arXiv:2008.13370v3 [gr-qc] 15 Dec 2020 cpcojcsi h nvre [ universe” the in objects scopic o sacsil oa bevra nnt Bb nyi the if only (Bob) infinity [ at conditions observer energy an classical to accessible is zon Cs[ UCOs h aao st aeahrznesUOo eua black regular a or UCO horizonless a have to infa is paradox the [ the precipitates paradox radiation loss Hawking information mous the hand, other the [ radiation Hawking [ interesting UCOs. horizonless are they thus black and are not, they do or i.e., cand regions, hole light-trapping black contain astrophysical dates observed issue the the of whether One singulari is hole. a stake black and regular singularity-free horizon a event be an or as other such possess features, may hole classical black physical [ o it A approximate clocks only meaning. lifespan their have asymptotic to can finite according solutions time a hole black finite with Otherwise, in formed observers be distant to has to relevant be To boundary. outer evolving its is zon [ spheri expansion with negative have surface topology two-dimensional spacelike tha a strong at o so geodesics inating is null there future-directed in Gravity outgoing and formalized region. ingoing is both trapped a escape of can notion nothing the which from region time solu- hole black of relevance physical [ tions th the (UCOs), about objects debate [ ultracompact astronomy old wave of mind” gravitational observations human the direct of and the successes the by to Thanks conceived concepts mysterious ac r ace yasneo nvral cetddefi- accepted universally a [ of nition absence by matched are cance lc oe r ecie oha tems efc macro- perfect most “the as both described are holes Black unu fet aetebakhl hsc particularly physics hole black the make effects Quantum [ region trapped a such contains hole black physical A iest foiin bu lc oe n hi signifi- their and holes black about opinions of Diversity 3 7 a enrfae saqeto bu h aueof nature the about question a as reframed been has ] 4 .Hwvr h oeie fabakhl saspace- a as hole black a of idea core the However, ]. – 6 ]. 9 – est,pesr,adflxa ecie ya naln obse infalling an by b metric. perceived Kerr–Vaidya as accreting flux symmetric and spherically pressure, density, A derive We numerically. different. it is m location locate Kerr–Vaidya its outgoing metric, the ingoing the in For horizon di apparent structure The its that tensors. show the we However, momentum, (NEC). angular condition nonzero ergy For Newman–Jan metrics. Kerr-Vaidya The and holes. black physical sph outgoing accreting the the and and of orating mass limits decreasing near-horizon with metric the Vaidya with ingoing them compare and ties 11 eateto hsc srnm,McureUiest,S University, Macquarie Astronomy, & Physics of Department erViy erc r h ipetnnttoayextens nonstationary simplest the are metrics Kerr–Vaidya eateto hsc srnm,McureUiest,S University, Macquarie Astronomy, & Physics of Department , 14 .INTRODUCTION I. 9 – , 17 11 otenUiest fSineadTcnlg,Seze 51 Shenzhen Technology, and Science of University Southern .O h n ad naprn hori- apparent an hand, one the On ]. , hnhnIsiuefrQatmSineadEgneig De Engineering, and Science Quantum for Institute Shenzhen 14 a rcsl hspoet.On property. this precisely has ] 8 , 18 16 1 – n soeo h “most the of one as and ] , 8 20 – 17 10 r iltd[ violated are ] .Oewyt resolve to way One ]. .Teaprn hori- apparent The ]. erViy lc holes black Kerr–Vaidya rvnKmrDahal Kumar Pravin 8 .The ]. ailR Terno R. Daniel holes 13 12 rig- at s cal 2 ty, i- ]. ]. ]. e - r t h paethrzn n rsneo firewall. a of presence and locatio horizons conditions, energy apparent the the of violation the on focusing h eeatpoete fteshrclysmercsolut Sec. symmetric In spherically the of properties relevant the t [ by given metrics Kerr–Vaidya are so-called distribution mass variable symmetric axially cla the [ spher of collapse result the asymptotic of sical the artifact is an metric not Kerr The is firewall symmetry. the that verify to tant remain scalars curvature the while fl finite. Alice, and by hol pressure, experienced density, black energy as energy physical divergent the Accreting to of lead violation it solutions require. of and they amount solutions, that the there hole conditions identify black symmetry to of spherical possible classes In is possible two results. only concrete are ob of to as- allows number it the a statements, horiz Once mathematical apparent into singularity-free translated form. a is of do formation holes of black sumption physical that sumption firewall. eciednmc i h isenequations Einstein the via dynamics describe 29 [ collapse gravitational the of product final the as hole ag ubro iheeg oe [ a encounters modes instead high-energy but of horizon, number hole black large the not does at (Alice) vacuum observer a infalling the information that the posits of paradox resolution conditi Another energy existence. the their of for violation a require also objects These hr h isentensor Einstein the where h riaydfeeta qainfrti ufc and surface this for equation differential ordinary the vr eso htti sas refrteoutgoing the for true also is this that show We rver. akhl ed oafieal—advretenergy divergent a — firewall a to leads hole lack euecasclntos(oios rjcois etc.), trajectories, (horizons, notions classical use [ we gravity ] semiclassical of framework the in Working elatohsclojcsaerttn.Hnei simpor- is it Hence rotating. are objects astrophysical Real [ approach self-consistent A stasomto eae h orsodn Vaidya corresponding the relates transformation is fr rmtesadr omo h NEC-violating the of form standard the from ffers oso h ermti.W xlr hi proper- their explore We metric. Kerr the of ions adamti ihicesn as o h evap- the for mass) increasing with metric Vaidya I ERHRZNRGOSO SPHERICALLY OF REGIONS NEAR-HORIZON II. rclysmercsl-ossetsltos(the solutions self-consistent symmetric erically ti onie ihta fteKr lc hole. black Kerr the of that with coincides etric nrymmnu esrvoae h ulen- null the violates tensor energy-momentum de e ot ae 19 utai and Australia 2109, Wales South New ydney de e ot ae 19 Australia 2109, Wales South New ydney III edsusterailysmerccounterparts, symmetric axially their discuss we 05 unog China Guandong, 8055, 1 YMTI LC HOLES BLACK SYMMETRIC , ateto Physics, of partment 8 , 9 .Tesmls oesta lo o an for allow that models simplest The ]. G µν 13 25 seutdt h expectation the to equated is , – 22 27 – .I Sec. In ]. 16 24 , trswt h as- the with starts ] 21 ,kona the as known ], G µν II ereview we 8 = 15 πT 4 ions. , , of n loss tain and ical ons see 28 µν 5 ux on he s- ]. e , , 2

ˆ value Tµν = Tµν ω of the renormalized energy-momentum Using the Einstein equations and the relationships between tensor (EMT).h Fori simplicity we consider an asymptotically components of the EMT in two coordinates systems [24] one flat space. We do not make any specific assumptions apart can show that from (i) the apparent horizon was formed at some finite time of Bob, (ii) it is regular, i.e., the curvature scalars, such as C+(v, r)= r+(v)+ w1(v)x + ..., (8) µ R µν µν 2 T := T µ /8π and T := T Tµν R Rµν /64π are h+(v, r)= χ1(v)x + ..., (9) ≡− R ≡ µ finite at the horizon. (Here Rµν and := R µ are the Ricci tensor and the Ricci scalar, respectively). where r+(v) is the radial coordinate of the apparent horizon, A general spherically symmetric metric in the C+(v, r+) r+, x =: r r+(v).As a result, at the apparent Schwarzschild coordinates is given by horizon both≡ the metric corresponds− to the Vaidya geometry ′ ′ with C+(v)=2M (v) < 0. 2 2h(t,r) 2 −1 2 2 ′ ds = e f(t, r)dt + f(t, r) dr + r dΩ, (1) If rg > 0 it is useful to switch to the retardednull coordinate − u. The near-horizon geometry is then described by the Vaidya ′ where r is the areal radius. The Misner-Sharp mass [10, 30] metric with C−(u) > 0. µ M(t, r) is invariantly defined via 1 2M/r := ∂µr∂ r, and A static observer finds that the energy density ̺ = − µ ν t µ ν r f(t, r)=1 2M(t, r)/r. The apparent horizon is located at Tµν u u = T t, the pressure p = Tµν n n = T r, and − − µ ν µ µ the Schwarzschild radius rg that is the largest root of f(t, r)= the flux φ := Tµν u n (where u is the four-velocity and n 0 [10, 31]. is the outward-pointing radial spacelike vector), diverge at the Only two near-horizonforms of the EMT and the metric are apparent horizon. A radially infalling Alice moves on a trajec- consistent with the above two assumptions. Here we consider µ tory xA(τ) = (T (τ), R(τ), 0, 0). Horizon crossing happens the generic form that agrees with the ab initio calculations not only at some finite proper time τ0, rg T (τ0) = R(τ0), of the EMT on the background of the Schwarzschild solution but thanks to the form of the metric also at a finite time T (τ0) [32]. In this case the leading terms in the expansion of the of Bob.
metric functions in terms of x := r rg(t) are However, experiences of Alice are different at the apparent − horizon of an evaporating and accreting physical black holes. ′ 2M(t, r)= rg w√x + (x), (2) For an evaporating black hole, r < 0, energy density, pres- − O g 1 x sure and flux are finite. For example, if we approximate the h(t, r)= ln + √x , (3) near-horizon geometry by a pure outgoing Vaidya metric with −2 ξ O ′
M (v) < 0, Alice’s energy density at the horizon crossing is where the function ξ(t) is determinedby the choice of the time Υ2 variable (and requires for its determination knowledge of the ̺< = p< = φ< = , (10) 2 2 3 A A A 2 full solution of the Einstein equations), and w := 16πΥ rg −4R˙ characterizes the leading behavior of the EMT [13]. ′ In particular, in the orthonormal basis the (tˆrˆ) block of the at rg = R. For an accreting black hole, rg > 0, Alice ex- EMT near the apparent horizon is given by periences the divergent values of energy density, pressure and flux, Υ2 1 1 2 2 T ˆ = ± . (4) 2R˙ Υ aˆb − f 1 1 ̺> = p> = φ> = + (F −1), (11) ±  A A − A − F 2 O The upper (lower) signs of T correspond to evaporation tˆrˆ in the vicinity of the apparent horizon, as F := f(T, R) 0. (growth) of the physical black hole. Consistency of the Ein- Thus an expanding trapped region is accompanied→ by a stein equations results in the relation firewall— a region of unbounded energy density, pressure, ′ and flux—that is perceived by an infalling observer. Unlike r / ξ = 4√π Υ√rg = w/rg. (5) g ± ± the firewall from the eponymous paradox, it appears as a con- The null energy conditionp (NEC) requires T lµlν > 0 for all sequence of regularity of the expanding apparent horizon and µν its finite formation time. The divergent energy density leads to null vectors lµ [8, 19, 20]. It is violated by radial vectors laˆ = (1, 1, 0, 0) for the evaporating and the accreting solutions, a violation [23, 24] of the inequality that bounds the amount respectively∓ [13]. of negative energy along a timelike trajectory in a moderately Null coordinates allow to represent the near-horizon geom- curved spacetime [33]. As a result a physical black hole, once formed, can only evaporate. Another possibility is that the etry in a simpler form. The advanced null coordinate v, semiclassical physics breaks down at the horizon scale. − − dt = e h(eh+ dv f 1dr), (6) − ′ III. KERR–VAIDYA METRIC is useful in the case rg < 0. A general spherically symmetric metric in (v, r) coordinates is given by A general time-dependent axisymmetric metric contains C+ seven functions of three variables (say, t, r and θ) that en- ds2 = e2h+ 1 dv2 +2eh+ dvdr + r2dΩ. (7) − − r ter the Einstein equations via six independent combinatons   3

[1]. However, to verify that certain predictions of the self- vector e2ˆ ∂θ and the remaining vector e3ˆ is found by com- consistent approach (such as a firewall at an expanding appar- pleting the∝ basis, the EMT takes the form ent horizon) are not an artefact of the spherical symmetry, it is enough to consider a simpler geometry. ν ν q2ˆ q3ˆ 2ˆ 3ˆ The Kerr metric can be represented using either the ingoing ˆ ν ν q q T aˆb =   . (16) [34] q2ˆ q2ˆ 0 0  3ˆ 3ˆ  2Mr 4aMr sin2 θ  q q 0 0  ds2 = 1 dv2 +2dvdr dvdψ   − − ρ2 − ρ2     Explicit expressions for the tetrad vectors and the matrix ele- (r2 + a2)2 a2∆ sin2 θ ments are given in Appendix B. 2a sin2 θdrdψ+ ρ2dθ2 + − sin2 θdψ2, − ρ2 For an arbitrary null vector laˆ = ( 1,naˆ), naˆ = − (12) (cos α, sin α cos β, sin α sin β) the NEC becomes or the outgoing null congruences [1], ν(1 cos α) + 2 sin α(q2ˆ cos β + q3ˆ sin β) > 0. (17) − 2 2Mr 4aMr sin θ 2ˆ ds2 = 1 du2 2dudr dudψ This inequality is satisfied if and only if ν > 0 and q = − − ρ2 − − ρ2 3ˆ 2ˆ 3ˆ   q = 0. The condition q = q = 0 holds only when a = 0, (r2 + a2)2 a2∆ sin2 θ so the metric reduces to its Vaidya counterpart and the EMT +2a sin2 θdψdr+ ρ2dθ2 + − sin2 θdψ2, ρ2 becomes a type II tensor. Only in this case the NEC may be (13) satisfied. Each type of the EMT is characterized by its Lorentz- where ρ2 := r2 + a2 cos2 θ, ∆ := r2 2Mr + a2, and invariant eignevlaues [18, 19]. These are the eigenvalues of − the matrix T aˆ , i.e., the roots of the equation a = J/M is the angular momentum per unit mass. ˆb The easiest way to obtain this result is to follow the ˆ ˆ ˆ complex-valued Newman–Janis transformation [35] starting det(T aˆb ληaˆb)=0, ηaˆb = diag( 1, 1, 1, 1). (18) with the Schwartzschild metric written in the ingoing or the − − outgoing Eddington–Finkelstein coordinates. The simplest The EMT of Eq. (16) has a single quadruple-degenerated nonstationary generalizations of the Kerr metric are obtained Lorentz-invariant eigenvalue λ = 0. On the other hand, two by introducing evolving masses M(v) and M(u). The metric of the eigenvalues of the matrix λ˜ of T aˆˆb are nonzero, ofEq.