1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{citesort,bibmods}

3: %\usepackage{santheorem}

4: 

5: %\usepackage{drafthead}

6: %\usepackage{amsmath2000}

7: \usepackage{url}

8: \usepackage{amsmath}

9: %\usepackage{xypic}

10: \usepackage{amscd}

11: \usepackage{amssymb,latexsym}

12: %\usepackage[final]{graphicx}

13: \usepackage{float}

14: \usepackage{deleq}

15: 

16: %\usepackage{srcltx}

17: %\SRCOKfalse

18: \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal}

19: \usepackage{a4}

20: %\usepackage[notcite]{showkeys}

21: %\usepackage[first,bottomafter,light]{draftcopy}

22: %\usepackage{xypic}

23: %\input xy                     % this loads in xypic, for diagrams

24: %\xyoption{all}

25: 

26: \emergencystretch=15pt  %%% Does away with most overfull \hboxs

27:                         %%% Remove for final version

28: \sloppy

29: 

30: \DeclareFontFamily{OT1}{rsfs}{}

31: \DeclareFontShape{OT1}{rsfs}{m}{n}{ <-7> rsfs5 <7-10> rsfs7 <10-> rsfs10}{}

32: \DeclareMathAlphabet{\mycal}{OT1}{rsfs}{m}{n}

33: \def\scri{{\mycal I}}%

34: \def\scrip{\scri^{+}}%

35: \def\scrp{{\mycal I}^{+}}%

36: \def\Scri{\scri}

37: 

38: %\renewcommand{\cal}{\mycal}

39: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}

40: \newcommand{\ncO}{{\cal O}}

41: \newcommand{\ncU}{{\cal U}}

42: \newcommand{\mcU}{{\mycal U}}

43: \newcommand{\cOp}{\widehat{\ncO}_{\hat p}}

44: \newcommand{\hOp}{\cOp}

45: 

46: \def\s{\_\!\imath}

47: \def\th{{e}}

48: \def\tH{{H}}

49: \def\tV{\tilde{V}}

50: \def\tK{{K}}

51: %\def\ext{\mbox{{\footnotesize ext}}}

52: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}

53: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}

54: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}

55: \newcommand{\oeps}{o(r^{-2\alpha})}

56: \newcommand{\oepsb}{o(r^{\beta-2\alpha})}

57: \newcommand{\myvareps}{}

58: \newcommand{\newa}{c}

59: 

60: \newcommand{\macro}[1]{\vphantom{A}

61: \raisebox{-0.085ex}{$\stackrel{{\scriptscriptstyle (#1)}}{x}$}

62: \vphantom{A}}

63: 

64: \newcommand{\two}[1]{\vphantom{#1}\stackrel{(2)}{#1}\!\vphantom{#1}}

65: %\newcommand{\zero}[1]{\vphantom{#1}\stackrel{(0)}{#1}\!\vphantom{#1}}

66: %\newcommand{\one}[1]{\vphantom{#1}\stackrel{(1)}{#1}\!\vphantom{#1}}

67: \newcommand{\yone} {\macro{1}}%{{}^{(1)}x} %{\one {y}}

68: \newcommand{\yzero} {\macro{0}}%{{}^{(0)}x} %{{\zero {y}}

69: \newcommand{\ytwo}{\macro{2}}% {{}^{(2)}x} %{{\two {y}}

70: 

71: \newcommand{\mnoteprzelicz}[1]{}%{\mnote{#1}}

72: \newcommand{\przelicz}{}%{\mnote{ja tego nie przeliczalem; zrobie to po przyjeciu pracy do druku   i/lub jak bedziemy cos pisac o momencie pedu}}

73: \renewcommand{\lrcorner}{\rfloor} %redefinicja dla zwezenia form

74: 

75: \newcounter{mnotecount}[section]

76: 

77: \renewcommand{\themnotecount}{\thesection.\arabic{mnotecount}}

78: \newcommand{\mnote}[1]{}

79: %{\protect{\stepcounter{mnotecount}}$^{\mbox{\footnotesize  $%\!\!\!\!\!\!\,

80: %      \bullet$\themnotecount}}$ \marginpar{\raggedright\tiny\em

81: %    $\!\!\!\!\!\!\,\bullet$\themnotecount: #1} }

82: 

83: 

84: \newcommand{\bA}{\,\,{\stackrel{\circ}{\!\!A}}\vphantom{A}}

85: 

86: \newcommand{\FS}       %{F_1} %

87:                   {F}

88:                        %{F_{\mbox{\scriptsize volume}}}

89: 

90: \newcommand{\HS} %{F_2}

91:        {H_{\mbox{\scriptsize volume}}}

92: 

93: \newcommand{\ren}{\mbox{\scriptsize normalised}}

94: \newcommand{\HSren} %{F_2}

95:        {{\HS^{\ren}}}

96: 

97: %

98: % nowe makra do grawitacyjnych przestrzeni fazowych

99: %

100: 

101: \newcommand{\calPx}{\mycal  P} %{\hcalPo}% generic phase space

102: \newcommand{\calPo}{{\mycal   P}_{[-1,0]}} % hatted phase space; the

103:                                             % hat needs fixing!

104: \newcommand{\hcalPo}{{\widehat{\!\mycal   P}}_{[-1,0]}} % hatted phase space; the

105:                                             % hat needs fixing!

106: \newcommand{\barSigma}{\;\bar{\!\Sigma}} %conformaly completed three

107:                                    %dimensional hypersurface

108: \newcommand{\lpsi}{\zeta} % the maps which map the hypersurfaces to

109:                          % each other, an other symbol is badly needed

110: \newcommand{\uomega}{u} % the variable u on scri

111: \newcommand{\gtaum}{\tau_-} % the lower end point of the u interval on

112:                             % Scri

113: \newcommand{\gSigma}{\mycal S} % the hypersurfaces in the physical

114:                                % space--time

115: 

116: 

117: %

118: %

119: %

120: 

121: %\newcommand{\Freud}{{\scriptsize\mbox{Freud}}}

122: \newcommand{\Freud}{{\mbox{\scriptsize boundary}}}

123: \newcommand{\HF}{H_{\Freud}}

124: \newcommand{\HFren}{H_{\Freud}^{\ren}}

125: \newcommand{\hype}{{\hyp^{\epsilon}}}

126: \newcommand{\hypext}{{\hyp_{\ext}}}

127: 

128: \newcommand{\pblurb}{(X,{\partial\hyp})}

129: \newcommand{\blurb}{(X,{\hyp})} % {(X,{\hyp},\Jped)}

130: \newcommand{\blurbe}{(X,{\hype})} %{(X,{\hype},\Jped)}

131: \newcommand{\HFh}{H_{\Freud}\blurb}

132: \newcommand{\HFhe}{H_{\Freud}\blurbe}

133: \newcommand{\Hh}{H\blurb}

134: \newcommand{\Hhe}{H\blurbe}

135: 

136: 

137: \newcommand{\hamiltonian}{Hamiltonian } %decide lower or upper case?

138: \newcommand{\Lagrangian}{Lagrangian } %decide lower or upper case?

139: 

140: \newcommand{\reword}{\mnote{rewordings}}

141: \newcommand{\ptc}[1]{\mnote{\textbf{PTC:} #1}}

142: \newcommand{\marc}[1]{\mnote{\textbf{PTC:} #1}}

143: % allow equations to be reset within sections.

144: 

145:   {\catcode `\@=11 \global\let\AddToReset=\@addtoreset}

146: \AddToReset{equation}{section}

147: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

148: 

149: 

150: \newcommand{\lie}{{\pounds}} %Lie derivative

151: %\newcommand{\lie}{{\mycal L}}

152: %\def\varOmega{{\it\Omega}}

153: \def\varOmega{{\mathit{\Omega}}}

154: %\def\varOmega{{\Omega}}

155: \newcommand{\rdphi}{\rd \varphi}

156: \newcommand{\rdS}{\rd S} % formy objetosciowe trzeba zmienic na dS

157: 

158: \newcommand{\cU}{{\mycal U}}

159: \newcommand{\cP}{{\mycal P}}

160: %\newcommand{\cDX}{{\mycal D}_X}

161: \newcommand{\cDX}{{\mathscr D}_X}

162: \newcommand{\dg}{\ \!\!\vartriangle\!\!\Kp}%{\Delta\Kp}{\blacktriangle\Kp}%

163:                                          %roznica metryki a metryka tla

164: 

165: \newtheorem{Theorem} {Theorem} [section] \newtheorem{Corollary}

166: [Theorem] {Corollary} \newtheorem{Lemma} [Theorem] {Lemma}

167: \newtheorem{Proposition} [Theorem] {Proposition}

168: \newtheorem{Conjecture}[Theorem]{Conjecture}

169: \newtheorem{Problem}[Theorem]{Problem}

170: \newtheorem{Definition}[Theorem]{Definition}

171: \newtheorem{example}[Theorem]{Example}

172: % Scri

173: % \font\svtnscr=rsfs10 scaled1700

174: % \font\tenscr=rsfs10 scaled1200

175: % \font\sevenscr=rsfs7 % scaled \magstep1

176: % \font\fivescr=rsfs5 % scaled \magstep1

177: % \skewchar\tenscr='177 \skewchar\sevenscr='177 \skewchar\fivescr='177

178: % \newfam\scrfam

179: % \textfont\scrfam=\tenscr

180: % \scriptfont\scrfam=\sevenscr

181: % \scriptscriptfont\scrfam=\fivescr

182: % \def\scr{\fam\scrfam}

183: 

184: % \def\scri{{\fam\scrfam I}}

185: 

186: % \newcommand{\SCRI}{{\svtnscr I}}

187: % %\newcommand{\Scri}{{\tenscr I}}

188: %\input{scrifont}

189: 

190: 

191: % \def\scri{\hbox{${\mycal J}$\kern -.645em {\raise

192: %       .57ex\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle (\ $}}}}

193: %      \newcommand{\Scri}{\scri}

194: %      \newcommand{\scrip}{\scri^{+}}

195:       \newcommand{\scrim}{\scri^-}

196: \newcommand{\eq}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

197:       \newcommand{\bh}{{\breve h}} % standard metric on S^2

198:  \newcommand{\taum}{{\tau_{-}}}

199:  \newcommand{\taumn}{-1}

200:  \newcommand{\phield}{{f}}

201: \newcommand{\phieldone}{{h}}

202: \newcommand{\phieldtwo}{{g}}

203:  \newcommand{\tauz}{{\tau_{0}}}

204:       \newcommand{\TB}{Trautman--Bondi\ }

205:       \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

206:       \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

207: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

208: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

209:       \newcommand{\dtwo}{\Delta_2}

210:       \newcommand{\kolo}[1]{\vphantom{#1}\stackrel{\circ}{#1}\!\vphantom{#1}}

211:       %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %% Additional fonts and characters

212:       \newfont{\msa}{msam10 scaled\magstep1}

213:       \font\SYMA=msam10 % For some AMS symbols%

214:       %\font\SYM=msbm10 % For blackboard bold

215: 

216: 

217: \def\Complex{{\mathbb C}} \def\Rationals{{\mathbb Q}}

218: \def\Reals{{\mathbb R}}

219: \def\T{{\mathbb T}}

220: \def\Integers{{\mathbb Z}} \def\Naturals{{\mathbb N}}

221: %\def\lrcorner{{\mathbb y}}

222: 

223: \def\cosec{\mathop{\rm cosec}\nolimits}

224: \newcommand{\comment}{\mnote{comment added}}

225: \newcommand{\dx}[1]{{\mbox{\rm d}#1}}

226: \newcommand{\mH}{{\mycal H}}%{{\mathscr H}}

227: \newcommand{\mHS}{{\mH}_{\Sigma}}

228: \newcommand{\bp}{p}%{\mathbf{p}}

229: \newcommand{\bd}{\mathbf{d}}

230: \newcommand{\bL}{\mathbf{L}}

231: %\newcommand{\bpi}{{\pi}\!\!\!\pi}

232: \newcommand{\bpi}{\pi}%{\underline{\pi}}

233: %\newcommand{\bpi}{{\mathscr p}}

234: \newcommand{\bbpi}{{\mbox{\boldmath$ \pi$}}}

235: %\newcommand{\bbpi}{\underline{\pi}}%{\underline{\underline{\pi}}}

236: %\newcommand{\bcL}{{\mathbf{\mycal L}}}

237: \newcommand{\bcL}{{\mbox{\boldmath$ {\mycal L}$}}}%{{\underline{\mycal                                                 %L}}}

238: %\newcommand{\bcL}{{\mbox{\boldmath$ {\mathscr L}$}}}%{{\underline{\mycal L}}}

239: \newcommand{\caL}{{{\mycal L}}}

240: \newcommand{\cLX}{{\lie_X}}

241: \newcommand{\caD}{{{\mycal D}}}

242: \newcommand{\rd}{\,{ d}} % exterior differential

243: %\newcommand{\rd}{\,{\rm d}} % exterior differential

244: \newcommand{\N}{\Naturals}

245: \newcommand{\R}{\Reals} \newcommand{\Z}{\Integers}

246: \newcommand{\C}{\Complex}

247: \newcommand{\Jphi}{f}%{{\tilde f}}%{\phi} % pole skalarne fizyczne

248: \newcommand{\dotphi}{\dot\phi}

249: \newcommand{\dotJphi}{\dot\Kphi}

250: \newcommand{\dotpi}{\dot\pi}

251: \newcommand{\dotJpi}{\dot\Jpi}

252: \newcommand{\Jpsi}{\tilde f}%{\psi} % pole skalarne niefizyczne

253: \newcommand{\Jpi}{{\tilde p}}%{\pi} %ped konforemnie przetransformowany

254: \newcommand{\Jped}{p}%{\pi} % ped na przestrzeni fizycznej

255: \newcommand{\tphi}{{\tilde\phi}}

256: \newcommand{\tpi}{{\tilde\pi}}

257: 

258: \newcommand{\aalpha}{\lambda} % funkcja wyznaczajaca supertranslacje

259: \newcommand{\przecinekJped}{}

260: \newcommand{\const}{\mbox{\scriptsize const}}

261: \newcommand{\bM}{{\widetilde {\! M}}} %conformally completed Minkowski

262: \newcommand{\bF}{{\widetilde F}}

263: \newcommand{\bi}{i_{\bSigma}}%{{\tilde \imath}}

264: \newcommand{\bhyp}{{\widetilde \hyp}}

265: \newcommand{\bSigma}{{\widetilde \Sigma}}

266: \newcommand{\Sscr}{\Sigma_{\scrip}}

267: \newcommand{\iscr}{i_{\scrip}}

268: \newcommand{\iS}{i_{\Sigma}}

269: \newcommand{\iSs}{i_{\Sscr}}

270: \newcommand{\PhiS}{\Phi_{\Sigma}}

271: \newcommand{\PhiSscr}{\Phi_{\Sscr}}

272: \newcommand{\PhibS}{\Phi_{\bSigma}}

273: \newcommand{\PsiS}{\Psi_{I\times\Sigma}}

274: \newcommand{\psiS}{\psi_{I\times\Sigma}}

275: \newcommand{\PsiScr}{\Psi_{I\times\Sscr}}

276: \newcommand{\psiScr}{\psi_{I\times\Sscr}}

277: %\newcommand{\hyp}{{\mathscr S}}

278: \newcommand{\hyp}{{\mycal S}}

279: \newcommand{\tg}{{\tilde g}}

280: \newcommand{\hamX}{{\mathscr{X}}}

281: \newcommand{\jky}{{ v}}

282: \newcommand{\scrimap}{{\sigma}} %odwzorowanie opisujace dynamike na Scri

283: \newcommand{\fscri}{{\chi}} % wartosc pola skalarnego na Scri

284: 

285: \newcommand{\Bgamma}{{B}} % koneksja tla

286: \newcommand{\bmetric}{{b}} % metryka tla

287: 

288: \newcommand{\Kp}{{\mathfrak g}} %{\pi}} % kontrawariantna gestosc metryki

289:                             %na czasoprzestrzeni

290: \newcommand{\KA}{p} % ped sprzezony do kontrawariantnej gestosci

291:                     % metryki (A duze w innych pracach JK i JJ)

292: \newcommand{\E}[1]{{\rm e}^{#1}}

293: %\newcommand{\kolo}[1]{\stackrel{\circ}{#1}}

294: \newcommand{\ve}{\varepsilon}

295: \newcommand{\gthreeup}{\,{}^3g} %three dimensional metric in

296:                                 %space--time, used for the inverse

297: \newcommand{\cO}{{\mathscr O}}

298: \newcommand{\arcsh}{{\rm argsh}}

299: \newcommand{\threeg}{{\gamma}} %three dimensional metric pulled back

300:                                %to the model space

301: \newcommand{\detthreeg}{{\det(\gamma_{ij})}} % determinant of the

302:                                              % three dimensional

303:                                              % metric pulled back

304:                                %to the model space

305: \newcommand{\lapse}{{\nu}} % the lapse function on the model space

306: \newcommand{\shift}{{\beta}} % the shift vector field on the model

307:                              % space

308: \newcommand{\threeP}{{\pi}} %three dimensional ADM momentum pulled back

309:                                %to the model space

310: \newcommand{\tildeg}{{\tilde g}} % conformally rescaled metric

311: \newcommand{\hst}{{\breve{h}}} % standard round metric on the two

312:                               % sphere

313: \newcommand{\ext}{{\mbox{\rm\scriptsize ext}}}

314: \newcommand{\Gtwo}{\two\Gamma}

315: \newcommand{\Gst}{\breve\Gamma}

316: \newcommand{\bel}[1]{\be\label{#1}}

317: \newcommand{\ourU}{\mathbb U}

318: \newcommand{\ourW}{\mathbb W}

319: 

320: \newcommand{\hzome}{\widehat{\mathring{\omega}}}

321: \newcommand{\dvaromega}{\dot\varomega} %time derivative of the conformal factor

322: \newcommand{\ohyp}{\,\,\overline{\!\!\hyp}} % closure of the initial data hypersurface

323: \newcommand{\thyp}{\tilde\hyp}

324: \newcommand{\hhyp}{\,\,\widehat{\!\!\hyp}\,} % extension of the initial data

325:                                % hypersurface beyond Scri

326: \newcommand{\tmet}{\tilde\met} % conformally rescaled metric on a

327:                                % three dimensional manifold

328: \newcommand{\hmet}{\hat\met}

329: \newcommand{\met}{\gamma} % metric induced on a three dimensional hypersurface

330: \newcommand{\extK}{K} % extrinsic curvature of a three dimensional hypersurface

331: \newcommand{\tiext}{\tilde\extK } % conformally rescaled extrinsic

332:                                 % curvature of a three

333:                                 % dimensional hypersurface (with a tilde)

334: \newcommand{\hext}{\hat\extK } % extrinsic curvature of a three

335:                              % dimensional hypersurface with a hat

336: \newcommand{\hM}{\,\widehat{\!M}} % four dimensional extended spacetime

337: \newcommand{\hfg}{\hat g} % four dimensional extended metric

338: \newcommand{\calD}{{\mathcal{D}}} %domain of dependence

339: \newcommand{\tn}{{\tilde n}} %unit normal with respect to the rescaled

340:                              %metric

341: \newcommand{\varomega}{\omega} % conformal factor on a fixed hypersurface

342: \newcommand{\hvaromega}{\hat{\varomega}} % conformal factor on a fixed hypersurface,

343:                                     % extended beyond the boundary

344: \newcommand{\hdotvaromega}{\widehat{\dot{\varomega}}} % conformal factor on a fixed hypersurface,

345:                                     % extended beyond the boundary

346: \newcommand{\toto}{\R}% \toto used to be \R^*_+, replaced by \R

347: \newcommand{\tLambda}{\tilde\Lambda} % tensor densities

348: \newcommand{\newH}{\widehat H}

349: 

350: \newcommand{\pgp}{P_{\hM}\gamma_p}

351: \newcommand{\pgq}{P_{\hM}\gamma_q}

352: 

353: \newcommand{\conffour}{\varOmega} % four dimensional conformal factor

354:                                   % here

355: \newcommand{\confthree}{\varomega} % three dimensional conformal factor

356:                                   % here

357: \newcommand{\dconfthree}{\dvaromega} % time derivative of the three

358:                                      % dimensional conformal factor

359: \newcommand{\extL}{L} % trace free part of the extrinsic curvature of

360:                       % a three dimensional hypersurface

361: \newcommand{\textL}{\tilde L} % conformally rescaled trace free part

362:                               % of the extrinsic curvature of

363:                       % a three dimensional hypersurface

364: %\newcommand{\textK}{\tilde K} % conformally rescaled extrinsic curvature of

365:                       % a three dimensional hypersurface

366: %\newcommand{\tK}{\tilde K} % trace of the conformally rescaled

367:                            % extrinsic curvature of

368:                       % a three dimensional hypersurface

369: \newcommand{\tlambda}{\tilde \lambda} % extrinsic curvature of

370:                       % a two  dimensional boundary in a conformal picture

371: \newcommand{\ccalD}{\;\breve{\!\mycal D}}

372: \newcommand{\tilh}{\tilde h} % metric induced by the conformal metric on S^2

373:  \newcommand{\DG}{D} % zbior odwzorowan konforemnych

374: \newcommand{\zR} {\zRs} % Ricci itd tla

375: \newcommand{\zRs} {\mathring{R}} % Ricci itd tla

376: \newcommand{\zRm} {\mathring{R}} % Ricci itd tla

377: \newcommand{\zo} {\mathring{\omega}} % koneksja metryki tla

378: \newcommand{\hzo} {\widehat{\zo}{}} % koneksja metryki tla

379: \newcommand{\znabla} {\mathring{\nabla}} % koneksja metryki tla

380: \newcommand{\sRz} {\mathring{\sigma}_R} % odleglosc geodezyjna metryki tla

381: \newcommand{\sR} {\sigma_R} % odleglosc geodezyjna metryki

382: 

383: \newcommand{\frg}{{\mathfrak g}} % determinant of the metric

384: \newcommand{\fb}{{\mathfrak b}} % determinant of the background metric

385: 

386: \newcommand{\zn} {\mathring{\nabla}} % pochodna metryki tla

387: \newcommand{\mn} {M} %{{}^{n-1}M} %the n-1 dimensional manifold

388: \newcommand{\cM}{\mycal M} % space-time

389: \newcommand{\cK}{\mycal K} %  Killing vectors

390: \newcommand{\hcK} {\,\,\widehat{\!\!\cK}} %  hatted Killing vectors

391: \newcommand{\cKS}{{\mycal K}_{\hyp^{\perp}}} % normal Killing vectors

392: \newcommand{\cKt}{{\mycal K}_{\hyp^{\parallel}}} % tangential Killing vectors

393: \newcommand{\cKST}{\cKS^\perp}%{{\mycal K}_{\mycal B}} % remainging Killing

394:                                         % vectors

395: \newcommand{\Eq}[1]{Equation~\eq{#1}}

396: \newcommand{\Eqsone}[1]{Equations~\eq{#1}}

397: \newcommand{\Eqs}[2]{Equations~\eq{#1}-\eq{#2}}

398: \newcommand{\hr}{{\hat r}}

399: \newcommand{\hbeta}{{\hat \beta}}

400: \newcommand{\hx}{{\hat x}}

401: \newcommand{\hphi}{{\hat \phi}}

402: \newcommand{\hth}{{\hat \theta}}

403: \newcommand{\htheta}{{\hth}}

404: \newcommand{\home}{{\hat \omega}}

405: \newcommand{\hh}{{\hat h}}

406: \newcommand{\hf}{{\hat f}}

407: \newcommand{\hb}{{\hat b}}

408: \newcommand{\hv}{{\hat v}}

409: \newcommand{\he}{{\hat e}}

410: \newcommand{\proof}{\noindent {\sl Proof:} }

411: \newcommand{\remark}{\noindent {\bf Remark:} }

412: \newcommand{\remarks}{\noindent {\bf Remarks:} }

413: \newcommand{\qed}{\hfill $\Box$\\ \medskip}

414: \newcommand{\ds}{\; ds}

415: %\newcommand{\xymatrix}[1]{}

416: %\newcommand{\ar}{}

417: %\input{scrif1}

418: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

419: \begin{document}\newcommand{\Sext}{\hyp_{{\text{\scriptsize\rm ext}}}}

420: \newcommand{\fg}{{}^4{g}}

421: \newcommand{\ac}{\zeta}

422: 

423: 

424: \title{The mass of spacelike hypersurfaces in asymptotically anti-de

425:   Sitter space-times}

426: 

427: \author{Piotr T.\ Chru\'sciel\thanks{ Supported in part by the Polish

428:     Research Council grant KBN 2 P03B 073 15, and by the A. von Humboldt foundation. E--mail:

429:     \texttt{chrusciel@univ-tours.fr}} \\ Gabriel Nagy\thanks{

430:     Current address: Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Gravitationsphysik,

431:                     Albert-Einstein-Institut,

432:                     Am M\"uhlenberg 1,

433:                     D-14476 Golm,

434:                     Germany. Supported by a grant from R\'egion Centre. E--mail:

435:     \texttt{nagy@aei-potsdam.mpg.de}} \\

436:   D\'epartement de

437:   Math\'ematiques \\ Facult\'e des Sciences\\

438:   Parc de Grandmont \\F-37200 Tours, France}

439: 

440: 

441: \maketitle

442: 

443: \begin{abstract}

444:   We give a Hamiltonian definition of mass for spacelike hypersurfaces

445:   in space-times with metrics which are asymptotic to the anti-de

446:   Sitter one, or to a class of generalizations thereof. We show that

447:   our definition provides a geometric invariant for a spacelike

448:   hypersurface embedded in a space-time.

449: \end{abstract}

450: \tableofcontents

451: 

452: \newcommand{\mSigma}{\cal S}

453: \section{Introduction}

454: \label{Si} Let $\hyp$ be an $n$-dimensional spacelike hypersurface

455: in a $n+1$-dimensional Lorentzian space-time $(\cM,g)$, $n\ge 2$.

456: Suppose that $\cM$ contains an open set $\cU$ with a global time

457: coordinate $t$ (with range not necessarily equal to $\R$), as well

458: as a global ``radial'' coordinate $r\in[R,\infty)$, leading to

459: local coordinate systems $(t,r,v^A)$, with $(v^A)$ --- local

460: coordinates on some compact $n-1$ dimensional manifold $\mn$. We

461: further require that $\hyp\cap \cU=\{t=0\}$. Assume that the

462: metric $g$ approaches (as $r$ tends to infinity, in a sense which

463: is made precise in Section~\ref{S2} below) a background metric $b$

464: of the form

465: \begin{equation}

466:   \label{eq:a1}

467:   b= -{\textstyle{\left({r^2\over\ell^2}+k\right)}} dt^2 + {1\over{r^2\over\ell^2}+k } dr^2

468:   +r^2 h\;,

469: \end{equation}

470: where $h$ is an $r$-independent Riemannian metric on $\mn$, while

471: $k$ and $\ell$ are constants\footnote{\label{footWoolgar}A warped

472: product form of the metric, with the factor in front of $h$ not

473: being constant, together with the Einstein equations~\eq{Ee},

474: force $g_{rr}$ and $g_{tt}$ to have the form \eq{eq:a1} in an

475: appropriate coordinate system \cite{CadeauWoolgar}, with $k$ being

476: a function of $r$ which approaches a constant as $r$ tends to

477: infinity.  Further $h$ itself has to satisfy the Einstein

478: equation~\eq{Ee} with $\Lambda$ replaced by an appropriate

479: constant. Some metrics slightly more general than \eq{eq:a1} will

480: be considered in the body of the paper. }.

481:  Suppose further that $g$ satisfies the vacuum Einstein equations with

482:  a cosmological constant

483: \begin{equation}

484:   \label{Ee}

485:   R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{g^{\alpha \beta} R_{\alpha \beta}}{2} g_{\mu\nu} =

486: -\Lambda g_{\mu\nu} \;, \qquad\Lambda = -\textstyle{n(n-1) \over

487: 2\ell^2}\;,

488: \end{equation}

489: similarly for $b$. (The existence of a large family of such $g$'s

490: follows from the work in \cite{Friedrich:adS,Kannar:adS}.) A

491: Hamiltonian analysis (following \cite{ChAIHP}, and discussed in

492: some more detail in Appendix \ref{AHam}; see also \cite[Section

493: 5]{ChruscielSimon}) leads to the following expression for the

494: Hamiltonian associated to the flow of a vector field $X$, assumed

495: to be a Killing vector field of the background $b$:\footnote{The

496: integral over $\partial \hyp$ should be understood by a limiting

497: process, as the limit as $R$ tends to infinity of integrals over

498: the sets $t=0$, $r=R$. $d S_{\alpha\beta}$ is defined as

499: % $\frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}\lrcorner

500: % \rd x^0 \wedge\rd x^1 \wedge\rd x^2 \wedge\rd x^3 $,

501:   $\frac{\partial}{\partial x^\alpha}\lrcorner

502:   \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\beta}\lrcorner \rd x^0 \wedge\cdots

503:   \wedge\rd x^{n} $, with $\lrcorner$ denoting contraction; $g$ stands

504:   for the space-time metric  unless explicitly indicated

505:   otherwise. Further, a semicolon denotes covariant differentiation

506:   \emph{with respect to the background metric $b$}.}

507: \begin{eqnarray}

508:   m(\hyp,g,b, X)&= &\frac 12 \int_{\partial\hyp}

509:  \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta}\;,

510: \label{toto}

511: \end{eqnarray}\begin{eqnarray}

512:   \ourU^{\nu\lambda}&= &

513: {\ourU^{\nu\lambda}}_{\beta}X^\beta + \frac 1{8\pi}

514: \left(\sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|}~g^{\alpha[\nu}-\sqrt{|\det

515: b_{\rho\sigma}|}~ b^{\alpha[\nu}\right) {X^{\lambda]}}_{;\alpha} \

516: ,\label{Fsup2new}

517: \\ {\ourU^{\nu\lambda}}_\beta &= & \displaystyle{\frac{2|\det

518:   \bmetric_{\mu\nu}|}{ 16\pi\sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|}}}

519: g_{\beta\gamma}(e^2 g^{\gamma[\nu}g^{\lambda]\kappa})_{;\kappa}

520: \;,\label{Freud2.0} %\nonumber

521: \\

522:   \label{mas2}

523: e&=& %\frac

524: {\sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|}}/{\sqrt{|\det\bmetric_{\mu\nu}|}}\;

525: .

526: \end{eqnarray}

527: (The question of convergence of the right-hand-side of \eq{toto}

528: is considered in Section~\ref{S2} below.) The hypersurface $\hyp$

529: singles out a set of Killing vectors $X$ for the metric $b$ which

530: are normal to $\hyp$,

531: \begin{equation}  \label{KVF}

532:  X\Big|_{\hyp}=N n\;,

533: \end{equation}

534: where $N$ is a function and $n=e_0

535: =({r^2\over\ell^2}+k)^{-1/2}\partial_t$ is the future-directed

536: $b$-unit normal to $\hyp$. We shall use the symbol $\cKS$ to

537: denote this set of Killing vectors.  The question then arises

538: whether one can extract out of \eq{toto}, with $X\in\cKS$, one or

539: more geometric invariants associated to $g$ along $\hyp$.  Another

540: way of stating this question is, essentially, whether the

541: integrals \eq{toto} are background independent. As discussed in

542: more detail below, every metric $g$ asymptotes many different

543: backgrounds of the form \eq{eq:a1} whenever it asymptotes one, and

544: it is not at all clear how these backgrounds relate to each other:

545: if the geometry of space-time does not sufficiently constrain the

546: set of allowed backgrounds \eq{eq:a1}, then the numbers obtained

547: from \eq{toto} could be completely unrelated to each other when

548: different backgrounds are chosen.  If this were the case, it would

549: appear questionable to associate physical meaning to the integrals

550: \eq{toto}. The purpose of this paper is to prove that, in several

551: cases of interest, geometric invariants can indeed be extracted

552: out of the integrals \eq{toto}.

553: 

554: The model problem of interest are space-times which are asymptotic

555: to anti-de Sitter space-time. In this context there exist several

556: alternative methods of defining mass --- using coordinate systems

557: \cite{BGH,GHHP83}, preferred foliations \cite{GibbonsGPI},

558: generalized Komar integrals \cite{Magnon}, conformal techniques

559: \cite{AshtekarDas,AshtekarMagnonAdS,Balasubramanian}, or

560: \emph{ad-hoc} methods \cite{AbbottDeser}; an extended discussion

561: can be found in \cite[Section 5]{ChruscielSimon}. We wish to

562: stress that the key advantage of the Hamiltonian approach is the

563: uniqueness of the candidate expression for the energy (which

564: follows from the fact that Hamiltonians are uniquely defined up to

565: a constant on each path connected component of the phase space),

566: and that no such uniqueness properties are known  in the

567: alternative approaches mentioned above (\emph{cf.}, however,

568: \cite{WaldZoupas,SilvaJulia:2000} for some partial results in the

569: ``Noether charges'' framework). Now, independently of the question

570: of what is the ``correct'' candidate expression for the energy,

571: each of the expressions proposed in the existing literature

572: suffers from some ambiguities, so that the question of

573: well-posedness of the definition of mass as defined in those

574: papers arises as well. For instance, the Abbott-Deser

575: mass~\cite{AbbottDeser}, or the Hamiltonian mass of \cite{HT},

576: both suffer from precisely the same potential ambiguities as the

577: Hamiltonian mass analyzed in this paper. As shown in

578: Appendix~\ref{AAD}, under the asymptotic conditions considered in

579: our well-posedness results, the Hamiltonian mass defined by

580: \eq{toto} coincides with the Abbott-Deser one. Thus, one way of

581: interpreting our results is that we prove the existence of a

582: geometric invariant which can be calculated using Abbott-Deser

583: type integrals. As another example, we note the potential

584: ambiguity in the mass defined by the conformal methods

585: in~\cite{AshtekarDas,AshtekarMagnonAdS}, related to the

586: possibility of existence of conformal completions which are

587: \emph{not} smoothly conformally equivalent. The results proved

588: here can be used to show~\cite{ChHerzlich} that no such

589: completions exist, establishing the invariant character of the

590: definitions of~\cite{AshtekarDas,AshtekarMagnonAdS}.

591: 

592: We note that a similar problem for the ADM mass of asymptotically

593: flat initial data sets has been solved in

594: \cite{Bartnik:mass,ChErice} (see also \cite{Chmass}). Our

595: treatment here is a non-trivial adaptation to the current setup of

596: the methods of \cite{ChErice}. Some of the results proved here

597: have been independently observed in \cite{Wang}.

598: 

599: The detailed statements of our results in a general context are to

600: be found in the sections below, and will not be reproduced here.

601: We shall, instead, discuss the application of our results to two

602: families of examples:

603: \begin{enumerate}

604: \item Let $M$ be the $n-1$ dimensional sphere $^{n-1}S$ with the

605:   round metric $h$ of scalar curvature $(n-1)(n-2)$, while $b$ is the

606:   $n+1$ dimensional anti-de Sitter metric:

607: \begin{equation}

608:   \label{eq:a1a}

609:   b= -\left({r^2\over\ell^2}+1\right) dt^2 + {1\over{r^2\over\ell^2}+1 } dr^2

610:   +r^2 h\;,

611: \end{equation}

612: The space $\cKS$ of $b$-Killing vector fields normal to

613: $\hyp\cap\cU$ consists of vector fields $X(\lambda)$,

614: $\lambda=(\lambda^{(\mu)})\in \R^{n+1}$, which\footnote{We stress

615: that the index ${(\mu)}$ on

616:   $\lambda$ does not have anything to do with space-time;

617:   $\lambda^{(\mu)}$ is simply a coordinate on the $n+1$ dimensional

618:   vector space $\cKS$.  Similarly the Lorentz metric

619:   $\eta_{{(\mu)}{(\nu)}}$, which arises naturally on $\cKS$ from the

620:   construction here, does not have anything to do with the space-time

621:   metric $g$. To emphasize this we put brackets around the $\mu$'s.}

622:   on $\hyp$ take the form \eq{KVF} with $N=\lambda^{(\mu)}

623:   N_{(\mu)}$, where $$N_{(0)}=\sqrt{{r^2\over\ell^2}+1}\;, \qquad

624:   N_{(i)}={x^i\over\ell}\;,$$ and $x^i = r n^i$, $r$ being the

625:   coordinate which appears in \eq{eq:a1}, while

626:   $n^i\in{}^{n-1}S\subset\R^n$. The group $\mathit{Iso}(\hyp,b)$ of

627:   isometries $\Phi$ of $b$ which map $\hyp$ into $\hyp$ acts on $\cKS$

628:   by push-forward; in Appendix \ref{Aai1} we show for completeness the

629:   well known fact that for every such $\Phi$ there exists a Lorentz

630:   transformation $M:\R^{n+1}\to\R^{n+1}$ so that we have $$\Phi_*

631:   X(\lambda)= X( M\lambda)\;.$$ Letting ${\mathfrak g}_{(\mu)}$ be the

632:   $\mu$'th basis vector of $\cKS\approx\R^{n+1}$, $ {\mathfrak

633:   g}_{(\mu)}:=X(\lambda^{(\alpha)} =\delta^\alpha_\mu)$, we set

634:   $$m_{(\mu)}\equiv m\left(\hyp,g,b,{\mathfrak g}_{(\mu)}\right)\;;$$

635:   it follows that the number $$m^2(\hyp,g) = |\eta^{{(\mu)}{(\nu)}}

636:   m_{(\mu)} m_{(\nu)}|\;,$$ where

637:   $\eta^{{(\mu)}{(\nu)}}=\mathit{diag}(-1,+1,\cdots,+1)$ is the

638:   Minkowski metric on $\R^{n+1}$, is an invariant of the action of

639:   $\mathit{Iso}(\hyp,b)$.\footnote{This has been observed

640:   independently by X.~Wang~\cite{Wang} in, however, a considerably

641:   less general setting.} Further, if we define $m(\hyp,g)$ to

642:   be positive if $m^\mu$ is spacelike, while we take the sign of

643:   $m(\hyp,g)$ to coincide with that of $m_0=-m^0$

644:   if $m^\mu$ is timelike or

645:   null, then $m(\hyp,g)$ so defined is invariant under the action of

646:   the connected component $\mathit{Iso}_0(\hyp,b)$ of the identity in

647:   $\mathit{Iso}(\hyp,b)$. We show in detail in Section~\ref{Sgc} that

648:   $m(\hyp,g)$ is independent of the background metric chosen to

649:   calculate the integrals \eq{toto}, provided that the fall-off

650:   conditions of Theorem~\ref{T0} and Theorem~\ref{TP1} hold, which

651:   justifies the notation. The number $m(\{t=0\},g)$ so defined

652:   coincides with the mass parameter $m$ of the Kottler

653:   metrics\footnote{The Kottler metrics, published in 1918

654:   \cite{Kottler}, are also known as the ``Schwarzschild -- de Sitter

655:   metrics''.}  \begin{eqnarray}\label{Kottler} g & = & -\left(1 -

656:   \frac {2m}r + {r^2\over \ell^2}\right) dt^2 + \left(1 - \frac {2m}r

657:   + {r^2\over \ell^2}\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2 h \;,

658: \end{eqnarray}

659: where $h=d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2$. Similarly

660: $m(\{t=0\},g)$ is proportional to the parameter $\eta$ which

661: occurs in the $(n+1)$-dimensional generalizations of the Kottler

662: metrics ({\em cf., e.g.,} \cite{HorowitzMyers})

663:  \begin{eqnarray}\label{Kottler2}

664:   g & = & -\left(1 - \frac {2\eta}{r^{n-2}} +  {r^2\over \ell^2}\right) dt^2 +

665:   \left(1 - \frac

666:   {2\eta}{r^{n-2}} +  {r^2\over \ell^2}\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2 h \;,

667: \end{eqnarray}

668: with $h$ --- a round metric on a $n-1$ dimensional sphere of

669: scalar curvature $(n-1)(n-2)$.

670: 

671: Some further global geometric invariants of the metrics asymptotic

672: to the backgrounds \eq{Kottler2} are discussed in

673: Section~\ref{Sgc}.

674: \item  Let $M$ be a compact $n-1$ dimensional manifold

675:   with a metric $h$ of constant scalar curvature and with non-positive

676:   Ricci tensor, and let $b$ take the form

677: \begin{equation}

678:   \label{eq:a1c}

679:  %b= -\textstyle\left({r^2\over\ell^2}-1\right) dt^2 +

680:  %\displaystyle{1\over{r^2\over\ell^2}-1 } dr^2

681: %  +r^2 h\;,

682:   b= -{1\over a^2(r)} dt^2 + a^2(r) dr^2 +r^2 h\;,

683: \end{equation}

684: $h$ being $r$-independent, as before. We show (see

685: Proposition~\ref{PA1}, Appendix~\ref{Aai2}) that for such metrics

686: the space of $b$-Killing vector fields normal to $\hyp$ consists

687: of vector fields of the form

688: \begin{equation}

689:   \label{eq:kvh}

690: X(\lambda)= \lambda\partial_t\;, \quad\lambda\in\R\;.

691: \end{equation}

692: The discussion in Section~\ref{Sgc} shows that $$m(\hyp,g)\equiv

693: m(\hyp,g,b,X(1))$$ is background independent, hence a geometric

694: invariant.  Some other geometric invariants can be obtained from

695: the integrals \eq{toto} when Killing vectors which are not

696: necessarily normal to $\hyp$ exist, using invariants of the action

697: of the isometry group of $b$ on the space of Killing vectors.  If

698: the Ricci tensor of $\mn$ is strictly negative no other Killing

699: vectors exist, \emph{cf.\/} Appendix~\ref{Aai2}. On the other

700: hand, if $h$ is a flat torus, then each $h$--Killing vector

701: provides a geometric invariant via the integrals \eq{toto},

702: provided that those converge and that the fall-off conditions of

703: Theorem~\ref{TP1} are met (this will be the case if,

704: \emph{e.g.,\/} Equations~\eq{C4}-\eq{C5} hold).

705: \end{enumerate}

706: 

707: The number $m(\hyp,g)$ defined in each case above is our proposal

708: for the geometric definition of total mass of $\hyp$ in $(\cM,g)$.

709: 

710: The results described above can be reformulated in a purely

711: Riemannian context, this will be discussed elsewhere

712: \cite{ChHerzlich}. The extension of the results proved here to

713: hyperboloidal hypersurfaces in Minkowski space-time, that  leads

714: to a geometric definition of the Trautman-Bondi mass, requires a

715: considerable amount of work and will be discussed

716: elsewhere~\cite{ChJTB}. Let us simply mention that if  the metric

717: of a hyperboloidal hypersurface in asymptotically Minkowskian

718: space-times satisfies the fall-off conditions here then its

719: Trautman-Bondi mass coincides with the Hamiltonian one. More

720: general statements require care.

721: 

722: It is natural to study the behaviour of the mass when $\hyp$ is

723: allowed to move in $\cM$. A partial answer to this question is

724: given in Theorem~\ref{TP1} below. A complete answer would require

725: establishing an equivalent of Theorem~\ref{T1} in a space-time

726: setting. The difficulties that arise in the corresponding problem

727: for asymptotically Minkowskian metrics \cite{Chmass} suggest that

728: this might be a considerably more delicate problem, which we plan

729: to analyze in the future. It should be stressed that this problem

730: mixes two different issues, one being the potential background

731: dependence of \eq{toto}, another one being the possibility of

732: energy flowing in or out through the timelike conformal boundary

733: of space-time.

734: 

735: This paper is organized as follows: In Section~\ref{S2} we present

736: conditions which guarantee convergence of the mass integrals

737: \eq{toto}, see Theorem~\ref{T0}. We also show that the integrals

738: \eq{toto} are invariant (Theorem~\ref{TP1}) or covariant

739: (Lemma~\ref{L1}) under a class of well-controlled coordinate

740: transformations, consisting of symmetries of the background, and

741: of certain generalizations of the usual ``supertranslations'' that

742: occur in the asymptotically flat case.  Section~\ref{Sai} contains

743: the proof of the asymptotic symmetries theorem, Theorem~\ref{T1},

744: which is the key result in this work.  In this theorem we show

745: that the coordinate transformations allowed by our conditions are

746: compositions of those considered in Section~\ref{S2}. In

747: Section~\ref{Sgc} we apply the previous results to the

748: construction of global geometric invariants in a reasonably

749: general setting.  In Appendix~\ref{AHam} the Hamiltonian approach

750: to the definition of mass  is examined in our context.

751: Appendix~\ref{Aiso} contains some results on Killing vectors which

752: are needed in the body of the paper.

753: 

754: 

755: 

756: \section{Convergence, covariance under well behaved coordinate

757:   transformations}\label{S2}

758: \newcommand{\zero}{0} \newcommand{\one}{1} \newcommand{\backg}{b}

759: \newcommand{\A}{A} \newcommand{\ta}{a} \newcommand{\ha}{a}

760: %\newcommand{\hb}{b}

761: \newcommand{\hc}{c} \newcommand{\gf}{f} \newcommand{\ce}{\beta} Let us

762: start by establishing convergence of the mass integrals \eq{toto}

763: --- this involves setting up appropriate boundary conditions on

764: $g$.  Let, thus, $g$ and $b$ be two metrics on a set $\{R_0\le r

765: <\infty\;, \; (v^A)\in \mn\}$, let $e_a$ be an orthonormal frame

766: for $b$, set

767: \begin{equation}

768:   \label{mas3}

769:   e^{\mu\nu}\equiv g^{\mu\nu}-b^{\mu\nu}%\;, \qquad %\textstyle

770: \; ,

771: \end{equation} and let  $e^{\ha b}\equiv g(\theta^a,\theta^b)-\eta^{ab}$

772: denote the coefficients of $e^{\mu\nu}$ with respect to the frame

773: $\theta^a$ dual to the $e_a$'s:

774: $$e^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\otimes \partial_\nu=e^{\ha\hc}e_{\ha}\otimes

775: e_{\hc}\;.$$ Here $\eta^{ab}=\mathrm{diag}(-1,+1,\cdots,+1)$. We

776: stress that we do {\em not} assume existence of global frames on

777: the asymptotic region: when $M$ is not parallelizable, then any

778: conditions on the $e^{ab}$'s, {\em etc.} assumed below should be

779: understood as the requirement of {\em existence of a covering of

780: $M$ by a finite number of  open sets ${\mycal O}_i$ together with

781: frames defined on $[R_0,\infty)\times {\mycal O}_i$ satisfying the

782: conditions spelled out above.}  The ``matter energy-momentum

783: tensor'' $T^\lambda{}_\kappa$ is defined as \be\label{N.5g2} 8\pi

784: T^\lambda{}_\kappa:= R^\lambda{}_\kappa -\frac 12

785: g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta} \delta ^\lambda_\kappa +\Lambda

786: \delta ^\lambda_\kappa\;. \ee In our first result we assume for

787: simplicity\footnote{Using \Eq{C3}, Appendix~\ref{AHam}, it is

788: straightforward to obtain results similar to Theorem~\ref{T0}

789: without the hypothesis that $b$ is Einstein. Similarly, the

790: hypothesis that $X$ is a Killing vector field can be relaxed using

791: the calculations of \cite[Appendix~B]{ChAIHP}; {\em cf.\/} also

792: \cite[Section~5.1]{CJK}.} that $b$ is Einstein, that is, $b$

793: satisfies \Eq{N.5g2} with $T^\lambda{}_\kappa=0$, with a

794: cosmological constant $\Lambda$ the sign of which is irrelevant

795: for the theorem that follows:

796: \begin{Theorem}\label{T0}

797:   Let $X$ be a Killing vector of an Einstein metric $b$,

798: set

799: %$$|X|^2\equiv \sum_a

800: %    |X^a|^2\right\;, \quad |\znabla X|\equiv \left(\sum_{a,b}

801: %    |\znabla _bX^a|^2\right)^{1/2}\;,\quad |\zR|= \left(\sum_{a,b}

802: %    |\zR_{ab}|^2\right)^{1/2}\;,$$

803:   \be\label{c0}|X|^2\equiv \sum_a |X^a|^2\;, \quad |\znabla X|^2\equiv

804: \sum_{a,b} |\znabla _bX^a|^2\;,\quad |J|^2=

805: \sum_{b}|T^0{}_{b}|^2\;

806: \ee %\quad |\zR|^2= \sum_{a,b}|\zRm_{ab}|^2\;,$$

807: where $\znabla$ is the covariant derivative of $b$; the indices

808: here refer to a $b$-orthonormal frame such that $e_0$ is normal to

809: the hypersurface $t=0$.

810: %and $\zR=\zRm_{ab}\theta^a\otimes\theta^b$ is the Ricci tensor of $b$.

811: Suppose that $\lim_{r\to\infty} e^{ab}=0$ and that

812: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

813:   \int_{\{r\ge R_0\}} \left\{|X|\left( |J|+{|\Lambda|} |e^{ab}b_{ab}| +

814:       \sum_{a,b,c} e_a(e^{bc})^2     +\sum_{b,c}

815:     |e^{bc}|^2   \right) \right.

816: \\ \left. + |\znabla X| \sum_{a,b,c,d,e}

817:     |e_a(e^{bc})| \; |e^{de}| \right\} \; d\mu_b < \infty\;,

818:   \label{c1}\end{eqnarray}

819: where $d\mu_b\equiv \sqrt{\det b_{ij}}dr\; dv^2\ldots dv^{n}$ is

820: the Riemannian measure induced on $\{t=0\}$ by $b$. Then the

821: right-hand-side of \Eq{toto}, understood as the limit  as $R\to

822: \infty$ of integrals over the sets $\{r=R, t=0\}$, exists and is

823: finite.

824: \end{Theorem}

825: 

826: \remark We note that the somewhat unexpected restriction on

827: integrability (for $\Lambda \ne 0$) of $e^{ab}b_{ab}$ arises also

828: in the requirement of a well defined generalized Komar mass for

829: static asymptotically anti-de Sitter metrics

830: \cite{Magnon,ChruscielSimon}.

831: 

832: \medskip

833: 

834: \proof We have

835: \begin{eqnarray}

836:    \int_{\{r=R\}}

837:  \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta}=  2\int_{\{R_0\le r\le R\}}

838:  \znabla_\beta \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha}  + \int_{\{r=R_0\}}

839:  \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta}\;.

840: \label{C2}

841: \end{eqnarray}

842: A formula for the volume integrand in \Eq{C2} is given in \Eq{C3},

843: Appendix~\ref{AHam}. Clearly conditions \eq{c1} guarantee

844: convergence of that volume integral to a finite value when $R$

845: tends to infinity. \qed

846: 

847: In the remainder of the paper we will only consider background

848: metrics of the form

849: \begin{equation}

850:   \label{A1}

851:   b= -{ a^{-2}(r)} dt^2 + a^2(r) dr^2 +r^2 h\;, \qquad

852:   h=h_{AB}(v^C)dv^A dv^B\;,

853: \end{equation}

854: where $h$ is a Riemannian metric on a $(n-1)$-dimensional compact

855: manifold $\mn$. The condition that $b$ is Einstein will not be

856: made unless explicitly stated otherwise. Let

857: $$\theta^0 = {1\over a} dt\;, \quad \theta^1= a dr\;, \quad \theta^A = r

858: \alpha^A\;,$$ where $\alpha^A$ is an $h$-orthonormal coframe. We

859: let $e_a$ be the frame dual to $\theta^a$,

860: \begin{eqnarray}

861:   \label{frame}

862: e_0 = a \partial_t\;, \qquad e_1 = {1 \over a } \partial _r

863: %  e_{\zero}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{k + \frac{r^2}{\ell^2}}}\partial_t\;,

864: %  \quad e_{\one}=  {\sqrt{k + \frac{r^2}{\ell^2}}} \partial_r\;,

865: \quad

866:   e_{\A} = \frac 1r \ce_{\A}\;,

867: \end{eqnarray}

868: so that $\ce_A$ is a $h$-orthonormal frame on $(M,h)$. As an

869: application of Theorem~\ref{T0}, consider, first, the Killing

870: vector field $X=\partial_t=(1/a)e_0$ and suppose that

871: \begin{equation}

872:   \label{A1.0} a(r)={\ell\over r } +

873: o(r)\;,\quad e_1(a)= -{1\over r } + o(r)\;, \end{equation} for

874: some constant $\ell$. We then have $|X|\approx \ell|\znabla

875: X|/\sqrt 2\approx{r/ \ell}$ and $d\mu_b= r^{n-2}\sqrt{\det

876: h}\,dr\, dv^2\ldots dv^{n}$.

877:   When $g$ and $b$ are Einstein, the condition \eq{c1} will be

878:   satisfied if

879: \begin{equation}

880:   \label{C4}

881:   e^{ab}= O(r^{-\beta})\;, \quad e_a(e^{bc}) = O(r^{-\beta})\;, \quad

882:   b_{ab}e^{ab}= O(r^{-\gamma})\;,

883: \end{equation}

884: with

885: \begin{equation}

886:   \label{C5}

887:   \beta>n/2\;, \qquad \gamma > n\;.

888: \end{equation}

889: (We note that the generalized $n+1$ dimensional Kottler metrics

890: \eq{Kottler2} satisfy \eq{C4} with $\beta=n$, and with

891: $\gamma=2n$.) An identical convergence analysis applies for all

892: ``rotational'' $b$-Killing vector fields $X^A(v^B)\partial_{A}$

893: (whenever occurring) for all the metrics \eq{A1}-\eq{A1.0}, as

894: well as all the remaining Killing vectors for the

895: $(n+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter metric (listed in

896: Appendix~\ref{Aai1}), showing that all the corresponding charges

897: are finite when the conditions \eq{C4}-\eq{C5} hold. Surprisingly,

898: in retrospect the analysis in the case $\Lambda\ne 0$ turns out to

899: be simpler than that for the asymptotically Minkowskian case,

900: where $\Lambda = 0$: in the latter case the requirement of

901: convergence of angular momentum or of boost integrals imposes more

902: stringent conditions on the metric than that of convergence of the

903: energy-momentum integrals.

904: 

905: The conditions presented above are sufficient, but certainly not

906: necessary, for convergence of the integrals \eq{toto}: indeed, the

907: metric considered in Proposition~\ref{P2} below has a convergent

908: mass integral, but the conditions of Theorem~\ref{T0} fail to

909: hold. However, there is a potential essential ambiguity in the

910: definition of the integrals \eq{toto}, which  we will describe

911: now. Proposition~\ref{P2} below then shows that \eq{C4}-\eq{C5}

912: are essentially sharp, if one requires that the integrals

913: \eq{toto} are convergent and {\em background-independent}.

914: 

915: The ambiguity in the integrals \eq{toto} arises as follows: to

916: define those integrals we have fixed a model background metric $b$

917: with the corresponding coordinate system $(t,r,v^A)$ as in

918: \eq{A1}, as well as an orthonormal frame as in \eq{frame}. Once

919: this has been done, let $g$ be any metric such that the frame

920: components $g^{ab}$ of $g$ tend to $\eta^{ab}$ as $r$ tends to

921: infinity in such a way that the integrals $m(\hyp,g,b, X)$ given

922: by \eq{toto} (labeled by the background Killing vector fields $X$

923: or perhaps by a subset thereof) converge.  Consider another

924: coordinate system $(\hat t,\hat r,\hat v^A)$ with the associated

925: background metric $\hat b$:

926: \begin{equation}

927:   \label{A1hat}

928:   \hat b= -{1\over a^2(\hat r)} d\hat t^2 + a^2(\hat r) d\hat r^2 +\hat r^2 \hat h\;, \qquad

929:   \hat h=h_{AB}(\hat v^C)d\hat v^A d\hat v  ^B\;,

930: \end{equation}

931: together with an associated frame $\hat e^a$,

932: \begin{eqnarray}

933:   \label{hframe}

934: \hat e_0 = a(\hat r) \partial_{\hat t}\;, \qquad \hat e_1 = {1

935: \over

936:   a(\hat r)  } \partial _{\hat r}

937: \quad

938:   \hat e_{\A} = \frac {1 }{\hat r} \hat{\ce}_{\A}\;,

939: \end{eqnarray}

940: and suppose that in the new hatted coordinates the integrals

941: defining the charges $m(\hhyp,g,\hat b, \hat X)$ converge again.

942: An obvious way of obtaining such coordinate systems is to make a

943: coordinate transformation

944: \begin{equation}

945:   \label{eq:A5}

946:   t\to \hat t=t+\delta t\;,\qquad r\to \hat r=r+\delta r\;,\qquad

947: v^A\to \hat v^A=v^A+\delta v^A\;,

948: \end{equation}

949: with $(\delta t, \delta r,\delta v^A)$ decaying sufficiently fast,

950: as \emph{e.g.\/} in the statement of Theorem~\ref{TP1} below.

951: (However, we do not know \emph{a priori\/} that the hatted

952: coordinates are related to the unhatted one by the simple

953: coordinate transformation \eq{eq:A5} with $(\delta t, \delta

954: r,\delta v^A)$ decaying as $r\to\infty$, or behaving in some

955: controlled way --- the behaviour of $(\delta t, \delta r,\delta

956: v^A)$ could be very wild.) The question then arises, how do the

957: $m(\hhyp,g,\hat b, \hat X)$'s relate to the $m(\hyp,g,b, X)$'s. A

958: geometric definition of mass should be coordinate-independent,

959: therefore one would like to have a simple relation between those

960: integrals.

961: 

962: At this point it is worth recalling that there exist several

963: expressions for mass alternative to \eq{toto}, which might or

964: might not coincide with each other when the decay of the metric is

965: too slow. For example, we show in Appendix~\ref{AAD} that

966: \eq{toto} coincides with the Abbott-Deser \cite{AbbottDeser} mass

967: for all metrics satisfying the decay conditions \eq{C4}-\eq{C5}

968: for Killing vectors such that $|X|=O(r)$ with, say, $a(r)$ as in

969: \Eq{eq:a1}. Now, if $X=\partial_t$, for background metrics of the

970: form \eq{eq:a1}, in space-times of dimension $4$, the integral

971: defining the Abbott-Deser $m_{AD}$ can be written in a

972: particularly simple form \cite{ChruscielSimon}

973:  \begin{eqnarray}

974:    m_{AD}(\{t=0\},g, b, \partial_t)

975: =\lim_{R\to\infty} \frac {R^3}

976:    {16\pi\ell^2}\int_{\Sigma\cap\{r=R\}} \left(r\sum_A{\frac {

977:           \partial e^{AA}}{\partial r}}-2e^{\one\one}%+e^{\hA\hA}

978:    \right) d^2\mu_{h}\;.

979:    \label{massequation}

980:  \end{eqnarray}

981:  Generalizing an argument of \cite{DenisovSolovev}, we show that if

982:  the decay conditions in \eq{C4} are too weak then one can obtain

983:  essentially any value of $m_{AD}(\hhyp,g,\hat b, \hat X)$ by performing

984:  coordinate transformations of the form \eq{eq:A5}.  We do this

985:  explicitly in $n=3$, the same argument applies in any dimension $n$:

986: 

987: \begin{Proposition}\label{P2}

988:   Let the physical metric $g$  equal the background metric $b$, and

989:   let $\{r,v^A\}$ be coordinates so that $b$ takes the form

990:   \eq{eq:a1a}.  Consider a new set of coordinates defined as

991: \be\label{ct1} \hat{r} = r+ \frac{\ac}{r^{1/2}} \;,\quad

992: \hat{v}^A= v^{A}\;,\ \ee

993:  where $\ac$ is a constant. (This leads to $\hat e^{ab}=O(r^{-3/2})$.)

994: If $\ac\ne 0$ then the mass $m_{AD}(\{t=0\},g,\hat b,

995: \partial_t) $ of $g$ with respect to the background metric $\hat b$

996: defined by the coordinates $\{\hat{r},\hat{v}^A\}$ does not

997: vanish.

998: \end{Proposition}

999: 

1000: \proof First notice that this transformation satisfies

1001: $\frac{\delta r}{r} = O\left( r^{-3/2}\right)$.  Then, by

1002: straightforward computations one has, assuming without loss of

1003: generality that  $\ell=1$,

1004: $$

1005: \hat{e}_{1} = \left[ 1+ \frac{3\ac}{2r^{3/2}} +

1006: \frac{3\ac^2}{4r^3}  + O( {r^{-7/2}})\right] e_1\;,

1007: $$

1008: $$

1009: \hat{e}_{A} = \left[ 1- \frac{\ac}{r^{3/2}} + \frac{\ac^2}{r^3}

1010:  +  O( {r^{-7/2}})\right] e_A\;,

1011: $$

1012: and so,

1013: $$

1014: \hat{e}^{11} =   \frac{3\ac}{r^{3/2}} + \frac{15 \ac^2}{4r^3} +O(

1015: {r^{-7/2}})\;,

1016: $$

1017: $$

1018: \sum_A{e}^{AA} =  -\frac{4\ac}{r^{3/2}} + \frac{6\ac^2}{r^3} +  O(

1019: {r^{-9/2}})\;.

1020: $$

1021: Hence

1022: $$

1023: r\sum_A\partial_r({e}^{AA}) - 2 {e}^{11} = -\frac{51 \ac^2}{2

1024:   r^3} +  O( {r^{-7/2}})\;,

1025: $$

1026: and the result follows. \qed

1027: 

1028: 

1029: While the above shows that the Abbott-Deser mass ceases to be well

1030: defined below the threshold $o(r^{-3/2})$ in dimension $3+1$, this

1031: still leaves open the unlikely possibility that the Hamiltonian

1032: mass \eq{toto} could be well defined. In order to see that this is

1033: not the case let us, first, calculate the mass integrand for

1034: metrics of the form \bel{acom} g=  -\mu

1035: \left(\frac{r^2}{\ell^2}+k\right) dt^2 +\displaystyle

1036: \frac{\nu}{\frac{r^2}{\ell^2}+k} dr^2 + \sigma r^2

1037: h_{AB}dv^Adv^B\;, \ee where $\mu$, $\nu$ and $\sigma$ are

1038: arbitrary functions. One finds

1039: \begin{eqnarray}

1040: \ourU^{tr}

1041: &=&\frac{r^{n}\sigma^{(n-1)/2}\sqrt{\det{h_{AB}}}}{16\pi

1042: \ell^2\sqrt{\mu\nu}} \left\{

1043: \frac{2\sqrt{\mu\nu}}{\sigma^{(n-1)/2}}-

1044: (\mu+\nu)\right.\nn\\

1045: &&+ \left. (n-1)\left(1+\frac{\ell^2k}{r^2}\right)\mu

1046: \left[\frac{1}{\sigma}\left(r\frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial r}

1047: -\nu\right)+ 1\right]\right\}\;.\label{acomm}

1048: \end{eqnarray}

1049: Suppose that ---in space-time dimension $n+1$ ---  $g$ is the

1050: metric $b$ expressed in a hatted coordinate system $(\hr,\hv^A)$,

1051: and consider the coordinate transformation

1052: $$ \hat{r} = r+ \frac{\ac}{r^{n/2-1}} \;,\quad \hat{v}^A= v^{A}\;,

1053: $$

1054: where $\ac$ is a constant. The metric $g$, when expressed in the

1055: unhatted coordinates $(r,v^A)$, satisfies \eq{C4} with

1056: $\beta=\gamma=n/2$, and is of the form \eq{acom} so that

1057: \eq{acomm} applies. A {\sc Mathematica} calculation then shows

1058: that $g$ has a mass integral \eq{toto} with respect to the

1059: unhatted background $b$ equal to

1060: $$

1061: \frac{\text{Vol}_h(M)}{8\pi\ell^2} \left(n+{n^2\over

1062:     8}\right)\ac^2\;,$$ which is non-zero for any $\ac\ne 0$ and for

1063:     any $n\in\N$. Here $\text{Vol}_h(M)$ is the $n-1$-dimensional volume of $M$

1064:     ---

1065:     area if $n-1=2$ --- with respect to the metric $h$.

1066: 

1067:   The coordinate transformation \eq{ct1} is not yet as good

1068: as one would wish, because it leads --- in space dimension three

1069: -- to coordinates in which the trace of the metric $e^{ab}b_{ab}$

1070: is $O(r^{-n/2})$, quite a bit above the threshold $r^{-n}$ set

1071: forth in \Eqs{C4}{C5}. We note that the change of coordinates

1072: \eq{ct1} accompanied by a further time redefinition (which clearly

1073: does not change the mass as given by \Eq{massequation})

1074: $$ \bar t =

1075: t(1+cr^{-3/2})\;,$$ with an appropriate choice of the constant

1076: $c$, will lead to a metric which at $\bar t = t=0$ satisfies

1077: \begin{equation}

1078:   \label{C4.}

1079:   e^{ij}= O(r^{-3/2})\;, \quad e_k(e^{ij}) = O(r^{-3/2})\;, \quad

1080:   b_{ab}e^{ab}= O(r^{-3})\;,

1081: \end{equation}

1082: where the indices $i,j$ run from $0$ to $3$. Note that the above

1083: fall-off conditions will not hold for some of the $e^{0a}$'s, and

1084: for some $e_0$ derivatives of the $e_{ab}$'s, but this turns out

1085: irrelevant for the problem at hand: the new hypersurface $\bar

1086: t=0$ coincides with the previous one, therefore its extrinsic

1087: curvature will not change. One can check~\cite{ChHerzlich} that

1088:  --- similarly to the ADM case

1089: --- conditions on the induced metric on the surface $t=0$ and on

1090: its extrinsic curvature are sufficient for a well defined notion

1091: of mass, so that the result in~\cite{ChHerzlich} complete the

1092: proof of sharpness of the condition on $\gamma$ in \eq{C5}.

1093: 

1094: Let us show that the decay rates \eq{C4}-\eq{C5} guarantee

1095: non-occurrence of the behaviour exhibited in Proposition~\ref{P2}:

1096: 

1097: \begin{Theorem}\label{TP1}

1098:  Consider an $n+1$ dimensional space-time

1099: $(\cM, g)$, and let $b$ and $\hat{b}$ be two background metrics of

1100: the form \eq{A1} and \eq{A1hat}, with $a(r)$ as in \Eq{eq:a1}, in

1101: coordinates $\{t,r,v^{A}\}$ and $\{\hat{t},\hat{r},\hat{v}^{A}\}$

1102: with ranges covering $\{r\ge R_0\}\times\mn$ and $\{\hat r\ge \hat

1103: R_0\}\times\mn$ for some $R_0,\hat R_0\in \R$. Suppose that $b$

1104: satisfies the vacuum Einstein equations with a negative

1105: cosmological constant, that the conditions of Theorem \ref{T0}

1106: hold both for the hatted and unhatted coordinates, and that we

1107: have

1108: \begin{eqnarray}

1109:  e^{ab}= o(r^{-n/2})\;, \quad e_c(e^{ab})= o(r^{-n/2})\;.

1110:    \label{eq:deccond}

1111: \end{eqnarray}

1112:  Let $X

1113: =X^a({t},{r},{v}^A)e_a\in \cK$ be a Killing vector field of the

1114: metric $b$ satisfying

1115: \begin{eqnarray}

1116: |X| + |\znabla X| = O(r)\;,   \label{eq:deccond1}

1117: \end{eqnarray}

1118: and let $\hat{X}=X^a(\hat{t},\hat{r},\hat{v}^A)\he_a \in \hcK$ be

1119: its hatted counterpart (with the $\he_a$ components of $\hat X$

1120: given by the {\em same} functions $X^a$ of the hatted variables as

1121: the $e_a$ components of $X$ in the unhatted variables). Let $\hyp$

1122: and $\hhyp$ be the hypersurfaces given by $t=0$ and $\hat{t} =0$

1123: respectively. If the coordinate transformation satisfies

1124: $$

1125: \hat{t} = t + o(r^{-(1+n/2)})\;,\qquad e_a(\hat{t}) =

1126: \ell\,\delta_a^0 + o(r^{-(1+n/2)})\;,

1127: $$

1128: $$

1129: \hat{r} = r + o(r^{1-n/2})\;,\qquad e_a(\hat{r}) =

1130: \frac{\delta_a^1}{\ell} + o(r^{1-n/2})\;,

1131: $$

1132: \be \hat{v}^A = v^A + o(r^{-(1+n/2)})\;,\qquad e_a(\hat{v}^A) =

1133: \delta_a^A + o(r^{-(1+n/2)}) \;, \label{coordtrP}\ee  then

1134: $$m(\hyp,g,b,X)=m(\hhyp,g,\hat{b},\hat{X})\;.$$

1135: \end{Theorem}

1136: 

1137: 

1138: \proof  The idea of the proof is to compute the background metric

1139: $\hat{b}$ in a frame related to the unhatted coordinates,

1140: obtaining an expression in terms of $b$ plus correction terms.

1141: Then, we compute (\ref{Fsup2new}) for $\hat{b}$, similarly

1142: obtaining an expression in terms of (\ref{Fsup2new}) for $b$ plus

1143: additional terms. We show that these terms integrate to zero, up

1144: to terms vanishing in the limit as $r$ tends to infinity, keeping

1145: thus the mass invariant.

1146: 

1147: In terms of $\delta t$, $\delta r$, and $\delta v^A$ defined as in

1148: \Eq{eq:A5}, the decay conditions \eq{coordtrP} imply

1149: \begin{equation}

1150: \label{fc-dx} \sqrt{k+r^2/\ell^2} \, \delta t =o(r^{-n/2})\;,

1151: \quad \frac{\delta r}{ \sqrt{k+r^2/\ell^2}} = o(r^{-n/2})\;, \quad

1152: r \delta v^A = o(r^{-n/2})\;.

1153: \end{equation}

1154: From \Eq{hframe} one finds the following relation between the

1155: hatted and non-hatted coframes

1156:  $$

1157: \hat{\theta}^0 =  \left(1+\frac{r\delta r}{{r^2+ k

1158: \ell^2}}\right)\theta^0 +

1159:  {\sqrt{k+r^2/\ell^2}}d(\delta t)  +

1160: o(r^{-n})\;,

1161: $$

1162:  $$

1163: \hat{\theta}^1 = \left(1-\frac{r\delta r}{{r^2+ k \ell^2}}\right)

1164: \theta^1 +

1165:  \frac 1{\sqrt{k+r^2/\ell^2}}d(\delta r)  +

1166: o(r^{-n})\;,

1167: $$

1168: \be\label{tettr} \hat{\theta}^A = \theta^A + \frac{\delta r}{r}

1169: \theta^A + r \left\{ \frac{\partial \alpha^A{}_B}{\partial

1170: v^C}\,\delta v^C \, dv^B + \alpha^A{}_B \,d(\delta v^B) \right\} +

1171: o(r^{-n})\;. \ee

1172:  where $\alpha^A$ ia a co-frame on $M$ dual to $\beta_A$, and

1173: we have introduced the notation $\alpha^A = \alpha^A{}_B dv^B$,

1174: with the index $A$ being a tetrad index, while the index $B$ is a

1175: coordinate index. All the terms denoted by $o(r^{-n})$ above have

1176: $o(r^{-n})$ coefficients when expressed in terms of the $\theta^a$

1177: frame. Actually, the term in the curly brackets in the right hand

1178: side of the last equation gives a clue to a convenient way of

1179: writing these equations, since it can be rewritten as

1180: $\lie_{\delta v^B

1181: \partial/\partial v^B }\alpha^A$, where $\lie$ denotes a Lie

1182: derivative; in order to justify such a procedure, we use the

1183: following artifact: As explained in \cite[Section~4]{CT93},

1184: embedding $\mn$ in $\R^{2(n-1)}$ and extending the metric

1185: appropriately, we can without loss of generality assume that the

1186: coordinates $v^A$ and the frames $\theta^A$ are globally defined

1187: on $\mn$. We then set $$ \zeta = \delta t \frac{\partial}{\partial

1188: t} + \delta r \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \delta v^A

1189: \frac{\partial }{\partial v^A}\;; $$ one sees from (\ref{fc-dx})

1190: that the components of $\zeta$ in the $e_a$ frame are all of the

1191: same order $o(r^{-n/2})$, and one can check that \Eq{tettr} for

1192: the hatted tetrad reduces to $$ \hat{\theta}^a = \theta^a +

1193: \lie_{\zeta}\theta^a + o(r^{-n})\;;

1194: $$ we note that $\lie_{\zeta}\theta^a = o(r^{-n/2})$. Let us write

1195: $$\hat{e}_a = e_a + \delta e_a\;;$$ one verifies that the tetrad

1196: components of $\delta e_a$ are $o(r^{-n/2})$, and from the

1197: condition $\theta^a(e_b) = \delta^a_b$ and its hatted analogue one

1198: has

1199: \begin{eqnarray*} \theta^a(\delta e_b) &=&- \lie_{\zeta}\theta^a(e_b)

1200: + o(r^{-n})

1201: \\ & = &

1202: - \underbrace{\lie_{\zeta}\left(\theta^a(e_b)\right)}_0+

1203: \theta^a(\lie_{\zeta}e_b) + o(r^{-n})

1204: \\ & = &

1205:  \theta^a(\lie_{\zeta}e_b) + o(r^{-n})

1206: \;,

1207: \end{eqnarray*}

1208: which shows that

1209: $$

1210: \hat{e}_a = e_a + \lie_{\zeta}e_a + o(r^{-n})\;,

1211: $$

1212: with $\lie_{\zeta}e_a = o(r^{-n/2})$. This looks to leading order

1213: like a change of tetrad under an infinitesimal transformation, but

1214: we emphasize that \emph{we are not} assuming that the

1215: transformation is infinitesimal. Denoting $\{x^{\mu}\} =

1216: \{t,r,v^A\}$, and using $\hat{b}^{\mu\nu} = \eta^{ab}

1217: \hat{e}_a{}^{\mu}\hat{e}_b{}^{\nu}$, and $b^{\mu\nu} = \eta^{ab}

1218: e_a{}^{\mu}e_b{}^{\nu}$, we obtain

1219: \begin{equation}

1220: \label{b-freedom} \hat{b}^{\mu\nu} = b^{\mu\nu} +

1221: \lie_{\zeta}b^{\mu\nu} + \delta b^{\mu\nu}\;,

1222: \end{equation}

1223: with $$\delta b^{ab}\equiv \delta

1224: b^{\mu\nu}\theta^a{}_{\mu}\theta^b{}_{\nu} = o(r^{-n})\;.$$ The

1225: expression \eq{b-freedom} is the first step to compute the change

1226: in the integrand of (\ref{toto}). The next step is to rewrite

1227: (\ref{Fsup2new}) in the following more convenient way $$

1228: \ourU^{\alpha\beta} = \frac{3}{8\pi} \sqrt{|\frg|}

1229: g_{\gamma\sigma} g^{\kappa[\alpha} X^{\beta}

1230: \zn_{\kappa}g^{\gamma]\sigma} + \frac{1}{8\pi} \left(\sqrt{|\frg|}

1231: g^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} - \sqrt{|\fb|}

1232: b^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma}\right)

1233: b_{\gamma\sigma}\zn_{\kappa}X^\sigma\;, $$ with

1234: $\frg=\det(g_{\mu\nu})$, and $\fb=\det(b_{\mu\nu})$. Let

1235: $\widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta}$ be defined as the expression above

1236: with $b$ and $X$ replaced with $\hat{b}$ and $\hat X$; from

1237: \Eq{b-freedom} we obtain

1238: \begin{eqnarray*}

1239: \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} -\ourU^{\alpha\beta} &=&

1240: -\frac{\sqrt{|\fb|}}{8\pi}  \left[

1241: 3\delta_{\lambda\nu\mu}^{\alpha\beta\gamma} X^{\mu}

1242: b^{\kappa\lambda} b_{\gamma\sigma} (\zn_{\kappa}\zn^{\nu}

1243: \zeta^{\sigma} + \zn_{\kappa}\zn^{\sigma}\zeta^{\nu}) \right] \\

1244: && - \frac{\sqrt{|\fb|}}{8\pi} \left[

1245: b^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} \zn_{\mu}\zeta^{\mu} -

1246: b^{\gamma[\beta}\zn^{|\kappa|}\zeta^{\alpha]} - b^{\gamma[\beta}

1247: \zn^{\alpha]}\zeta^{\kappa} \right] \zn_{\kappa}X_{\gamma} +

1248: \delta\ourU^{\alpha\beta}\;,

1249: \end{eqnarray*}

1250: with $$\delta \ourU^{ab}\equiv\delta \ourU^{\alpha\beta}

1251: \theta^a{}_{\alpha} \theta^b{}_{\beta} = o(r^{-n})\;.$$ We have

1252: used the fact that $\lie_{\zeta} b^{\alpha\beta}= -2

1253: \zn^{(\alpha}\zeta^{\beta)}$, and  that $\sqrt\frg =\sqrt\fb(1 +

1254: \zn_{\mu}\zeta^{\mu} - e_\mu{}^\mu/2) + o(r^{-n})$.

1255: 

1256: The idea now is to write the right hand side above as a total

1257: divergence of a totally antisymmetric tensor density. The first

1258: term at the right hand side above can be written as

1259: \begin{eqnarray*}

1260: \lefteqn{ 3\delta_{\lambda\nu\mu}^{\alpha\beta\gamma} X ^{\mu}

1261: b^{\kappa\lambda} b_{\gamma\sigma} (\zn_{\kappa}\zn^{\nu}

1262: \zeta^{\sigma} + \zn_{\kappa}\zn^{\sigma}\zeta^{\nu})  =

1263:  3 \zn_{\gamma} \left[

1264: \delta^{\alpha\beta\gamma}_{\lambda\nu\mu} X

1265: ^{\mu}\zn^{\lambda}\zeta^{\nu}\right] } && \\

1266: &&+\zRm_{\gamma\rho}{}^{\alpha\beta} X ^{\gamma}\zeta^{\rho}  + 2

1267: X ^{[\beta}\zRm^{\alpha]}{}_{\rho} \zeta^{\rho} - (\zn_{\gamma}X

1268: ^{\beta}) \zn^{[\gamma}\zeta^{\alpha]} +(\zn_{\gamma}X ^{\alpha})

1269: \zn^{[\gamma}\zeta^{\beta]} \;.

1270: \end{eqnarray*}

1271: Since $\zn_{\alpha}X _{\beta}$ is antisymmetric, one obtains

1272: \begin{eqnarray*}\hat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} -\ourU^{\alpha\beta} &=&

1273: -\frac{\sqrt{|b|}}{8\pi} \left\{3\zn_{\gamma} \left[ \,

1274:   \delta^{\alpha\beta\gamma}_{\lambda\nu\mu} X

1275:   ^{\mu}\zn^{\lambda}\zeta^{\nu}\right]

1276: +\zRm_{\gamma\rho}{}^{\alpha\beta} X ^{\gamma}\zeta^{\rho} \right.\\

1277: && \left.+ 2 X ^{[\beta}\zRm^{\alpha]}{}_{\rho} \zeta^{\rho} + 3

1278: (\zn^{[\alpha}X ^{\beta})(\zn_{\gamma}\zeta^{\gamma]})\right\}+

1279: \delta \ourU^{\alpha\beta}\;.

1280: \end{eqnarray*}

1281: Finally, with the remaining terms we construct the divergence of a

1282: totally antisymmetric tensor, as follows: $$ 3

1283: (\zn_{\gamma}\zeta^{[\gamma})(\zn^{\alpha}X ^{\beta]}) = 3

1284: \zn_{\gamma}\left[\zeta^{[\gamma}(\zn^{\alpha}X ^{\beta]})\right]

1285: - \zeta^{\gamma}\zn_{\gamma}\zn^{\alpha}X ^{\beta} - 2

1286: \zeta^{[\alpha}\zRm^{\beta]}{}_{\rho} X ^{\rho}.

1287: $$ Recalling that a Killing vector satisfies $\zn_{\alpha}\zn_{\beta}

1288: X _{\gamma} = \zRm^{\rho}{}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} X _{\rho}$, and

1289: that $\zRm_{\alpha\beta} = 2\Lambda b_{\alpha\beta}/(n-1)$, one

1290: finds $$ \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} -\ourU^{\alpha\beta} =

1291: -\frac{3\sqrt{|\fb|}}{8\pi} \zn_{\gamma} \left[ X^{[\gamma}

1292: \zn^{\alpha}\zeta^{\beta]} + \zeta^{[\gamma}

1293: \zn^{\alpha}X^{\beta]} \right] + \delta \ourU^{\alpha\beta}\;.

1294: $$

1295: %with $\delta \ourU^{\alpha\beta} \theta^a{}_{\alpha}

1296: %\theta^b{}_{\beta} = o(r^{-n})$.

1297: (It would suffice that $\zRm_{\alpha\beta} = 2\Lambda

1298: b_{\alpha\beta}/(n-1) +O(r^{-n/2})$ for the argument to go

1299: through.) The first term on the right hand side above integrates

1300: out to zero on $(n-1)$ dimensional boundaryless compact

1301: submanifolds, and the remainder is order $o(r^{-n})$, so that

1302: \begin{equation}

1303:   \label{eq:*}

1304:   \int_{ r =  R}  \hat \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta} =  \int_{ r

1305:     =  R}   \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta} + o(1)\;,

1306: \end{equation}

1307: with $o(1)$ tending to zero as $r$ goes to infinity. We also have

1308: \begin{equation}

1309:   \label{eq*}

1310:   \int_{ r =  R}  \hat \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta} =  \int_{

1311:     \hat r

1312:     =  \hat R}   \hat \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\alpha\beta}

1313:   +2 \int_{V_{R,\hat R}}   \znabla_\alpha \hat

1314:   \ourU^{\alpha\beta}dS_{\beta} \;,

1315: \end{equation}

1316: where $V_{R,\hat R}$ is a set the boundary of which is the union

1317: of the coordinates sets $\{ r = R\}$ and $\{\hat r = \hat R\}$.

1318: Conditions \eq{c1} guarantee that the volume integral in \Eq{eq*}

1319: tends to zero when both $R$ and $\hat R$ tend to infinity, which

1320: together with \eq{eq:*} establishes our claims.\qed

1321: 

1322: 

1323: 

1324: 

1325: 

1326: 

1327: 

1328: Let us finally show that the integrals \eq{toto} are {\em

1329: covariant} under isometries of the background.  In what follows

1330: $\hyp$ is an arbitrary hypersurface on which the charge integrals

1331: \eq{toto} converge:

1332: \begin{Lemma}

1333:   \label{L1}

1334:   Let $\Phi:\cM\to\cM$ be an isometric diffeomorphism of $(\cM,b)$

1335:   such that $\Phi(\hyp)=\hyp.$ Then

1336:   \begin{equation}

1337:     \label{eq:l1}

1338:     m(\hyp,\Phi^*g,b,(\Phi_*)^{-1}X) =  m(\hyp,g,b,X)\;.

1339:   \end{equation}

1340: \end{Lemma}

1341: 

1342: 

1343: \proof Formula \eq{toto} for mass is invariant under

1344: diffeomorphisms, hence

1345: \begin{eqnarray*}

1346:    m(\Phi(\hyp),g,b,\Phi_* Y) = m(\hyp, \Phi^*g,\Phi^*b,Y)\;,

1347: \end{eqnarray*}

1348: and the result follows from $\Phi(\hyp)=\hyp$, $\Phi^*b=b$.\qed

1349: 

1350: 

1351: \section{Asymptotic isometries - the Riemannian problem}

1352: \label{Sai}

1353: 

1354: Throughout this section, \emph{in contradistinction with the

1355: remainder of this paper}, $g$ will denote the Riemannian metric

1356: induced by the space-time metric on $\hyp$.  Similarly the letter

1357: $b$ will denote the associated Riemannian background

1358: metric\footnote{One could also consider background metrics of the

1359: form $b= a^2(\bar r)d\bar r^2 +q^2(\bar r) h$; however, if $q$ is

1360: sufficiently differentiable, then $b$ can be brought to the form

1361: \eq{eq:b00} in the asymptotic region by a change of coordinates $r

1362: = q(\bar r)$ provided that $dq/d\bar r$ has no zeros for large

1363: $\bar r$'s.} of the form

1364: \begin{equation}

1365:   \label{eq:b00}

1366: b=  a^2(r)dr^2 +r^2 h\;, \qquad h=h_{AB}(v^C)dv^A dv^B\;,

1367: \end{equation}

1368: with the indices $A$ running from $2$ to $n$. We assume that

1369: $r\in[R,\infty)$ for some $R$, while the coordinates $v^A$ are

1370: local coordinates on some compact $n-1$ dimensional manifold

1371: $\mn$. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, we use the symbol

1372: $\cO(r^\beta)$ to denote either $O(r^\beta)$ {\em throughout} this

1373: section, {\em or} $o(r^\beta)$ {\em throughout} this section. We

1374: shall mainly be interested in background metrics for which

1375: \begin{deqarr}

1376: & ra(r) =  \ell  + \newa(r)\;,\quad \newa = O(r^{-m_1})\;, \quad

1377: \R\ni m_1>0\;, &

1378:  \label{eq:b0-1}

1379: \\ &  \newa'(r)= O(r^{-1-m_1})\;. &

1380: \label{equicond} \arrlabel{eq:b0}\end{deqarr} for some constants

1381: $m_1,\ell>0$.\footnote{ A typical example is

1382: %\begin{eqnarray}  \label{eq:b0-}

1383: $a(r) = \frac \ell r\left(1 + \sum_{i=m_1}^{m_2}

1384:   {a_i\over r^i} +\cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)%\;.

1385: $ %\end{eqnarray}

1386: for some constants $m_1\ge 1$, $m_2\ge m_1$, $a_i$ and

1387: $\alpha$.\label{aexp}  } When the vacuum Einstein equations

1388: \eq{Ee} are satisfied by the metric \eq{eq:b00} we

1389: have$^{\mathrm{\ref{footWoolgar}}}$ $a(r)=1/\sqrt{r^2/\ell^2+k}$,

1390: where $k$ is a constant, which can be written in the form

1391: \eq{eq:b0} with $m_1=2$, as well as in the form of

1392: footnote~\ref{aexp} (with $m_2$ of that footnote as large as

1393: desired). However, the hypothesis that the vacuum Einstein

1394: equations hold plays no role in this section, therefore in

1395: \eq{eq:b0} any $m_1>0$ will be allowed.

1396: % Clearly terms $a_ir^{-i}$ can be absorbed

1397: %into $\cO(r^{-\alpha})$ when $i> \alpha$, so that in

1398: %\eq{eq:b0-} one could without loss of generality assume that $a_i=0 $

1399: %for all $i>\alpha$; equivalently $m_2\le\lfloor \alpha

1400: %\rfloor$, the integer part of $\alpha$. In particular one could choose

1401: %all the $a_i$'s to be zero when $\alpha \le m_1$.

1402: %In order to check that

1403: %$a$ given by

1404: %\eq{eq:b0-} satisfies \eq{eq:b0-2,} one   notes that

1405: %$$ {1 \over r^i} - {1 \over \hr^i} = {(r+\delta r)^i - r^i \over r^i

1406: %(r+\delta r)^i} = O(r^{-i-1}) \delta r\;, $$ hence

1407: %\begin{eqnarray*}

1408: %& ra(r) - \hr a(\hr) = O(r^{-m_1-1}) \delta r

1409: %\;.

1410: %\end{eqnarray*}

1411: Let us mention that \eq{equicond} is equivalent to the  condition

1412: \begin{equation}\newa(\hr) - \newa(r) = O(r^{-1-m_1})(\hr -r )

1413:  \label{eq:b0-2m}

1414: \end{equation}

1415:  for $r$ large enough, and for

1416:  $|\hr-r|\le r/2$. Indeed, under \eq{equicond} we have $$ \newa(\hr) -

1417:  \newa(r) = \left(\int_0^1 \newa'(t\hr + (1-t)r)dt\right)(\hr -r)\;,$$

1418:  and \Eq{eq:b0-2m} follows. The implication the other way round is

1419:  straightforward using the fact that $\newa$ is smooth (recall that

1420: local smoothness of the

1421:  metric is assumed throughout). Condition~\eq{eq:b0-2m}  is actually

1422: the one which is needed in the arguments below.

1423: 

1424: Let $\theta^i$, $i=1,\ldots,n$ be an orthonormal coframe for $b$,

1425: with $\theta^1= a(r)dr$, and let $e_i$ be the dual frame; we

1426: denote by

1427: $$\zo^{i}{}_{jk}\equiv \theta^i(\zn_{e_k}e_j)$$ the associated

1428: connection coefficients, where $\zn$ is the Levi-Civita connection

1429: of $b$.  One easily finds

1430: \begin{equation}

1431:   \label{eq:b3}

1432:   \zo^A{}_{1B}=  \frac 1 {ra(r)} \delta ^A_B= -\zo^1{}_{AB}\;.

1433: \end{equation}

1434: If we denote by \begin{equation}

1435:   \label{eq:b2}\alpha^A\equiv \alpha(v^C)^A{}_{B} dv^B\end{equation}

1436: an orthonormal frame for the metric $h$, and by $\beta^A{}_{BC}$

1437: the associated Levi-Civita connection coefficients, then

1438: \begin{equation}

1439:   \label{eq:b4}

1440:   \zo^A{}_{BC}= \frac 1r \beta^A{}_{BC}\;.

1441: \end{equation}

1442: All connection coefficients other than those in \eq{eq:b3} or

1443: \eq{eq:b4}vanish.

1444: 

1445: 

1446: \begin{Lemma}

1447:   \label{L2} Let  $\theta^i$ be an orthonormal

1448:   coframe for the metric $b$ as in \eq{eq:b00}, let

1449:   $g=g_{ij}\theta^i\otimes \theta^j$, and suppose that

1450:   $$g_{ij}\to_{r\to\infty} \delta^i_j\;.  $$ Denote by $\sR$,

1451:   respectively $\sRz$, the $g$-geodesic distance along $\hyp$,

1452:   respectively the $b$-geodesic distance along $\hyp$, from the set

1453:   $\{r=R\}$. There exists a function $C(R)\ge 1$ satisfying

1454:   $\lim_{R\to\infty}C(R)=1$ such that \begin{equation} \label{eq:l2}

1455:   C(R)^{-1} \sRz \le \sR \le C(R) \sRz\;.  \end{equation}

1456: \end{Lemma}

1457: 

1458: 

1459: \medskip

1460: 

1461: \proof For $s\in[R,r]$ let $\gamma(s)=(s,v^A)$, then

1462: \begin{eqnarray}

1463:   \sR(r,v^A) & \le & \int_R^r \sqrt{g(\dot \gamma,\dot \gamma)(s,v^A)}\ds

1464: \nn\\ & = & \int_R^r \sqrt{g_{ij}\theta^i(\dot

1465: \gamma)\theta^j(\dot \gamma)(s,v^A)}\ds \nn\\ & = & \int_R^r

1466: \sqrt{g_{11}(s,v^A)} a(s) \ds\label{fsr1}

1467: \\\nn & \le & (1+o(1))\sRz(r,v^A)\;.

1468: \end{eqnarray}

1469: To obtain the reverse inequality, we note that for points

1470: $(r,v^A)$ such that $r\ge R$ it holds that

1471: $$

1472: \forall X\quad g(X,X) \ge (1+o(1)) b(X,X)\;,$$ with $o(1)$ going

1473: to zero as $R\to \infty$, hence for every curve $\gamma$ from

1474: $\{r=R\}$ to $(r,v^A)$ we have

1475: $$\int_\gamma \sqrt{g(\dot \gamma,\dot \gamma)(s)}\ds\ge

1476: (1+o(1))\int_\gamma \sqrt{b(\dot \gamma,\dot \gamma)(s)}\ds\;,

1477: $$

1478: therefore

1479: \begin{eqnarray}

1480: \sR&=&\inf_\gamma \int_\gamma \sqrt{g(\dot \gamma,\dot

1481: \gamma)(s)}\ds \nn\\ &\ge& (1+o(1)) \inf_\gamma \int_\gamma

1482: \sqrt{b(\dot \gamma,\dot

1483:   \gamma)(s)}\ds

1484: \nn\\ &= & (1+o(1))\sRz\;. \label{fsr2}

1485: \end{eqnarray} \qed

1486: 

1487:  The proof of Lemma~\ref{L2}

1488: uses only the product structure of $b$, and does not require

1489: Equation~\eq{eq:b0} to hold. If, however, that last equation

1490: holds, then clearly

1491: $$\sRz(r,v^A)= \int_R^r a(s)ds =\ell \ln (r/R) +O(R^{-m_1})\approx \ell \ln (r/R) $$ for large

1492: $r$, and \eq{eq:l2} implies that for all $\epsilon>0$ there exists

1493: $R_\epsilon\ge R$ and a constant $\hat C(\epsilon)$ such that for

1494: all $r\ge R_\epsilon $ we have

1495: \begin{equation} \label{eq:l2aold} \hat C(\epsilon)^{-1} r^{1-\epsilon}

1496: \le \exp{(\sR/\ell)} \le \hat C(\epsilon) r^{1+\epsilon}\;.

1497: \end{equation}

1498: We will need a sharper version of this:

1499: 

1500: 

1501: \begin{Lemma}

1502:   \label{L2.1} Under the hypotheses of Lemma~\ref{L2}, suppose further that

1503:   \Eq{eq:b0} holds, and that there exists a constant $\alpha>0$ such that

1504:   $$g_{ij}-\delta^i_j=\cO(r^{-\alpha})\;.  $$ Then

1505:   %there exists a constant $C'>0$  such that

1506:   for $r\ge \max[R,1]$ we have

1507: \begin{equation} \label{eq:l2a0} \exp{(\sR/\ell)} = r/R + O(R^{-m_1}) +

1508: \cO(R^{-\alpha})\;,

1509: \end{equation}

1510: in particular

1511: \begin{equation} \label{eq:l2a1}  r/C'

1512: \le \exp{(\sR/\ell)} \le  C' r\;.

1513: \end{equation}

1514: \end{Lemma}

1515: 

1516: \proof

1517: %Let us suppose that $\cO=O$, the proof with $\cO=0$

1518: %requires obvious modifications which are left to the reader.

1519: Here and elsewhere in this paper the letter $C$ denotes a constant

1520: which may vary from line to line; if $\cO=o$ the constants in the

1521: current proof can be chosen as small as desired by choosing $R$

1522: large enough. In \Eq{fsr1} we can estimate $\sqrt{g_{11}}$ by $1+C

1523: s^{-\alpha}$, obtaining thus

1524: \begin{eqnarray*}

1525: \sR(r,v^A) &\le &\sRz(r,v^A)+ CR^{-\alpha}

1526: \\ &=& \ell \ln (r/R) + O(R^{-m_1}) + CR^{-\alpha}\;.

1527: \end{eqnarray*}

1528: Similarly, \Eq{fsr2} is rewritten as

1529: \begin{eqnarray}

1530: \sR&=&\inf_\gamma \int_\gamma \sqrt{g(\dot \gamma,\dot

1531: \gamma)(s)}\ds \nn\\ &\ge&\inf_\gamma

1532: \int_\gamma(1-Cs^{-\alpha})\sqrt{b(\dot \gamma,\dot \gamma)(s)}\ds

1533: \;. \label{fsr3}

1534: \end{eqnarray}

1535: The last term in \Eq{fsr3} is the distance from the set $\{r=R\}$

1536: in the metric

1537: $$ (1-Cr^{-\alpha})^2\left(a^2(r)dr^2 +r^2 h\right)\;,$$

1538: which equals

1539: $$

1540: \int_R^r (1-Cs^{-\alpha})a(s)\ds= \ell \ln(r/R) + O(R^{-m_1}) -

1541: O(R^{-\alpha})\;,

1542: $$

1543: and our claims immediately follow. \qed

1544: 

1545:  The key result in our work is the following:

1546: \begin{Theorem}[Asymptotic symmetries] \label{T1} Let $(r,v^A)$ coordinatize

1547:   $\Omega\subset \hyp$ so that $\Omega

1548:   \approx\{r\in[R,\infty)\}\times\mn$, and let $(\hr,\hv^A)$ be

1549:   another set of coordinates on $\Omega$ so that

1550:   $\Omega\approx\{(\hv^A)\in \hM ,\hr\in [\hat R(\hv^A),\infty)\}$ for

1551:   some continuous function $\hat R$. We further assume that $v^A$ and

1552:   $\hv^A$ are consistently oriented, and that $(r,v^A)$ and

1553:   $(\hr,\hv^A)$ are also consistently oriented.  Let $b$, $\theta^i$,

1554:   $e^i$, \emph{etc.}, be as at the beginning of this section, with $a$

1555:   of the form

1556: \eq{eq:b0}, and let $\hb$, $\hth^i$,

1557:   $\he_i$, \emph{etc.} be the hatted equivalents thereof, so

1558:   that $$\hb =

1559:   a^2(\hr)d\hr^2 +\hr^2 \hh= \sum_i \hth^i\otimes\hth^i\;,

1560:   %\qquad

1561:   %\hh=h_{AB}(\hat v^C)d\hv^A d\hv^B\;,

1562:   $$

1563: for some Riemannian metric $\hh$ on $\hM $. Suppose that there

1564: exists $\alpha

1565: >0$ such that

1566: \begin{eqnarray}

1567:   \label{eq:hd}

1568: & g(e_i,e_j)-\delta_i^j = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;,\quad e_k(g(e_i,e_j))

1569: = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;, & \\ &

1570:   g(\he_i,\he_j)-\delta_i^j = \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;,\quad

1571: \he_k(g(\he_i,\he_j)) = \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;.

1572: \end{eqnarray}

1573: Then:

1574: \begin{enumerate}

1575: \item There exists a $C^{\infty}$ map

1576: $\Psi:\mn\to\hM $ satisfying

1577: $$\Psi^*\hh = e^{-2\psi} h$$

1578: for some $C^\infty$ function $\psi:\mn\to\R$, and\ptc{ would make

1579: sense to add the second derivative equations here as well, and

1580: give a coordinate counterpart of those second derivative equations

1581: }

1582: \begin{eqnarray}

1583:   \label{eq:t1}& \hr = e^{\psi} r + O(r^{1-\beta})\;, \quad

1584:   e_i (\hr) = e_i(e^{\psi}r)  +

1585: O(r^{1-\beta})\;, & \\ & \hv^A = \psi^A(v^B)+ O(r^{-2})\;, \quad

1586: e_i(\hat{v}^A) = e_i(\psi^A(v^B)) + O(r^{-2}) \;,  \label{eq:t2}

1587:  &\end{eqnarray} in local coordinates with $\Psi =

1588: (\psi^A)$, with $\beta=\min{(m_1,\alpha,2)}$.

1589: \item If

1590: $\Psi$ is the identity and if $\psi=0$, then for $\alpha >1$ we

1591: further have

1592: \begin{eqnarray}

1593:   \label{t1}& \hr =  r + \cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;, \quad

1594:   e_i (\hr) = e_i(r)  +

1595: \cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;, & \\ & \hv^A = v^A+ \cO(r^{-\alpha-1})\;,

1596: \quad e_i(\hat{v}^A) = e_i(v^A) + \cO(r^{-\alpha-1}) \;,

1597: \label{t2}&

1598: \\ &e_i\left(e_j(\hat{r}-r)\right) =

1599: \cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;, \quad e_i\left(e_j(\hat{v}^A-v^A)\right) =

1600: \cO(r^{-\alpha-1}) \;.  \label{t2a}&\end{eqnarray}

1601: \end{enumerate}

1602: \end{Theorem}

1603: 

1604:  \remarks

1605:  1. For reference we note the partial derivatives estimates

1606:  \begin{eqnarray}

1607:   \label{eq:t1+1}& \displaystyle\frac{\partial \hr}{\partial r} = e^{\psi} + O(r^{-\beta})\;,

1608:   \quad

1609:    \displaystyle\frac{\partial \hr}{\partial v^A} =

1610:    \frac{\partial e^{\psi}}{\partial v^A}r+ O(r^{1-\beta})\;,

1611:    & \\ & \displaystyle\frac{\partial\hv^A}{\partial r} =  O(r^{-3})\;, \quad

1612: \frac{\partial\hat{v}^A}{\partial v^B} =

1613: \frac{\partial\psi^A}{\partial v^B}+ O(r^{-\beta}) \;,

1614: \label{eq:t2+1}

1615:  &\end{eqnarray}

1616: with the second estimate in \eq{eq:t2+1} being somewhat stronger

1617: than its counterpart in \eq{eq:t2}.

1618: %\medskip

1619: 

1620: \noindent 2. It should be noted

1621:  that in point 1. above we do not assume that $\hM =M$

1622: and $\hh=h_{AB}(\hat v^C)d\hat v^Ad\hat v^B$; this fact plays a

1623: role in~\cite{ChHerzlich}. The arguments in that last reference

1624: show that $\Psi$ is a diffeomorphism, in particular $\hM$ is

1625: necessarily diffeomorphic to $M$. If $\hh=h_{AB}(\hat v^C)d\hat

1626: v^Ad\hat v^B$ and $\Psi$ is the identity, then clearly $\psi=0$

1627: follows.

1628: 

1629: \medskip

1630: 

1631: \noindent 3. We stress that we do not assume $M$ or $\hM $ to be

1632: parallelizable, thus \Eqs{eq:t1}{t2a} have to be understood in the

1633: sense of finite coverings of $M$ and $\hM $, with corresponding

1634: frames, on which the claimed estimates hold. However, if $M$ or

1635: $\hM$ are parallelizable, then the estimates are global.

1636: \medskip

1637: 

1638: \proof Let $\ncO_p$ be a conditionally compact subset of an open

1639: domain of a local coordinate system $(v^A)$ around $p=(v_0^A)\in

1640: M$, and let, on a neighbourhood of $\overline{\ncO_p}$, $\beta_A$

1641: be  a $h$-orthonormal frame dual to $\alpha^A$. We note that the

1642: connection coefficients $\beta^A{}_{BC}$ are uniformly bounded on

1643: $\ncO_p$. Consider the radial ray $$\gamma_p(r):=(r,v_0^A)\;,$$

1644: which, in hatted coordinates, can be written as

1645: \be\label{gamhat}[R,\infty)\ni r\to

1646: \gamma_p(r)=\left(\hr(r,v_0^A),\pgp(r):=\left(\hv^A(r,v_0^A)\right)\right)\in

1647: [\hat R,\infty)\times \hM  \subset \hyp\;;\ee here and in what

1648: follows we identify $[R,\infty)\times \ncO_p$ with the

1649: corresponding subset of $\hyp$, similarly for sets of the form

1650: $[\hat R,\infty)\times \widehat\mcU$, where $\widehat\mcU\subset

1651: \hM $. It should be clear from \eq{gamhat} that the operation

1652: ``$\gamma_p\to\pgp$" above is a coordinate projection which

1653: consists in forgetting the $\hr$ coordinate in a coordinate system

1654: $(\hr,\hv^A)$. We have

1655: \begin{eqnarray*}

1656: \hh_{AB}\frac{\partial \hv^A}{\partial r}\frac{\partial

1657: \hv^B}{\partial r} & \le & \frac 1 {\hr^2}\left(\hr^2

1658: \hh_{AB}\frac{\partial \hv^A}{\partial r}\frac{\partial

1659: \hv^B}{\partial r} + a^2(\hr)\left(\frac{ \partial \hr}{\partial

1660: r}\right)^2\right)

1661: \\ &= &\frac 1 {\hr^2} \hat b(\frac{ \partial }{\partial

1662: r},\frac{ \partial }{\partial r}) \ \le \ C\frac 1 {\hr^2}

1663: g(\frac{

1664: \partial }{\partial r},\frac{ \partial }{\partial r})

1665: \\ &\le  &C^2\frac 1 {\hr^2} b(\frac{ \partial }{\partial

1666: r},\frac{ \partial }{\partial r})\ =\ C^2\frac {a^2(r)} {\hr^2}\;.

1667: \end{eqnarray*}

1668: %Equation \eq{eq:l2a} together with  its

1669: %hatted equivalent show that for any $\epsilon >0$ there exists

1670: %$R_\epsilon\ge R$ and a constant $\tilde C(\epsilon)$ such that

1671: %for all $r\ge R_\epsilon $ wWe have

1672: %\begin{equation} \label{eq:l2a1} \tilde C(\epsilon)^{-1} r^{1-\epsilon}

1673: %\le \hr \le \tilde C(\epsilon) r^{1+\epsilon}\;.

1674: %\end{equation}

1675: Let $d_{\hh}$ denote the $\hh$ distance on $\hM $, for $r_2\ge

1676: r_1$ we thus obtain

1677: \begin{eqnarray}\label{hatdist}

1678: d_{\hh}\left(\pgp(r_1),\pgp(r_2)\right) & \le & \int _{r_1}^{r_2}

1679: \sqrt{\hh_{AB}\frac{\partial \hv^A}{\partial r}\frac{\partial

1680: \hv^B}{\partial r}(s)}\; ds

1681: \\ \nn&\le &C\int _{r_1}^{r_2}\frac {a(s)} {\hr(s,v_o^A)}\; ds

1682: \\ \nn &\le& C^2\int _{r_1}^{r_2}\frac {1} {s^{2}}\; ds = C^2\left(

1683: \frac {1} {r_1}-\frac {1} {r_2}\right)\;,

1684: \end{eqnarray} and Lemma~\ref{L2.1} has been used.

1685:  It then easily follows that

1686: $$\hat p:= \lim_{r\to\infty}\pgp(r)$$ exists, with

1687: \be\label{*} d_{\hh}\left(\pgp(r),\hat p\right)\le \frac {C^2}

1688: {r}\;.\ee Let $\hOp$ be a conditionally compact subset of a domain

1689: of local coordinates $\hv^A$ around $\hat p$, \Eq{*} shows that

1690: $\gamma_p$ enters and remains in $[\hat R,\infty)\times \hOp$ for

1691: $r$ large enough. In what follows only such $r$'s will be

1692: considered.

1693: 

1694: Consider, now, a point $q\in\ncO_p$; we wish to show that the

1695: corresponding ray $\gamma_q$ will stay within $[\hat

1696: R,\infty)\times \cOp$ if $q$ is close enough to $p$. In order to

1697: do that, consider an $h$-geodesic segment $\gamma \subset M$

1698: parameterized by proper length such that $\gamma(0)=p$ and $

1699: \gamma(d_h(p,q))=q$.

1700: %As long as

1701: %$(r,\gamma(s))$ remains within $[\hat R,\infty)\times \cOp$ we

1702: Expressing the path $$s\to\Gamma(s):=(r,\gamma(s))\in

1703: [R,\infty)\times\ncO_p\subset \hyp$$ in terms of the barred

1704: coordinates we have

1705: \begin{eqnarray*}

1706: \hh_{AB}\frac{d\hv^A}{ds}\frac{d \hv^B}{ds} & \le & \frac 1

1707: {\hr^2}\left(\hr^2 \hh_{AB}\frac{d\hv^A}{ds}\frac{d \hv^B}{ds} +

1708: a^2(\hr)\left(\frac{ d \hr}{ds}\right)^2\right)

1709: \\ &= &\frac 1 {\hr^2} \hat b(\frac{ d\Gamma }{ds},\frac{d\Gamma}{ds})

1710: \ \le \ C\; \frac 1 {\hr^2}  b(\frac{ d\Gamma

1711: }{ds},\frac{d\Gamma}{ds})

1712: \\ & = &C\; \frac {r^2} {\hr^2}\ \le\  C^2\;,

1713: \end{eqnarray*}

1714: An estimation as in \Eq{hatdist} gives

1715: \begin{eqnarray*}%\label{hatdist2}

1716: d_{\hh}\left(\pgp(r),\pgq(r)\right) & \le & C\;

1717: d_h(p,q)\;.\end{eqnarray*} Passing to a subset of $\ncO_p$ if

1718: necessary we thus obtain that for all $q\in \ncO_p$ the rays

1719: $\gamma_q$ enter and remain in $[\hat R,\infty)\times \cOp$, for

1720: $r\ge R_p$ for some $R_p$.

1721: 

1722: Let, on an open neighbourhood of $\overline{\cOp}$, $\hat\alpha^A$

1723: be a $\hh$-ON frame with uniformly bounded connection coefficients

1724: $\hat\beta^A{}_{BC}$, and let $\hat\beta_A$ be a $\hh$-orthonormal

1725: frame dual to $\hat\alpha^A$. Equations \eq{eq:b3} and \eq{eq:b4}

1726: show then that all the $\zo^i{}_{kj}$'s and $\hzo^i{}_{kj}$'s ---

1727: the connection coefficients of $b$ and of $\hb$

1728: --- are uniformly bounded along the rays $\gamma_q$, $q\in\ncO_p$; the reader will note that the same

1729: will be true for the constants controlling various error terms

1730: $\cO(r^{\cdot})$ in the calculations below. The idea of the

1731: argument below is then to derive the desired estimates along the

1732: $\gamma_q$'s, $q\in\ncO_p$; covering the compact manifold $\mn$ by

1733: a finite number of coordinate patches $\ncO_{p_i}$,

1734: $i=1,\ldots,I$, will establish our claims.

1735: 

1736: Let $f_i$, respectively $\hf_i$, be a $g$-orthonormal frame

1737: obtained by a Gram-Schmidt orthonormalisation procedure using

1738: $\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n$, respectively $\{\he_i\}_{i=1}^n$. The explicit

1739: form of the $f_i$'s and $\hf_i$'s in terms of the $e_i$'s and

1740: $\he_i$'s shows that

1741: \begin{eqnarray}

1742: &   f_i = e_i +\delta f_i\;,\quad \delta f_i = \delta f_i{^j}

1743: e_j\;, \quad \delta f_i{^j} = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;,\quad e_k(\delta

1744: f_i{^j}) = \cO(r^{-\alpha}) \;, & \nn\\ && \label{eq:B1a}\\

1745: & \hf_i = \he_i +\delta \hf_i\;,\quad \delta \hf_i = \delta

1746: \hf_i{^j} \he_j\;, \quad \delta \hf_i{^j} =

1747: \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;,\quad \he_k(\delta \hf_i{^j}) =

1748: \cO(\hr^{-\alpha}) \;. \nn \\ && \label{eq:B1b}

1749: \end{eqnarray}

1750: By construction we actually have

1751:  \bel{Gseq} f_1= \left(1+

1752: \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right) e_1 =  \left(1+ \cO(r^{-\alpha})

1753: +O(r^{-m_1} )\right)\frac r \ell \partial_r \;. \ee The uniform

1754: boundedness of the $\zo^i{}_{kj}$'s further shows that

1755: \be\label{eq:B1c} \zn_{e_i}\delta f_j = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;,\ee

1756: similarly for the $\hb$-covariant derivatives of the $\delta

1757: \hf_j$'s with respect to the $\he_i$'s. Recall that

1758: \be\label{b0}\zo^i{}_{kj}=\frac 12 \left\{\theta^j([e_i,e_k]) -

1759:   \theta^i([e_k,e_j])-\theta^k([e_j,e_i]) \right\}\;;\ee

1760: Equation~\eq{b0} together with its $g$-equivalent and

1761: \eq{eq:B1a}-\eq{eq:B1c} imply \be\label{eq:B1d}\omega^i{}_{jk} =

1762: \zo^i{}_{jk} + \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;,\ee similarly

1763: \be\label{eq:B1e}\home^i{}_{jk} \equiv

1764: \hat\phi^i(\nabla_{\hf_k}\hf_j)= \hzo^i{}_{jk} +

1765: \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;.\ee

1766: %Here $\hzo^i{}_{jk}$ denotes

1767: %$\zo^i{}_{jk}$ with $(r,v^A)$ replaced by $(\hr,\hv^A)$, wherever

1768: %occurring; w

1769: We use the symbols $\phi^i$ and $\hat\phi^i$ to denote coframes

1770: dual to $f_i$ and $\hf_i$. Now, both the $f_i$'s and $\hf_i$'s are

1771: orthonormal frames for $g$, hence there exists a field of rotation

1772: matrices $\Lambda=(\Lambda_i{}^j) \in O(n)$ such that \be

1773: \label{B4a+}\hf_i = \Lambda_i{}^j f_j\;.\ee

1774:  We recall that for rotation matrices we

1775: have\footnote{We use the convention summation throughout, so that

1776: repeated indices in different positions have to be summed over. We

1777: will explicitly indicate the summation only in those equations in

1778: which we need to sum over repeated indices which are both

1779: subscripts or both superscripts.}

1780: \begin{equation}

1781:   \label{eq:B4a}\sum_k \Lambda_i{}^k\Lambda_j{}^k = \delta^i_{j}\;,\ee

1782: in particular

1783: $$(\Lambda^{-1})_i{}^j = \Lambda _j {}^i\;,$$

1784: so that $\hphi^i= \Lambda _j {}^i\phi^j$, and $\phi^j = \sum_i

1785: \Lambda_j{}^i\hphi^i$. Further, from  \Eq{eq:B4a} we obtain

1786: \begin{equation}

1787:   \label{eq:B4} \sum_k \Lambda_i{}^k\Lambda_i{}^k=1\quad

1788:   \Longrightarrow \quad \forall\; i,j\ \; |\Lambda_i{}^j| \le 1\;.

1789: \end{equation}

1790: From the definition of the connection coefficients we have

1791: \begin{eqnarray*}

1792:   \hat{\omega}^\ell{}_{ji} & = & \langle\hat \phi^\ell,\nabla_{\hf_i}

1793:   \hf_j\rangle

1794: \\  & = & \langle\Lambda_k{}^\ell \phi^k,\nabla_{\Lambda_i{}^m f_m}

1795:   \left(\Lambda_j{}^n f_n\right)\rangle

1796: \\  & = & \Lambda_k{}^\ell\Lambda_i{}^m \langle \phi^k,{f_m}(

1797:   \Lambda_j{}^n) f_n+ \Lambda_j{}^n\nabla_{f_m}

1798:   f_n\rangle \;,

1799: \end{eqnarray*}

1800: leading to the well known transformation law

1801: $$\hat{\omega}^l{}_{ji} \Lambda_l{}^k = \Lambda_i{}^l

1802: f_l(\Lambda_j{}^k) + \Lambda_j{}^l \Lambda_i{}^n

1803: \omega^k{}_{ln}\;,

1804: $$

1805: which we intepret as an equation for the $\Lambda_j{}^k$'s:

1806: \begin{equation}

1807:   \label{eq:B5}

1808: f_i(\Lambda_j{}^k) = (\Lambda^{-1})_i{}^l\hat{\omega}^n{}_{jl}

1809: \Lambda_n{}^k - \Lambda_j{}^l \omega^k{}_{li}\;.

1810: \end{equation}

1811: From \Eqsone{eq:b0} and \eq{eq:B1a} we obtain

1812: \begin{deqarr}

1813:  \phi^m(\partial_r) &=& {a( r)} \left(\delta^m_1+

1814: \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)\label{eq:B6-}

1815: \\ &=& \frac \ell r \left(\delta^m_1+

1816: \cO(r^{-\beta})\right) \;,   \label{eq:B6}\arrlabel{B6}

1817: \end{deqarr}

1818: with $\beta=\min(\alpha,m_1)$, except if $\cO=o$ and $\alpha >m_1$

1819: in which case either  $\beta$ should be taken to be any number

1820: smaller than $m_1$, or $\cO$ should be understood as $O$.

1821: Rescaling $r$ and the metric $g$ by a constant conformal factor

1822:  we may without loss of

1823: generality assume that $\ell=1$; similarly for $\hr$. \Eq{eq:l2a1}

1824: together with Equations~\eq{eq:B1d}-\eq{B6} leads to

1825: \begin{deqarr}

1826:   \frac{\partial \Lambda_i{}^{j}}{\partial r} &=&

1827: %\frac  {a( r)}{\hr a(\hr)}

1828:  {a( r)}

1829: \left(

1830:     \sum_k\hzo{}^\ell{} _{ik} \Lambda _\ell{}^j \Lambda _k {} ^1 +

1831:     \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right) \label{eq:B7a-} \\ &=& \frac

1832:   1 r  \left(

1833:     \sum_k\hzo^\ell{} _{ik} \Lambda _\ell{}^j \Lambda _k {} ^1 +

1834:     \cO(r^{-\beta})\right)\;,

1835:   \label{eq:B7a}\arrlabel{B7a}

1836: \end{deqarr}

1837: in particular

1838: \begin{deqarr}

1839:    \frac{\partial \Lambda_1{}^{j}}{\partial r} &=& \frac

1840:   {a( r)}{\hr a(\hr)} \left( \sum_A\Lambda _A{}^j \Lambda _A{} ^1+

1841:   \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right) \label{eq:B8-}

1842: \\&=& \frac

1843:   1r \left( \sum_A\Lambda _A{}^j \Lambda _A{} ^1+

1844:   \cO(r^{-\beta})\right)

1845: \;.\label{eq:B8}\arrlabel{B8}

1846: \end{deqarr}

1847: Now, the transpose of a rotation matrix is again a rotation

1848: matrix, therefore we also have

1849: $$\sum_k\Lambda_k{}^i \Lambda_k {}^j = \delta^i_{j}\;,$$ which gives

1850: \begin{equation}

1851:   \label{eq:B8a}

1852:   \sum_A\Lambda _A{}^1 \Lambda_A{} ^1 = 1 - (\Lambda_1{}^1)^2\;,

1853: \end{equation}

1854: and it follows that

1855: \begin{deqarr}

1856:    \frac{\partial \Lambda_1{}^{1}}{\partial r} &= & \frac

1857:   {a( r)}{\hr a(\hr)} \left(1-

1858:      (\Lambda _1{}^1)^2  +

1859:     \cO(r^{-\alpha}) \right)

1860:   \label{eq:B9-}

1861: \\

1862:  &= & \frac

1863:   1r \left(1-

1864:      (\Lambda _1{}^1)^2  \right)+

1865:     \cO(r^{-\beta-1})

1866:   \label{eq:B9}

1867: \;.

1868:   \arrlabel{B9}

1869: \end{deqarr}

1870:  We have the following:

1871: \newcommand{\mysigma}{\sigma}

1872:  \begin{Lemma}

1873:    \label{L3} For all $\mysigma<\min(m_1,\alpha,2)$ we

1874:    have

1875:    \begin{eqnarray}

1876:      \label{eq:B10}

1877:      \Lambda _1{}^1 & = & 1+ \cO(r^{-\mysigma}) \;,

1878: \\ r \frac{\partial \hr}{\partial r}& = & \hr +

1879: \cO(r^{1-\mysigma})   \label{eq:B10a}\;.

1880:    \end{eqnarray}

1881:  \end{Lemma}

1882: \proof Let $\chi$ denote the $ \cO(r^{-\beta-1}) $ term in

1883: Equation~\eq{eq:B9}, set $g:=\Lambda _1{}^1$, and denote by

1884: $\phi(r,v^A) = \int_r^\infty \chi (s,v^A)\ds= \cO(r^{-\beta})$;

1885: Equation~\eq{eq:B9} shows that

1886: $$\frac{\partial (g-\phi)}{\partial r} = \frac{1-g^2}{r}\ge 0\;.$$

1887: It follows that $g-\phi$ is non-decreasing, and therefore has a

1888: limit as $r$ goes to infinity; since $\phi$ tends to zero in this

1889: limit we conclude that

1890: $$g_\infty\equiv \lim_{r\to\infty}g$$

1891: exists. Equation~\eq{eq:B9} shows that

1892: \begin{equation}

1893:   \label{eq:last}

1894:   \lim_{r\to\infty} r {\partial g \over \partial r} =

1895: 1-g_\infty^2\;.

1896: \end{equation}

1897: Now Equation~\eq{eq:B4} gives $|g|\le 1$, while

1898: Equation~\eq{eq:last} implies a logarithmic divergence of $g$

1899: unless $g_\infty=\pm 1$; thus $g_\infty=\pm 1$. Define $f\ge 0$ by

1900: the equation

1901: $$g= g_\infty(1-f)\;,$$

1902: then $f\to_{r\to\infty} 0$ and we have

1903: $${\partial f \over \partial r} = -{g_\infty f(2-f) \over r} -

1904: g_\infty\chi\;.$$ Suppose, first, that $g_\infty =1$; since

1905: $f\to_{r\to\infty}=0$ it follows that for every $\delta>0$ there

1906: exists $r_\delta$ such that $f\le \delta$ for $r\ge r_\delta$; for

1907: such $r$ we then obtain

1908: \begin{equation}

1909:   \label{eq:B11}

1910:   {\partial f \over \partial r} \le -{ f(2-\delta) \over r} -

1911: \chi\;,

1912: \end{equation}

1913: and by integration

1914: \begin{eqnarray*}

1915:   r^{2-\delta} f(r,\cdot) - r_\delta^{2-\delta} f(r_\delta,\cdot) \le

1916:   -\int_{r_\delta}^r \chi(s,\cdot)s^{2-\delta}\ds =

1917:   \cO(r^{2-\delta-\beta}) + \cO(r_\delta^{2-\delta-\beta})\;,

1918: \end{eqnarray*}

1919: so that

1920: \begin{equation}

1921:   \label{eq:B12a}

1922:   f(r) = \cO(r^{\delta-2}) + \cO(r^{ -\beta})\;.

1923: \end{equation}

1924: Choosing $\delta$ appropriately we obtain \eq{eq:B10} with any

1925: $\mysigma<\min(m_1,\alpha,2)$, under the assumption that

1926: $g_\infty\ne -1$. In the case $g_\infty= -1$ similar, but simpler,

1927: manipulations lead again to Equation~\eq{eq:B12a} with $\delta=0$.

1928: From Equation~\eq{eq:B8a} and from $ \Lambda_1{}^1 = g_\infty +

1929: \cO(r^{-\mysigma})$ we obtain

1930: \begin{equation}

1931:   \label{eq:B14a}

1932:   \Lambda_A{}^1 = \cO(r^{-\mysigma/2})\;.

1933: \end{equation}

1934: Equation~\eq{eq:B4a} similarly implies

1935: \begin{equation}

1936:   \label{eq:B14b}

1937:   \Lambda_1{}^A = \cO(r^{-\mysigma/2})\;.

1938: \end{equation}

1939: Equation~\eq{eq:B7a-} gives

1940: %\ptc{equation expanded for further use}

1941: \begin{eqnarray*} %{deqarr}\label{lauf}

1942:   \frac{\partial \Lambda_A{}^{1}}{\partial r}

1943: %& =& \frac 1 r \frac{ra(r)}{\hr a(\hr)}\left(

1944: %    - \Lambda_1 {}^1\Lambda_A {}^1+

1945: %    \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)

1946: %\\ \label{laus}

1947: &  =& \frac 1 r \left(

1948:     - \Lambda_1 {}^1\Lambda_A {}^1+

1949:     \cO(r^{-\mysigma})\right) \;,

1950: \end{eqnarray*}%{deqarr}

1951: and integration in $r$ together with \eq{eq:B14a} yields (assuming

1952: without loss of generality that $\sigma\ne 1$)

1953: \begin{equation}

1954:   \label{eq:B15-}

1955:   \Lambda_A{}^1 = O(r^{-1}) + \cO(r^{-\mysigma})\;.

1956: \end{equation}

1957: %so that for $\mysigma<\min(m_1,\alpha,1)$ it holds that

1958: %\begin{equation}

1959: %  \label{eq:B15}

1960: %  \Lambda_A{}^1 = \cO(r^{-\mysigma})\;.

1961: %\end{equation}

1962: \ptc{unnecessary equation and redefinition of sigma removed}

1963: Integrating in $r$ Equation~\eq{eq:B8} and using

1964: \eq{eq:B14b}-\eq{eq:B15-} we similarly obtain\ptc{term added since

1965: sigma's redefinition removed}

1966: \begin{equation}

1967:   \label{eq:B14}

1968:   \Lambda_1{}^A = O(r^{-1})+\cO(r^{-\mysigma})\;.

1969: \end{equation}

1970: From the definition of the $\hf_i$'s and from \eq{eq:b0} (with

1971: $\ell=1$) we have

1972: $$\hf_1(\hr) =  \hr + \cO(\hr^{1-\beta})\;, \quad

1973: \hf_A(\hr)=\cO(\hr^{1-\alpha})\;,$$ hence\ptc{$f_A(\hr)$ equation

1974: commented out since not needed; still in the file}

1975: \begin{eqnarray*}

1976:   f_1(\hr) & =&  \Lambda_1{}^1 \hf_1(\hr) +  \Lambda_1{}^A \hf_A(\hr)

1977: \\ & = & g_\infty  \hr + \cO(r^{1-\mysigma})\;,

1978: %\\ f_A(\hr) & =&  \Lambda_A{}^1 \hf_1(\hr) +  \Lambda_A{}^B \hf_B(\hr)

1979: %\\ & = &  \cO(r^{1-\mysigma})\;.

1980: \end{eqnarray*}

1981: Inverting \Eq{Gseq} we have

1982: %the relation $f_i=e_i+\delta

1983: %f_i{}^je_j$ and using Equation~\eq{eq:B1a} shows that $e_i = f_i +

1984: %\sum_j \cO(r^{-\alpha}) f_j$, which implies

1985: \begin{eqnarray*}

1986: \left(1+ O(r^{-m_1})\right) r {\partial

1987:     \hr \over \partial r}

1988:   & = &  e_1(\hr)

1989: \\ & = &\left(1+\cO(r^{-\alpha})\right) f_1(\hr)

1990:  % + \sum_j \cO(r^{-\mysigma}) f_j(\hr)

1991: \\ & = & g_\infty \hr + \cO(r^{1-\mysigma})\;.

1992: \end{eqnarray*}

1993: We have finally obtained

1994: \begin{equation}

1995:   \label{eq:B16}

1996:   r {\partial \hr \over \partial r } = g_\infty\hr

1997:   +\cO(r^{1-\mysigma}) \;,

1998: \end{equation}

1999: which is compatible with the fact that the coordinate systems

2000: $(r,v^A)$ and $(\hr,\hv^A)$, as well as  $(v^A)$ and $(\hv^A)$,

2001: carry the same orientations if and only if $g_\infty=1$, and the

2002: lemma is established. \qed

2003: 

2004: Returning to the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}, it is useful to

2005: introduce new coordinates $x$ and $\hx$ defined as

2006: $$r=e^x\;, \qquad \hr = e^{\hx}\;.$$

2007: \newcommand{\mysigmax}{\mysigma x}

2008: In terms of those variables Equation~\eq{eq:B10a} can be rewritten

2009: as \be\label{hxx}{\partial \hx \over \partial x } = 1 + \phi\;,

2010: \qquad\phi =\cO(e^{-\mysigmax})\;,\ee for an appropriately defined

2011: function $\phi$: More precisely, if we write \be\label{fnotation}

2012: e_i=e_i{}^jf_j\;,\quad f_i= f_i{}^je_j\;, \ee with the obvious

2013: hatted equivalents, then \be\label{phiequation} \phi:= \frac

2014: {ra(r)}{\hr a(\hr)} \sum_{k,j} e_1{}^j \Lambda^j{}_k\hat

2015: f_k{}^1-1\;.\ee

2016:  Integration of \Eq{hxx} gives

2017: \begin{eqnarray}

2018:  \hx(x,v^A)& = & x-\hx(x_0,v^A) + \int_{x_0}  ^x \phi(s,v^A)\ds

2019: \nonumber \\ & = &

2020:  x-\hx(x_0,v^A) + \int_{x_0}  ^\infty  \phi(s,v^A)\ds- \int_{x}  ^\infty \phi(s,v^A)\ds

2021: \nonumber \\ & =: & x+\psi(v^A) + \cO(e^{-\mysigmax})\;,

2022: \label{eq:B16a}

2023: \end{eqnarray}

2024: which establishes the existence of a continuous function

2025: $\psi:\mn\to\R$ such that

2026: \begin{equation}

2027:   \label{eq:B17}

2028:   \hr(r,v^A) = e^{\psi(v^A)} r + \cO(r^{1-\mysigma})

2029: \end{equation}

2030: (continuity of $\psi$ follows from the Lebesgue (dominated)

2031: theorem on continuity of integrals with parameters; the Lebesgue

2032: theorem is used in a similar way without explicit reference at

2033: several places below).

2034: 

2035:  Let us write

2036: \Eq{eq:B9-}  as

2037: \begin{eqnarray}

2038:    \frac{\partial (\Lambda_1{}^{1}-1)}{\partial r} &= &

2039: \chi_1(\Lambda_1{}^{1}-1) +\chi_2 \;,

2040:   \label{eq:B9-a}

2041: \end{eqnarray}

2042: where

2043: $$ \chi_1:= -(1+\Lambda_1{}^{1})\frac

2044:   {a( r)}{\hr a(\hr)} =-{2\over r}+\cO(r^{-1-\sigma})\;,

2045: \qquad \chi_2 = \cO(r^{-\alpha-1})\;;$$ we obtain

2046: \begin{eqnarray}

2047:    { \Lambda_1{}^{1}}{(r,v^A)} &= & 1 + \left(f_1{}^{1}(v^A)

2048: + \int_{r_0}^r

2049: s^2\exp\left\{\int_s^{\infty}\left(\chi_1(v,v^A)+{2\over

2050: v}\right)dv\right\}\chi_2(s,v^A)ds\right)\times

2051: \nonumber \\

2052: & & r^{-2}\exp\left\{-\int_{r}^\infty\left(\chi_1(v,v^A)+{2\over

2053: v}\right)dv\right\} \;,

2054:   \label{eq:B9-b}

2055: \end{eqnarray}

2056: with some continuous function $f_1{}^{1}:M\to \R$. In particular

2057: \begin{eqnarray}

2058: \Lambda_1{}^1 &= & 1 + O(r^{-2})+\cO(r^{-\alpha})+ \delta

2059: _\alpha^2\cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln r)%+O(r^{-\sigma_1})\;,

2060: \;. \label{eq:B7a--}

2061: \end{eqnarray}

2062: %where $\sigma_1$ is any number smaller than

2063: %$\min{(m_1,\alpha,2)}+2$.

2064: From \Eq{eq:B7a-} we obtain

2065: \begin{eqnarray}

2066:   \frac{\partial \Lambda_A{}^{1}}{\partial r} &=& \frac

2067:   {a( r)}{\hr a(\hr)} \left(-\Lambda _1{}^1 \Lambda _A {} ^1 +

2068:   O(r^{-2})+

2069:     \cO(r^{-2\sigma})+\cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)\;, \label{eq:B7a-a}

2070: \end{eqnarray}

2071: which integrated in a manner similar to that for \Eq{eq:B9-a}

2072: shows that there exists a continuous function $f_A{}^1: M\to \R$

2073: such that\ptc{terms added since $\alpha \le 1$ allowed now; there

2074: was an error here before anyway, so \eq{deltaeq} added }

2075: \begin{deqarr}

2076: \Lambda_A{}^1(r,v^B) &= &

2077: \frac{f_A{}^1(v^B)}{r}+\cO(r^{-\alpha})+\delta_1^\alpha \cO(

2078: r^{-\alpha}\ln r) + O(r^{-1-\delta}) \nn \\ &&

2079:  \label{eq:B8--1}\\

2080: & = & O(r^{-1})+\delta_1^\alpha \cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln

2081: r)+\cO(r^{-\alpha})\; , \label{eq:B8--}

2082: \end{deqarr}

2083: with any $\delta$ satisfying\ptc{maybe sigma $\le$ and not $<$?}

2084: \bel{deltaeq} \delta<\min(1,2\sigma-1)\;.\ee It is easily seen now

2085: that the $r^{-2}\ln r$ terms which could potentially be present in

2086: \Eq{eq:B7a--} cannot occur: clearly they are only relevant for

2087: $\alpha = 2$; in that last case it immediately follows from

2088: \Eqsone{eq:B8a} and \eq{eq:B8--1} that no such terms are allowed.

2089: It follows that

2090: \begin{eqnarray}

2091: \Lambda_1{}^1 &= & 1 + O(r^{-2})+\cO(r^{-\alpha})\;. \label{B7a--}

2092: \end{eqnarray}

2093: %Inserting \Eq{eq:B8--}

2094: %into \Eq{eq:B8-} and integrating in $r$ one further finds that

2095: %\begin{eqnarray}

2096: %\Lambda_1{}^A (r,v^B)&= & O(r^{-1})\;.

2097: %\label{eq:B8--an}

2098: %\end{eqnarray}

2099: Repeating the argument after \Eq{eq:B14} one is led to

2100: \begin{deqarr}

2101: {\partial \hr \over \partial r} & = & {\hr \over r} %e^{\psi(v^A)}

2102: +

2103: \cO(r^{-\alpha}) +O(r^{-m_1}) + O(r^{-2})\;, \label{eq:B18first}\\

2104: \hr &=& e^{\psi(v^A)} r + \cO(r^{1-\alpha})+O(r^{1-m_1}) +

2105: O(r^{-1})\;;

2106:   \label{eq:B18}\arrlabel{eq:B18m}

2107: \end{deqarr}

2108: \eq{eq:B18} has been obtained from \eq{eq:B18first} by calculating

2109: $\partial \hx / \partial x$ and integrating the resulting

2110: equation, compare \Eqs{hxx}{eq:B16a}. Equations~\eq{eq:B7a-} and

2111: \eq{eq:B18} yield\ptc{log term added cause of small alphas}

2112: \begin{eqnarray*}

2113:   {\partial \Lambda_A{}^B \over \partial r} &= & a(r) \left(

2114:     \sum_k\hzome^\ell{}_{Ak} \Lambda_\ell{}^B\Lambda_k{}^1

2115:     +\cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)

2116: \\ &= & a(r) \left(

2117:     \sum_C\hzome^\ell{}_{AC} \Lambda_\ell{}^B\Lambda_C{}^1

2118:     +\cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)

2119: \\ & = & \cO(r^{-\alpha-1})

2120: +\delta_1^\alpha \cO(r^{-\alpha-1}\ln r) +O(r^{-3})\;,

2121: \end{eqnarray*}

2122: and by integration one finds that there exists a continuous matrix

2123: valued function $R=(R_A{}^B):\mn\to O(n-1)$ such that

2124: \begin{equation}

2125:   \label{eq:B19}

2126:   \Lambda_A{}^B(r,v^C)= R_A{}^B(v^C)+  \cO(r^{-\alpha})+

2127: \delta_1^\alpha \cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln^2 r) +O(r^{-2})\;.

2128: \end{equation}

2129: Repeating the argument which led to \Eq{eq:B14} and using

2130: \eq{eq:B19} one  finds now that there exists a continuous function

2131: $f_1{}^A: M\to \R$ such that\ptc{there is a problem with the delta

2132: terms which might need clarifying; there was a wrong  log term in

2133: the previous equation}

2134: \begin{eqnarray}

2135: \Lambda_1{}^A (r,v^B)&= &

2136: \frac{f_1{}^A(v^B)}{r}\left(1+O(r^{-m_1})\right) \nn \\&&

2137: +\cO(r^{-\alpha})+ \delta _\alpha^1\cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln r)

2138: %\delta_\alpha^2\cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln r)

2139: + \cO(r^{-2\sigma})\;, \label{eq:B8--ao}

2140: \end{eqnarray}

2141: compare \Eq{eq:B7a-a}; without loss of generality we have assumed

2142: that $\sigma \ne 1$. The hatted equivalent of \eq{eq:b2},

2143: $$\hat\alpha^A\equiv \hat \alpha(\hv^C)^A{}_{B} d\hv^B\;,$$ gives

2144: \begin{eqnarray*}

2145:   d\hv^A & = & \hbeta^A{}_B \hat \alpha ^B

2146: =\frac 1 \hr \hbeta^A{}_B\hat \theta ^B

2147: \\ & = & \frac 1 \hr \hbeta^A{}_B

2148: \left((1 +\cO(r^{-\alpha}))\Lambda_C{}^B \theta^C + (1

2149:   +\cO(r^{-\alpha}))\Lambda_1{}^B \theta^1\right)\;,

2150: \end{eqnarray*}

2151: where $\beta^A{}_B$ denotes the matrix inverse to $\alpha^A{}_B$,

2152: while the symbol $\hbeta^A{}_B$ is used to denote the the matrix

2153: inverse to $\hat \alpha^A{}_B$. This implies\begin{eqnarray}

2154:   \label{eq:B20}

2155:   {\partial \hv ^A \over \partial r } &= &O(r^{-3})\;,

2156: \\ \label{eq:B21}

2157:   {\partial \hv ^A \over \partial v^C } &= &\frac r {\hr}

2158: \hbeta^A{}_B \Lambda_D{}^B \alpha ^D{_C}  +\cO(r^{-\alpha}) \;.

2159: \end{eqnarray}

2160: Integrating \eq{eq:B20} in $r$ one obtains that the limits

2161: $$\psi^A\equiv \lim_{r\to\infty}\hv ^A$$

2162: exist and are continuous functions, with \bel{eq:B21+}

2163: \hv^A-\psi^A = O(r^{-2})\;.\ee Moreover, it follows from

2164: \eq{eq:B21} that the limits as ${r}$ tends to infinity of $

2165: {\partial \hv^A /

2166: \partial v^B}$ exist and are continuous.\ptc{Argument rearranged,

2167: since the previous one did not work for small alpha}

2168:  Passing

2169: to the limit $r\to\infty$ in Equation~\eq{eq:B21} one obtains

2170: \bel{B22++}\Psi^*\hat \alpha^A= e^{-\psi} R^A{}_B \alpha ^B\;,\ee

2171: hence

2172: \begin{eqnarray*}

2173:   \Psi^*\hat h &= &\Psi^*\sum_A\hat\alpha^A\otimes\hat\alpha^A

2174: \\ & = & e^{-2\psi} \sum_AR^A{}_B R^A{}_C \alpha ^B\otimes\alpha ^C

2175: \\ & = & e^{-2\psi} \sum_A\alpha^A\otimes\alpha^A = e^{-2\psi} h\;,

2176: \end{eqnarray*}

2177: where we have used the fact that $R=(R_A{}^B)$ is a rotation

2178: matrix. It follows that the map $\Psi=(\psi^A)$ is a conformal

2179: local diffeomorphism from $(M,h)$ to $(\hM,\hh)$. We can thus use

2180: a deep result  of Lelong-Ferrand~\cite{Lelong-Ferrand} to conclude

2181: that $\Psi$ is smooth, in particular so is $\psi$.

2182: Equation~\eq{B22++} shows then smoothness of $R^A{}_B$. Further

2183: \begin{eqnarray}

2184:   \frac 1 r \beta^B{}_A {\partial \hr \over \partial v^B}

2185:  & = & e_A(\hr) \nonumber \\ & = & (1

2186: +\cO(r^{-\alpha}))\sum_B\Lambda_B{}^A \hf_B(\hr)

2187:  + (1 +\cO(r^{-\alpha}))\Lambda_1{}^A \hf_1(\hr)

2188: \nonumber\\ & = & O(1)+\cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;, \label{B22}

2189: \end{eqnarray}

2190: hence \bel{B22+} {\partial \hx \over \partial v^A} = \frac 1 \hr

2191: {\partial \hr \over \partial v^A} = O(1)+\cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;. \ee

2192: This, together with \Eqs{eq:B20}{eq:B21+}, establishes point 1 for

2193: $0<\alpha\le 1$.

2194: 

2195: If $\alpha>1$, a closer inspection of the $O(1)$ terms in

2196: \Eq{B22+}, making use of \Eq{eq:B8--ao}, shows that the limits

2197: $\lim_{r\to\infty} {\partial \hx / \partial v^A}$ exist, and are

2198: continuous functions of the $v^A$'s. Now, in the current range of

2199: $\alpha$'s it is easy to  show that the function $\psi$ in

2200: \eq{eq:B16a} is continuously differentiable without invoking the

2201: Lelong-Ferrand theorem, as follows: Let $\phi$ be the function

2202: appearing at the right-hand-side of \Eq{hxx}, from

2203: \eq{phiequation} and from what has been said with a little work

2204: one finds

2205: $$\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial v^A} = \cO(e^{(1-\alpha)x}) + O(e^{-x})\;; $$

2206: the differentiability of $\psi$ follows now from its definition

2207: \eq{eq:B16a} and from Lebesgue's dominated theorem on

2208: differentiability of integrals with parameters. The last estimate

2209: together with \Eq{eq:B16a} also show that

2210: \be\label{hxvder}\frac{\partial \hx}{\partial v^A} =

2211: \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial v^A}+\cO(e^{(1-\alpha)x}) +

2212: O(e^{-x})\;.\ee \ptc{end of new stuff; a spurious piece of

2213: previous  argument commented out} and point 1 is established.

2214: 

2215: % Next, Equation \eq{eq:B5}

2216: %shows that the $\partial \Lambda_A{}^B/

2217: %\partial v^C $'s are uniformly bounded, hence the

2218: %$\Lambda_A{}^B$'s are uniformly Lipschitzian. This implies that

2219: %the $R_A{}^B$'s are Lipschitzian functions, as pointwise limits of

2220: %Lipschitzian functions. Equation~\eq{eq:B21} implies that the

2221: %limits $\lim_{r\to\infty} {\partial \hv^A/

2222: %\partial v^B}$ are Lipschitzian functions, and one concludes that

2223: %$\Psi=(\psi^A)$ is a $C^{1,1}$ map from $\mn$ to itself. Passing

2224: %to the limit $r\to\infty$ in \Eq{eq:B5} multiplied by $r$ shows

2225: %that the limits

2226: %$$

2227: %\lim_{r\to\infty} \partial_A \Lambda_B{}^C(r,v^C)$$ exist, and are

2228: %continuous functions of $v^C$. It follows that the $R_A{}^B$'s are

2229: %continuously differentiable. Passing, next, to the limit

2230: %$r\to\infty$ in \Eq{eq:B21} we obtain --- from uniform convergence

2231: %as $r$ tends to infinity of the $v^A(r,\cdot)$ and their

2232: %derivatives to continuous limiting functions\comment

2233: %--- that the limits

2234: %$$\lim_{r\to\infty}{\partial \hv ^A \over \partial v^C }$$ are

2235: %continuously differentiable functions of the $v^B$'s, hence $\Psi$

2236: %is $C^2$. Straightforward algebra establishes the remaining claims

2237: %in point 1.

2238: 

2239: To establish point 2, suppose that $\Psi$ is the identity and that

2240: $\psi=0$. The calculation in \Eq{B22} shows that

2241: $$0 =\lim_{r\to\infty} {\partial \hx \over

2242: \partial v^A} =

2243: \lim_{r\to\infty} {1\over \hr}{\partial \hr \over \partial v^A} =

2244: \lim_{r\to\infty} r\alpha^B{}_A e_B(\hr)

2245:  =\lim_{r\to\infty} \alpha^B{}_A\Lambda_B{}^1\;,

2246: $$

2247: hence the function $f_A{}^1$ appearing in \Eq{eq:B8--} vanishes.

2248: The identity

2249: \begin{equation}

2250: \Lambda_1{}^A\Lambda_1{}^1+\sum_B\Lambda_B{}^A\Lambda_B{}^1 =0

2251: \label{B23-}\end{equation} shows that the function $f_1{}^A$ from

2252: \Eq{eq:B8--ao} vanishes as well. If $1<\alpha<2$ we thus obtain

2253: \begin{equation}

2254: \Lambda_i{}^j =\delta_i^j + \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;. \label{B23}

2255: \end{equation}

2256: \ptc{From now on changes} For $\alpha\ge2$ a closer inspection of

2257: \Eq{eq:B8-} is needed: \begin{eqnarray} \nn \frac{\partial

2258: \Lambda_1{}^A}{\partial r} &=&  \frac 1 r \frac {ra(r)}{\hr a

2259: (\hr)} \left( \sum_C\Lambda_C{}^A\Lambda_C{}^1 +

2260: \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right)

2261: \\

2262: &=&  \frac 1 r \frac {ra(r)}{\hr a (\hr)} \left(- \Lambda_1{}^1

2263: \Lambda_1{}^A + \cO(r^{-\alpha})\right) \;,

2264: \label{B8-++}\end{eqnarray} where we have used \Eq{B23-}. \ptc{an

2265: elegant but unneeded argument commented out}

2266: % For $\epsilon\ge 0$

2267: %let us set

2268: %$$f_\epsilon:=r^{-2} \sqrt{\sum_A\Lambda_1{}^A\Lambda_1{}^A +

2269: %\epsilon^2}\;.$$ It follows from \Eq{B8-++} that for $\epsilon>0$

2270: %we have

2271: %\begin{eqnarray*} &\displaystyle

2272: %\frac{\partial f_\epsilon}{\partial r}  \le \chi_5 f_\epsilon +

2273: %\chi_6\;, &

2274: %\\

2275: %& \chi_5 = O(r^-5) + O(r^{-m_1-3})\;, \quad \chi_6 =

2276: %\cO(r^{-\alpha-3})\;.

2277: %\end{eqnarray*}

2278: %which implies

2279: %$$f_\epsilon \le \exp\left\{-\int_r^\infty \chi_5(v) dv\right\} \left(\epsilon -

2280: %\int_r^\infty \exp\left\{\int_s^\infty \chi_5(v) dv\right\}

2281: %\chi_6(s)\; ds\right)\;.

2282: %$$

2283: %Passing with $\epsilon $ to zero we then obtain

2284: %$$|\Lambda_1{}^A| \le r^2 f_0 = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;.

2285: %$$

2286: Integrating this equation in a way somewhat similar to

2287: \Eq{eq:B9-a} shows that

2288: \begin{eqnarray}

2289: \Lambda_1{}^A (r,v^B)= \cO(r^{-\alpha})+ \delta

2290: _\alpha^2\cO(r^{-\alpha}\ln r)\;. \label{eq:B8--ao+}

2291: \end{eqnarray}

2292: If $\alpha=2$, suppose for the moment that there is no $\ln r$

2293: term in \eq{eq:B8--ao+}; it then follows from \Eqsone{B7a--} and

2294: \eq{B23-} that \Eq{B23} holds. On the other hand, for $\alpha>2$

2295: \Eq{eq:B8a} forces the function $f_1{}^1$ from \Eq{eq:B9-b} to

2296: vanish, which in turn implies that \Eq{B23} holds again. The

2297: formula inverse to \Eq{B4a+} reads \be \label{B4b+}f_j =

2298: \sum_i\Lambda_i{}^j \hf_i\;,\ee in particular

2299: $$f_1(\hr) = \Lambda_1{}^1 \hf_1(\hr)+\sum_A\Lambda_A{}^1 \hf_A(\hr)\;,$$

2300: which implies

2301: \begin{equation}{\partial \hr \over \partial r } = {a(r) \over a(\hr) }

2302: \left(1+\cO(r^{ -\alpha})\right)+\cO(r^{ -\alpha})\;. \label{B24}

2303: \end{equation}

2304: \Eq{eq:b0-2m} together with the identities

2305: \begin{deqarr}

2306: \arrlabel{B24+}

2307:  & \displaystyle

2308: {ra(r) \over \hr a(\hr)} = { ra(r) - \hr a(\hr)\over \hr a(\hr)}

2309: +1 = 1 + O(r^{-m_1-1}) \delta r \;, & \\ & \displaystyle {a(r)

2310: \over  a(\hr)} = { ra(r) \over \hr a(\hr)} \times {\hr \over r} =

2311: { ra(r) \over \hr a(\hr)}  \left(1+{\delta r\over r}\right) = 1 +

2312: \left({1\over r} +O(r^{-m_1-1})\right) \delta r \;.\end{deqarr}

2313: shows that \Eq{B24} can be rewritten as

2314: \begin{equation}

2315: {\partial \delta r \over \partial r} = \chi_3

2316:  \delta r + \chi_4 \;,

2317: \label{B25}

2318: \end{equation}

2319: with

2320: $$\chi_3 = {1\over r} + O (r^{-m_1-1})\;, \qquad \chi_4 =

2321: \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;.

2322: $$

2323: Hence, for $r_2>r$ we have

2324: \begin{eqnarray*}

2325: {\delta r(r_2) \over r_2} &=& \left( {\delta r (r)\over r} +

2326: \int_r^{r_2} \exp\left\{-\int_t^\infty \left(\chi_3(s)-{1\over

2327: s}\right)ds\right\} {\chi_4(t)\over t}dt\right) \times\\ &&

2328: \exp\left\{\int_r^\infty \left(\chi_3(s)-{1\over

2329: s}\right)ds\right\} \;.

2330: \end{eqnarray*}

2331: Passing with $r_2$ to infinity and using the fact that $\delta r =

2332: o(r)$ shows that

2333: \begin{eqnarray}

2334:  \delta r &=& -r \int_r^{\infty}

2335: \exp\left\{-\int_t^\infty \left(\chi_3(s)-{1\over

2336: s}\right)ds\right\} {\chi_4(t)\over t}dt \nonumber \\ &=&

2337: \cO(r^{1-\alpha})\;. \label{B27-}\end{eqnarray} From \Eq{B24} we

2338: obtain

2339: \begin{equation}{\partial \delta r \over \partial r } = \cO(r^{ -\alpha})\;.

2340: \label{B27}

2341: \end{equation}

2342: \Eq{B4b+} implies

2343: \begin{eqnarray}

2344: e_j &=&\left(\delta_j^k +\cO(r^{ -\alpha})\right) f_k \nonumber \\

2345: &=& \sum_i\left(\delta_j^k +\cO(r^{ -\alpha})\right) \Lambda_i{}^k

2346: \left(\delta_i^k +\cO(r^{ -\alpha})\right)

2347:  \he_k

2348: \nonumber \\ &=& \he_j +\sum_i \cO(r^{ -\alpha}) \he_i \;.

2349: \label{B4c+}\end{eqnarray} It follows that

2350: \begin{deqarr}

2351: e_j(\hr) &=& \delta_j^1\hr +\cO(r^{1 -\alpha})

2352:  \nonumber\\ &=&

2353: e_j(r)  +\cO(r^{1 -\alpha})\;,

2354:  \\

2355: e_j(\hv^A) &=& \he_j(\hv^A)

2356:  +\cO(r^{-1 -\alpha})

2357: \;. \label{B4d+}

2358: \end{deqarr}

2359: In particular

2360: \begin{eqnarray}

2361: &\displaystyle{\partial \hv^A \over \partial r}  =  a(r)

2362: e_1(\hv^A) = \cO(r^{-2-\alpha})

2363: %& \nonumber \\ &

2364: \quad \Longrightarrow \quad

2365: %&\nonumber \\ &

2366:  \hv^A - v^A = \cO(r^{-1-\alpha})\;.

2367: \label{B4e+}\end{eqnarray} \Eqsone{B27-} and \eq{B4e+} allow us to

2368: rewrite \Eq{B4d+} as

2369: \begin{eqnarray}

2370: e_j(\hv^A) &=& e_j(v^A)

2371:  +\cO(r^{-1 -\alpha})

2372: \;. \label{B4f+}\end{eqnarray} \Eqs{eq:t1}{eq:t2} are thus

2373: established. A straightforward analysis of the equations

2374: \begin{eqnarray*}

2375: \label{B4g+}e_k\left(f_j(\hr)\right) &=&

2376: e_k\left(\sum_i\Lambda_i{}^j \hf_i(\hr)\right)

2377: \;,\\

2378: e_k\left(f_j(\hv^A)\right) &=& e_k\left(\sum_i\Lambda_i{}^j

2379: \hf_i(\hv^A)\right) \;,

2380: \end{eqnarray*}

2381: leads to \Eq{t2a}, and the theorem is established for $\alpha\ne

2382: 2$, or for $\alpha=2$ provided that no log terms are present in

2383: \eq{eq:B8--ao+}.\reword

2384: 

2385: Let us return to the case $\alpha=2$; then \eq{B23} holds with any

2386: $\alpha<2$ and therefore the calculations that follow remain valid

2387: with any $\alpha<2$. Further \eq{B23} holds with $i=j=1$ and

2388: $\alpha=2$ by \Eq{B7a--}. \Eqsone{eq:B5} and \eq{B24+} give then

2389: $$\frac{\partial(r\Lambda_A{}^1)}{\partial r} = \cO(r^{-2}) \quad

2390: \Longrightarrow \quad \Lambda_A{}^1= \cO(r^{-2})\;,

2391: $$

2392: so that no $\log$ terms can occur in $\Lambda_A{}^1$. \Eq{B23-}

2393: implies then

2394: $$ \Lambda_1{}^A= \cO(r^{-2})\;,

2395: $$

2396: and \eq{eq:B5} establishes \eq{B23} with $\alpha=2$,\reword and

2397: the theorem follows. \qed

2398: 

2399:  In the next section we shall need the following:

2400: \begin{Corollary}

2401: \label{C1} Let $\Psi(r,v^A)=(\hr(r,v^A),\hv^B(r,v^A))$

2402:  be an isometry of the background metric $b$:

2403: $$\Psi^*(a^2(r)dr^2 +r^2 h) =a^2(\hr)d\hr^2 +\hr^2 \hh\;, \qquad \hh=h_{AB}(\hv^C)d\hv^A

2404: d\hv^B\;.$$ If there exists $\alpha >1$ such that the physical

2405: metric $g$ satisfies

2406: \begin{eqnarray}

2407:   \label{eq:hd1}

2408: & g(e_i,e_j)-\delta_i^j = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;,\quad e_k(g(e_i,e_j))

2409: = \cO(r^{-\alpha})\;, &

2410: \end{eqnarray}

2411: where $e_i$, $i=1,\ldots,n$ is the usual ON frame for the metric

2412: $b$ as in \eq{frame}, then

2413: \begin{eqnarray}

2414:   \label{eq:hd2}

2415:  &

2416:   g(\he_i,\he_j)-\delta_i^j = \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;,\quad

2417: \he_k(g(\he_i,\he_j)) = \cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;,

2418: \end{eqnarray}

2419: where $\he_i$ is the corresponding hatted frame.

2420: \end{Corollary}

2421: 

2422: \proof Applying point 1. of Theorem~\ref{T1} to $g=b$ we obtain

2423: that

2424: \begin{eqnarray}

2425:   \label{eq:t1+}& \hr = e^{\psi} r + O(r^{1-\beta})\;,

2426: \end{eqnarray}

2427: with $\beta=\min{(m_1,2)}$. Since $\Psi$ is an isometry we have

2428: $\he_i = \Lambda_i{}^je^j$ for some rotation matrix

2429: $\Lambda_i{}^j$, which gives

2430: $$ \he^{ij}= (g-b)(\htheta^i,\htheta^j)

2431: =\Lambda_k{}^i\Lambda_\ell{}^j(g-b)(\theta^k,\theta^\ell)=

2432: \cO(r^{-\alpha})=\cO(\hr^{-\alpha})\;.$$ Further,

2433: $$e_r({\he^{ij}})=e_r\left( \Lambda_k{}^i\Lambda_\ell{}^je^{kl}\right)\;,$$

2434: and --- since $e_i( \Lambda_k{}^j)=O(1)$ by \eq{eq:B5} --- the

2435: result easily follows. \qed

2436: \section{Global charges}\label{Sgc}

2437: \newcommand{\Isot}{\text{Iso}^\uparrow(\hyp,b)}

2438: \newcommand{\Iso}{\text{Iso}(\hyp,b)}

2439: \newcommand{\Isoo}{\text{Iso}_0(\hyp,b)}

2440: %\newcommand{\Isoto}{\text{Iso}^\uparrow_0(\hyp,b)}

2441: \newcommand{\cC}{\mycal C}

2442: Let us give here a general prescription how to assign global

2443: geometric invariants to hypersurfaces $\hyp$ in the class of

2444: space-times with metrics asymptotic to backgrounds \eq{A1}:

2445: consider such a background metric $b$ and consider a hypersurface

2446: $\hyp$ given by the equation $\{t=0\}$ in the coordinate system of

2447: \eq{A1}. Let $\cK$ denote the set of all Killing vector fields of

2448: $b$; the hypersurface $\hyp$ singles out two subsets of $\cK$: a)

2449: the set $\cKS$ of those Killing vector fields of $b$ which are

2450: normal to $\hyp$, and the set $\cKt$ of all $b$-Killing vector

2451: fields which are tangent to $\hyp$.  Consider any metric $g$ for

2452: which the fall-off hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{T0} are met, with

2453: $X\in\cKS$, or with $X\in\cKt$, or perhaps with all $X\in\cK$. (In

2454: that theorem we have assumed that $b$ satisfies Equation~\eq{Ee},

2455: but it would be sufficient that \eq{Ee} holds only up to terms

2456: which decay sufficiently fast when $r$ tends to infinity, the same

2457: for $g$.)  Let $\Isot$ be the group of all time-orientation

2458: preserving isometries of $b$ which leave $\hyp$

2459: invariant.\footnote{Some further invariants can sometimes be

2460: obtained by considering the connected component of the identity of

2461: $\Isot$, but this seems to require a case by case analysis, so

2462: that no general discussion will be given here.} We shall suppose

2463: further that the following condition holds:

2464: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

2465:   &  \text{\emph{for every orientation-preserving

2466:    conformal  isometry $\Psi$ of $(M,h)$ there exists  }}  & \\

2467: %   \label{H}

2468: \nonumber &\text{\emph{$R_*>0$ and a $b$-isometric map $\Phi:

2469: [R_*,\infty)\times M \to [R,\infty)\times M$, such that}} & \\

2470: \label{H} & \lim_{r\to\infty} \Phi(r,\cdot) = \Psi(\cdot)\;.&

2471: \end{eqnarray} It follows from

2472: \cite[Vol.~II,Theorem~18.10.4]{Berger} and from what is said in

2473: Appendix \ref{Aai1} that this condition holds for the

2474: $(n+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter metrics, $n\ge 3$; the case

2475: $n=2$ is handled by the discussion of toroidal $\mn$'s below.

2476: Further, the above condition obviously holds for those metrics for

2477: which every conformal isometry of $(M,h)$ is an isometry, as is

2478: the case for the $(M,h)$'s considered in Appendix~\ref{Aai2}: the

2479: desired extension $\Phi$ is

2480: $$\Phi(r,v^A)=(r,\Psi(v^A))\;.$$

2481: In fact, it is shown in \cite{ChHerzlich} that condition~\eq{H}

2482: always holds when $a(r)=1/\sqrt{r^2+k}$ regardless of the metric

2483: $h$.

2484: 

2485: Let $\cC$ denote the collection of positively oriented coordinate

2486: systems $c=\left(\cO,(r,v^A)\right)$, where $\cO$ is the domain of

2487: definition of the collection of functions $(r,v^A)$, with the

2488: associated background metrics and orthonormal tetrads, for which

2489: Equations~\eq{c1}, \eq{eq:deccond} and \eq{eq:deccond1} hold.  For

2490: each such coordinate system $c$ we can calculate the set of

2491: integrals \eq{toto}, where $X$ runs over $\cKS$, or over $\cKt$,

2492: or over $\cK$, whichever appropriate. By Theorem~\ref{T1} every

2493: two coordinate system $c_1,c_2$ in $\cC$ differ by a coordinate

2494: transformation, say $\Upsilon$, the $M$-part of which asymptotes

2495: to an orientation preserving conformal isometry $\Psi:M\to M$. By

2496: the hypothesis \eq{H} $\Psi$ can be extended to an isometry $\Phi$

2497: of $b$ which leaves $\hyp$ invariant. Writing $\Upsilon$ as

2498: $$\Upsilon = (\Upsilon\circ \Phi^{-1})\circ\Phi$$ we can decompose

2499: $\Upsilon$ into an isometry of $b$ and a map

2500: $\Upsilon\circ\Phi^{-1} $ which asymptotes to the identity. By

2501: Corollary~\ref{C1} the metric $\Phi^*g$ satisfies the hypotheses

2502: of Theorem~\ref{T1}, in the new coordinates $c_3$ as made precise

2503: by that Corollary, so that the conclusions of Theorem~\ref{T1}

2504: apply to $\Upsilon\circ \Phi^{-1}$. Let $b$ be the background

2505: associated with the first coordinate system $c_1$, and let $\hb$

2506: be that associated with $c_2$; since $\Phi$ is an isometry, the

2507: background metric associated with $c_3$ coincides with that

2508: associated with $c_1$. Now, by Theorem~\ref{TP1}, the integrals

2509: \eq{toto} are invariant under the change of background which is

2510: associated to $\Upsilon\circ\Phi^{-1}$:

2511: \begin{equation}

2512:   \label{eq:t1*}

2513:  m(\hyp,g,b, X)= m(\hyp,g,\hb, \hat X)\;,\end{equation}

2514: where the $\hb$-Killing vector $\hat X$ is associated to the

2515: $b$-Killing vector field $X$ as described in the statement of

2516: Theorem~\ref{TP1}. On the other hand, Lemma~\ref{L1} shows that

2517: the

2518:  isometry $\Phi$  reshuffles the integrals associated with

2519: different Killing vectors,

2520: \begin{equation}

2521:   \label{eq:t1**}m(\hyp,\Phi^*g,b,(\Phi_*)^{-1}X) =

2522:   m(\hyp,g,b,X)\;,\end{equation}

2523: according to the action of $\Isot$ by push-forward on $\cK$, or

2524: $\cKS$, or $\cKt$. (We note that since $\Phi$ is an $b$-isometry

2525: preserving $\hyp$, $\Phi_*$ preserves the field of $b$-unit

2526: normals to $\hyp$, hence the space $\cKS$ of those Killing vector

2527: fields which are normal to $\hyp$. Similarly $\Phi$ preserves the

2528: space $\cKt$ of Killing vector fields tangent to $\hyp$.)

2529: Equations~\eq{eq:t1*}-\eq{eq:t1**} show that any invariant of the

2530: action of $\Isot$ on $\cK$, or on $\cKS$,  or on $\cKt$, gives a

2531: geometric invariant which can be associated to $\hyp$,

2532: independently of the choice the coordinate

2533: systems in $\cC$. % which define the backgrounds $b$.

2534: 

2535: When $b$ is the $(n+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter metric, the

2536: relevant invariants based on Killing vector fields in $\cKS$ have

2537: already been discussed in detail in the introduction,

2538: Section~\ref{Si}. Consider the remaining Killing vector fields

2539: $L_{(\mu)(\nu)}\in\cKt$, as given by \Eq{Lor2}. Equation~\eq{remK}

2540: shows that under the action of $\Isot=O^\uparrow(1,n)$, the

2541: orthochronous $(n+1)$-dimensional Lorentz group, the integrals

2542: $$Q_{(\mu)(\nu)}\equiv m(\hyp,g,b,L_{(\mu)(\nu)})$$ transform as

2543: the components of a two-covariant antisymmetric tensor. One  then

2544: obtains a

2545:  geometric invariant of $\hyp$ by calculating

2546: \begin{equation}

2547:   \label{eq:ch}Q\equiv Q_{(\mu)(\nu)}Q_{(\alpha)(\beta)}\eta^{(\mu)(\alpha)}\eta^{(\nu)(\beta)}\end{equation}

2548: (for conventions see Appendix~\ref{Aai1}). In dimension $3+1$

2549: another independent geometric invariant is obtained from

2550: \begin{equation}

2551:   \label{eq:ch1}

2552:   Q^*\equiv

2553: Q_{(\mu)(\nu)}Q_{(\alpha)(\beta)}\epsilon^{(\mu)(\alpha)(\nu)(\beta)}\;.

2554: \end{equation}

2555: In higher dimensions further invariants are obtained by

2556: calculating $\text{tr}(P^{2k})$, $2\le 2k\le (n+1)$, where

2557: $P^{(\alpha)}{}_{(\beta)}= \eta^{(\alpha)(\mu)}Q_{(\mu)(\beta)}$.

2558: (In this notation $Q$ given by \Eq{eq:ch} equals

2559: $\text{tr}(P^{2})$.) When $n+1$  is even one also has obvious

2560: generalisations of \eq{eq:ch1}.

2561: 

2562: Consider, next, a (compact) strictly negatively curved $(\mn,h)$,

2563: as considered in Appendix~\eq{Aai2}. In that case all Killing

2564: vector fields are in $\cKS$, the action of $\Isot$ on $\cKS$ is

2565: trivial, and all the geometric invariants of $\hyp$ given by

2566: \eq{toto} are provided by the mass integrals considered in the

2567: Introduction.

2568: 

2569: Let, finally, $(\mn,h)$ be a flat $(n-1)$-dimensional torus

2570: $\mathbb{T}^n$, $n\ge 2$; as discussed in Appendix~\eq{Aai2}, all

2571: conformal isometries  of $(\mn,h)$ are isometries and the action

2572: of $\Isot$ on $\cK$ is trivial. It follows that in addition to the

2573: mass we have  $n-1$ independent  invariants

2574: $$m_A(\hyp,g)\equiv m(\hyp,g,b, \partial_A)$$

2575: associated with  the Killing vectors $\partial_A$ of $(\mn,h)$;

2576: here

2577:  the $\partial_A$'s have been chosen so that they are

2578: tangent to the $S^1$ factors of $\T^N=S^1\times\cdots\times S^1$,

2579: and normalized to have unit length; such vector fields can loosely

2580: be thought of as generating ``rotations'' of the torus

2581: $\mathbb{T}^n$ into itself, giving the $m_A$'s an angular-momentum

2582: type character.

2583: %Here the $h$-Killing vector filed

2584: %$X=X^A\partial_A$ on $\mn$ has been extended to

2585: %a space-time Killing vector field in the obvious way.

2586: 

2587: 

2588: \appendix

2589: \section{The phase space and the Hamiltonians}

2590: \label{AHam} {In \cite{ChAIHP} the starting

2591:   point of the analysis is the Hilbert Lagrangian for vacuum Einstein

2592:   gravity, $$\mathcal{L}= \sqrt{- \det g_{\mu\nu}}~\frac{g^{\alpha

2593:       \beta} R_{\alpha \beta}}{16\pi}\;. $$ With our signature

2594:   $(-+\cdots+)$ one needs to repeat the analysis in \cite{ChAIHP}

2595: with

2596:   $\mathcal{L}$ replaced by $$\frac{\sqrt{- \det

2597:       g_{\mu\nu}}}{16\pi}\left(g^{\alpha \beta} R_{\alpha \beta}

2598:     -2\Lambda\right)\;,$$ and without making the assumption $n+1=4$ done

2599:   there; we follow the presentation in \cite{CJK}:

2600: Consider the Ricci tensor, \be \label{JK1} R_{\mu\nu} =

2601: \partial_\alpha \left[

2602:   {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} - {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu}

2603:   {\Gamma}^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa} \right] - \left[

2604:   {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu} {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu}-

2605:   {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} \right]

2606: \;, \ee where the $\Gamma$'s are the Christoffel symbols of $g$.

2607: Contracting $R_{\mu\nu}$ with the contravariant density of metric,

2608: \be \label{JK1.1}

2609: \Kp^{\mu\nu} := %\textstyle

2610: \frac 1{16 \pi} \sqrt{-\det g } \ g^{\mu\nu} \;, \ee one obtains

2611: the following expression for the Hilbert \Lagrangian density:

2612: \begin{eqnarray}

2613: {\tilde L} & = & \frac 1{16 \pi} \sqrt{-\det g } R = \Kp^{\mu\nu}

2614: R_{\mu\nu} \nonumber \\ \label{JK3} & = &

2615: \partial_\alpha \left[

2616: \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left( {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} -

2617: {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu} {\Gamma}^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa} \right)

2618: \right] + \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left[ {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}

2619: {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu}-

2620:  {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} \right] \;.

2621: \end{eqnarray}

2622: Here we have used the metricity condition of $\Gamma$, which is

2623: equivalent to the following identity: \be\label{JK2}

2624: \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \

2625:   , \alpha} := \partial_\alpha \Kp^{\mu\nu} = \Kp^{\mu\nu}

2626: {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} - \Kp^{\mu\sigma}

2627: {\Gamma}^{\nu}_{\sigma\alpha} - \Kp^{\nu\sigma}

2628: {\Gamma}^{\mu}_{\sigma\alpha} \;.  \ee Suppose now, that

2629: ${\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}$ is another symmetric connection

2630: in $M$, which will be used as a background (or reference)

2631: connection. Denote by $\zR_{\mu\nu}$ its Ricci tensor.  From the

2632: metricity condition \eq{JK2} we similarly obtain

2633: \begin{eqnarray}

2634: \Kp^{\mu\nu} \zR_{\mu\nu} \nonumber & = &

2635: \partial_\alpha \left[

2636: \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left( {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} -

2637: {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu} {\Bgamma}^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa} \right)

2638: \right] - \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left[ {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}

2639: {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu}-

2640:  {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} \right]

2641:  \nonumber \\

2642:  &  & +

2643: \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left[ {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}

2644: {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu} + {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}

2645: {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu} - {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}

2646: {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} - {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}

2647: {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} \right]

2648:  \;. \label{JK4}

2649: \end{eqnarray}

2650: It is useful to introduce the tensor field \be \KA^\alpha_{\mu\nu}

2651: :=\left( {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} -

2652:   {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu} {\Bgamma}^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa} \right) -\left({\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} - {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu}

2653: {\Gamma}^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa}\right) \label{Pend} \;.  \ee Once

2654: the reference connection $\Bgamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ is given, the

2655: tensor $\KA^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ encodes the entire information about

2656: the connection $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$: \[

2657: {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} = {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} -

2658: \KA^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} + \frac 2{n} {\delta}^{\alpha}_{(\mu}

2659: \KA^{\kappa}_{\nu ) \kappa}   \] (recall that the space-time

2660: dimension is $n+1$). Subtracting Equation~\eq{JK4} from \eq{JK3},

2661: and using the definition of $\KA^\alpha_{\mu\nu} $, we arrive at

2662: the equation

2663: \[\Kp^{\mu\nu}

2664: R_{\mu\nu} -\frac{\sqrt{- \det

2665:       g_{\mu\nu}}}{8\pi}\Lambda= -\partial_\alpha \left( \Kp^{\mu\nu}

2666: \KA^\alpha_{\mu\nu} \right) + L \;,\] where

2667: \begin{eqnarray*}  L &:=& \Kp^{\mu\nu}

2668: \left[ \left(

2669:     {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu} - {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\sigma\mu}

2670:   \right) \left( {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu}-

2671:     {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\nu} \right) - \left(

2672:     {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} - {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} \right)

2673:   \left( {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} -

2674:     {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} \right) + \zR_{\mu\nu} \right]

2675: \\ && -\frac{\sqrt{- \det

2676:       g_{\mu\nu}}}{8\pi}\Lambda\;.\end{eqnarray*} This result may be

2677:       used as follows: the quantity $L$ differs by a total divergence

2678:       from the gravitational Lagrangian, and hence the associated

2679:       variational principle leads to the same equations of motion.

