma^{-2}$, is small. For $\xi\gg 1$, we can
652: approximate (\ref{eq:x}) by,
653: \begin{equation}
654: \label{eq:a7}
655: \tfrac{1}{2}e^{\xi}\approx\gamma\xi + {\cal O}(e^{-\xi})\;,
656: \end{equation}
657: which can approximately be solved by,
658: \begin{equation}
659: \xi \approx - W(-\tfrac{1}{2}\gamma^{-1})\;.
660: \end{equation}
661: where $W$ is the Lambert function defined in (\ref{lambf}).
662: For, $-e^{-1}<x<0$, the two real branches of $W$ satisfy $W_{0}(x)\geq -1$ and
663: $W_{-1}(x)\leq-1$, \cite{lamb}, consequently
664: since we are assuming that $\xi\gg 1$, we should take the branch $W_{-1}$. So, using
665: (\ref{eq:sol:u},\ref{eq:def:ga}), we obtain,
666: \begin{equation}
667: \G_{S}(\lambda/P)\approx (\lambda/P){\left[ W_{-1}(-\tfrac{1}{2}\sqrt{\lambda/P})\right]^{-2}}\;,
668: \end{equation}
669: which we found agrees well with our numerical results shown in figure~\ref{fig:2}, for $\lambda/P$ small.
670:
671: \bibliographystyle{JHEP}\bibliography{nl4}
672:
673: \end{document}
674:
675:
676: