text:
# Celestial mechanics in Kerr spacetime

## 1 Introduction

In Newtonian theory, there are two basic methods of analysing the motion of a test mass under the attraction of a central, spherically symmetric gravitational field: Either Hamiltonian mechanics is applied to solve the problem in a spherical polar coordinate system or, for bound orbits, one may invoke a canonical transformation to action-angle variables. In the latter case, solving the *Hamilton-Jacobi* differential equation yields the integrals of motion and, in particular, *Kepler’s third law* which for elliptical orbits, in geometric units, reads

$$M\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}=\left(\frac{1e^2}{p}\right)^{3/2},$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}`$ is the angular frequency of orbital revolution, $`e`$ is the eccentricity of the orbit, $`p/(1e^2)`$ its semi-major axis and $`M`$ is the mass which acts as the source of the central field.

A generalisation of the Hamilton-Jacobi method to the relativistic motion of a test mass in Kerr spacetime, as proposed by Carter , shows that the motion is still separable and there is a complete set of constants of motion: The energy $`E`$ as measured by an observer at spatial infinity, the axial angular momentum component $`L_z`$ and the Carter constant $`Q`$. Whereas $`E`$ and $`L_z`$ reflect isometries of the spacetime geometry, $`Q`$ arises from the separation of the radial and polar components of motion. The resulting first-order equations of motion can be used to compute the particle’s worldline and, in limiting cases such as circular and equatorial orbits, to calculate periods of motion.

However, no attempt has been made yet to formulate a relativistic generalisation of action-angle variables for geodesic motion in Kerr spacetime and to calculate the dynamical frequencies of arbitrary bound non-plunging orbits. Exactly these frequencies would be relevant to the computation of gravitational radiation emitted by stellar-mass compact objects in the vicinity of super-massive black holes if a perturbation theory based on the adiabatic approximation is employed. In this approximation one considers the motion as being nearly geodesic under the assumption that the time scale of radiation reaction, $`T_{\mathrm{RR}}`$, is much larger than the dynamical time scales $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$ of the three components of orbital motion. Recently, Hughes  has raised the question what time scales should, in general, be chosen for $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$, as there is no obvious way of calculating orbital periods from the integrals of motion if the orbit is neither circular nor equatorial.

In the following, it is shown that suitable action-angle variables can be formulated within a fully relativistic framework for general orbits in Kerr spacetime and formulas for dynamical frequencies in terms of numerically solvable integrals are derived.

## 2 Dynamical equations and integrals of motion

Let us first review the procedure applied by Carter  in order to determine the constants of motion. We define the relativistic Hamiltonian for geodesic motion of a particle that possesses no spin in a spacetime with given metric in the absence of an electromagnetic field as

$$H(x^\alpha ,p_\beta )=\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }p_\mu p_\nu .$$
(2)
In this equation, the metric components $`g^{\mu \nu }`$ are considered to be functions of the coordinates $`x^\alpha `$ and the quantities $`p_\beta `$ are the conjugate momenta of the particle associated with these coordinates. Substituting the contravariant components $`g^{\mu \nu }`$ of the Kerr metric in the Boyer-Lindquist coordinate representation , the explicit form of the Hamiltonian is given by

$`H^{(\mathrm{BL})}(x^\alpha ,p_\beta )=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(r^2+a^2)^2\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }}}(p_t)^2{\displaystyle \frac{2aMr}{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }}}p_tp_\varphi `$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}(p_\varphi )^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2\mathrm{\Sigma }}}(p_r)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{\Sigma }}}(p_\theta )^2,`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=r^22Mr+a^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=r^2+a^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta `$.

A complete set of constants of motion can be determined if a canonical transformation $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(x^\alpha ,p_\beta )(X^\alpha ,P_\beta )`$ is found such that the Hamiltonian becomes cyclic in all of the new generalised coordinates $`X^\alpha `$, i.e., $`(H^{(\mathrm{BL})}\mathrm{\Phi }^1)(X^\alpha ,P_\beta )=H^{(\mathrm{cycl})}(P_\beta )`$, and the transformed momenta $`P_\beta `$ are thus conserved along the worldline of the particle. The generator of such a canonical transformation, $`W(x^\alpha ,P_\beta )`$, is called the *characteristic function* and is determined by the *Hamilton-Jacobi* differential equation

$$g^{\mu \nu }\frac{W}{x^\mu }\frac{W}{x^\nu }+\mu ^2=0.$$
(4)
Solving this equation, yields three constants of integration, $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$, apart from $`\mu ^2/2`$, the value of the Hamiltonian evaluated along the worldline of the particle. The transformed conjugate momenta $`P_\beta `$ can be chosen as any functions of the these constants, i.e., $`P_\beta =f_\beta (\mu ^2/2,E,L_z,Q)`$, assuming that $`f`$ is bijective and $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$, and the generalised coordinates $`X^\alpha =W/P_\alpha `$ are obtained from Hamilton’s equations of motion,

$$\mu \frac{X^\alpha }{\tau }=\frac{H}{P_\alpha }^{(\mathrm{cycl})}=\nu ^\alpha ,$$
(5)
where each $`\nu ^\alpha `$ is a constant. The generalised coordinates are therefore given by $`X^\alpha (\tau )=X^\alpha (0)+\nu ^\alpha \tau `$ if the Hamiltonian is cyclic in all of these coordinates.

For geodesic motion in Kerr spacetime, the constants of motion $`E:=p_t`$ and $`L_z:=p_\varphi `$ are related to the isometries of the metric in the coordinates $`t`$ and $`\varphi `$. $`E`$ and $`L_z`$ can be interpreted, respectively, as the particle’s energy and axial angular momentum component as seen by an observer at spatial infinity. The third constant of motion, $`Q`$, is obtained by separating radial and polar motion and is called *Carter’s constant*. In terms of $`\mu `$, $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$, the characteristic function $`W`$ is given by

$$W=Et+\frac{\sqrt{R}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}r+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}\theta +L_z\varphi ,$$
(6)
where

$`R`$ $`=\left[(r^2+a^2)EaL_z\right]^2\mathrm{\Delta }[\mu ^2r^2+(L_zaE)^2+Q],`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=Q\left[(\mu ^2E^2)a^2+{\displaystyle \frac{L_z^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}\right]\mathrm{cos}^2\theta .`$ (8)
Since $`p_\beta =g_{\beta \alpha }W/x^\alpha `$, the following set of first-order equations of motion is obtained :

$`\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\tau }}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{r^2+a^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}Pa\left(aE\mathrm{sin}^2\theta L_z\right),`$ (9)
$`\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}`$ $`=\pm \sqrt{R},`$ (10)
$`\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{\tau }}`$ $`=\pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }},`$ (11)
$`\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\tau }}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}PaE+{\displaystyle \frac{L_z}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }},`$ (12)
where $`P=E(r^2+a^2)aL_z`$.

If the conjugate momenta are chosen such that the Hamiltonian becomes identically equal to $`P_0`$, i.e., $`H^{(\mathrm{id})}(P_\beta )=P_0`$, then we obtain $`\nu ^0=1`$ and $`\nu ^k=0`$. Substituting the characteristic function into the identities $`W/P_0=\tau +X^0(0)`$ and $`W/P_k=X^k(0)`$ and adjusting the constants $`X^\alpha (0)`$ in a suitable way, we find the following well-known integrals of motion :

$`\tau \tau _0`$ $`={\displaystyle _{r_0}^r}{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{\sqrt{R}}}r^{}+{\displaystyle _{\theta _0}^\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{a^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta ^{}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}\theta ^{},`$ (13)
$`tt_0`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{r_0}^r}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{R}{E}}r^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\theta _0}^\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{E}}\theta ^{},`$ (14)
$`\varphi \varphi _0`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{r_0}^r}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{R}{L_z}}r^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\theta _0}^\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{L_z}}\theta ^{},`$ (15)
and, finally,

$$_{r_0}^r\frac{\theta ^{}}{\sqrt{R}}=_{\theta _0}^\theta \frac{\theta ^{}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}.$$
(16)
In general, there are distinct turning points of the radial and polar motions which are asynchronously passed by the particle because $`r(\tau )`$ and $`\theta (\tau )`$ are not periodic functions of time. In consequence, equation (14) evaluates to different intervals of coordinate time when integrating over various cycles of radial or polar motion and, for this reason, there is no obvious way of calculating the time scales $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$ from the above integrals.

## 3 The fundamental frequencies

Even though it might seem that there is no useful notion of orbital frequencies if the coordinate functions representing the motion are not periodic, it is still possible to find a representation in which *complete periodicity* becomes manifest. However, such a representation is not found by means of a coordinate transformation in the usual sense, but by virtue of the more general concept of a *canonical transformation* of both spacetime coordinates and conjugate momenta. By its definition, a canonical transformation acts on the cotangential bundle $`T^{}(_{\mathrm{Kerr}})`$ of Kerr spacetime, as opposed to a pure coordinate transformation between charts on the basis manifold $`_{\mathrm{Kerr}}`$. In analogy to phase space trajectories in non-relativistic Hamiltonian mechanics, let us consider the locus of all points in $`T^{}(_{\mathrm{Kerr}})`$ which are passed by a particle in the course of its motion along a particular orbit. We shall denote the image of that set under the coordinate chart corresponding to Boyer-Lindquist coordinates $`x^\alpha `$ and their conjugate momenta $`p_\beta `$ by $`𝒯_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ for a given set of constants of motion.

The basic topological properties of $`𝒯_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ in the case of a bound orbit of the first kind can be readily inferred from the equations determining the conjugate momenta,

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill p_t=E,& p_\varphi =L_z,\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }^2p_r^2=R,& p_\theta ^2=\mathrm{\Theta }.\hfill \end{array}`$ (19)
Firstly, since the orbital revolution progresses continuously in time, $`𝒯_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ is not compact in timelike directions. Secondly, the motion is bound both in the $`r`$\- and in the $`\theta `$-domain. Moreover, since $`p_r`$ is solely a function of $`r`$ and, likewise, $`p_\theta `$ is a function of $`\theta `$ only, both radial and polar motion are of compact support and of the libration type provided that the orbit is *bound* and *stable*. Otherwise, the orbit either plunges and, hence, the particle approaches the horizon towards future timelike infinity or, if the orbit is only marginally stable, it asymptotically approached the inner turning point. Thirdly, the azimuthal motion is a rotation and, of course, it is of compact support as well because $`\varphi =0`$ is to be identified with $`\varphi =2\pi `$.

According to a theorem by Arnold , that was formulated in the framework of non-relativistic mechanics, the phase space trajectory of a *fully integrable* system of $`N`$ degrees of freedom is diffeomorphic to the $`N`$-torus $`𝒯^N=(𝒮_1)^N`$ whenever the motion of the system is of *compact support*. It seems plausible, that this theorem is applicable to relativistic problems as well if we account for the distinct role of the timelike coordinate which is related to the non-compactness of the worldline of a particle. Accordingly, as a manifestation of the weak equivalence principle, geodesic motion in Kerr spacetime has only three *physical* degrees of freedom because orbits are the same regardless of the mass $`\mu `$ of the particle. Since $`𝒯_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ is defined with respect to a particular coordinate system, there is a well defined notion of projecting this set in the directions of the pair of conjugate variables $`(t,p_t)`$. The resulting projected set, $`\widehat{𝒯}_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$, resides in the six-dimensional space spanned by the spacelike conjugate pairs $`(r,p_r)`$, $`(\theta ,p_\theta )`$ and $`(\varphi ,p_\varphi )`$ and corresponds to a phase space. Indeed, from the topological considerations in the previous paragraph, we see that $`\widehat{𝒯}_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ is diffeomorphic to the three-torus $`𝒯^3`$.

Utilising this toroidal topology, let us now define for each spatial component a closed curve $`𝒞_k\widehat{𝒯}_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q}`$ which circumscribes the $`k`$-th torus and can be contracted into a single point with respect to the other tori. If $`\psi `$ is the coordinate chart on the cotangential bundle producing the Boyer-Lindquist coordinates and its conjugate momenta, then $`\psi ^1(𝒞_k)`$ is the pre-image of the $`k`$-th loop in $`T^{}(_{\mathrm{Kerr}})`$. Furthermore, if we note that the *canonical one-form* of Hamiltonian mechanics, $`𝚯=E\mathbf{}t+p_r\mathbf{}r+p_\theta \mathbf{}\theta +L_z\mathbf{}\varphi `$, is the one-form corresponding to the relativistic four-momentum $`𝐩`$, i.e.,

$$𝚯,\mathrm{p}\mathbf{}\mathbf{=}\mathrm{p}_𝜶\mathrm{p}^𝜶\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}𝝁^2\mathbf{,}$$
(20)
then we can define an *action variable* $`J_k`$ for the $`k`$-th spatial component as

$$J_k=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\psi ^1(𝒞_k)}𝚯.$$
(21)
It might appear that such an action variable ultimately depends on the choice of the closed curve $`𝒞_k`$ which is defined with respect to a particular coordinate system and, thus, one would assume that it is not a geometric invariant. However, $`J_k`$ is independent of the shape of $`𝒞_k`$ because $`𝚯`$ is *closed* on $`\psi ^1(𝒯_{\mu ,E,L_z,Q})`$, i.e., $`\mathbf{}𝚯=0`$. The closedness of the canonical one-form is shown by substituting the expressions (19) for the conjugate momenta and applying the rules of exterior differentiation222 It is actually the separability of the components of motion which renders the canonical one-form being closed on the dynamical submanifold in the cotangential bundle. . The generalised Stokes theorem then yields the desired property of $`J_k`$ . Furthermore, since transformations between coordinate charts preserve topological features, we could have defined the curves $`𝒞_k`$ with respect to any coordinate system and then found their pre-images in $`T^{}(_{\mathrm{Kerr}})`$. It is only the topological features of $`𝒞_k`$ with respect to the three-torus that matters! Therefore we conclude that the action variables (21) are, indeed, geometric invariants. For convenience, however, we shall denote these variables as $`J_r`$, $`J_\theta `$ and $`J_\varphi `$ as if they were specific for the Boyer-Lindquist coordinate system.

Since motion in Kerr spacetime is separable in the coordinates $`r`$, $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$, we may choose each $`𝒞_k`$ such that it is located completely within the $`(x^k,p_k)`$-plane. Then the action variables can be easily calculated from cyclic integrals over the spatial conjugate momenta in the Boyer-Lindquist coordinate representation:

$`J_r`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle p_rr}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{R}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}r},`$ (22)
$`J_\theta `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle p_\theta \theta }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Theta }\theta },`$ (23)
$`J_\varphi `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle p_\varphi \varphi }=L_z.`$ (24)
As can be seen from the above expressions, $`J_r`$, $`J_\theta `$ and $`J_\varphi `$ are functions of the mass $`\mu `$ and the three constants of motion $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$.

The generator of the transformation to the action variables $`J_k`$ is given by $`W=𝚯`$. It is not globally defined, but changes by an amount of $`2\pi J_k`$ when integrating over the path $`𝒞_k`$. As a consequence, if the spatial coordinate $`x^k`$ goes through $`N`$ complete cycles and the other coordinates are kept unchanged, then the generalised coordinate $`w^k=W/J_k`$ associated with $`J_k`$ changes by $`2\pi N`$.333 Such a change has to be understood as a virtual displacement.  This result implies that $`w_k`$ is a phase or *angle variable* and, since $`\mathrm{\Delta }w^k=\omega _k\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$, the constant $`\omega _k`$ can be interpreted as a frequency. Moreover, as a consequence of the geometrically invariant definition of the action variables $`J_k`$, the frequencies $`\omega _k`$ specify fundamental properties of the orbital motion independent of any particular coordinate representation. Therefore, they are called the *fundamental frequencies* of the system. However, these frequencies are subject to a straightforward physical interpretation only with respect to the spatial coordinates $`r`$, $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$, when the paths $`𝒞_k`$ are correspondingly chosen as cycles of, respectively, radial, polar and azimuthal motion. Accordingly, we shall use the notation $`\omega _r`$, $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$ for the fundamental frequencies of an orbit in Kerr spacetime.

The standard procedure of determining fundamental frequencies is to find the explicit form of the Hamiltonian in the action-angle representation, $`H^{(\mathrm{aa})}`$, and to calculate the frequencies from the partial derivatives with respect to the action variables $`J_k`$ :

$$\mu \omega _k=\frac{H}{J_k}^{(\mathrm{aa})}.$$
(25)
Unfortunately, the definition of the radial and polar action variables in terms of the non-trivial integrals (22) and (23) does not admit an explicit inversion because none of these integrals can be solved analytically. However, as is shown in A, the derivatives $`H^{(\mathrm{aa})}/J_k`$ and, hence, the frequencies $`\omega _k`$ can be found even without knowing the functional form of the Hamiltonian $`H^{(\mathrm{aa})}`$ if the theorem on implicit functions is employed. This procedure results in equations (99)–(101) of A and the fundamental frequencies are therefore given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mu \omega ^r}}`$ $`=2a^2z_+^2\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{E(k)}{K(k)}}\right]X(r_1,r_2)+2Y(r_1,r_2),`$ (26)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mu \omega ^\theta }}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{4a^2z_+}{\beta }}\left[K(k)E(k)\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\beta z_+}}{\displaystyle \frac{X(r_1,r_2)}{Y(r_1,r_2)}}K(k),`$ (27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mu \omega ^\varphi }}`$ $`=2\pi {\displaystyle \frac{a^2z_+^2[K(k)E(k)]X(r_1,r_2)+K(k)Y(r_1,r_2)}{L_z[\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)K(k)]X(r_1,r_2)+K(k)Z(r_1,r_2)}},`$ (28)
where $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ are the turning points of radial motion, $`z_\pm ^2`$ are the two roots of the equation $`\mathrm{\Theta }(z)=0`$ when substituting $`\mathrm{cos}\theta =z`$ in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, $`k=z_{}^2/z_+^2`$, $`\beta ^2=a^2(\mu ^2E^2)`$, $`K(k)`$, $`E(k)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)`$ are, respectively, the complete elliptical integrals of the first, second and third kind,

$`K(k)`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\psi }{\sqrt{1k\mathrm{sin}^2\psi }}},`$ (29)
$`E(k)`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}\sqrt{1k\mathrm{sin}^2\psi }\psi ,`$ (30)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\psi }{\left(1z_{}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \right)\sqrt{1k\mathrm{sin}^2\psi }}},`$ (31)
and $`X(r_1,r_2)`$, $`Y(r_1,r_2)`$ and $`Z(r_1,r_2)`$ are radial integrals defined by

$`X(r_1,r_2)`$ $`={\displaystyle _{r_1}^{r_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\sqrt{R}}},`$ (32)
$`Y(r_1,r_2)`$ $`={\displaystyle _{r_1}^{r_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r^2r}{\sqrt{R}}},`$ (33)
$`Z(r_1,r_2)`$ $`={\displaystyle _{r_1}^{r_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r\left[L_zr2M(L_zaE)\right]}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{R}}}r.`$ (34)
The above equations for the fundamental frequencies, however, have two deficiencies: Firstly, they are suggestive of $`\omega _k`$ being dependent on the mass $`\mu `$ of the particle which is, of course, not the case. For this reason, we will cast these equations into a dimensionless scale-invariant form, in which $`\mu `$ does not appear anymore. Secondly, the radial functions $`X`$, $`Y`$ and $`Z`$ are not proper integrals because the integrated functions are divergent at the turning points $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$. Fortunately, they are transformed into well-behaved integrals by virtue of the substitution $`r=M\stackrel{~}{r}=pM/(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )`$, where $`\chi `$ varies from $`0`$ to $`2\pi `$ as $`r`$ goes through a complete cycle. Although this substitution originates from the pure Kepler ellipse, it is actually still expedient even for relativistic orbits that may be very different in shape. In analogy to non-relativistic orbits, $`p`$ is called the *semi-latus rectum* and $`e`$ is the *eccentricity* of the orbit. Working out this substitution, yields the following equations for the dimensionless fundamental frequencies $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_k=M\omega _k`$:

$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_r`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\pi pK(k)}{(1e^2)\mathrm{\Lambda }}},`$ (35)
$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \stackrel{~}{\beta }z_+\stackrel{~}{X}}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}},`$ (36)
$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{L}_z\stackrel{~}{X})K(k)+\stackrel{~}{L}_z\stackrel{~}{X}\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}},`$ (37)
where the tilde on top of each symbol indicates the corresponding dimensionless quantity (see B) and the constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is defined by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=(\stackrel{~}{Y}+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2\stackrel{~}{X})K(k)\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2\stackrel{~}{X}E(k).$$
(38)
The dimensionless radial integrals in the $`\chi `$-representation are given by

$`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ $`=\mu M{\displaystyle \frac{p}{1e^2}}X(r_1,r_2)={\displaystyle _0^\pi }{\displaystyle \frac{\chi }{\sqrt{J(\chi )}}},`$ (39)
$`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{M}}{\displaystyle \frac{p}{1e^2}}Y(r_1,r_2)={\displaystyle _0^\pi }{\displaystyle \frac{p^2\chi }{(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^2\sqrt{J(\chi )}}},`$ (40)
$`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{p}{1e^2}}Z(r_1,r_2)={\displaystyle _0^\pi }{\displaystyle \frac{G(\chi )\chi }{H(\chi )\sqrt{J(\chi )}}},`$ (41)
where the functions $`G`$, $`H`$ and $`J`$ are defined by

$`J(\chi )=`$ $`(1\stackrel{~}{E}^2)(1e^2)+2\left(1\stackrel{~}{E}^2{\displaystyle \frac{1e^2}{p}}\right)(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )`$ (42)
$`+\left\{(1\stackrel{~}{E}^2){\displaystyle \frac{3+e^2}{1e^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{p}}+\left[\stackrel{~}{a}^2(1\stackrel{~}{E}^2)+\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2+\stackrel{~}{Q}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{1e^2}{p^2}}\right\}`$
$`\times (1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^2,`$
$`H(\chi )=`$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{2}{p}}(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{a}^2}{p^2}}(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^2,`$ (43)
$`G(\chi )=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{L_z}{\displaystyle \frac{2(\stackrel{~}{L}_z\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{E})}{p}}(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi ).`$ (44)
In the above equations, the constants of motion $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$ are understood as functions of the orbital parameters $`p`$, $`e`$ and $`z_{}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{}`$. Although analytical expressions for these functions can be derived, it is hardly feasible to substitute these expressions for $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$. For given orbital parameters, it is much easier to calculate the constants of motion numerically, as explained in B, and to substitute the resulting values into $`G(\chi )`$, $`H(\chi )`$ and $`J(\chi )`$.

Apart from the three frequencies $`\omega _r`$, $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$, a fourth constant of motion is obtained, which is associated with the timelike generalised coordinate $`X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0(\tau )=X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0(0)+\gamma \tau `$ in the action-angle variable representation. According to equation (98) of A, this constant is given by

$$\mu \gamma =\frac{\left[W(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2EX(r_1,r_2)\right]K(k)a^2z_+^2EX(r_1,r_2)E(k)}{\left[Y(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2X(r_1,r_2)\right]K(k)a^2z_+^2X(r_1,r_2)E(k)},$$
(45)
where the function $`W(r_1,r_2)`$ is defined by

$$W(r_1,r_2)=_{r_1}^{r_2}\frac{r\left[r^3+a^2Er2a(L_zaE)\right]r}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{R}}.$$
(46)
In dimensionless form, $`\gamma `$ can be expressed as

$$\gamma =\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left[(\stackrel{~}{W}+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{X})K(k)\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{X}E(k)\right],$$
(47)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{W}=\frac{1}{M}\frac{p}{1e^2}W(r_1,r_2)=_0^\pi \frac{p^2F(\chi )\chi }{(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^2H(\chi )\sqrt{J(\chi )}},$$
(48)
and the function $`F`$ is defined by

$$F(\chi )=\stackrel{~}{E}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{a}^2\stackrel{~}{E}}{p^2}(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^2\frac{2\stackrel{~}{a}(\stackrel{~}{L}_z\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{E})}{p^3}(1+e\mathrm{cos}\chi )^3.$$
(49)
As for the physical interpretation of $`\gamma `$, we note that the conjugate momentum associated with the generalised coordinate $`X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0`$ is $`P_0^{(\mathrm{aa})}=p_t=E`$, i.e., the same as in the Boyer-Lindquist representation. For this reason, one would expect that $`X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0`$ is in some sense an interval of coordinate time. However, it cannot be equal to $`tt_0`$ as equation (14) tells us that the relation between the elapse of proper time $`\tau `$ and the corresponding interval of coordinate time, $`tt_0`$, is not linear. On the other hand, there are three particular scales of proper time, $`\tau _r`$, $`\tau _\theta `$ and $`\tau _\varphi `$, associated with the three fundamental frequencies, $`\omega _r`$, $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$. Substituting each of these constants into the expression for $`X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0`$, three scales of *coordinate time* are produced:

$$T_k=X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0(\tau _k)X_{(\mathrm{aa})}^0(0)=\frac{2\pi \gamma }{\omega _k}.$$
(50)
This seems to be a natural definition of the coordinate-time scales associated with the fundamental frequencies. As we shall see in following Section, the above definition, indeed, reproduces the known periods of coordinate time in the limits of, respectively, circular and equatorial motion. Hence, we are led to the conjecture that $`\gamma `$ can be interpreted as a *gravitational Lorentz factor* which relates the three dynamical scales of proper time, $`\tau _r`$, $`\tau _\theta `$ and $`\tau _\varphi `$, to the corresponding intervals of coordinate time, $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$.

In the general case, this conjecture has the following implication: The ratio of time scales associated with two particular components of motion, say, radial and polar motion, is the same regardless of the frame of reference in which these time scales are defined. For example, if an observer at infinity saw the intervals of time $`T_r`$ and $`T_\theta `$, he would find that the ratio $`T_r/T_\theta `$ is equal to $`\tau _r/\tau _\theta `$. Of course, this is exactly what one would expect, provided that the fundamental frequencies truly arise from invariant properties of orbital motion. In conclusion, the ratio of time scales should be independent of the frame of reference in use. With respect to coordinate time $`t`$, this is inherently ensured by the above definition of $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$.

Ultimately, the significance of the fundamental frequencies lies in the possibility of expanding a dynamical quantity $`q(\tau )`$ in a Fourier series with harmonics $`\omega _{klm}=k\omega _r+l\omega _\theta +m\omega _\varphi `$ of these frequencies :

$$q(\tau )=\underset{k,l,m}{}q_{klm}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{}\omega _{klm}\tau )=\underset{\stackrel{}{k}}{}q_\stackrel{}{k}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{w}),$$
(51)
where $`\stackrel{}{k}=(k,l,m)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{w}=kw^r+lw^\theta +mw^\varphi =\omega _{klm}\tau `$ according to definition of the action variables $`w^r`$, $`w^\theta `$ and $`w^\varphi `$. The Fourier coefficients $`q_\stackrel{}{k}`$ of the above expansion are given by

$$q_\stackrel{}{k}=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}_0^{2\pi }w^r_0^{2\pi }w^\theta _0^{2\pi }w^\varphi q(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{w}/\omega _\stackrel{}{k})\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{w}).$$
(52)
Therefore, dynamical properties of the particle are completely specified by discrete sets of numbers such as $`\{q_\stackrel{}{k}\}_{\stackrel{}{k}^3}`$. This is the very essence of bound geodesic orbital motion in a Kerr spacetime being *quasi-periodic* rather than quasi-chaotic, as was proposed due to the ergodic properties of these orbits.

## 4 Limiting cases and numerical results

As an important test to support the validity of the fundamental frequencies derived in the previous Section, we will consider two special cases of bound motion in Kerr spacetime: Firstly, the limit of vanishing eccentricity and, secondly, purely equatorial orbits. In particular, we will see that previously derived equations for the periods and the corresponding azimuthal angles of circular orbits  can be reproduced from the general formulas. Briefly summarised, the features of orbits in the two limiting cases are as follows:

* Circular orbits ($`e`$ = 0): In Schwarzschild spacetime, Kepler’s third law (1) holds exactly for the period of azimuthal revolution with respect to coordinate time, i.e., $`T_\varphi =2\pi M\stackrel{~}{r}_0^{3/2}`$. For circular orbits in Kerr spacetime, there are two distinct frequencies depending on whether the particle co-revolves or counter-revolves with the rotation of the black hole. If the motion is not confined to the equatorial plane, then the particle changes periodically its altitude such that $`2\pi /\omega _\theta `$ is twice the elapse of proper time between two subsequent passages of the particle through the equatorial plane. The frequencies $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$ are generally incommensurate. As a consequence, the azimuthal angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta =2\pi \omega _\varphi /\omega _\theta `$ that is accumulated as the particle completes a cycle of polar motion is different from $`2\pi `$.
* Equatorial orbits ($`Q=0`$): As a consequence of the different shape of the potential of radial motion as compared to the Newtonian potential, non-circular orbits do not close on themselves as the particle revolves around the gravitational centre. The total azimuthal angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_r`$ swept out by the particle as it moves from, say, the apastron at radius $`r_\mathrm{a}=p/(1e)`$ to the periastron at radius $`r_\mathrm{p}=p/(1+e)`$ and back to the apastron is given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_r=2\pi \omega _\varphi /\omega _r`$.

Actually, there is another limit, called polar orbits, for which $`L_z=0`$. In this case, the particle crosses the spin axis of the black hole and the inclination parameter is $`z_{}=1`$. However, it seems unlikely that polar orbits are astrophysically relevant and we only refer to  for a general discussion.

### 4.1 Circular orbits

Orbits of zero eccentricity, $`e=0`$, are called circular. In this case, the particle moves on a spherical surface of constant radial coordinate, $`r(\tau )=pM=r_0`$, within the bounds of the inclination $`\theta `$ given by $`\theta _{}\theta \pi \theta _{}`$. Since the perihelion and aphelion radii coincide, we have $`r_\mathrm{p}=r_\mathrm{a}=r_0`$ and $`R(r_0)=0`$. In consequence, the integrals given by equations (32)–(34) and (46) are undefined in the limit of vanishing eccentricity. The corresponding quantities in the $`\chi `$-representation, however, have well-defined limits because the functions $`F`$, $`G`$, $`H`$ and $`J`$ are constant if $`e=0`$. Hence, we define

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X(r_0,r_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\mu r_0J_{\mathrm{circ}}^{1/2}}},& W(r_0,r_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi r_0F_{\mathrm{circ}}}{H_{\mathrm{circ}}J_{\mathrm{circ}}^{1/2}}},\hfill \\ \hfill Y(r_0,r_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi r_0}{\mu J_{\mathrm{circ}}^{1/2}}},& Z(r_0,r_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi MG_{\mathrm{circ}}}{r_0H_{\mathrm{circ}}J_{\mathrm{circ}}^{1/2}}},\hfill \end{array}`$ (55)
where the constants $`F_{\mathrm{circ}}`$, $`G_{\mathrm{circ}}`$, $`H_{\mathrm{circ}}`$ and $`J_{\mathrm{circ}}`$ are obtained by substituting $`e=0`$ in equations (42)–(44) and (49). The frequencies of the angular components of motion are therefore given by

$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_r^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{r}_0J_{\mathrm{circ}}^{1/2}K(k)}{(\stackrel{~}{r}_0^2+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2)K(k)\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2E(k)}},`$ (56)
$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta ^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \stackrel{~}{\beta }z_+}{2[(\stackrel{~}{r}_0^2+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2)K(k)\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2E(k)]}},`$ (57)
$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi ^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{a}(2\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{r}_0\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{L}_z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0^1K(k)+\stackrel{~}{L}_z\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)}{(\stackrel{~}{r}_0^2+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2)K(k)\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2E(k)}}.`$ (58)
The existence of a distinct radial frequency even in the case of circular motion indicates that the limit of the integrated azimuthal angle over a cycle of *radial* motion, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_r`$, does not become $`2\pi `$ as the eccentricity approaches zero. Of course, this is well known from equatorial orbits. On the other hand, we can calculate the integrated azimuthal angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta `$ as the particle goes through one cycle of *polar* motion by combining the equations of motion (11) and (12). The result is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta =\frac{4}{\stackrel{~}{\beta }z_+}\left[\frac{\stackrel{~}{a}(2\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{r}_0\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{L}_z)}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0}K(k)+\stackrel{~}{L}_z\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)\right],$$
(59)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\stackrel{~}{r}_0^22\stackrel{~}{r}_0+\stackrel{~}{a}^2`$. When comparing this expression for $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta `$ with the quotient of $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi ^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta ^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$, we see that the following well known equation holds:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta =2\pi \frac{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi ^{(\mathrm{circ})}}{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta ^{(\mathrm{circ})}}.$$
(60)
Furthermore, calculating the period of coordinate time $`T_\theta `$ for a cycle of polar motion from equation (14), yields

$$T_\theta =\frac{4}{\stackrel{~}{\beta }z_+}\left\{\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0^2+\stackrel{~}{a}^2)\stackrel{~}{r}_0^22\stackrel{~}{a}(\stackrel{~}{L}_z\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{E})\stackrel{~}{r}_0}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0}K(k)+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_+^2\stackrel{~}{E}[K(k)E(k)]\right\}.$$
(61)
If the constant $`\gamma `$ given by equation (47) is also calculated in the limit $`e=0`$, we find that

$$T_\theta =\frac{2\pi \gamma ^{(\mathrm{circ})}}{\omega _\theta ^{(\mathrm{circ})}},$$
(62)
which suggests that $`\gamma ^{(\mathrm{circ})}`$ can be interpreted as the *Lorentz factor* of circular motion in Kerr spacetime.

### 4.2 Equatorial orbits

If $`Q=0`$, then the equation for the turning points of polar motion, $`\mathrm{\Theta }(z)=0`$, admits the solutions $`z_{}^2=0`$ and $`z_+^2=1+L_z^2/\beta ^2>1`$. As a consequence, the motion of the particle is confined to the equatorial plane, i.e., $`\theta (\tau )=\pi /2`$. Since $`k=(z_{}/z_+)^2=0`$, the elliptical integrals become $`K(0)=E(0)=\mathrm{\Pi }(0,0)=\pi /2`$. The resulting expressions for the fundamental frequencies of equatorial orbits are thus given by

$`\omega _r^{(\mathrm{eq})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\pi p}{(1e^2)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{\mathrm{eq}}}},`$ (63)
$`\omega _\theta ^{(\mathrm{eq})}`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{\beta }z_+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{X}_{\mathrm{eq}}}{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{\mathrm{eq}}}},`$ (64)
$`\omega _\varphi ^{(\mathrm{eq})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{Z}_{\mathrm{eq}}}{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{\mathrm{eq}}}}.`$ (65)
As in the case of circular orbits, we still have three different frequencies.

Combining the equations of motion (10) and (12), we can calculate the integrated azimuthal angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_r`$ between two successive passages through, say, the periastron and we find that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_r=2Z_{\mathrm{eq}}=\frac{2(1e^2)}{p}\stackrel{~}{Z}_{\mathrm{eq}}.$$
(66)
According to equation (14), the corresponding period of coordinate time is given by $`T_r=2W_{\mathrm{eq}}`$. Using $`\gamma ^{(\mathrm{eq})}=\stackrel{~}{W}_{\mathrm{eq}}/\stackrel{~}{Y}_{\mathrm{eq}}`$, we obtain

$$T_r=\frac{2\pi \gamma ^{(\mathrm{eq})}}{\omega _r^{(\mathrm{eq})}}$$
(67)
and one can see that $`\gamma ^{(\mathrm{eq})}`$ acts as a Lorentz factor which relates the elapse of proper time over one cycle of equatorial motion with the corresponding period of coordinate time.

### 4.3 Keplerian orbits

In the Newtonian limit, the constants of motion asymptotically approach the values of Keplerian orbits which are given by equations (143) in B. Since the Keplerian values of energy and angular momentum, naturally, are independent of the spin of the black hole, the problem reduces to that one of motion in Schwarzschild spacetime and we can set $`z_{}=0`$. Thus, we obtain the the asymptotic expressions

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill F(\chi )\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+\mathrm{O}(p^1),& G(\chi )p^{1/2}+\mathrm{O}(p^{1/2}),\hfill \\ \hfill H(\chi )\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+\mathrm{O}(p^1),& J(\chi )(1e^2)^2p^1+\mathrm{O}(p^2)\hfill \end{array}`$ (70)
which lead to

$$\stackrel{~}{W}\stackrel{~}{Y},\stackrel{~}{X}\frac{\pi p^{1/2}}{1e^2},\stackrel{~}{Y}\frac{\pi p}{(1e^2)\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}},\stackrel{~}{Z}p^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{X},$$
(71)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}`$ is the Keplerian frequency given by equation (1).

Substitution of the above asymptotic expressions into equations (35)–(37) and (47) results in

$`\gamma 1,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_r\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta \stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi \mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}.`$ (72)
The three components of motion therefore become commensurate in the Newtonian limit and the corresponding frequencies asymptotically degenerate. In the nearly Newtonian regime, where the three frequencies are close to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}`$ yet slightly different from each other, we expect that there will be a minute perihelion drift (due to the small difference between $`\omega _\varphi `$ and $`\omega _r`$) as well as a slow precession of the orbital plane (due to the difference between $`\omega _\varphi `$ and $`\omega _\theta `$). In order to calculate this precession, an approximation of the fundamental frequencies including terms of next lower order in $`p`$ would be required. However, this is left for future work.

### 4.4 Numerical case study of a rapidly rotating black hole

Let us now consider bound orbits around a nearly extreme Kerr black hole of spin $`\stackrel{~}{a}=0.998`$.444 The chosen value of the spin is presumably a critical value as black holes which are accreting material tend to be buffered against further increase of spin if $`\stackrel{~}{a}0.998`$ .  Such a black hole is particularly interesting because effects due to spacetime dragging caused by the high angular momentum of the black hole are strong and stable orbits exist even very close to the horizon (which is located at $`r=r_\mathrm{H}1.0632M`$). Subsequently, we will explore the parameter space in all three dimensions and analyse the behaviour of the fundamental frequencies as each of the orbital parameters is varied. The numerical evaluation of equations (35)–(37) and a general algorithm to calculate the constants of motion $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$ for arbitrary orbital parameters $`p`$, $`e`$ and $`\theta _{}`$ was implemented in MATHEMATICA.555 The procedures were tested, for instance, by comparison of large numerical samples to the results of Wilkins  for circular orbits around an extreme Kerr black hole and those of Cutler et al  for elliptical orbits in Schwarzschild spacetime. They are available from the author on request.

To begin with, we choose $`e=1/3`$ (in this case the aphelion radius is twice the perihelion radius) and $`\theta _{}=\pi /3`$ (corresponding to $`30^{}`$ of maximum altitude from the equatorial plane). The fundamental frequencies of the prograde and retrograde orbits as functions of $`p`$ are shown in figure 1. Basically, one can see that the frequencies $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_r`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\theta `$ increasingly deviate from each other as the distance from the black hole becomes smaller. For increasing $`p`$, on the other hand, the fundamental frequencies tend to degenerate and, in fact, they converge towards the Keplerian frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}=(16\sqrt{2}/27)p^{3/2}`$ for $`e=1/3`$. Thus, we call the Keplerian power law for given eccentricity the *asymptotic Keplerian branch* of the fundamental frequencies.

The values of $`p`$, for which the frequencies of, respectively, prograde and retrograde orbits diverge, are located exactly where the respective orbits become *marginally stable*. In this case, stable prograde orbits only exist if $`p>p_{\mathrm{ms}}^{(\mathrm{p})}1.682`$ and stable retrograde orbits only if $`p>p_{\mathrm{ms}}^{(\mathrm{r})}9.416`$. Hence, the corresponding minimal perihelion radii of stable prograde and retrograde orbits with $`e=1/3`$ and $`\theta _{}=\pi /3`$ are, respectively, $`r_\mathrm{p}^{(\mathrm{p})}1.261M`$ and $`r_\mathrm{p}^{(\mathrm{r})}7.062M`$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_r0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\varphi \mathrm{}`$ as $`pp_{\mathrm{ms}}`$. This is a consequence of the orbits becoming ”zoom whirls” which means that the particle moves from the apastron inwards and then revolves many times along an almost circular spiral before it actually reaches the periastron.666 Equatorial zoom whirl orbits have been recently investigated .  In the limit of a marginally stable orbit, the periastron is approached asymptotically. The elapse of proper time as the particle moves from apastron to periastron, thus, ever increases as $`pp_{\mathrm{ms}}`$ and the radial frequency approaches zero. If the particle represents an astrophysical object, however, radiation reaction will finally act on a time scale that is comparable to the dynamical time scale of radial motion ($`2\pi \gamma /\omega _r`$) and, as a consequence, it will drive the particle within finite time over the stability threshold so that it plunges into the black hole.

In parameter space, the locus of all points corresponding to marginally stable orbits, $`p=p_{\mathrm{ms}}(e,z_{})`$, is called the *separatrix*. A plot of the separatrix for $`\stackrel{~}{a}=0.998`$ is shown in figure 2, where the perihelion radius $`r_\mathrm{p}=p/(1+e)`$ is used as parameter in place of $`p`$. There are two sheets, one corresponding to prograde marginally stable orbits and the other one corresponding to retrograde marginally stable orbits. The two sheets smoothly join at $`z=1`$, i.e., where the polar orbits with $`\stackrel{~}{L}_z=0`$ are located. As $`z_{}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{}`$ becomes smaller, however, there is an increasing space between the two sheets, in which only prograde but no retrograde orbits reside. As the eccentricity increases, both prograde and retrograde orbits exist closer to the horizon due to the higher momentum of the particle at the periastron as compared to circular orbits of the same radius. In particular, there are prograde orbits of eccentricity $`e0.5`$ with $`z0.5`$ for which the periastron is very close to the horizon (within $`\delta \stackrel{~}{r}0.1`$).

Figure 3 shows the change of the fundamental frequencies with eccentricity for various choices of $`\theta _{}`$ and $`p`$. The main feature of these plots is the convergence of the frequencies to a single value as $`e1`$. This simply reflects the fact that orbits of eccentricity very close to unity are almost unbound and the apastron is located far away from the region of strong gravity. In consequence, the particle is mostly moving in the nearly Newtonian regions of spacetime and the fundamental frequencies tend to degenerate. In the plot showing the frequencies of nearly polar orbits with $`\theta _{}=\pi /180`$ and $`p=6`$, the frequencies terminate just below $`e=0.5`$ as prograde orbits of higher eccentricity do not exist if $`z1`$ (note that the value of the perihelion radius depends on $`e`$ according to $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p}=6/(1+e)`$ when comparing to the plot of the separatrix in figure 2).

The dependence of the fundamental frequencies on the inclination parameter $`\theta _{}`$ (which is the smallest angle of inclination to the spin axis of the black hole that can be reached by the particle) is shown in figure 4 for different values of $`e`$ and $`p`$. Apparently, both the radial and polar frequencies of prograde and retrograde orbits converge towards each other as $`\theta _{}0`$, i.e., in the polar limit. On the other hand, there is a crossing-over of the azimuthal frequencies at some finite value of $`\theta _{}`$. As a consequence, the azimuthal motion of nearly polar retrograde orbits is *faster* than that of the corresponding prograde orbits and, thus, it seems that nearly polar orbits are markedly different from nearly equatorial orbits. We have to keep in mind, however, that the revolution of the particle around the black hole in the case $`\theta _{}0`$ is rather specified by the polar frequency $`\omega _\theta `$, whereas $`\omega _\varphi `$ determines an azimuthal precession around the spin axis of the black hole.

Finally, in figure 5, the scales of coordinate time, $`T_r`$, $`T_\theta `$ and $`T_\varphi `$, defined by equation 50 are shown in physical units as functions of the semi-major axis $`a`$ for orbits of eccentricity $`e=1/3`$ and inclination parameter $`\theta _{}=\pi /3`$. The mass of the black hole is chosen to be $`M=310^6M_{\mathrm{sol}}`$ which is about the mass determined for the black hole in the centre of our Galaxy . It is interesting to note that for virtually all prograde orbits the time scale of polar motion $`T_\varphi `$ is very close to the the Keplerian orbital period $`P_\mathrm{K}=2\pi /\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}`$. However, this is only accidentally the case for the chosen set of parameters, as for lower eccentricity $`T_\varphi `$ is above $`P_\mathrm{K}`$, whereas it tends to become significantly smaller than $`P_\mathrm{K}`$ at higher eccentricity.

## 5 Conclusion

The investigation of bound geodesic orbits in Kerr spacetime presented in this article clearly illustrates that the properties of these orbits in the regime of strong gravity are profoundly different from Keplerian orbits in the Newtonian regime. In particular, there are three different frequencies of orbital motion, $`\omega _r`$, $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$, which increasingly deviate from the Keplerian frequency as the size of the orbit decreases and finally approaches the limit of a marginally stable orbit. This is a consequence of the radial, polar and azimuthal components of motion being *incommensurate* in Kerr spacetime. As a consequence, the shapes of orbits in the vicinity of a Kerr black hole are exceedingly complex.

The explicit formulas for the fundamental frequencies $`\omega _r`$, $`\omega _\theta `$ and $`\omega _\varphi `$ presented in Section 3 are exact in the test particle limit and useful approximations if radiation reaction is *adiabatic*, i.e., if the time scales associated with the frequencies are small compared to the time scale of radiation reaction. Based on the constant of motion $`\gamma `$ which is associated with a timelike generalised coordinate, we have proposed a conversion of the invariant fundamental frequencies into coordinate-time scales, $`T_r`$, $`T_\varphi `$ and $`T_\theta `$, which should be relevant to an observer at spatial infinity and, thus, gravitational wave astronomy. Once these time scales are established, one can compute *instantaneous* gravitational wave forms in the adiabatic approximation. In this context, the term “instantaneous” means an interval of time, over which no significant changes of the constants of motion are accumulated due to radiation reaction. From the resulting spectrum, an estimation of the power emitted in the frequency band of a detector could be made, without making use of an advanced theory of radiation reaction.

## Acknowledgements

I thank C. Glampedakis for many discussions and making me aware of the problem concerning the dynamical time scales of geodesic orbits in Kerr spacetime and also B. S. Sathyaprakash and L. P. Grishchuk for their support and useful criticism. This work was funded by a *Wilhelm-Macke mobility scheme award* of the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz, Austria, as part of my postgraduate studies at Cardiff University.

## Appendix A Determination of the fundamental frequencies

Let $`P_\beta ^{(\mathrm{aa})}=f_\beta ^{(\mathrm{aa})}(\mu ^2/2,E,L_z,Q)`$ be the momenta given by $`P_0^{(\mathrm{aa})}=p_t=E`$ and $`P_k^{(\mathrm{aa})}=J_k`$, where the $`J_k`$ are the action variables defined by equations (22)–(24). If we denote the Jacobian matrix of $`f`$ by $`\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}`$, then, by the theorem on implicit functions, $`\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}𝘋(𝘧^\mathsf{1})=\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}(\mathrm{𝘋𝘧})^\mathsf{1}=𝘐`$, provided that $`f`$ is non-zero and the Jacobian does not vanish . Since $`\mu ^2/2`$ is the invariant value of the Hamiltonian, we can substitute $`\mu ^2/2=H^{(\mathrm{aa})}(E,J_k)`$, where $`H^{(\mathrm{aa})}`$ is the Hamiltonian in the action-angle variable representation. For brevity, let us subsequently use the symbol $`H`$ to denote the Hamiltonian in that representation. Moreover, two rows of the Jacobian matrix are trivial due to the identities $`P_0^{(\mathrm{aa})}=E`$ and $`J_\varphi =L_z`$. Thus, the equation $`\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}𝘋(𝘧^\mathsf{1})=𝘐`$ reads

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0\hfill & 1\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ \frac{J_r}{H}\hfill & \frac{J_r}{E}\hfill & \frac{J_r}{L_z}\hfill & \frac{J_r}{Q}\hfill \\ \frac{J_\theta }{H}\hfill & \frac{J_\theta }{E}\hfill & \frac{J_\theta }{L_z}\hfill & \frac{J_\theta }{Q}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 1\hfill & 0\hfill \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{H}{E}\hfill & \frac{H}{J_r}\hfill & \frac{H}{J_\theta }\hfill & \frac{H}{J_\varphi }\hfill \\ 1\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 1\hfill \\ \frac{Q}{E}\hfill & \frac{Q}{J_r}\hfill & \frac{Q}{J_\theta }\hfill & \frac{Q}{J_\varphi }\hfill \end{array}\right)=𝘐.$$
(73)
The above matrix equation can be split into four non-trivial sets of linear equations in the eight unknowns $`\frac{H}{E}`$, $`\frac{H}{J_k}`$, $`\frac{Q}{E}`$ and $`\frac{Q}{J_k}`$:

$``$ $`𝘈{\displaystyle \frac{}{𝘌}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}𝘏\hfill & & & \\ 𝘘\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathsf{2}_{𝘳_\mathsf{1}}^{𝘳_\mathsf{2}}\frac{𝘳}{\sqrt{𝘙}}\left[\frac{(𝘳^\mathsf{2}+𝘢^\mathsf{2})𝘗}{\mathsf{\Delta }}+𝘢(𝘓_𝘻\mathrm{𝘢𝘌})\right]\hfill & & & \\ \mathsf{2}𝘢^\mathsf{2}𝘌_\theta _{}^{\pi /\mathsf{2}}\frac{\mathrm{cos}^\mathsf{2}\theta \theta }{\sqrt{\mathsf{\Theta }}}\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)`$ (78)
$`𝘈{\displaystyle \frac{}{𝘑_𝘳}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}𝘏\hfill & & & \\ 𝘘\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathsf{2}\pi \hfill & & & \\ \mathsf{0}\hfill & & & \end{array}\right),`$ (83)
$`𝘈{\displaystyle \frac{}{𝘑_\theta }}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}𝘏\hfill & & & \\ 𝘘\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathsf{0}\hfill & & & \\ \frac{\pi }{\mathsf{2}}\hfill & & & \end{array}\right),`$ (88)
$`𝘈{\displaystyle \frac{}{𝘑_\varphi }}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}𝘏\hfill & & & \\ 𝘘\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathsf{2}_{𝘳_\mathsf{1}}^{𝘳_\mathsf{2}}\frac{𝘳}{\sqrt{𝘙}}\left[\frac{\mathrm{𝘢𝘗}}{\mathsf{\Delta }}+(𝘓_𝘻\mathrm{𝘢𝘌})\right]\hfill & & & \\ \mathsf{2}𝘓_𝘻_\theta _{}^{\pi /\mathsf{2}}\frac{\mathrm{cot}^\mathsf{2}\theta \theta }{\sqrt{\mathsf{\Theta }}}\hfill & & & \end{array}\right)`$ (93)
where $`P=(r^2+a^2)EaL_z`$, and the coefficient matrix $`𝘈`$ is given by

$$𝘈=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathsf{2}_{𝘳_\mathsf{1}}^{𝘳_\mathsf{2}}\frac{𝘳^\mathsf{2}𝘳}{\sqrt{𝘙}}\hfill & _{𝘳_\mathsf{1}}^{𝘳_\mathsf{2}}\frac{𝘳}{\sqrt{𝘙}}\hfill & & \\ \mathsf{2}𝘢^\mathsf{2}_\theta _{}^{\pi /\mathsf{2}}\frac{\mathrm{cos}^\mathsf{2}\theta \theta }{\sqrt{\mathsf{\Theta }}}\hfill & _\theta _{}^{\pi /\mathsf{2}}\frac{\theta }{\sqrt{\mathsf{\Theta }}}.\hfill & & \end{array}\right)$$
(94)
Using the definitions (32)–(34) and (46) for the radial integrals and the identities

$`{\displaystyle _\theta _{}^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta z_+}}K(k),`$ (95)
$`{\displaystyle _\theta _{}^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}\theta `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{z_+}{\beta }}[K(k)E(k)],`$ (96)
$`{\displaystyle _\theta _{}^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}^2\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Theta }}}}\theta `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{z_+}{\beta }}[\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)K(k)],`$ (97)
where the elliptical integrals $`K(k)`$, $`E(k)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)`$ are defined by equations (29)–(31), the solutions of the above systems of equations for $`\frac{H}{E}`$ and $`\frac{H}{J_k}`$ are given by

$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{E}}={\displaystyle \frac{K(k)W(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2E\left[K(k)E(k)\right]X(r_1,r_2)}{K(k)Y(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2\left[K(k)E(k)\right]X(r_1,r_2)}},`$ (98)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{J_r}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi K(k)}{K(k)Y(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2\left[K(k)E(k)\right]X(r_1,r_2)}},`$ (99)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{J_\theta }}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \beta z_+X(r_1,r_2)}{2\{K(k)Y(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2\left[K(k)E(k)\right]X(r_1,r_2)\}}},`$ (100)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{J_\varphi }}={\displaystyle \frac{K(k)Z(r_1,r_2)+L_z[\mathrm{\Pi }(z_{}^2,k)K(k)]X(r_1,r_2)}{K(k)Y(r_1,r_2)+a^2z_+^2[K(k)E(k)]X(r_1,r_2)}}.`$ (101)
The validity of the above solution depends on the Jacobian matrix $`\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}`$ being non-singular. In fact, $`det\mathrm{𝘋𝘧}\mathsf{0}`$ if and only if

$$det𝘋(𝘧^\mathsf{1})=\frac{𝘘}{𝘑_𝘳}\frac{𝘏}{𝘑_𝘳}=\mathsf{2}𝘢^\mathsf{2}𝘻_+^\mathsf{2}\left[\mathsf{1}\frac{𝘌(𝘬)}{𝘒(𝘬)}\right]\left(\frac{𝘏}{𝘑_𝘳}\right)^\mathsf{2}\mathsf{0},$$
(102)
as is easily shown by using the second equation of system (83). The above condition is fulfilled whenever $`k>0`$, i.e., if the orbit is non-equatorial. Since $`Q=0`$ for equatorial orbits, this is immediately clear from the above systems of equations as well. Nevertheless, the frequencies of equatorial orbits can be calculated by taking the limit $`k0`$ of the general expressions for $`k>0`$ and, as demonstrated in Section 4.2, one finds agreement with the results obtained from a direct calculation based on the equations of motion.

## Appendix B Calculation of the constants of motion

In order to find the constants of motion $`E`$, $`L_z`$ and $`Q`$ for given orbital parameters $`p`$, $`e`$ and $`\theta _{}`$, one has to solve the following set of equations:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{r}{\tau }}`$ $`=0R(r)`$ $`=0,`$ (103)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{\tau }}`$ $`=0\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta )`$ $`=0,`$ (104)
where $`R(r)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta )`$ are given by equations (7) and (8). The roots of these equations correspond to the turning points of, respectively, radial and polar motion, i.e.,we can substitute $`r=r_\mathrm{p}=pM/(1+e)`$ or $`r=r_\mathrm{a}=pM/(1e)`$ in the first equation and $`\theta =\theta _{}`$ in the second equation. Thus, a system of three equations is obtained which can be solved for the three unknown constants of motion, provided that $`e0`$. In the case $`e=0`$, on the other hand, we have got to make use of the supplemental constraint $`R^{}(r_0)=0`$, in addition to $`R(r_0)=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta _{})=0`$, because circular orbits occur if both $`R(r)`$ and its radial gradient $`R^{}(r)`$ vanish at the same point, $`r=r_0`$.

Introducing the dimensionless quantities

$$\stackrel{~}{a}=\frac{a}{M},\stackrel{~}{E}=\frac{E}{\mu },\stackrel{~}{L}_z=\frac{L_z}{\mu M},\stackrel{~}{Q}=\frac{Q}{\mu ^2M^2},$$
(105)
we can actually set up a completely scale-invariant formulation of the problem. Hence, it is sufficient to calculate $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{L}_z`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ only once for given orbital parameters. The corresponding physical values for a particular black hole of mass $`M`$ and a particle of mass $`\mu `$ can then be inferred from the above definitions.

To begin with, we re-arrange $`\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta _{})=0`$ in order to express Carter’s constant $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ in terms of $`\theta _{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}_z`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}=z_{}^2\left[\stackrel{~}{a}^2(1\stackrel{~}{E}^2)+\frac{\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2}{1z_{}^2}\right],$$
(106)
where $`z_{}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{}`$. If this expression is substituted for $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ in the equation $`\stackrel{~}{R}(\stackrel{~}{r})=\mu ^2M^4R(r)=0`$, we obtain

$$\stackrel{~}{R}(\stackrel{~}{r})=f(r)\stackrel{~}{E}^22g(r)\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{L}_zh(r)\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2d(r),$$
(107)
where

$`f(r)`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{r}^4+\stackrel{~}{a}^2\left[\stackrel{~}{r}(\stackrel{~}{r}+2)+z_{}^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right],`$ (108)
$`g(r)`$ $`=2\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{r},`$ (109)
$`h(r)`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{r}(\stackrel{~}{r}2)+{\displaystyle \frac{z_{}^2}{1z_{}^2}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }},`$ (110)
$`d(r)`$ $`=(\stackrel{~}{r}^2+\stackrel{~}{a}^2z_{}^2)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }},`$ (111)
and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\stackrel{~}{r}^22\stackrel{~}{r}+\stackrel{~}{a}^2`$. Substitution of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{R}^{}(r)=0`$ yields

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{R}}{\stackrel{~}{r}}=f^{}(r)\stackrel{~}{E}^22g^{}(r)\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{L}_zh^{}(r)\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2d^{}(r),$$
(112)
where

$`f^{}(r)`$ $`=4\stackrel{~}{r}^3+2\stackrel{~}{a}^2\left[(1+z_{}^2)\stackrel{~}{r}+(1z_{}^2)\right],`$ (113)
$`g^{}(r)`$ $`=2\stackrel{~}{a},`$ (114)
$`h^{}(r)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2(\stackrel{~}{r}1)}{1\stackrel{~}{z}_{}^2}},`$ (115)
$`d^{}(r)`$ $`=2\left(2\stackrel{~}{r}3\right)\stackrel{~}{r}^2+2\stackrel{~}{a}^2\left[(1+z_{}^2)\stackrel{~}{r}z_{}^2\right].`$ (116)
Thus, we shall define the following coefficients in terms of the orbital parameters:

$`(f_1,g_1,h_1,d_1)`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}(f(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p}),g(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p}),h(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p}),d(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p}))\hfill & \text{if }e>0,\hfill \\ (f(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),g(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),h(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),d(\stackrel{~}{r}_0))\hfill & \text{if }e=0,\hfill \end{array}`$ (119)
$`(f_2,g_2,h_2,d_2)`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}(f(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{a}),g(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{a}),h(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{a}),d(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{a}))\hfill & \text{if }e>0,\hfill \\ (f^{}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),g^{}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),h^{}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0),d^{}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0))\hfill & \text{if }e=0.\hfill \end{array}`$ (122)
Eliminating $`\stackrel{~}{L}_z`$ from the set of quadratic equations,

$$\begin{array}{cc}f_1\stackrel{~}{E}^22g_1\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{L}_zh_1\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2d_1\hfill & =0,\hfill \\ f_2\stackrel{~}{E}^22g_2\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{L}_zh_2\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2d_2\hfill & =0,\hfill \end{array}\}$$
(123)
a quadratic equation in $`\stackrel{~}{E}^2`$ is obtained,

$$(\rho ^2+4\eta \sigma )\stackrel{~}{E}^42(\kappa \rho +2ϵ\sigma )\stackrel{~}{E}^2+\kappa ^2=0,$$
(124)
where $`ϵ`$, $`\eta `$, $`\kappa `$, $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ are defined by the following $`2\times 2`$ determinants:

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \kappa & \end{array}=`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cc}d_1& h_1\\ d_2& h_2\end{array}\right|,ϵ=`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cc}d_1& g_1\\ d_2& g_2\end{array}\right|,`$ (130)
$`\rho =`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cc}f_1& h_1\\ f_2& h_2\end{array}\right|,\eta =`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cc}f_1& g_1\\ f_2& g_2\end{array}\right|,`$ (135)
$`\sigma =`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cc}g_1& h_1\\ g_2& h_2\end{array}\right|.`$ (138)
The roots of equation (124) are given by

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_\pm ^2=\frac{\kappa \rho +2ϵ\sigma \pm 2\sqrt{\sigma (\sigma ϵ^2+\rho ϵ\kappa \eta \kappa ^2)}}{\rho ^2+4\eta \sigma }.$$
(139)
Actually, these roots can be calculated regardless of whether the corresponding orbits are of the first or the second kind, i.e., if they are stable or plunging. There is a simple criterion, however, which can be used to determine the kind of the orbit: Let the *potential* of the radial component of motion be defined by

$$\left(\frac{r}{\tau }\right)^2=\stackrel{~}{E}^2\stackrel{~}{V}^2.$$
(140)
According to equation (10), $`\stackrel{~}{V}=(\stackrel{~}{E}^2\stackrel{~}{R}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^2)^{1/2}`$ and the radial domain of motion is subject to the constraint $`\stackrel{~}{V}\stackrel{~}{E}`$. Hence, the orbit is *stable* if

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{V}}{\stackrel{~}{r}}(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p})<0.$$
(141)
If the gradient of the potential vanishes at $`r=r_\mathrm{p}`$, the potential has a local maximum at the perihelion radius and, in that case, the orbit is *marginally stable*.

Substituting $`\pm \sqrt{E_\pm ^2}`$ into the system (123) and solving for $`L_z`$, yields four roots which satisfy both equations. Therefore, we obtain *four* possible solutions for the constants of motion with given orbital parameters, namely, $`(E^{(\mathrm{r})},L_z^{(\mathrm{r})},Q^{(\mathrm{r})})`$, $`(E^{(\mathrm{p})},L_z^{(\mathrm{p})},Q^{(\mathrm{p})})`$, $`(E^{(\mathrm{p})},L_z^{(\mathrm{p})},Q^{(\mathrm{p})})`$ and $`(E^{(\mathrm{r})},L_z^{(\mathrm{r})},`$ $`Q^{(\mathrm{r})})`$, where $`E^{(\mathrm{p})}=E_{}`$ is the *lower* and $`E^{(\mathrm{r})}=E_+`$ the *higher* energy given by equation (139). Numerical evaluation shows that $`L_z^{(\mathrm{p})}>L_z^{(\mathrm{r})}`$. In the first case, the particle has higher binding energy and co-revolves with the rotation of the black hole. Such orbits are called *prograde*. In the second case, the particle has lower binding energy and usually counter-revolves, except for some orbits close to the horizon of rapidly rotating black holes. These orbits are called *retrograde*. The solutions with negative energies correspond to the respective motions under time reversal.

Finally, we consider the *Newtonian* limits of the constants of motion which are asymptotically approached as $`p\mathrm{}`$. Using the formulas for the potential energy and angular momentum of Keplerian orbits in geometric units ,

$$\stackrel{~}{U}=\frac{1e^2}{2p},\stackrel{~}{L}=p^{1/2},$$
(142)
and noting that $`L_z=L\mathrm{cos}(\pi /2\theta _{})=L\mathrm{sin}\theta _{}=L(1z_{}^2)^{1/2}`$, we obtain the following asymptotic expressions for the constants of motion:777 The constraints $`\stackrel{~}{R}(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{p})=0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{R}(\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{a})=0`$ are fulfilled asymptotically in the highest power for non-circular orbits, and $`\stackrel{~}{R}(\stackrel{~}{r}_0)=0`$ is satisfied down to $`\mathrm{O}(\stackrel{~}{r}^{5/2})`$ if $`e=0`$.

$$1\stackrel{~}{E}^2\frac{1e^2}{p},\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2(1z_{}^2)p,\stackrel{~}{Q}z_{}^2p.$$
(143)
Since $`\stackrel{~}{Q}+\stackrel{~}{L}_z^2\stackrel{~}{L}^2`$, Carter’s constant in the Newtonian limit is the squared angular momentum component parallel to the equatorial plane.

## References


format: text

text:
# Effect of matter motion and polarization in neutrino flavour oscillations

## Abstract

The Lorentz invariant formalism for description of neutrino flavour oscillations in moving and polarized matter is developed. It is shown that the neutrino effective potential, which determines the effective mass difference between neutrinos in matter can be significantly changed by relativistic motion of matter. In the case of matter motion parallel to neutrino propagation, matter effects in neutrino flavour oscillations are suppressed. In the case of relativistic motion of matter in the opposite direction substantial increase of effects of matter in neutrino oscillations is predicted. The dependence of the matter term in neutrino effective potential on the values and correlations of the three vectors, the neutrino and matter speeds and matter polarization, is discussed in detail.

Moscow State University,
Department of Theoretical physics,
$`119992`$ Moscow, Russia

The problem of neutrino propagation in matter, starting from the paper of Wolfenstein , is still under intensive study. One of the most famous results in this field was obtained by Mikheyev and Smirnov  who showed that there is a mechanism for resonance amplification of neutrino flavour oscillations in matter (the MSW effect). Now it is commonly believed that neutrino oscillations in matter can provide not only solutions for the solar and atmospheric neutrino puzzles but also have important applications in different astrophysical and cosmology environments (see, for example, - and references therein).

In this paper we should like to discuss a new phenomenon in neutrino flavour oscillations in matter that have never been considered before neither in textbooks and monographs on neutrino physics nor in papers in research journals. We show below (see also ) that the matter Wolfenstein term in neutrino effective potential can be substantially increased or suppressed in the case of matter moving with relativistic speed. This effects can lead to interesting consequences for environments with neutrino propagating through relativistic jets of matter. As an example, we point out that astrophysical systems, such as quasars and microquasars, are believed to emit collimated relativistic jets of plasma. Another important application of the studied here effect can be found within several models of gamma-ray bursts ( see for a resent review ) where highly relativistic matter with Lorentz factor $`\gamma 10^210^3`$ is supposed to be accelerated in the fireball shocks.

In the frame of the Lorentz invariant approach (see ,-) to description of the neutrino flavour and spin oscillations in matter we get below the effective neutrino potential which contributes to the Hamiltonian describing neutrino evolution in the case of matter motion with arbitrary (also relativistic) total speed. We show here that the matter motion could lead to sufficient change in the neutrino flavour oscillation probabilities and other neutrino oscillation parameters (like the effective mixing angle and oscillation length) if matter is moving with relativistic speed. In particular, in the case of matter moving parallel to the neutrino propagation, the Wolfenstein matter term in the neutrino effective potential is suppressed. Contrary to this suppression effect, in the case of relativistic motion of matter in the opposite direction in respect to neutrino propagation, substational increase of effects of matter in neutrino flavour oscillations is predicted. We also argue that effects of matter motion have to be accounted for in the resonance conditions for the neutrino flavour oscillations. Effects of matter polarization are also taken into account, and the dependence of the matter term in neutrino effective potential on the values and correlations of the three vectors, the neutrino and matter speeds and matter polarization, are discussed in detail.

It should be also noted here that effects of matter polarization in neutrino oscillations were considered previously in several papers ( see, for example,  and references therein). However, the procedure used in refs.  of accounting for the matter polarization effect does not enable one to study the case of matter motion with total relativistic speed. Within our approach we can reproduce corresponding results of  in the case of matter which is slowly moving or is at rest.

Our goal is to investigate neutrino oscillations characteristics in the case of relativistic motion of matter which is composed of different charged and neutral background fermions, $`f=e,n,p,\mu ,\tau `$, $`\nu _e,\nu _\mu ,\nu _\tau `$, etc, accounting for possible effects of matter motion and polarization. In the general case each of the matter components is characterised by the number density $`n_f`$, the speed, $`\stackrel{}{v}_f`$, of the reference frame in which the mean momentum of the fermion $`f`$ is zero, and fermion polarization $`\lambda _f^\mu `$. The fermion $`f`$ current is determined as

$$j_f^\mu =(n_f,n_f\stackrel{}{v}_f).$$
(1)
If a component of the matter $`f`$ is slowly moving or is at rest in the laboratory frame, $`v_f0`$, the fermion current equals

$$j_f^\mu =(n_f,0,0,0).$$
(2)
The polarization of each of the matter components $`f`$ is given by

$$\lambda _f^\mu =(n_f\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f\stackrel{}{v}1_f,n_f\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f\sqrt{1v_f^2}+\frac{n_f\stackrel{}{v}_f\left(\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f\stackrel{}{v}_f\right)}{1+\sqrt{1v_f^2}}).$$
(3)
Here vectors $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f`$ $`(0|\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f|^21)`$ are the mean values of polarization vectors of background fermions $`f`$ in the reference frame in which the mean momentum of fermions $`f`$ is zero. These vectors are determined by the two-step averaging procedure described in ref. . In the case of non-moving matter component $`f`$, $`\stackrel{}{v}_f=0`$, the fermion $`f`$ polarization is

$$\lambda _f^\mu =(0,n_f\stackrel{}{\zeta }_f).$$
(4)
Let us suppose that at least one of the matter components $`f`$ is moving as a whole with relativistic speed, $`v_f1`$. For simplicity, let us consider neutrino two-flavour oscillations, e.g. $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$, in matter composed of only one component, electrons ($`f=e`$), moving with relativistic total speed. Generalisation for the case of other types of neutrino conversions and different compositions and types of motion of matter is straightforward.

The matter effect in neutrino oscillations occurs as a result of elastic forward scattering of neutrinos on the background fermions. In our case the difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ between the potentials $`V_e`$ and $`V_\mu `$ for the two-flavour neutrinos is produced by the charged current interaction of the electron neutrino with the background electrons. Note that the neutral current interaction is affective in oscillations between the active and sterile neutrinos. Concluding remarks of the paper are devoted to this type of neutrino oscillations. We do also account for effects of matter polarization which vanishes if there is no preferred spin orientation of electrons. Note that these effects were discussed in detail for neutrino flavour oscillations in non-moving matter  and also for neutrino spin oscillations in moving matter . We neglect below the momentum dependence of the charged vector boson propagator. Then the corresponding part of the neutrino effective Lagrangian can be written in the following form (see  and also )

$$_{eff}=f^\mu \left(\overline{\nu }\gamma _\mu \frac{1+\gamma ^5}{2}\nu \right),$$
(5)
where

$$f^\mu =\sqrt{2}G_F(j_e^\mu \lambda _e^\mu ).$$
(6)
This additional term in the Lagrangian modifies the Dirac equation for neutrino:

$$(\gamma _0E\stackrel{}{\gamma }\stackrel{}{p}m)\psi =(\gamma _\mu f^\mu )\psi .$$
(7)
Rearranging the terms we get the neutrino dispersion relation in matter in the following form,

$$E=\sqrt{(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{f})^2+m^2}+f_0.$$
(8)
The further simplification is found to occur in the limit of weak potential $`|\stackrel{}{f}|p_0=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{p}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}+m^2}`$. Thus we get for the effective energy of the electron neutrino in the moving and polarized matter

$$\begin{array}{cc}E=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{p}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}+m^2}+U\{(1\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)+& \\ \sqrt{1v_e^2}[\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{\beta }\frac{(\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)(\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)}{1+\sqrt{1v_e^2}}]\}+O(\gamma _\nu ^1),& \end{array}$$
(9)
where $`\stackrel{}{\beta }`$ is the neutrino speed, $`\gamma _\nu =(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}`$, and in the considered case of the two-flavour neutrino oscillations $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ and one-component matter $`U=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_e`$.

The effective electron neutrino energy in addition to the vacuum energy $`p_0`$ contains the matter term which is proportional to the electron number density $`n_e`$. Let us underline that $`n_e`$ is related to the invariant electron number density $`n_0`$ given in the reference frame for which the total speed of electrons is zero,

$$n_e=n_0/\sqrt{1v_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}.$$
(10)
There is no matter term in the muon neutrino effective energy in the case of matter composed of only electrons. If matter is slowly moving or is at rest, $`v_e0`$, eq. (9) includes the well known result for the Wolfenstein matter term .

The important new phenomenon, as it can be seen from eq. (9), is the matter term dependence on the value of the total speed $`\stackrel{}{v}_e`$, polarization $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e`$ of background electrons, neutrino speed $`\stackrel{}{\beta }`$ and correlations between these three vectors.

Now following the usual procedure for the two-flavour neutrinos, $`\nu _e`$ and $`\nu _\mu `$, with mixing in the high-energy limit it is possible to get the constant-density solution for the neutrino oscillation problem. Thus, the probability of neutrino conversion $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ can be written in the form

$$P_{\nu _e\nu _\mu }(x)=\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{eff}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi x}{L_{eff}},$$
(11)
where $`x`$ is the distance travelled by neutrino in moving and polarized matter. The effective mixing angle, $`\theta _{eff}`$, and the effective oscillation length, $`L_{eff}`$, are given by

$$\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{eff}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mathrm{sin}^22\theta }{\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta A\right)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mathrm{sin}^22\theta },$$
(12)
$$L_{eff}=\frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta A\right)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mathrm{sin}^22\theta }}.$$
(13)
Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\delta m_\nu ^2/2|\stackrel{}{p}|`$, $`\delta m_\nu ^2=m_2^2m_1^2`$ is the difference of the neutrino masses squired, $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ is the neutrino momentum, $`\theta `$ is the vacuum mixing angle and

$$\begin{array}{c}A=\sqrt{2}G_F\frac{n_0}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}\{(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)(1\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)+\\ \sqrt{1v_e^2}[\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{\beta }\frac{(\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)(\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)}{1+\sqrt{1v_e^2}}]\}.\end{array}$$
(14)
One can see that the neutrino oscillation probability, $`P_{\nu _e\nu _\mu }(x)`$, the mixing angle, $`\theta _{eff}`$, and the oscillation length, $`L_{eff}`$, exhibit dependence on the total speed of electrons $`\stackrel{}{v}_e`$, correlation between $`\stackrel{}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{}{v}_e`$ and polarization of matter $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e`$. The resonance condition

$$\frac{\delta m_\nu ^2}{2|\stackrel{}{p}|}\mathrm{cos}2\theta =A,$$
(15)
at which the probability has unit amplitude no matter how small the mixing angle $`\theta `$ is, also depends on the motion and polarization of matter and neutrino speed. We show below that the relativistic motion of matter could provide appearance of the resonance in the neutrino oscillations in certain cases when for the given neutrino characteristics, $`\delta m_\nu ^2`$, $`|\stackrel{}{p}|`$ and $`\theta `$, and the invariant matter density at rest, $`n_0`$, the resonance is impossible.

Let us consider first unpolarized matter, $`\zeta _e0`$. Then the expression in the right hand side of eq. (15) is equal to the difference of the vector parts of neutrino $`\nu _e`$ and $`\nu _\mu `$ effective potentials (see also ),

$$V^V=\sqrt{2}G_F\frac{n_0}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e).$$
(16)
The resonance condition (15) can be rewritten as

$$\frac{\delta m_\nu ^2}{2|\stackrel{}{p}|}\mathrm{cos}2\theta =\sqrt{2}G_F\frac{n_0}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e).$$
(17)
Note that the value of $`n_0`$ gives the matter density in the reference frame for which the total speed of matter is zero. It follows that the effect of matter motion in the resonance condition depends on the factor

$$a=\frac{1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}.$$
(18)
The appearance of the same factor in the matter term for neutrino spin oscillations was shown in .

If one estimates this factor for the ultra-relativistic neutrinos, $`\beta 1`$, and matter moving along the direction of neutrino propagation with total speed $`v_e`$, then

$$\frac{1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}=\sqrt{\frac{1v_e}{1+v_e}}.$$
(19)
Here we suppose that the condition $`\gamma _e\gamma _\nu `$ is valid, $`\gamma _e=(1v_e^2)^{1/2}`$. For example, this condition in the case of the neutrino mass and energy to be equal to $`m_\nu 2eV`$ and $`E_\nu 10MeV`$ sets a limit on the total energy of the background electrons on the level of $`E_e<2.5TeV`$. In the opposite case, when matter is moving against the direction to the neutrino propagation, we get

$$\frac{1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}=\sqrt{\frac{1+v_e}{1v_e}}.$$
(20)
From these estimations it follows (see ) that: 1) the relativistic motion of matter, $`v_e1`$ , along the neutrino propagation could provide the resonance increase of the oscillation probability if the matter density $`n_0`$ is too high for the resonance appearance in non-moving matter, 2) the relativistic motion of matter in opposite direction to the neutrino propagation could provide the resonance increase of the oscillation probability if the matter density $`n_0`$ is too low for the resonance appearance in non-moving matter.

Now let us discuss the case when the matter polarization effects are also important, $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e0`$. Consider the axial part of the difference of neutrino effective potentials. From the general expression, eq.(14), for $`A=V^V+V^A`$ we find that the axial part is given by

$$V^A=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\left\{\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{\beta }\frac{(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)(\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}\frac{(\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)(\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e)}{1+\sqrt{1v_e^2}}\right\}.$$
(21)
In the case of non-moving matter, $`v_e0`$, we find

$$V^A=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{\beta }.$$
(22)
This result coincides with the corresponding expression of ref.  if one follows approximation $`\stackrel{}{\beta }=\stackrel{}{k}_\nu `$, where $`\stackrel{}{k}_\nu =\stackrel{}{p}_\nu /|\stackrel{}{p}_\nu |`$ is the unit vector in the direction of the neutrino momentum.

We get the same result, eq. (22), if electrons are polarized in the transverse plane, $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e=0`$. Let us underline that due to the condition $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e`$ the axial potential $`V^A`$ does not depend on the absolute value of matter speed $`v_e`$. In this case for the relativistic neutrino $`V^A`$ is zero only if neutrino is also propagating in the perpendicular direction to the matter polarization. Note that this statement is valid also for the case of the relativistic motion of matter (see below).

In an analogy with what have been found for the matter term in the neutrino spin oscillations , the potential $`V^A`$ exhibits critical dependence on the correlation between the direction of the neutrino propagation, $`\stackrel{}{k}_\nu `$, and the direction of the matter motion given by the unit vector ($`\stackrel{}{k}_e=\stackrel{}{v}_e/v_e`$). For these two particular cases, $`\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \stackrel{}{k}_e=\pm 1`$, from eq. (21) we get

$$V^A|{}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \stackrel{}{k}_e)=1}}{}^{}=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \sqrt{\frac{1v_e}{1+v_e}},$$
(23)
and

$$V^A|{}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \stackrel{}{k}_e)=1}}{}^{}=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \sqrt{\frac{1+v_e}{1v_e}}.$$
(24)
For the neutrino and matter motion along one line with respect to the sign of $`\stackrel{}{k}_\nu \stackrel{}{k}_e=\pm 1`$ there can be a significant decrease (see also ref. ) and increase of matter term.

Let us compare eqs. (23) and (24) with eq. (22) for the potential $`V^A`$ which is also valid for the transversal polarization, $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e=0`$, and relativistic motion of matter, $`v_e1`$. It follows that in the relativistic case and transversal polarization of matter the potential $`V^A`$ is zero not for any momenta of neutrinos (as it was claimed in ), but only when neutrino is also propagating in the transverse plane with respect to the matter polarization and in addition to $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{v}_e=0`$ the condition $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu =0`$ is valid.

The total potential $`A=V^V+V^A`$ for arbitrary motion of matter in the direction of the neutrino propagation, $`\stackrel{}{k}_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu =1`$, as it follows from eqs. (16), (19) and (23), is

$$A=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\sqrt{\frac{1v_e}{1+v_e}}(1+\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu ).$$
(25)
The total potential $`A`$ in the relativistic case has a general suppression factor $`(1v_e)^{1/2}1`$, and is zero for the complete matter polarization $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_e=1`$. In the case of opposite motion of matter and the neutrino, $`\stackrel{}{k}_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu =1`$, from eqs. (16), (20) and (24) we get for the total potential,

$$A=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_0\sqrt{\frac{1+v_e}{1v_e}}(1+\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_\nu ).$$
(26)
It follows that the total potential can be substantially increased for the relativistic motion of matter due to the factor $`(1v_e)^{1/2}1`$, however in the case of the longitudinal polarization of matter, $`\stackrel{}{\zeta }_e\stackrel{}{k}_e=1`$, the potential is zero.

In conclusion it is worth noting that a similar analysis can be performed for any type of the neutrino flavour conversion and different matter composition. As it follows from the above considerations, there could be a decrease (increase) of the particular matter component contribution to the difference of neutrino potentials if the matter component is moving along (against) the direction of neutrino propagation. If different matter components move with different speeds, the difference of neutrino effective potentials in the general case depends on each of the speeds. As an example, let us consider the case of electron neutrino $`\nu _e`$ conversion into sterile neutrino $`\nu _s`$ in the presence of matter composed of electrons, protons and neutrons. We also suppose that each of the matter components is characterised by its total speed $`\stackrel{}{v}_{e,p,n}`$ and invariant number density $`n_0^{e,p,n}`$. For simplicity we consider the unpolarized matter components, then

$$\begin{array}{c}A_{\nu _e\nu _s}=\frac{\sqrt{2}G_F}{2}\{\frac{n_0^e(1+4\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)}{\sqrt{1v_e^2}}(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_e)+\\ \frac{n_0^p(14\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)}{\sqrt{1v_p^2}}(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_p)\frac{n_0^n}{\sqrt{1v_n^2}}(1\stackrel{}{\beta }\stackrel{}{v}_n)\}.\end{array}$$
(27)
From this expression it follows that new phenomena are expected to appear in the case of moving matter which are absent if matter is at rest. For instance, it is easy to see that if $`\stackrel{}{v}_e\stackrel{}{v}_p,`$ then the neutral current contributions from the electron neutrino elastic forward scattering off the background electrons and protons does not cancel even in the case when the electron and proton invariant densities are equal $`n_e^{(0)}=n_p^{(0)}`$. This phenomenon can exist in the relativistically expanding fireballs which are predicted within several models of gamma-ray bursts  and in which the electron Lorentz factor may exceed that of the proton by a factor up to the ratio of the proton to the electron mass.