2680:       Further, the metricity condition \eq{JK2} enables us to rewrite

2681:       $L$ in terms of the first derivatives of $\Kp^{\mu\nu}$: indeed,

2682:       replacing in \eq{JK2} the partial derivatives $

2683: \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \;, \alpha} $ by the covariant derivatives

2684: $\Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \alpha} $, calculated with respect to the

2685: background connection $\Bgamma$,\be\label{JK2.1} \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \

2686: ; \alpha} := \Kp^{\mu\nu} \left(

2687:   {\Gamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma} - {\Bgamma}^{\sigma}_{\alpha\sigma}

2688: \right) - \Kp^{\mu\sigma} \left( {\Gamma}^{\nu}_{\sigma\alpha} -

2689:   {\Bgamma}^{\nu}_{\sigma\alpha} \right) - \Kp^{\nu\sigma} \left(

2690:   {\Gamma}^{\mu}_{\sigma\alpha} - {\Bgamma}^{\mu}_{\sigma\alpha}

2691: \right) \;, \ee we may calculate $\KA^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}$ in terms

2692: of the latter derivatives. The final result is:

2693: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Pend2}

2694:   \KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu} & = &  \frac 12

2695:   \Kp_{\mu\alpha}  \Kp^{\lambda\alpha}_{\ \ ; \nu}

2696:   + \frac 12

2697:   \Kp_{\nu\alpha}  \Kp^{\lambda\alpha}_{\ \ ; \mu}

2698:   - \frac 12

2699:   \Kp^{\lambda\alpha} \Kp_{\sigma\mu} \Kp_{\rho\nu}

2700:   \Kp^{\sigma\rho}_{\ \ ; \alpha}

2701:   \nonumber \\   & &

2702:   +\frac 1{2(n-1)}

2703:   \Kp^{\lambda\alpha} \Kp_{\mu\nu} \Kp_{\sigma\rho}

2704:   \Kp^{\sigma\rho}_{\ \ ; \alpha} \;,

2705: \end{eqnarray}

2706: where by $\Kp_{\mu\nu}$ we denote the matrix inverse to

2707: $\Kp^{\mu\nu}$; we assume that $n\ge 2$. Further,

2708: \[ {\Gamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}-

2709:  {\Bgamma}^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} = - \KA^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} + \frac 1{n-1}

2710:  \Kp_{\sigma\rho}

2711:   \Kp^{\sigma\rho}_{\ \ ; (\mu}{\delta}^{\alpha}_{\nu)} \;.  \]

2712: We have \be\label{JK5alt} \frac{\partial L}{\partial

2713: \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \;, \lambda}} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial

2714: \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \lambda}}  = \frac{\partial L}{\partial

2715: \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}}\frac{\partial

2716: \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}}{\partial \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ;

2717: \lambda}} = \KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu}\;, \ee with the last equality

2718: being obtained by tedious but otherwise straightforward algebra.

2719: It follows that the tensor $ \KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu}$  is the

2720: momentum canonically conjugate to the contravariant tensor density

2721: $\Kp^{\mu\nu}$; prescribing this last object is of course

2722: equivalent to prescribing the metric. Alternatively, one can

2723: calculate

2724: \begin{eqnarray}

2725: L & =  & \frac 12 \Kp_{\mu\alpha} \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \lambda}

2726: \Kp^{\lambda\alpha}_{\ \ ; \nu} - \frac 14 \Kp^{\lambda\alpha}

2727: \Kp_{\sigma\mu} \Kp_{\rho\nu} \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \lambda}

2728: \Kp^{\sigma\rho}_{\ \ ; \alpha} \nonumber \\ & & + \frac 18

2729: \Kp^{\lambda\alpha} \Kp_{\mu\nu} \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \lambda}

2730: \Kp_{\sigma\rho}  \Kp^{\sigma\rho}_{\ \ ;

2731: \alpha}+\Kp^{\mu\nu}\zR_{\mu\nu}  -\frac{\sqrt{- \det

2732:       g_{\mu\nu}}}{8\pi}\Lambda\;.\label{defL}

2733: \end{eqnarray}

2734: and check  directly that \be\label{JK5}  \frac{\partial

2735: L}{\partial \Kp^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ ; \lambda}} =

2736: \KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu}\;. \ee

2737: 

2738:   Given a symmetric background connection

2739: $B$ on $M$, we take $L$ given by Equation~\eq{defL} as the

2740: \Lagrangian for the theory.  The canonical momentum $

2741: \KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu}$ is defined by Equation~\eq{Pend2} or,

2742: equivalently, by \Eq{JK5}. If ${\hyp}$ is any piecewise smooth

2743: hypersurface in $M$, we define {\em  the space-time phase bundle

2744: over $\hyp$ } as the collection of the $

2745: (\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\Kp^{\alpha\beta}) $'s over $\hyp$.  If $

2746: (\delta_a\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_a \Kp^{\alpha\beta}) $,

2747: $a=1,2$, are two sections over $\hyp$ of the bundle of vertical

2748: vectors tangent to the space-time phase bundle, following

2749: \cite{KijowskiGRG} we set \be\label{N.3g}

2750: \Omega_{\hyp}((\delta_1\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_1

2751: \Kp^{\alpha\beta}),(\delta_2\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_2

2752: \Kp^{\alpha\beta}))=\int_{\hyp}

2753: (\delta_1\KA^{\mu}_{\alpha\beta}\delta_2

2754: \Kp^{\alpha\beta}-\delta_2\KA^{\mu}_{\alpha\beta}\delta_1

2755: \Kp^{\alpha\beta})\rd S_\mu \, , \ee with the fields

2756: $(\delta_1\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_1 \Kp^{\alpha\beta})$ and

2757: $(\delta_2\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_2 \Kp^{\alpha\beta})$ such

2758: that the integrals converge. Here $\rdS_{\mu}$ is defined as

2759: \begin{equation}

2760:   \label{eq:dSdef}

2761:  \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}\lrcorner \rd x^0 \wedge\cdots

2762: \wedge\rd x^{n} \;,

2763: \end{equation}

2764:  where $\lrcorner$ denotes contraction.

2765: This can be loosely thought of as being the ``symplectic'' form on

2766: the gravitational phase space; however we will avoid this

2767: terminology since the definition of a symplectic form involves

2768: non-degeneracy conditions, which are quite subtle in an infinite

2769: dimensional context, and which we do not want to address.

2770: 

2771: To be more specific, let $\hyp$ be a hypersurface which is the

2772: union of a compact set with an asymptotic region $\hypext\approx

2773: [R_0,\infty)\times M$ parameterized by $(r,v^A)$ as in the body of

2774: this paper. Consider a background metric $b$ of the form

2775: \eq{eq:a1} defined on $\hypext$, with its associated tetrad $e_a$;

2776: we define the phase space $\cP_b$ as the space of those

2777: smooth\footnote{The condition of smoothness of the relevant fields

2778: is certainly not needed, and should be relaxed if an attempt is

2779: made to obtain a full symplectic description of the situation at

2780: hand.} sections $ (\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\Kp^{\alpha\beta}) $

2781: along $\hyp$ of the space-time phase bundle which satisfy the

2782: following conditions:

2783: \begin{enumerate}

2784: \item[${\mycal C} 1$.]

2785: First, we only allow those sections of the space-time phase bundle

2786: which arise from solutions of the vacuum Einstein equations with

2787: cosmological constant $\Lambda$ --- in particular the general

2788: relativistic constraint equations with cosmological constant

2789: $\Lambda$ have to be satisfied by the fields $

2790: (\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\Kp^{\alpha\beta}) $.

2791: \item[${\mycal C} 2$.] Next, the $e_a$-tetrad

2792: components of $g$ are required to be bounded on $\hypext$.

2793: Moreover,  we impose the integral condition

2794: \begin{equation}\int_\hypext  r\left(\sum_{a,b,c}

2795:     |\znabla_ae^{bc}|^2 + \sum_{d,e} |e^{de}|^2\right) \; d\mu_b <

2796:     \infty\;, \label{P1}\end{equation} where $e^{ab}$ are the

2797:     $e_a$-tetrad components of $g-b$. In \eq{P1} $d\mu_b$ is, as

2798:     before, the measure arising from the metric induced on $\hyp$ by

2799:     the background metric $b$; in local coordinates such that

2800:     $\hypext=\{t=0\}$ we have $d\mu_b=\sqrt{\det b_{ij}}drd^{n-1}v$,

2801:     with the indices $i,j$ running from $1$ to $n$.

2802: \item[${\mycal C} 3$.] Further,

2803: the fall-off conditions

2804: \begin{eqnarray}

2805:  e^{ab}= o(r^{-n/2})\;, \quad e_c(e^{ab})= o(r^{-n/2})\;.

2806:    \label{P1-}

2807: \end{eqnarray}

2808:  are assumed to hold on $\hypext$.

2809: \item[${\mycal C} 4$.]Finally, we shall assume that the

2810: following ``volume normalization condition'' is satisfied:

2811: \begin{equation}\int_\hypext  r|b_{cd}e^{cd}| \; d\mu_b <

2812:     \infty\;.  \label{P1+}\end{equation}

2813: \end{enumerate}

2814: (Recall that when $M$ is not parallelizable, then

2815:     conditions \eq{P1}, \eq{P1-}, {\em etc.},  should be understood as

2816:     the requirement of { existence of a covering of $M$ by a finite

2817:     number of  open sets ${\mycal O}_i$ together

2818:     with frames defined on $[R_0,\infty)\times {\mycal O}_i$

2819:     satisfying the relevant conditions.})

2820: 

2821: Whenever we consider variations

2822: $(\delta\KA^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta\Kp^{\alpha\beta}) $ of the

2823: fields in $\cP_b$, we will require that those variations satisfy

2824: the same decay conditions as the  fields in $\cP_b$.

2825: 

2826: From now on we shall assume that $B^\alpha_{\beta\gamma}$ is the

2827: Levi-Civita connection of the background metric $b$. A condition

2828: equivalent to \eq{P1}, and slightly more convenient to work with,

2829: is

2830: \begin{equation}\int_\hypext r \left(\sum_{a,b,c}

2831:     |e_a(e^{bc})|^2 + \sum_{d,e} |e^{de}|^2\right) \; d\mu_b <

2832:     \infty\;.  \label{P1equiv}\end{equation}

2833: This follows immediately from \Eqsone{eq:b3} and \eq{eq:b4}, which

2834: show that the $\znabla$-connection coefficients are bounded in the

2835: frame $e_a$. It follows that  the fall-off conditions

2836: \eq{C4}-\eq{C5} will ensure that ${\mycal C} 2$--${\mycal C} 4$

2837: hold.

2838: 

2839:  Let us show that

2840: \Eq{P1} guarantees that the integral defining $\Omega_\hyp$

2841: converges. In order to see that, consider the identity:

2842: \begin{eqnarray*}\znabla_{\alpha}e^{\mu\nu} & = &

2843: \znabla_{\alpha}g^{\mu\nu} =

2844: (\znabla_{\alpha}-\nabla_{\alpha})g^{\mu\nu}

2845: \\ & = & -g^{\mu\sigma}(\Gamma^\nu_{\sigma\alpha} -

2846: B^\nu_{\sigma\alpha})-g^{\nu\sigma}(\Gamma^\mu_{\sigma\alpha} -

2847: B^\mu_{\sigma\alpha}) \;.

2848: \end{eqnarray*}

2849: The usual cyclic permutations calculation allows one to express

2850: $\Gamma^\alpha_{\beta\gamma} - B^\alpha_{\beta\gamma}$ as a linear

2851: combination of the $\znabla_{\alpha}e^{\mu\nu} $'s. It then

2852: follows from \Eq{Pend} that the tetrad coefficients $p^a_{bc}$ of

2853: $p^\alpha_{\beta\gamma}$ are, on $\hypext$, linear combinations

2854: with bounded coefficients of the $\znabla_ae^{bc}$'s. In local

2855: coordinates on $\hypext$ we have

2856: $$\sqrt{|\det b_{\mu\nu}|}\sim r \sqrt{\det b_{ij}}\;,$$

2857: hence

2858: $$\int_{\hypext} |\delta p^t_{ab}|\;|\delta

2859: \Kp^{ab}| dr d^{n-1}v \le C \sum_{a,b,c,d,e}\int_{\hypext} r

2860: |\znabla_c\delta e^{de}|\;|\delta e^{ab}| d\mu_b <\infty\;.$$ Here

2861: the coordinate $x^0\equiv t$ has been chosen so that

2862: $\hypext=\{t=0\}$. Thus, $\Omega_\hyp$ is well defined on $\cP_b$,

2863: as desired.

2864: 

2865: Recall, now, that $\Omega_\hyp$ coincides up to boundary terms

2866: with the more familiar ``ADM symplectic form'' \cite{Kij1,Kij2}:

2867: one sets

2868: \begin{eqnarray} \label{Pkl}

2869:   P^{kl} & := & \sqrt{\det g_{mn}} \ (\gthreeup^{ij}K_{ij}

2870:   \gthreeup^{kl} - K^{kl} )\;,

2871: \end{eqnarray}

2872: where $K_{kl}$ is the extrinsic curvature of $\hyp$,

2873: \begin{eqnarray} \label{Kl} K_{kl} & := & - \frac

2874:   1{\sqrt{|g^{tt}|}} {\Gamma}^t_{kl}

2875: %= - \frac 1{\sqrt{|g^{tt}|}}  A^t_{kl}

2876: \;,

2877: \end{eqnarray}

2878: with $\gthreeup^{kl}$ --- the three-dimensional inverse of the

2879: induced metric $g_{kl}$ on $\hyp$; the indices on $K^{kl}$ have

2880: been raised using $\gthreeup^{kl}$.   If we further choose the

2881: coordinate $x^3$ in such a way that

2882: $\partial\hypext=\{t=0,x^3=1\}$, then the ``symplectic'' form

2883: (\ref{N.3g}) can be rewritten as~\cite{Kij1,Kij2}

2884: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

2885: \lefteqn{\Omega_{\hyp}((\delta_1 p^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_1

2886: \Kp^{\alpha\beta}),(\delta_2 p^{\lambda}_{\mu\nu},\delta_2

2887: \Kp^{\alpha\beta})) =   \frac 1{16 \pi} \int_\hyp \left( \delta_1

2888: g_{kl} \delta_2

2889:   P^{kl} -\delta_2 g_{kl} \delta_1 P^{kl} \right) d^{n}x} \\ &

2890:   \phantom{xxxxxxxxx} + \displaystyle\frac 1{16 \pi} \int_{\partial

2891:   \hyp} \left(\delta_1 N^3 \delta_2 \frac{\sqrt{\det g_{kl}}}{N} -

2892:   \delta_2 N^3 \delta_1 \frac{\sqrt{\det g_{kl}}}{N} \right)

2893:   d^{n-1}v\;, \label{nN.3.1jj}\end{eqnarray} where

2894:   $$N=1/\sqrt{-g^{tt}}\;,\quad N_k=g_{tk}\;,\quad

2895:   N^3=(g^{3k}-\frac{g^{t3}g^{tk}}{g^{tt}})N_k\;.$$ Let us show that

2896:   $\Omega_\hyp$ actually coincides with the ADM ``symplectic form'' on

2897:   $\cP_b$. It clearly follows from \eq{P1} (with

2898:   $e^{ab}$ replaced by $\delta e^{ab}$) that the volume integral there

2899:   converges as before; it remains to show that the boundary integral

2900:   vanishes.

2901: We have

2902: \begin{eqnarray*}

2903: \delta \left( \frac {\sqrt{\det g_{ij}}} {N} \right) & = & \delta

2904: \left(

2905:     \sqrt{|\det g_{\mu\nu}|}\right)

2906: \\

2907: & = & \delta \left( \sqrt{\frac {\det g_{\mu\nu}}{\det

2908:     b_{\mu\nu}}}\right) \sqrt{|{\det b_{\mu\nu}} |}

2909: \\

2910: &=& o(r^{-n/2})O(r^{n-1})= o(r^{n/2-1})\;.

2911: \end{eqnarray*}

2912: One easily checks the identity

2913: $$ N^3= \frac {f_0(r)}{\sqrt{|g^{tt}|}} \;,$$

2914: where $f_0$ is the future directed $g$-unit-normal to $\hyp$. We

2915: have

2916: \begin{eqnarray*}

2917:   g^{tt}\equiv g(dt,dt) &=& (\eta^{ab}+e^{ab})e_a(t)e_b(t)

2918: \\ &=& (\eta^{00}+e^{00})\left(e_0(t)\right)^2

2919: \\

2920: &=& (\eta^{00}+e^{00})|b^{tt}|\;,

2921: \end{eqnarray*}

2922: which gives

2923: $$\frac 1 {\sqrt{|g^{tt}|}}=O(r)\;,$$

2924: $$  \delta\left(

2925: \frac 1 {\sqrt{|g^{tt}|}} \right) = \delta\left(

2926:  \sqrt{\frac {b^{tt}}{g^{tt}}}\right)\frac 1{\sqrt{|b^{tt}|}} =

2927:  o(r^{-n/2+1})\;.$$ Further, $$ f_0(r) = f_0{}^be_b(r) =

2928:  f_0{}^1e_1(r)= o(r^{-n/2+1})\;,$$ $$\delta f_0(r) =\delta

2929:  f_0{}^1e_1(r)= o(r^{-n/2+1})\;,$$ where $e_a$ is a $b$-orthonormal

2930:  frame as in \Eq{frame}, and the vanishing of the boundary term in

2931:  \eq{nN.3.1jj} readily follows.

2932: 

2933: According to \cite{KijowskiTulczyjew} (see also

2934: \cite{CJK,KijowskiGRG}) the Hamiltonian associated with a one

2935: parameter family of maps of the phase space into itself which

2936: arise from  the flow of a vector field $X$ on the space-time

2937: equals \be\label{N.5g} H(X,{\hyp}\przecinekJped )=\int_{\hyp}

2938: (\KA^{\mu}_{\alpha\beta}\lie_X \Kp^{\alpha\beta} -X^\mu L)\rd

2939: S_\mu \, \ee {\em provided that all the integrals involved are

2940: well defined, and that the boundary integral in the variational

2941: formula

2942: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

2943:   -\delta H

2944:   & = & \int_{\hyp}\left(

2945:     \cLX\KA^{\lambda}{_{\mu\nu}}\delta\Kp^{\mu\nu}-\cLX\Kp^{\mu\nu}

2946:     \delta\KA^{\lambda}{_{\mu\nu}}\right) \rd S_\lambda

2947:   \phantom{xxxxxxxxxxx} \\ & &  +

2948:   \int_{\partial\hyp} X^{[\mu}{ \KA^{\nu ]}{_{\alpha\beta}} } \delta

2949:   \Kp^{\alpha\beta} \rdS_{\mu\nu} \;,

2950: \label{Hvar1g}

2951:   \end{eqnarray}

2952: vanishes.} In  the case when $\Bgamma$ is the metric connection of

2953: a given background metric $\bmetric_{\mu\nu}$, and when $X$ is a

2954: Killing vector field of $\bmetric_{\mu\nu}$, the identification

2955: \begin{eqnarray}

2956:   m(\hyp,g,b, X)&= &H(X,{\hyp}\przecinekJped )\;,

2957: \label{toto2}\end{eqnarray} together with the calculations in

2958: \cite{ChAIHP} leads to  \Eqs{toto}{Freud2.0}. More precisely, let

2959: $E^{\nu\lambda}$ be given by the formula \cite{ChAIHP}

2960: \begin{eqnarray}

2961:   E^{\nu\lambda}&= &  \displaystyle{\frac{2|\det

2962:   \bmetric_{\mu\nu}|}{ 16\pi\sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|}}}

2963: g_{\beta\gamma}(e^2 g^{\gamma[\nu}g^{\lambda]\kappa})_{;\kappa}

2964: X^\beta \nonumber \\ && + \frac 1{8\pi} \sqrt{|\det

2965: g_{\rho\sigma}|}~g^{\alpha[\nu}\delta^{\lambda]}_\beta

2966: {X^\beta}_{;\alpha}

2967: \;.\label{Freud2.01} %\nonumber

2968: \\

2969:   \label{mas2.1}

2970: e&=& {\sqrt{|\det

2971: g_{\rho\sigma}|}}/{\sqrt{|\det\bmetric_{\mu\nu}|}}\; .

2972: \end{eqnarray}

2973: It can be checked that all the formulae of

2974: \cite[Appendix~B]{ChAIHP} are dimension independent, and lead to

2975: the identity \be\label{N.5g1} E^\lambda :=

2976: \KA^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}\lie_X \Kp^{\alpha\beta} -X^\lambda L =

2977: E^{\nu\lambda}{}_{;\nu} +T^\lambda{}_\kappa X^\kappa\;, \ee where

2978: the matter energy-momentum tensor has been defined in \eq{N.5g2}.

2979: Now, when $b$ is the anti de Sitter metric, the integral of

2980: $E^\lambda dS_\lambda$ over large ``balls'' $B_R:=\{r\le R\}$

2981: within $\hyp$ would diverge if we tried to pass with the radius of

2982: those balls to infinity because we have $$ E^\lambda\Big|_{g=b}=

2983: -(\zRs-2\Lambda)X^\lambda/16\pi\;,$$ with $\zRs$

2984: --- the Ricci scalar of the background metric $b$, and

2985: $\zRs-2\Lambda=4 \Lambda/(n-1)$ in an $(n+1)$-dimensional

2986: space-time. We therefore add to $E^\lambda$ a $g$-independent term

2987: which will cancel this divergence: indeed, such terms can be

2988: freely added to the Hamiltonian because they do not affect the

2989: variational formula that defines a Hamiltonian.  {}From an energy

2990: point of view such an addition corresponds to a choice of the zero

2991: point of the energy. We thus set $$ \ourU^{\alpha\beta}:=

2992: E^{\alpha\beta}-E^{\alpha\beta}\Big|_{g=b} \;.$$ From the

2993: definition of $E^\lambda$ and from \Eq{N.5g1} one easily finds

2994: \begin{eqnarray}

2995: \nonumber

2996:   16\pi\znabla_\beta \ourU^{\alpha\beta} &= &    \left( \sqrt{|\det g|}

2997:     g^{ab} - \sqrt{|\det b|}    b^{ab}\right) \zRm_{ab} X^\beta

2998: \\ & &  +2 \Lambda \left(\sqrt{|\det b| }- \sqrt{|\det g| }\right)X^\beta

2999: \nonumber \\ & & +

3000: \left(\mathring{T}^\lambda{}_\kappa-T^\lambda{}_\kappa\right)X^\kappa

3001: \nonumber \\ & & + \sqrt{|\det    b|} \;\left( Q^\alpha{}_{\beta}

3002: X^\beta + Q^\alpha{}_{\beta \gamma}

3003:     \znabla^\beta X^\gamma\right)\;, \label{C3}\end{eqnarray} where

3004:     $Q^\alpha{}_{\beta}$ is a quadratic form in $e_a(e^{bc})$, and

3005:     $Q^\alpha{}_{\beta \gamma}$ is bilinear in $e_a(e^{bc})$ and

3006:     $e^{ab}$, both with bounded coefficients. Further,

3007: $\mathring{T}^\lambda{}_\kappa$ is defined as in \Eq{N.5g2} with

3008: $g$ replaced by $b$.

3009: 

3010: From now on we assume that both $g$ and $b$ are Einstein, and we

3011: only consider vector fields $X$ which are $b$-Killing vector

3012: fields and satisfy \be \label{A1.}|X|+ |\zn X| \le C r \ee

3013:  for some constant $C$; this holds for

3014: all the backgrounds considered in Appendix~\ref{Aiso}, in

3015: particular for the generalized Kottler metrics \eq{Kottler2}.

3016: Theorem~\ref{T0} then shows that the integral defining $H$

3017: converges for fields in $\cP_b$.

3018: 

3019: Suppose, further, that the $b$-Killing vector field $X$ has the

3020: property that {\em the associated variations of the fields are

3021: compatible with the boundary conditions} imposed on fields in

3022: $\cP_b$. This means in particular that we must have

3023: \begin{equation}\int_\hyp  r\sum_{a,b,c}

3024:     | \lie_X \left(\znabla_a e^{bc}\right)|^2 \;

3025: d\mu_b < \infty\;.

3026:     \label{eqP2}\end{equation}

3027:   Clearly the volume

3028:     integral in the variational formula \eq{Hvar1g} converges under

3029: \eq{eqP2} together with the remaining conditions set forth above.

3030: Further,  the boundary integral there vanishes under \eq{P1-}, so

3031: that \Eq{N.5g} does indeed provide the required Hamiltonian on

3032: $\cP_b$.

3033: 

3034: For Killing vectors satisfying \eq{A1.} \Eq{eqP2} will hold if

3035: \begin{equation}\int_\hyp  r^3\sum_{a,b,c,d}

3036:     | \left(\znabla_a \znabla_d e^{bc}\right)|^2 \; d\mu_b < \infty\;,

3037:     \label{eqP2.1}\end{equation} but we emphasize that the weaker

3038:     condition \eq{eqP2} suffices.