(13) with a variable M(u) is obtained from the retarded Vaidya metric [36, 37]. By using the advanced Vaidya metric 2 2 2 λ˜ , = ν 2(q + q )+ ν . (19) of Eq. (7) as the seed metric, the metric of Eq. (12) can be 1 2 ± 2ˆ 3ˆ obtained following the same procedure (Appendix A). q As a result the EMT tensor (16) cannot be broughtto a generic type III form by an arbitrary similarity transformations unless λ˜ = λ˜ , which is impossible for M ′ =0 (see Appendix B A. Energy conditions 1 2 for the− details). 6 A schematic form of the EMT in both cases is B. Apparent horizon Too 0 Toθ Toψ 000 0 Tµν = , (14) The apparent horizon of the Kerr black hole coincides with Toθ 0 0 Tθψ  its event horizon. It is located at the largest root of ∆=0, Toψ 0 Tθψ Tψψ   µ 2 2 where o = u, v. Using the null vector k = (0, 1, 0, 0) [25] r0 := M + M a . (20) − the EMT can be represented as For both the ingoing and the outgoingp Vaydia metrics the ap- Tµν = Tookµkν + qµkν + qν kµ, (15) parent horizon is located at rg = r0 = 2M. For the metric (13) the relation rg = r0 also holds [39], but it fails for the where the components of Tµν and of the auxiliary vector qµ, metric (12)[27]. In this case the difference rg(v,θ) r0(v) is µ − qµk =0, for both cases are given in Appendix B. The EMT of the order Mv . [for the metric Eq. (13)] was identified in Ref. [38] as belong- We now identity| | its location in the foliations with the hy- ing to the type [(1, 3)] in the Segre classification [18], i.e., to persurfaces v = const. The standard approach [40, 41] for the type III of the Hawking–Ellis classification [8, 19], indi- constructing the ordinary differential equation for the appar- cating that the NEC is violated for any a =0. ent horizon is based on exploiting properties of a spacelike A detailed investigation reveals some interesting6 properties foliation. It cannot be used in this case as the foliating hyper- of this EMT. We use a tetrad in which the null eigenvector surfaces are timelike. However, since the approximate loca- µ aˆ µ aˆ k = k eaˆ has the components k = (1, 1, 0, 0), the third tion of the apparent horizon is known, we obtain the leading 4

z -5 ×10 to the families of affinely parametrized null geodesics in the 3.5 bulk. 3. One approach to calculation of the expansion uses its ge- ometric meaning as a relative rate of change of the two- 2.5 dimensional cross section area [8, 34]. Consider an infinites- z′/z max imal geodesic triangle (x x x ) on the surface S . It is de- 2. 1 in θ ψ 0 fined by three vertices 0.5 1.5 θ µ µ µ µ µ µ µ π π /2 xin, xψ = xin + bψδψ, xθ = xin + bθ δθ. (21) 1. -0.5 -1 0.5 The two tangent vectors µ µ θ µ ∂x µ ∂x 0 π/4 π/2 3π/4 π b := , b := , (22) ψ ∂ψ θ ∂θ S0 S0

FIG. 1. Location of the apparent horizon relative to r0 for M = 1, 2 introduce a metric two-tensor a = 0.1, Mv = −κ/M = 0.01. The equation was first solved ′ as a boundary value problem z(0) = 0, z (π/2) = 0, resulting in µ ν −5 σAB := gµν b bB, A,B = θ, ψ. (23) zm := z(π/2) ≈ 3.57 × 10 . Solution of the initial value problem A ′ z(π/2) = zm, z (π/2) = 0 coincides with the previous one within −15 −6 1 the relative precision of 2 × 10 outside δ = 10 interval from The area of the triangle (xinxθxψ) is δA = 2 √σδθδψ, where 2 the poles. σ = σ11σ22 σ12 is the determinant of the two-dimensional metric. Under− the geodesic flow xµ xµ + lµ(x)dλ the coordinates θ and ψ are comoving and→ thus constant for the three vertices, but both the metric g and the vectors bA evolve correction in Mv by using the methods of analysis of null con- with λ. gruences and hypersurfaces [34]. Calculating the ratio of the first-order area change δA(λ + Assume that at some advanced time v the apparent horizon dλ) δA(λ) to the initial area of the triangle allows to obtain the expansion− by using the relation S0(v) is located at rg = r0(v) + z(θ), where the function z(θ) is to be determined. Once the future-directed outgoing 1 d√σ null geodesic congruence orthogonal the surface is identified, ϑ = , (24) calculating the expansion ϑ and equating it to zero results in √σ dλ the differential equation for z(θ). There are at least two equiv- where λ is the affine parameter. Solution of the second-order alent ways to obtain this equation. differential equation ϑ(z)=0 gives the desired function z(θ). The outward and inward-pointing null vectors lµ and N µ, An alternative derivation is based on the direct evaluation of µ respectively, are defined on S0. They are orthogonal to its ϑ = l;µ on S0 (see Appendix C for the details). µ tangents and can be normalized by the condition Nµl = 1. If both z(θ) and its derivatives are much smaller than r0, These vectors can be extended to the fields of tangent vectors− we obtain a linear ordinary differential equation for z,

2 2 2 2 ′′ ′ 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 8r (a + r ) (z + cot θz ) (r a ) a +7a r +8r + a (r a )cos2θ z 8r a (a + r ) sin θMv =0, (25) 0 0 − 0 − 0 0 0 − − 0 0

′ ′′ ′ where the regular singular term (cot θz + z ) is a standard the assumption z r0 is clearly valid, leads to feature of the apparent horizon equations [40, 41]. Symmetry | | ≪ a2M r considerations lead to the condition z(0) = z(π)=0. The v 0 4 5 (26) ′ zser = 2 2 θ + (θ ). second initial condition z (π)=0 ensures that the surface of 16(a + r0) O the apparent horizon is smooth [40]. For Mv > 0 it implies that at least near the poles rg > r0, i.e., at r = r0 the expansion is still negative. However, this is impossible: at the poles the null congruence that is orthogonal A typical result of the numerical solution is depicted in to the two-dimensional surface r = r0 [27] has ϑ> 0. More- Fig. 1. It was obtained by imposing the boundary conditions over, using this solution to provide the initial values z(θ), z(0) = 0 and z′(π/2)= 0, that enforces the equatorial sym- z′(θ) at some θ = ǫ 1 leads to inconsistencies. ′ ≪ metry. The assumption of z r0 fails near the poles, where We investigated stability of this result in numerical exper- | | ≪ 2 z =0. This is not an artefact of the approximation. Using the iments. For a fixed Mv = κ/M the initial value problem ′ − series solutions of Eq. (25) with the conventional initial con- z(π/2) = z0, z (π/2) = 0, where z0 is some number, leads ditions z(0) = 0, z′(0)=0 [40, 41], i.e., in the regime where to a well-behaved numerical solution. However, the condi- 5 tions z(0) = z(π)=0 are satisfied within a prescribed tol- It is easy to see that for a = 0 we recover the firewall of the erance only for a very narrow range of the values z0 around outgoing Vaidya metric. zm = z(π/2) of the numerical solution of the above boundary Violations of the NEC are bounded by quantum energy in- value problem. We will provide a full analysis of the apparent equalities (QEIs) [20, 42]. For spacetimes of small curvature horizon in a future work. explicit expressions that bound time-averaged energy density for a geodesic observer were derived in Ref. [33]. For any Hadamard state ω and a sampling function f(τ) of compact C. Firewall support, negativity of the expectation value of the energy den- ˆ µ ν sity ρ = Tµν ωu u as seen by a geodesic observer that All components of the EMT (14) are finite at the apparent moves on ah trajectoryi γ(τ) is bounded by horizon. Divergences of the comoving parameters can appear only as a result of divergences in the components of the four- f2(τ)ρdτ > B(R, f,γ), (34) − velocity of Alice. We now show that similarly to the spher- Zγ ically symmetric geometries density and pressure in Alice’s where is a bounded function that depends on the tra- frame are finite if Alice crosses the apparent horizon in the B > 0 jectory, the Ricci scalar and the sampling function [33]. metric of Eq (12), but diverge for the metric of Eq. (13). Consider a growing apparent horizon, ′ . For sim- In the spherically symmetric case Alice was a zero angular r0(u) > 0 plicity we consider a polar trajectory . For a macro- momentum observer (ZAMO) [9, 34]. In axially symmetric θ = 0 scopic black hole the curvature at the apparent horizon is low spacetimes the ZAMO condition results in a nontrivial angular and thus Eq. (34) is applicable. Horizon radius (and mass, as velocity Ψ . We begin with the retarded Kerr–Vaidya metric, Z in this model a = const), do not appreciablychange while Al- where the apparent horizon is located at r = r . Alice’s four- g 0 ice moves in its vicinity. Hence dM/dτ = M ′(U)U˙ const velocity is ≈ and X˙ R˙ . Given Alice’s trajectory we can choose f 1 µ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ≈ ≈ uA = U, R, Θ, ΨZ , (27) at the horizon crossing and f 0 within the NEC-violating domain (as Eq. (12) can be valid→ only in the vicinity of the where the ZAMO condition ξψ uA =
0, where the Killing · horizon). As the trajectory passes through X0 + rg rg the vector ξψ = ∂ψ, implies Ψ˙ Z = (g U˙ + g R˙ )/g . Dur- → − uψ rψ ψψ lhs of Eq. (34) behaves as ing the fall ˙ . The velocity component ˙ is obtained R< 0 U > 0 ′ 2 M r2R˙ 2dτ from the normalization condition uA = 1, 2 0 − f ρAdτ 2 2 ≈− 4πX (r0 M) ˙ 2 Zγ Zγ − R 2 2 1 U˙ = (r + a )+ (∆(1 + ρ2Θ˙ 2)+ ρ2R˙ 2)Σ , Mτ r0 dX − ∆ ∆ρ log X0 , (35) q ≈ γ 8πM(r0 M)X ∝ → −∞ (28) Z − 2 2 2 2 2 where Σ = (a + r )ρ +2a rM sin θ. As X := R(τ) ′ ˙ ˙ −1 − where Mτ = M U and we used R const. The rhs of r0 U(τ) 0 the derivative U˙ diverges as ∆ , ∼ → Eq. (34) remains finite, and thus the QEI is violated. This
2r RM˙ violation indicates that the apparent horizon cannot expand, U˙ = 0 + (X). (29) similarly to the spherically symmetric case. −X(r M) O 0 − On the other hand, nothing dramatic happens to the comov- The energy density in Alice’s frame is given then by ing density and pressure in the ingoing Kerr–Vaidya metric. Following the same steps we find that, e.g., the comoving en- 2 guψ guψ 2 −1 ergy density for the motion in the equatorial plane (Θ= π/2, ρ = Tuu + Tψψ 2Tuψ U˙ + ∆ , A g − g O Θ=0˙ ), is  ψψ  ψψ ! (30)
Tvv 2 resulting in ρA = + (a ). (36) 4R˙ 2 O ( 2M ′ (2M r ) sin2 θM ′′)r2R˙ 2 ρ − − − 0 0 This quantity is finite and for a =0 reduces to Eq. (10). A ≈ 8πX2(r M)2 0 − ′ 2 2 ′′ 2 ( 2r0M a sin θM )r0R˙ = − − . (31) IV. DISCUSSION 8πX2(r M)2 0 − We choose the spacelike direction analogously to the spheri- Extending the self-consistent approach of horizon analysis cally symmetric case, to the axially symmetric spacetimes is difficult.Kerr–Vaidya nA = ( R,˙ U,˙ 0, 0). (32) metrics are the simplest nonstationary extension of the Kerr µ − solution. All Kerr–Vaidya metrics violate classical energy Then (after setting Θ=0˙ ), conditions. While it could have been previously considered as a drawback, this violation is a necessary condition to describe ′ 2 2 ′′ ˙ 2 µ ν ( 2r0M a sin θM )r0R an object with a trapped region that is accessible, even in prin- p = Tµν n n − − . (33) A A A ≈ 8πX2(r M)2 ciple, to a distant observer. Moreover, Kerr–Vaidya metrics 0 − 6 are related by the Newman–Janis transformation to the pure of a pair of real [1] Vaidya metrics that describe the geometry of physical black holes near their apparent horizons. µ µ 1 µ l = δv + f(v, r)δr , (A1) These simple geometries have several remarkable proper- 2 nµ = δµ (A2) ties. The EMT of the Kerr-Vaidya metric, while violating the − r NEC for all a = 0 is a special case of type III form of the EMT in the Segre–Hawking–Ellis6 classification. An expand- and a pair of complex-conjugate vectors ing spherically symmetric apparent horizon leads to a fire- 1 i wall and violates the quantum energy inequality that bounds mµ = δµ + δµ , m¯ µ = (mµ)∗, (A3) √2r θ sin θ ψ the amount of negative energy in spacetimes of low curva-   ture. The outgoing Kerr-Vaidya metric has the same property, that satisfy the standard completeness and orthogonality rela- showing that the firewall is not an artifact of spherical sym- tions, metry. µ µ µ The apparent horizon of the outgoing Kerr-Vaidya metric l lµ = l mµ = l m¯ µ =0, coincides with the event horizon r = M + √M 2 a2 of the µ µ µ µ 0 − n nµ = n mµ = n m¯ µ = m mµ =0, (A4) Kerr metric, M(u) = const. For the ingoing the two surfaces µ µ l nµ = m m¯ µ = 1. are different. However, the difference z(θ)= rg r0 is small − − ′ ′ − if M (v) 1, as in this case z M . However, while at The metric the| poles |z ≪(0) = z(π)=0, a commonly∝ used assumption ′ z (0) = 0 does not hold. As a result, the apparent horizon is ds2 = f(v, r)dv2 +2dvdr + r2dθ2 + r2 sin2 θdψ2, (A5) not a smooth surface. − The assumption a = const is incompatible with the con- where f(v, r)=1 2M(v)/r, is rewritten as − tinuous eventual evaporation of a physical black hole, as for gµν = lµnν lν nµ + mµm¯ ν + mν m¯ µ. (A6) M

′ 1 ′ l µ = δµ + F(v,r,θ)δµ, n µ = δµ, (A11) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v 2 r − r ′µ 1 µ µ µ i µ m = ia (δv + δr ) sin θ + δθ + δψ , The work of PKD is supported by IMQRES. Useful dis- √2(r ia cos θ) sin θ −   cussions with Pisin Chen, Eleni Kontou and Sebastian Murk, (A12) and helpful comments of Luis Herrera, Joey Medved and AJ Terno are gratefully acknowledged. where after restricting to the real-valued coordinates F =1 2M(v)r/ρ2. (A13) − Appendix A: The Newman–Janis Substituting these explicit expressions into the transformed transformation of the advanced Vaidya metric metric g′µν = l′µn′ν l′ν n′µ + m′µm¯ ′ν + m′ν m¯ ′µ, (A14) The procedure follows the Newman-Janis prescription [35, − − 37] that is applied to the Vaidya metric in advanced coordi- produces the Kerr-Vaidya metric in the advanced coordinates nates as the seed metric. We use the null tetrad that consists that is given in Eq. (12). 7

Appendix B: Energy-momentum tensor and the NEC qµ = q2ˆeµ + q3ˆeµ with 2ˆ 3ˆ violation for Kerr–Vaidya metric a2rM q2ˆ = v sin 2θ, (B17) The nonzero components of the energy-momentum tensor − 8πρ5 for the Kerr–Vaidya metric in advanced coordinates are 2 2 2 ˆ a(r a cos θ)Mv q3 = − sin θ. (B18) − 8πρ5 r2(a2 + r2) a4 cos2 θ sin2 θ a2r sin2 θ Tvv = − Mv Mvv, 4πρ6 − 8πρ4 A generic form [19] of a type III EMT is (B1) a2r sin θ cos θ ̺ 0 ϕ 0 Tvθ = Mv, (B2) 4πρ4 aˆˆb 0 ̺ ϕ 0 − T =  −  . (B19) r2 a2 cos2 θ ϕ ϕ ̺ 0 T = a sin2 θT a sin2 θ − M , (B3)  −  vψ vv 4 v  0 0 0 p  − − 8πρ   a3r sin3 θ cos θ   Tθψ = Mv, (B4) All four Lorentz-invariant eigenvalues are zero if and only if 4πρ4 ̺ = p =0. In this case the nonzero eigenvalues of the matrix 2 2 2 aˆˆb 4 4 r a cos θ are T = a2 sin θT + a2 sin θ − M . (B5) T ψψ vv 4πρ4 v λ˜1,2 = √2ϕ. (B20) The nonzero components of the energy-momentum tensor for ± the Kerr–Vaidya metric in retarded coordinates are Appendix C: Apparent horizon in the outgoing r2(a2 + r2) a4 cos2 sin2 θ a2r sin2 θ Vaidya metric Tuu = − Mu Muu, − 4πρ6 − 8πρ4 (B6) On a hypersurface v = const we introduce the surface co- 2a2r sin θ cos θ ordinates (˘r,θ,φ) where the bulk coordinate r is expressed in Tuθ = Mu, (B7) terms of the coordinates r˘ and θ as − 8πρ4 2 2 2 2 2 r a cos θ r =r ˘ + z(θ), (C1) Tuψ = a sin θTuu + a sin θ − Mu, (B8) − 8πρ4 2a3r sin3 θ cos θ for some function z. Locating the apparent horizon rg(v,θ) is Tθψ = Mu, (B9) then expressed as a problem of finding the function z(θ) such 8πρ4 that r = r (v)+ z(θ). While the function z also depends on 2 2 2 g 0 2 4 2 4 (r a cos θ) v, it does not affect the derivation below and this dependence Tψψ = a sin θTuu a sin θ − Mu. − 4πρ4 is omitted. (B10) Two spacelike vectors that are tangent to the surface r˘ = const are In the advanced coordinate the decomposition (15) of the µ ′ µ µ µ µ EMT is obtained with the vectors bθ = z (θ)δr + δθ , bψ = δψ. (C2)

2 kµ = (1, 0, 0, a sin θ), (B11) We obtain the outward- and inward-pointing future-directed − null vectors l+ l and l− N by using the orthogonality ± µ ≡ ≡ v and condition lµ bA = 0. Before the rescaling l = 1 and the normalization N l = 1 the two null vectors are given by 2 2 2 · − 2 r a cos θ qµ = 0, 0,Tvθ, a sin θ − Mv . (B12) ± ′ − 8πρ4 l ( 1,ℓ±, ℓ±z (θ), 0). (C3)   µ ∝ − − µ µ µ The two values of ℓ± are obtained from the null condition The orthonormal tetrad with where k = eˆ + eˆ is given by 1 0 l± l± =0, · eµ = ( 1,rM/ρ2, 0, 0), (B13) 0ˆ 1 2 2 − ℓ± = r + a eµ = (1, 1 rM/ρ2, 0, 0) (B14) ∆+ z′2 1ˆ − µ  e = (0, 0, 1/ρ, 0) (B15) 2a2rM sin2 θ + ρ2 (a2 + r2) a2z′2 sin2 θ . 2ˆ ± − µ 1 q (C4) e = a sin θ,a sin θ, 0, csc θ . (B16)  3ˆ ρ
After setting lv = 1 the leading order components of the Hence the EMT is given by Eq. (16) with ν = Tvv and future-directed outward-pointing null vector orthogonal to the 8 two-surface r = r0 + z(θ) are respectively, the cross section tangents evolve as

v l =1, (C5) µ µ µ µ µ bψ bψ, bθ bθ + ∂θl (xin)dλ. (C13) (r2 a2)z′ → → r 0 (C6) l = −2 2 , 2r0(r0 + a ) ′ The area differential dδA (d√σ/dλ)dλ is evaluated by θ z ∝ (C7) subtracting σ(xin) from the first-order expansion in dλ l = 2 2 , −r0 + a of σ(x ). The desired Eq. (25) is obtained by setting a fn p lψ = dδA =0. r2 + a2 p 0 An alternative derivation is based on extending the vector a(a4 7a2r2 10r4 a2(r2 a2)cos2θ)z µ + − 0 − 0 − 0 − , (C8) field l from the hypersurface v = const to the bulk in such 2 2 µ 4r0(r0 + a ) a way that the new field ˚l satisfies the geodesic equation ˚lµ˚lν = 0. In fact, this needs to be done only on the hyper- where we assume that and ′ . ;ν z r0 z r0 surface itself, where it is realized by setting We now consider the| | change ≪ in the| | two-dimensional ≪ area µ µ after one infinitesimal step δλ of the evolution xin xfn, where → ˚lµ := lµ, (C14)

µ (C9) xin = (v, r0 + z(θ), θ, 0), ˚0 0 µ µ µ µ and thus l = l =1, xfn = xin + l (xin)dλ, (C10) ˚µ µ and λ is the affine parameter. l;m := l ;m, (C15) The determinant of the two-dimensional metric σAB is given by Eq. (23). To obtain the initial area the Kerr-Vaidya for m =1, 2, 3, and setting the covariant derivative over v as metric is evaluated at xin and the vectors bA are given by Eq. (C2). To calculate the final area we evaluate the four- ˚µ µ m dimensional metric at the point . In addition, since the l ;0 := l ;ml , (C16) xfn − points xψ and xθ that are defined by Eq. (21) evolve with the vectors ˚µ For the affinely parametrized geodesic congruence ϑ = l ;µ, µ µ and Eq. (25) follows from l (xψ)= l (xin), (C11) and ϑ = l0 lm + lm =0. (C17) − ;m ;m µ µ µ l (xθ) l (x )+ ∂θl (x )δθ, (C12) ≈ in in

[1] S. Chandrasekhar, The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes (Springer, Heidelberg, 2015). (Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, 1992). [11] S. W. Hawking, Nature (London) 248, 30 (1974). [2] Astrophysical Black Holes, edited by F. Haardt, V. Gorini, U. [12] V. P. Frolov, arXiv:1411.6981. Moschella, A. Trever, and M. Colpi (Springer, Heidelberg, [13] V. Baccetti, R. B. Mann, S. Murk, and D. R. Terno, 2016). Phys. Rev. D 99, 124014 (2019). [3] W. Israel, in Three Hundred Years of Gravitation, edited by S. [14] N. D. Birrel and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved W. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge University Press, Cam- Space (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, bridge, England, 1987), p. 199. 1986). [4] V. Cardoso and P. Pani, Nat. Astron. 1, 586 (2017); [15] B.-L. Hu and E. Verdaguer, Semiclassical and Stochastic Grav- Living Rev. Relativity 22, 4 (2019). ity: Quantum Field Effects on Curved Spacetime (Cambridge [5] R. Carballo-Rubio, F. Di Filippo, S. Liberati, and M. Visser, University Press, Cambridge, England 2020). Phys. Rev. D 98, 124009 (2018). [16] R. B. Mann, Black Holes: Thermodynamics, Information, [6] L. Barack, V. Cardoso, S. Nissanke, and T. P. Sotiriou, and Firewalls (Springer, New York, 2015); D. Harlow, Classical Quantum Gravity 36, 143001 (2019). Rev. Mod Phys. 88, 015002 (2016). [7] E. Curiel, Nat. Astron. 3, 27 (2019). [17] W. G. Unruh and R. M. Wald, [8] S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure Rep. Prog. Phys. 80 092002 (2017); D. Marolf of Space-Time (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Eng- Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 092001 (2017). land, 1973). [18] H. Stephani, D. Kramer. M. MacCallum, C. Hoenselaers, and [9] V. P. Frolov and I. D. Novikov, Black Holes: Basic Concepts E. Herlt, Exact Solutions to Einstein’s Field Equations (Cam- and New Developments (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998). bridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2003). [10] V. Faraoni, Cosmological and Black Hole Apparent Horizons, [19] P. Mart´ın-Moruno and M. Visser, Classical and semi-classical 9

energy conditions, in Wormholes, Warp Drives and Energy [33] E.-A. Kontou and K. D. Olum, Conditions, edited by F. N. S. Lobo (Springer, New York, Phys. Rev. D 91, 104005 (2015). 2017), p. 193. [34] E. Poisson, A Relativist’s Toolkit (Cambridge University Press, [20] E.-A. Kontou and K. Sanders, Cambridge, England, 2004). Classical Quantum Gravity 37, 193001 (2020). [35] E. T. Newman and A. I. Janis, [21] A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski, and J. Sully, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 6, 915 (1965). J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2013) 062. [36] C. Gonz´alez, L. Herrera, and J. Jim´enez, [22] V. Baccetti, S. Murk, and D. R. Terno, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 20, 837 (1979); L. Herrera, and J. Phys. Rev. D 100, 064054 (2019). Jim´enez, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 23, 2339 (1982). [23] D. R. Terno, Phys. Rev. D 100, 124025 (2019). [37] S. G. Ghosh and S. D. Maharaj, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 7 (2015). [24] D. R. Terno, Phys. Rev. D 101, 124053 (2020). [38] Th. Christoulakis, Th. Grammenos and Ch. Kolassis, [25] M. Murenbeeld and J. R. Trollope, Phys. Lett. 149A, 354 (1990). Phys. Rev. D 1, 3220 (1970). [39] D.-Y. Xu, Classical Quantum Gravity 16, 343 (1999). [26] M. Carmeli and M. Kaye, Ann. Phys. 103, 97 (1977). [40] M. Shibata, Numerical Relativity (World Scientific, New Jersey, [27] J. M. M. Senovilla and R. Torres, 2016). Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 189501 (2015). [41] J. Thornburg, Living Rev. Relativity 10, 3 (2007). [28] A. Paranjape and T. Padmanabhan, [42] C. J. Fewster, Quantum Energy Conditions, in Wormholes, Phys. Rev. D 80, 044011 (2009). Warp Drives and Energy Conditions, edited by F. N. S. Lobo [29] V. Baccetti, R. B. Mann, and D. R. Terno, (Springer, New York, 2017), p. 215. Classical Quantum Gravity 35, 185005 (2018). [43] R. Dong, W. H. Kinney and D. Stojkovic, [30] C. W. Misner and D. H. Sharp, Phys. Rev. 136 B571 (1964). J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2016) 034. [31] V. Faraoni, G. F. R. Ellis, J. T. Firouzjaee, A. Helou, and I. [44] A. Arbey, J. Auffinger, and J. Silk, Musco, Phys. Rev. D 95, 024008 (2017). Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 494, 1257 (2020). [32] A. Levi and A. Ori, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 231101 (2016). [45] A. Levi, E. Eilon, A. Ori, and M. van de Meent, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 141102 (2017).