3039: 

3040: \section{Isometries and Killing vectors of the background}\label{Aiso}

3041: 

3042: 

3043: \subsection{$(n+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter metrics}

3044: \label{Aai1}

3045: 

3046: \newcommand{\Y}{{\mycal Y}}

3047: %{\R^{n,2}}%{{\mycal Y}}

3048: 

3049: For $n\ge 2$ consider the $(n+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter

3050: space-time $(\cM,b)$, thus $b$ is given by \eq{eq:a1a}

3051: %\begin{equation}

3052: %\label{app-AdS}

3053: %b = -\left( \frac{r^2}{\ell^2} +1\right) dt^2 + \left( \frac{r^2}{\ell^2}

3054: %+1\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2 h\;,

3055: %\end{equation}

3056: with $h$ --- the unit round metric on the $(n-1)$-dimensional

3057: sphere ${}^{(n-1)}S$. As elsewhere we set $\hyp = \{t=0\}.$ When

3058: $\mn$ is the two-dimensional sphere, the Killing vectors of $b$

3059: are given in \cite{HT}. For higher dimensional spheres the

3060: $b$-Killing vector fields are easily found by thinking of $b$ as

3061: the metric induced on the covering space of the hyperboloid

3062: \begin{equation}

3063:   \label{hyp}

3064:   \eta_{(a)(b)} y^{(a)}y^{(b)} =-\ell^2

3065: \end{equation}

3066: in the $(n+2)$-dimensional manifold $\Y$ with the

3067: metric\footnote{$\Y$ can be identified with the universal covering

3068: of the space obtained by removing the set $y^{(0)}=y^{(n+1)}=0$

3069: from $\R^{n+2}$; $\Y$ then inherits the local coordinates

3070: $y^{(a)}$ used in \Eq{locy}. However, in order to understand the

3071: geometry of $\cM$ in a neighbourhood of $\hyp$ it is sufficient

3072: --- and most convenient --- to  think of $\Y$ as of $\R^{n+2}$.}

3073: \be\label{locy} \eta_{(a)(b)}dy^{(a)}dy^{(b)} = -(dy^{(0)})^2 +

3074: \sum_{(i)=(1)}^{(n)}(dy^{(i)})^2 -(dy^{(n+1)})^2\;. \ee Throughout

3075: this section the indices $(a),(b)$, \emph{etc.,\/} run from $ (0)$

3076: to $(n+1)$. The hyperboloid can be locally parameterized by

3077: coordinates $t$, $x^i$ implicitly defined by the

3078: equations\footnote{The spherical coordinates associated to the

3079:   ``cartesian'' coordinates $x^i$ give the form (\ref{eq:a1a}) of the

3080:   metric $b$.}

3081: \begin{equation}

3082: \label{transf1} y^{(0)} = \ell\cos (t/\ell)\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2} \;,

3083: \end{equation}

3084: \begin{equation}

3085: \label{transf2} y^{(n+1)} = \ell \sin (t/\ell)\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2}

3086: \;,

3087: \end{equation}

3088: \begin{equation}

3089: \label{transf3} y^{(i)} =x^i\;,

3090: \end{equation}

3091: with $r^2 = \sum_{i=1}^n (x^i)^2$, where $x^i=r n^i$, and

3092: $n^i\in{}^{(n-1)}S$ can eventually be expressed in terms of

3093: coordinates on the sphere ${}^{(n-1)}S$. For example, for $n=3$ we

3094: can use $x^1=r \sin(\theta)\cos(\varphi)$, $x^2 =r \sin(\theta)

3095: \sin(\varphi)$, $x^3= r \cos(\theta)$, with $\theta,\varphi$ ---

3096: the usual spherical coordinates.  It is also convenient to

3097: represent the hypersurface $\hyp \subset \cM$ given by $\hyp

3098: =\{t=0\}$ as $\{\eta_{(a)(b)} y^{(a)}y^{(b)} =-\ell^2\}\cap

3099: \{y^{(n+1)} =0, y^{(0)}

3100: >0\} \subset \Y$. We set

3101: \begin{equation}

3102:   \label{Lor2}

3103: L_{(a)(b)} = y_{(a)} \frac{\partial~~}{\partial y^{(b)}} -y_{(b)}

3104: \frac{\partial~~}{\partial y^{(a)}}\;,

3105: \end{equation}

3106: where $y_{(a)}=\eta_{(a)(b)} y^{(b)}$. The $L_{(a)(b)}$'s are

3107: Killing vector fields of $(\Y,\eta_{(a)(b)})$. Further they are

3108: tangent to the hyperboloid $\{\eta_{(a)(b)} y^{(a)}y^{(b)}

3109: =-\ell^2\}$ and hence define, by restriction, Killing vector

3110: fields of the hyperboloid with the induced metric. In fact they

3111: span the space of all the Killing vectors of $b$ because there is

3112: the right maximal number of them.  From the coordinate

3113: transformation (\ref{transf1})-(\ref{transf3}) one can compute the

3114: corresponding Killing vectors of anti de Sitter space-time in the

3115: coordinates $\{t,x^i\}$, obtaining

3116: $$

3117: L_{(n+1)(0)} = \ell\frac{\partial }{\partial t}\;,

3118: $$

3119: $$

3120: L_{(i)(n+1)} = \frac{x^i}{\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2}} \cos(t/\ell)

3121: \frac{\partial }{\partial t} + \ell\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2}

3122: \sin(t/\ell)

3123: %(\delta_{i}^j+n^in^j)

3124: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\;,

3125: $$

3126: $$

3127: L_{(i)(0)} = -\frac{x^i}{\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2}} \sin(t/\ell)

3128: \frac{\partial }{\partial t} +\ell\sqrt{1+r^2/\ell^2} \cos(t/\ell)

3129: %(\delta_{i}^j+n^in^j)

3130: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\;,

3131: $$

3132: $$

3133: L_{(i)(j)} = x^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} - x^j

3134: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\;.

3135: $$

3136: Let $\cKS$ be the set of Killing vector fields of $b$ which are

3137: orthogonal to $\hyp$; from the expressions above it is not

3138: difficult to check that a vector basis for $\cKS$ is given by

3139: $\frg_{(\mu)} = L_{(n+1)(\mu)}|_{t=0}$, where $(\mu)$ runs from

3140: $(0)$ to $ (n)$.

3141: 

3142: \begin{Proposition}

3143: \label{app-lemma1} Let $\Phi:\cM \to \cM$ be an isometry of $b$

3144: such that $\Phi(\hyp)=\hyp$.  Then there exists  a Lorentz

3145: transformation matrix $\Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)}$ such that the

3146: basis vectors of $\cKS$ satisfy

3147: $$\Phi_{*}\frg_{(\mu)} = \Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)} \frg_{(\nu)}\;.$$

3148: \end{Proposition}

3149: \remark We note that the property $\Phi_*(\cKS) =\cKS$ follows

3150: from the fact that $\Phi$ preserves $\hyp$, which implies that

3151: $\Phi$ maps the field of unit normals to $\hyp$ into itself.

3152: 

3153: \medskip

3154: 

3155: \proof As is well known, for every isometry $\Phi:\cM \to \cM$ of

3156: $b$ there exists a diffeomorphism $\hat{\Phi}:\Y \to \Y$, isometry

3157: of $\eta_{(a)(b)}$, such that $\Phi$ is the restriction of

3158: $\hat{\Phi}$ to the hyperboloid \eq{hyp}. In  coordinates we have

3159: \begin{equation}

3160:   \label{Lor0}\hat{\Phi}^{(a)}(y) =

3161:   \Lambda^{(a)}{}_{(b)}y^{(b)}\;,\end{equation}

3162: where $\Lambda^{(a)}{}_{(b)}$ is a matrix satisfying

3163: \begin{equation}

3164:   \label{Lor}

3165:   \Lambda^{(c)}{}_{(a)} \Lambda^{(d)}{}_{(b)} \eta_{(c)(d)} =

3166: \eta_{(a)(b)}\;.

3167: \end{equation}

3168: The hypersurface $\hyp \subset \Y$ is given by

3169: $\eta_{(a)(b)}y^{(a)}y^{(b)} =-1$ and $y^{(n+1)} =0$ together with

3170: the condition $y^{(0)} >0$, so that the condition

3171: $\hat{\Phi}(\hyp) =\hyp$ implies

3172: $$

3173: \Lambda^{(a)}{}_{(b)} = \left[

3174: \begin{array}{cc}

3175: \Lambda^{(\mu)}{}_{(\nu)} & 0 \\

3176: 0 & \pm 1

3177: \end{array}

3178: \right]\;,

3179: $$

3180: where we split the indices as $(a)=(\mu), (n+1)$.

3181: Equation~\eq{Lor} shows that $\Lambda^{(\mu)}{}_{(\nu)}$ is a

3182: $n+1$-dimensional Lorentz transformation,

3183: $(\Lambda^{(\mu)}{}_{(\nu)})\in O(1,n)$. Equations~\eq{Lor0} and

3184: \eq{Lor2} imply that under push-forward by $\hat{\Phi}$ the

3185: Killing vectors of $\eta_{(a)(b)}$ transform as

3186: $$

3187: \hat{\Phi}_{*}L_{(a)(b)} = \Lambda^{(c)}{}_{(a)}

3188: \Lambda^{(d)}{}_{(b)} L_{(c)(d)}

3189: $$

3190: in particular, the basis vectors of $\cKS$ transform as

3191: \begin{eqnarray*}

3192: \hat{\Phi}_{*}\frg_{(\mu)} &=&

3193: \hat{\Phi}_{*}L_{(n+1)(\mu)}\Big |_{\hat{\Phi}(y^{(n+1)}) =0} \\

3194: &=& \Lambda^{(c)}{}_{(n+1)} \Lambda^{(d)}{}_{(\mu)}

3195: L_{(c)(d)}\Big |_{y^{(n+1)} =0} \\

3196: %&=& \Lambda^{(d)}{}_{(\mu)} L_{(n+1)(d)}\Big |_{y^{(n+1)} =0} \\

3197: %&=& \Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)} L_{(n+1)(\nu)}\Big |_{y^{(n+1)} =0} \\

3198: %\hat{\Phi}_{*}\frg_{(\mu)}

3199: &=& \pm \Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)} \frg_{(\nu)}.

3200: \end{eqnarray*}

3201: Replacing $\Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)}$ by

3202: $-\Lambda^{(\nu)}{}_{(\mu)}$ if necessary, the result follows.

3203:  \qed

3204: 

3205:  Let $\cKt$ be the space of $b$- Killing vectors spanned by the

3206:  $L_{(\mu)(\nu)}$'s, thus $\cKt$ contains all the $L_{(a)(b)}$'s

3207:  which are not in $\cKS$.  An identical calculation as in the proof

3208:  above shows that under isometries of $b$ preserving $\hyp$ we have

3209: \begin{eqnarray} \label{remK}

3210: \hat{\Phi}_{*}L_{(\mu)(\nu)} &=&

3211:  \Lambda^{(\sigma)}{}_{\mu} \Lambda^{(\rho)}{}_{(\nu)}

3212: L_{(\sigma)(\rho)}\;.

3213: \end{eqnarray}

3214: It follows %that $\cKt$ is mapped into itself by such isometries, and

3215: that the resulting representation of the Lorentz group on $\cKt$

3216: is equivalent to a representation on two-contravariant

3217: anti-symmetric tensors.

3218: 

3219: %$\Phi(\cK)=\cK$, where $\cK$ the set of killing vectors of $b$

3220: % which are tangent to the hypersurface $\hyp$.

3221: 

3222: 

3223: 

3224: 

3225: 

3226: \subsection{$h$'s with a non-positive Ricci tensor} \label{Aai2}

3227: We consider metrics \eq{A1}, as in Section~\ref{S2}. In what

3228: follows we shall only consider $(M,h)$'s with a non-positive Ricci

3229: curvature, with $n\ge 3$, the case $n=2$ being covered by the

3230: previous section. We shall further assume that the scalar

3231: curvature $R_h$ of $h$ (the Ricci scalar) is a constant. We note

3232: that the vector fields

3233: \begin{equation}

3234:   \label{A5}

3235:   X=X^0 n= {\lambda\over a}n = \lambda \partial_t \;,\qquad \lambda \in \R\;,

3236: \end{equation}

3237: where $n=e_0$ is the field of future pointing unit normals to the

3238: hypersurfaces $\{t=\mathit{const}\}$, are  Killing vector fields

3239: for the metric $b$ whatever $a=a(r)$. The non-vanishing connection

3240: coefficients, $$\zo^{a}{}_{bc}\equiv \theta^a(\zn_{e_c}e_b)\;,$$

3241: with respect to this frame  are

3242: \begin{equation}

3243:   \label{A2}

3244:   \zo^A{}_{1B}=  \frac 1 {ra(r)} \delta ^A_B= -\zo^1{}_{AB}\;,\quad

3245:   \zo^A{}_{BC}= \frac 1r \beta^A{}_{BC}\;, \quad \zo_{100}=-\zo_{010}

3246:   = -{a'(r)\over a^2(r)}\;,

3247: \end{equation}

3248: where the $\beta^A{}_{BC}$ are the

3249:  Levi-Civita connection coefficients of $h$ with respect to  the frame

3250:  $\alpha^A$.

3251:  The $AB$ components of the Killing equations read

3252: \begin{equation}

3253:   \label{eq:A1}

3254:   \caD_A X_B + \caD_B X_A + {1\over  a(r)}h_{AB}X^1 =0\;,

3255: \end{equation}

3256: where $\caD$ is the covariant derivative operator associated with

3257: the metric $h$, which shows that $X^B\partial_B$ is a conformal

3258: Killing vector field on $M$. Uniqueness of solutions of the

3259: volume-normalized Yamabe equation in the case under consideration

3260: implies that conformal Killing vector fields of $(\mn,h)$ are

3261: necessarily Killing vectors, hence

3262: $$X^1\equiv 0\;.$$

3263: The $00$, $01$ and $0A$ components of the Killing equations read

3264: \begin{eqnarray}

3265:   \label{eq:A2}

3266:   e_0(X_0)& = & 0\;,

3267: \\  \label{eq:A3}

3268:   e_1(X_0)+ {a'\over a^2} X_0& = & 0\;,

3269: \\  \label{eq:A4}

3270:   e_A(X_0)+e_0(X_A)& = & 0\;.

3271: \end{eqnarray}

3272: Equation~\eq{eq:A2} shows that $X_0$ is $t$-independent.

3273: 

3274: Suppose, first, that the Ricci tensor of $h$ is strictly negative.

3275: It is well known\footnote{\label{Kf}The Killing equations imply

3276:   $X_B\caD_C\caD^C X^B =

3277:   -R_{AB} X^AX^B$, where $R_{AB}$ is the Ricci tensor of $h$;

3278: integration of this equation over $\mn$ shows that $X^A$ is

3279: covariantly constant when $R_{AB}$ is non-positive, and vanishes

3280: when $R_{AB}$ is strictly negative.} that in this case $(\mn,h)$

3281: has no non-trivial Killing vector fields so that $X^A\equiv 0$,

3282: and Equation~\eq{eq:A4} shows that $X_0$ is $v^A$-independent.

3283: Integrating \eq{eq:A3} yields then the  one parameter family of

3284: Killing vector fields \eq{A5}, which shows that the algebra of all

3285: Killing vector fields of $b$ is one-dimensional.

3286: 

3287: Suppose, next, that $(M,h)$ is an $(n-1)$-dimensional flat torus

3288: $(\T^{n-1},\delta)$. Then the $X^A$'s are covariantly

3289: constant$^{\mathrm{\ref{Kf}}}$ vector fields on $\T^{n-1}$, which

3290: shows that $X^A=X^A(t,r)$ in coordinates $v^A$ in which the metric

3291: $\delta$ has constant entries. Integrating \eq{eq:A4} over

3292: $\T^{n-1}$ gives

3293: $$0= \int_{\T^{n-1}} e_A(X_0) = -e_0(X_A)\;\mathrm{Vol}(\T^{n-1})\;,$$

3294: hence $X_A=X_A(r)$. Equation~\eq{eq:A4} implies then that $X_0$ is

3295: $v^A$-independent, so that $X_0=X_0(r)$,  from \eq{eq:A3} we

3296: recover \eq{A5}, and $\cKS$ is again one-dimensional, as claimed.

3297: We note that the $1A$ component of the Killing equation implies

3298: that the $X^A$'s are in fact $r$-independent, which gives a

3299: complete description of the set of Killing vector fields occurring

3300: in this case.

3301: 

3302: The above arguments extend to all manifolds with constant scalar

3303: curvature and non-positive Ricci curvature, as follows: suppose

3304: that $(\mn,h)$ has non-trivial Killing vector fields. The $1A$

3305: component of the Killing equations gives

3306: $$e_1(X_A) - {1\over ra} X_A = 0 \quad \Longrightarrow \quad X^A =

3307: X^A(t,v^A)\;.$$

3308:  Integration of Equation~\eq{eq:A3} gives

3309:  \begin{equation}

3310:    \label{A6}

3311:    X^0 = {\lambda(v^A)\over a(r)}\;,

3312:  \end{equation}

3313: for some function $\lambda$ on $\mn$. Equation~\eq{A5} inserted

3314: into \eq{eq:A4} gives

3315: $$e_A(\lambda)=-a^2(r)\partial_t X^A\;,$$

3316: which is compatible with \Eq{A5} only if $\partial_t X^A=0$, hence

3317: $e_A(\lambda)=0$. Summarizing, we have proved

3318: 

3319: \begin{Proposition}

3320:   \label{PA1} If $(\mn,h)$ has non-positive Ricci curvature and

3321:   constant scalar curvature, then all Killing vector fields of the

3322:   metric $b$ given by \Eq{A1} are of the form

3323: $$X={\lambda \over a} n + X^A(v^B)\partial _A\;, \qquad\lambda \in

3324: \R\;,$$ where $X^A(v^B)\partial _A$ is a Killing vector field of

3325: the metric $h$.

3326: \end{Proposition}

3327: 

3328: \section{Equality of the Hamiltonian mass with the Abbott-Deser one}

3329: \label{AAD}

3330: 

3331: In this appendix we consider a subset  $\R\times \Sigma_{\ext}$ of

3332: a four dimensional space-time $(\cM,g)$ defined by

3333:  a coordinate system $\{x^{\alpha}\}$; we identify

3334: $\Sigma_{\ext}$ with the set $ \{x^{\alpha} : x^0 =0\}$. The space

3335:  coordinates $(x^i)$ on $\Sigma_{\ext}$ will be written as $(r,v^A)$,

3336:  with the range of $r$ being $[R_0,\infty)$, and with the $v^A$ being

3337:  local coordinates on some compact two dimensional manifold. Assume that

3338: there exists a frame $\{ e_a\}_{a=0}^3$ defined on

3339: $\Sigma_{\ext}$, which defines a background metric

3340: $b^{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{ab} e_a^{\alpha}e_b^{\beta}$, where

3341: $\eta^{ab} = \mbox{diag}(-1,1,1,1)$. In other words, the tetrad

3342: $\{e_a\}$ is orthonormal with respect to $b_{\alpha\beta}$. Assume

3343: that in this frame the space-time metric $g$ has the form

3344: $$g_{ab} = \eta_{ab} + e_{ab}\;,$$

3345: where $$e_{ab} = o(1/r^{\alpha})\:,\qquad e_a(e_{bc}) =

3346: o(1/r^{\alpha}) %\;,\qquad \alpha >3/2

3347: \;,$$ for some $\alpha>0$.  The Abbott-Deser mass $M_{AB}$

3348: associated with $X$ is defined as \cite{AbbottDeser}

3349: \begin{equation}

3350: \label{m-ab} M_{AB} =  \frac{1}{2} \lim_{R \to \infty}

3351: \int_{\partial \Sigma_R} V^{\alpha\beta} dS_{\alpha\beta}\;,

3352: \end{equation}

3353: where

3354: \begin{equation}

3355: \label{m-ab1} V^{\alpha\beta}(h)= \frac{1}{8\pi}\, b \left(

3356: K^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}{}_{;\kappa} X_{\sigma} -

3357: K^{\alpha\kappa\sigma\beta} X_{\sigma;\kappa} \right) \;, \ee with

3358: $$K^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa} =

3359: b^{\alpha[\kappa}H^{\sigma]\beta} +

3360: H^{\alpha[\kappa}b^{\sigma]\beta}\;,\quad H^{\alpha\beta} =

3361: e^{\alpha\beta} -\frac{1}{2} e_{\gamma}{}^{\gamma}

3362: b^{\alpha\beta}\;,$$

3363: $$ b= \sqrt{|\det b_{\mu\nu}|}\;.$$

3364:  Note that

3365: $\tK^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}$ has the same symmetries as the

3366: Riemann tensor. Let $\ourU^{\alpha\beta}$  be the ``Hamiltonian

3367: superpotential'' defined by  \eq{Fsup2new}; assume that

3368: \begin{equation}

3369: \label{m-ab2} (|X| + |\nabla X|)b = O(r^\beta)\;, \ee

3370:  we then

3371: claim that

3372: $$\ourU^{\alpha\beta} = \myvareps

3373: \,\tV^{\alpha\beta} + \oepsb\;.$$ In order to establish this,

3374: recall that

3375: \begin{eqnarray*}

3376: \det(g_{\alpha\beta}) &=&

3377: \det\left(b_{\alpha\gamma}\left[\delta^{\gamma}{}_{\beta} +

3378: \myvareps

3379: b^{\gamma\sigma}\th_{\sigma\beta} + \oeps\right]\right) \\

3380: &=& \det(b_{\alpha\gamma}) \det(\delta^{\gamma}{}_{\beta} +

3381: \myvareps e^{\gamma}{}_{\beta})\;,

3382: \end{eqnarray*}

3383: where $e^{\gamma}{}_{\beta} = b^{\gamma\sigma}\th_{\sigma\beta} +

3384: \oeps$. A well known identity gives

3385: $$

3386: \det(g_{\alpha\beta}) = \det(b_{\alpha\beta}) \left(1 + \myvareps

3387: \, \th_{\gamma}{}^{\gamma} + \oeps \right)\;.

3388: $$

3389: Let us write $\ourU^{\alpha\beta} =\ourU^{\alpha\beta}{}_{\gamma}

3390: X^{\gamma} + \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta}$, where

3391: $$

3392: \ourU^{\alpha\beta}{}_{\gamma} := \frac{1}{8\pi} \frac{b}{e}

3393: \left(e^2 g^{\sigma[\alpha} g^{\beta]\kappa}\right)_{;\kappa}

3394: g_{\gamma\sigma}\;,

3395: $$

3396: $$

3397: \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} := \frac{1}{8\pi} \left( \sqrt{|\det

3398: g_{\rho\sigma}|} \; g^{\kappa[\alpha}\delta^{\beta]}{}_{\gamma} -

3399: b \; b^{\kappa[\alpha} \delta^{\beta]}{}_{\gamma} \right)

3400: X^{\gamma}{}_{;\kappa} \;.

3401: $$

3402: We have

3403: $$

3404: e^2 = 1+ \myvareps \,\th_{\alpha}{}^{\alpha} + \oeps \;,$$ so that

3405: the first term above can be written as

3406: \begin{eqnarray*}

3407: {\ourU}^{\alpha\beta}{}_{\gamma} &=& \frac{1}{8\pi} b \left[ (1+

3408: \myvareps \th_{\alpha}{}^{\alpha} + \oeps) \left(b^{\sigma[\alpha}

3409: b^{\beta]\kappa} - \myvareps \,

3410: b^{\sigma[\alpha}\th^{\beta]\kappa} - \myvareps

3411: \,\th^{\sigma[\alpha} b^{\beta]\kappa}

3412: + \oeps\right)\right]_{;\kappa} b_{\gamma\sigma}\\

3413: &=& \frac{b}{8\pi} \,\myvareps \, b_{\gamma\sigma} \left(

3414: \th_{\rho}{}^{\rho} \,b^{\sigma[\alpha} b^{\beta]\kappa} -

3415: b^{\sigma[\alpha} \th^{\beta]\kappa} - \th^{\sigma[\alpha}

3416: b^{\beta]\kappa} \right)_{;\kappa}

3417: + \oepsb \\

3418: &=&- \frac{b}{8\pi}\, \myvareps \,b_{\gamma\sigma} \left(

3419: b^{\sigma[\alpha} \tH^{\beta]\kappa} + \tH^{\sigma[\alpha}

3420: b^{\beta]\kappa} \right)_{;\kappa} + \oepsb

3421: \end{eqnarray*}

3422: so that

3423: $$

3424: {\ourU}^{\alpha\beta}{}_{\gamma} = \frac{b}{8\pi} \, \myvareps\,

3425: b_{\gamma\sigma} \tK^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}{}_{;\kappa} +

3426: \oepsb\;.

3427: $$

3428: Similarly,

3429: \begin{eqnarray*}

3430: \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} &:=& \frac{1}{8\pi} \left(

3431: \sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|} \;

3432: g^{\kappa[\alpha}\delta^{\beta]}{}_{\gamma} - b \;

3433: b^{\kappa[\alpha} \delta^{\beta]}{}_{\gamma} \right)

3434: X^{\gamma}{}_{;\kappa}\\

3435: &=& \frac{1}{8\pi} \left( \sqrt{|\det g_{\rho\sigma}|} \;

3436: g^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} - b \; b^{\kappa[\alpha}

3437: b^{\beta]\gamma} \right)

3438: X_{\gamma;\kappa} \\

3439: &=& \frac{b}{8\pi} \left[ \left(1+ \frac{1}{2}\, \myvareps \th +

3440: \oeps\right) \left(b^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} - \myvareps

3441: \, \th^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} + \oeps\right)

3442: - b^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} \right] X_{\gamma;\kappa}\\

3443: &=& - \frac{b}{8\pi} \,\myvareps

3444: \tH^{\kappa[\alpha}b^{\beta]\gamma} X_{\gamma;\kappa}  + \oepsb\;.

3445: \end{eqnarray*}

3446: Now, $X_{\gamma}$ is a Killing vector of $b_{\mu\nu}$, therefore

3447: \begin{eqnarray*}

3448: \tH^{\kappa[\beta}b^{\alpha]\gamma} X_{\gamma;\kappa}

3449: &=& \tH^{\kappa[\beta}b^{\alpha]\gamma}X_{[\gamma;\kappa]}\\

3450: &=& \frac{1}{2} \left(\tH^{\kappa[\beta}b^{\alpha]\gamma}

3451: - \tH^{\gamma[\beta}b^{\alpha]\kappa} \right) X_{\gamma;\kappa}\\

3452: &=& \frac{1}{2} \tK^{\kappa\gamma\alpha\beta}X_{\gamma;\kappa}\;,

3453: \end{eqnarray*}

3454: so, we have obtained

3455: $$

3456: \widehat{\ourU}^{\alpha\beta} = \frac{b}{16\pi} \, \myvareps

3457: \tK^{\kappa\gamma\alpha\beta}X_{\gamma;\kappa} + \oepsb\;.

3458: $$

3459: The two terms together give

3460: \begin{eqnarray*}

3461: \ourU^{\alpha\beta}&=& \frac{b}{8\pi}\, \myvareps  \left(

3462: \tK^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}{}_{;\kappa} X_{\sigma} +

3463: \frac{1}{2}\,\tK^{\kappa\gamma\alpha\beta}X_{\gamma;\kappa}\right)

3464: + \oepsb\\

3465: &=& \frac{b}{8\pi}\, \myvareps  \left(

3466: \tK^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}{}_{;\kappa} X_{\sigma} -

3467: \frac{1}{2}\,\tK^{\alpha\beta\gamma\kappa}X_{\gamma;\kappa}\right)

3468: + \oepsb\;.

3469: \end{eqnarray*}

3470: As $\tK^{\alpha\beta\gamma\kappa}$ has the same symmetries as the

3471: Riemann tensor, we have $\tK^{\alpha[\beta\gamma\kappa]} =0$,

3472: which implies that $\frac{1}{2} \, \tK^{\alpha\beta\gamma\kappa} =

3473: \tK^{\alpha[\kappa\gamma]\beta}$, and

3474: \begin{eqnarray*}

3475: \ourU^{\alpha\beta}&=& \frac{b}{8\pi}\, \myvareps  \left(

3476: \tK^{\alpha\beta\sigma\kappa}{}_{;\kappa} X_{\sigma} -

3477: \tK^{\alpha[\kappa\gamma]\beta}X_{\gamma;\kappa}\right)

3478: + \oepsb\\

3479: &=& \myvareps \, \tV^{\alpha\beta} + \oepsb\;.

3480: \end{eqnarray*}

3481: If \be\label{abcond} \beta - 2 \alpha \le 0\;,\ee we obtain

3482: equality of the Abbott-Deser mass with the Hamiltonian one; recall

3483: that $\beta=n$ for the anti-de Sitter type metrics considered in

3484: the body of the paper, and \Eq{abcond} reproduces the condition

3485: $\alpha \ge n/2$,  identical to that which arises in the proof of

3486: coordinate-invariance of the mass integral.

3487: 

3488: Summarizing, we have proved:

3489: 

3490: \begin{Proposition}

3491: Suppose that \Eqsone{m-ab1}, \eq{m-ab2} and \eq{abcond} hold. Then

3492: the Hamiltonian mass coincides with the Abbott-Deser one; in

3493: particular, either they are both undefined, or both diverge, or

3494: both converge to the same values.

3495: \end{Proposition}

3496: 

3497: \textbf{Acknowledgements:} PTC acknowledges useful discussions

3498: with S.~Ilias, A.~Polombo and A.El Soufi. We appreciated the

3499: friendly hospitality of the Max Planck Institute for Gravitation

3500: in Golm during final stages of work on this paper.

3501: 

3502: %%% Local Variables:

3503: %%% mode: latex

3504: %%% TeX-master: "a"

3505: %%% End:

3506: 

3507: %\cite{Aros,WaldZoupas,YorkBrown}

3508: \addcontentsline{toc}{1}{\bigskip \noindent  {\bf References \hfill}}

3509: 

3510: \bibliographystyle{amsplain}

3511: %\bibliographystyle{/usr/share/texmf/tex/revtex/prsty}

3512: \bibliography{%ptjjk,

3513: ../../references/newbiblio,%

3514: ../../references/reffile,%

3515: ../../references/bibl,%

3516: ../../references/Energy,%

3517: ../../references/hip_bib,%

3518: ../../references/netbiblio}

3519: %\texttt{\input{READMEl}}

3520: \end{document}

3521: 

3522: %%% Local Variables:

3523: %%% mode: latex

3524: %%% TeX-master: t

3525: %%% End:

3526: