format: text

text:
# Geometry and topology of singularities in spherical dust collapse

## I Introduction and summary

The role played by regular initial data in determining the final state of marginally bound spherically symmetric collapse of inhomogeneous dust is well understood. A comprehensive description of this role was first given in sj (1) where explicit necessary and sufficient conditions on the initial data were derived for the existence of a naked singularity. A naked singularity here means a singular region from which there emanates a future-pointing (f.p.) causal geodesic. The result referred to dealt with the existence of f.p. radial null geodesics. Motivated by a desire to (i) study the stability of this result with respect to the introduction of angular momentum and (ii) generalise, in the relevant subsets of the initial data space, to all f.p. causal geodesics, we have studied non-radial null geodesics in spherical dust collapse mn1 (2). We showed that there exist f.p. non-radial null geodesics emanating from the singularity if and only if there exist f.p. radial null geodesics emanating from the singularity. It would be useful to know whether this result can be extended to timelike geodesics in order to give a complete account of all possible causal geodesics. Interesting results in this direction were recently given in desh (3).

The existence of non-radial geodesics outgoing from the singularity might suggest that, topologically, the singularity is not a point. It is therefore interesting to study in more detail the structure of the singularity and in particular to investigate its topological properties. This is a difficult problem since, firstly, the singularity is not part of the space-time and there is no unique definition for the space-time boundary (see seno (4) for a review). Secondly, given the complexity of the geodesic equations, it is difficult to study the topology of a given singular boundary.

In order to have a first intuition about the singularity ‘shape’, we can start by studying the behaviour of the expansion of dust world lines in the neighbourhood of the singularity. In this way, we can classify the singularities as points, cigars, barrels or pancakes dsincosmo (5).

However, this classification says little about topological issues. For example, in a dust filled Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker universe the big bang singularity is point-like in this classification, but is foliated by 2-spheres according to a scheme used below. Furthermore, there are simple examples where this classification scheme does not give any results such as for the singularity in Schwarzschild space-time with negative mass. We recall that in the context of the self-similar collapse of a scalar field, Christodoulou christo-scalar (6) has found an example a singular boundary (see below) which is foliated by points in some sectors and by spheres in other sectors. So, a space-time singularity might not have a distinct unique topology and can possess complicated geometrical features (see also e.g. the Curzon singularity scott (7)). It is therefore of importance to investigate some of these non-trivial issues in the context of spherical dust collapse.

This paper aims to study carefully some aspects of the singularity and its topological properties in Lemaitre-Tolman (LT) space-times. In section II we briefly describe the marginally bound LT model and recall previous results of sj (1) and mn1 (2). In section III, we consider the problem of extending the result of mn1 (2) to all f.p. causal geodesics. In section IV, we investigate the causal structure of the singularity by studying the behaviour of ingoing radial null geodesics. In section V, we shall use Thorne’s classification scheme, which turns out to be of interest in this case beyond merely classifying the singularity. We shall also study the behaviour of a number of space-time invariants in order to investigate the structure of the singularity. These invariants involve the shear and the space-time curvature and have been used e.g. in studies of the Weyl curvature hypothesis penrose (8) as well as in the context of isotropic singularities gw (9). In section VI, we address topological issues by considering non-radial null geodesics emerging from the singularity for self-similar solutions. We end with some conclusions and comments. All our considerations are restricted to the local visibility of the singularity. Another important point to keep in mind is that when dealing with radial geodesics, we will for the most part treat them as curves in the Lorentzian 2-space $`\theta =`$constant, $`\varphi =`$constant. So a ‘unique’ radial geodesic as referred to in e.g. Proposition 4 is a unique curve in the $`rt`$ plane, but is a 2-parameter family of curves in the space-time. The exception is Section VI, where the different angular parameters of radial curves play an essential role. A bullet $``$ indicates the end of a proof. We use $`8\pi G=c=1`$.

## II Field equations and singularities

We study spherical inhomogeneous dust collapse for the marginally bound case. The line element is Lemaitre (10, 11, 12)

$$ds^2=dt^2+(R_{,r}dr)^2+R^2(r,t)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(1)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ is the line element for the unit 2-sphere. We use subscripts to denote partial derivatives. The Einstein field equations yield

$`R_{,t}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{m(r)}{R}}},`$ (2)
$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_{,r}}{R^2R_{,r}}},`$ (3)
the latter equation defining the density $`\rho (r,t)`$ of the dust; $`m(r)`$ is arbitrary (but subject to certain conditions introduced below) and will be referred to as the mass, although in fact $`m`$ equals twice the Misner-Sharp mass. In particular, this locates the apparent horizon at $`R=m`$. Solving (2) gives

$$R^3(r,t)=\frac{9}{4}m(t_c(r)t)^2,$$
(4)
where $`t_c(r)`$ is another arbitrary function which, in the process of collapse, corresponds to the time of arrival of each shell $`r`$ to the singularity.

We assume that the collapse proceeds from a regular initial state; i.e. at time $`t=0`$ (i) there are no singularities (all curvature invariants are finite) and (ii) there are no trapped surfaces i.e. $`m(r)<R(r,0)`$. We have the freedom of a coordinate rescaling in (1) which we can use to set $`R(r,0)=r`$. This gives

$$t_c(r)=\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{\frac{r^3}{m}}.$$
(5)
Notice that this leaves just one arbitrary function, $`m(r)`$. There is a curvature singularity called the shell-focussing singularity along $`t=t_c(r)`$, so the ranges of the coordinates $`r,t`$ are $`0r<\mathrm{}`$ and $`0t<t_c(r)`$. The possibility that the shell-focussing singularity may be naked was first noted in eardley-smarr (13), and the first mathematical results on the role of initial data were given in christo-dust (14). We note that only the subset $`\{(r,t)=(0,t_0)\}`$ (where $`t_0:=t_c(0)`$) of this singularity may be visible christo-dust (14). Assuming a dust sphere of finite radius, we can restrict the range of $`r`$ to $`[0,b]`$ for some $`b>0`$, and match it to a Schwarzschild exterior. During the collapse of the dust sphere there can be also a curvature singularity given by $`R_{,r}=0`$ along $`t=t_{sc}(r)`$, where

$$t_{sc}(r)=2\frac{\sqrt{rm}}{m_{,r}}.$$
(6)
This so-called shell-crossing singularity is gravitationally weak newman (15, 16), though what this means in terms of continuation of the geometry is not yet known. Since we are primarily interested in the shell-focussing singularity we impose the condition that along each world-line $`r=constant`$, the shell-crossing singularity does not precede the shell-focussing singularity. That is, $`t_c(r)<t_{sc}(r)`$ for all $`r>0`$. This is equivalent to taking $`R_{,r}>0`$ for all $`r>0`$, and yields $`rm_{,r}<3m,r>0`$. We note that $`t_{sc}(0)=t_0`$.

The initial data consists of just one function $`\mu (r):=\rho (r,0)`$ defined on an interval $`[0,b]`$ where $`b`$ is the initial radius of the collapsing dust sphere. The result of sj (1) confirmed in mn1 (2) is as follows:

###### Theorem 1

Let $`b>0`$ and $`\mu C^3[0,b]`$. Let

$$m(r)=_0^rx^2\mu (x)𝑑x$$

defined on $`[0,b]`$ satisfy the no-shell crossing condition $`rm_{,r}<3m`$ on $`(0,b]`$. Then the marginally bound collapse of the dust sphere with initial radius $`b`$ and initial density profile $`\mu (r)`$ results in a singularity from which there emanates a f.p. radial null geodesic if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied.

1. $`\mu ^{}(0)<0.`$
2. $`\mu ^{}(0)=0`$ and $`\mu ^{\prime \prime }(0)<0`$.
3. $`\mu ^{}(0)=\mu ^{\prime \prime }(0)=0`$ and

$$\frac{\mu ^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)}{(\mu _0)^{5/2}}\frac{2}{3}(26\sqrt{3}+45)60.0222,$$

where $`\mu _0:=\mu (0)`$.

In mn1 (2), we found it convenient to make the following definitions which will be used below.

$`m(r)`$ $`=:`$ $`r^3({\displaystyle \frac{\mu _0}{3}}+m_1),m_1(0)=0;`$ (7)
$`m_{,r}(r)`$ $`=:`$ $`r^2(\mu _0+m_2),`$ (8)
$`m_{,rr}(r)`$ $`=:`$ $`r(2\mu _0+m_3),m_3(0)=0.`$ (9)
Notice that $`m_2(r)=\mu (r)\mu _0`$, and so $`m_2C^3[0,b]`$ and $`m_2(0)=0`$. These terms are related as follows:

###### Proposition 1

$`m_1,m_3C^3[0,b]`$ and

$`m_1^{}(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}m_2^{}(0),m_3^{}(0)=3m_2^{}(0);`$ (10)
$`m_1^{\prime \prime }(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}m_2^{\prime \prime }(0),m_3^{\prime \prime }(0)=4m_2^{\prime \prime }(0);`$ (11)
$`m_1^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}m_2^{\prime \prime \prime }(0),m_3^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)=5m_2^{\prime \prime \prime }(0).`$ (12)
As we shall see below, the proofs of the results in mn1 (2) sometimes require a different approach in each of the following cases:

1. $`m_1^{}(0)0.`$
2. $`m_1^{}(0)=0,m_1^{\prime \prime }(0)0.`$
3. $`m_1^{}(0)=0,m_1^{\prime \prime }(0)=0,m_1^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)0.`$

## III Time-like geodesics

In this section, we determine the circumstances under which radial and non-radial time-like geodesics may emanate from the singularity.

The governing equations for the geodesics with angular momentum $`L`$ obtained from the Euler-Lagrange equations are

$`\ddot{t}+R_{,r}R_{,rt}\dot{r}^2+R_{,t}{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{R^3}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (13)
$`R_{,r}\ddot{r}+R_{,rr}\dot{r}^2+2R_{,rt}\dot{r}\dot{t}{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{R^3}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (14)
$`\dot{t}^2+(R_{,r}\dot{r})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{R^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ,`$ (15)
where the over-dot represents differentiation with respect to an affine parameter $`s`$ along the geodesics. We have $`ϵ=+1`$ for time-like geodesics and $`ϵ=0`$ for null geodesics. We are looking for the existence of a solution of (13)-(15), which satisfies the following condition:
Existence condition:
There exists $`\delta >0`$ such that $`\dot{t}`$ is a non-negative, integrable function of the affine parameter $`s`$ and $`\dot{r}`$ is an integrable function of $`s`$ for $`s[0,\delta )`$ and such that

$$\underset{s0^+}{lim}r(s)=0,\underset{s0^+}{lim}t(s)=t_0.$$

Non-negativity of $`\dot{t}`$ implies that the geodesic is future-pointing. We shall now demonstrate the following result:

###### Theorem 2

Given regular initial data for marginally bound spherical dust collapse subject to a condition which rules out shell-crossing singularities, there are radial and non-radial timelike geodesics which emanate from the ensuing singularity if and only if there are radial null geodesics which emanate from the singularity.

Proving one half of Theorem 2 is quite straightforward. Considering the f.p. causal geodesics through a point $`p`$ of this spherically symmetric space-time as curves in the $`rt`$ plane, we can compare slopes at $`p`$ using (15) to show that a f.p. causal geodesic $`\gamma `$ through $`p`$, which is not the unique outgoing radial null geodesic $`\gamma _{}`$ through $`p`$, locally precedes $`\gamma _{}`$. That is if $`\gamma ,\gamma _{}`$ are given by $`t=t_\gamma (r)`$, $`t=t_\gamma _{}(r)`$ respectively with $`t_\gamma (r_0)=t_\gamma _{}(r_0)`$ where $`r_0`$ corresponds to $`p`$, then $`t_\gamma _{}(r)>t_\gamma (r)`$ for $`r<r_0`$. Hence if $`\gamma _{}`$ avoids the singularity i.e. reaches $`r=0`$ at some time $`t_{}<t_c(0)`$, then so too must $`\gamma `$. A general result of this nature is given in nmg (17). So we have

###### Proposition 2

If there are no f.p. radial null geodesics emanating from the singularity, then there are no f.p. causal geodesics emanating from the singularity.

Proving the converse result is more difficult. However it turns out that the proof of Proposition 9 in mn1 (2) relating to non-radial null geodesics requires only minor modifications in order to be applied in the present case. The idea of the proof is to identify a region $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ bounded by a line $`r=r_0>0`$ and by curves $`t=t_1(r),t=t_2(r)`$ which intersect at the singularity and out of which time-like geodesics moving into the past may not pass. This confinement is proven by carefully controlling the derivative of $`x/y`$, where $`x=\dot{t}`$ and $`y=R_{,r}\dot{r}`$, and the region may be constructed only if there are radial null geodesics emanating from the singularity. Using the geodesic equations (13)-(15), we obtain

$$\frac{d}{ds}\left(\frac{x}{y}\right)=\frac{L^2}{R^3y}\left[G\left(1+ϵ\frac{R^2}{L^2}\right)+\sqrt{\frac{m}{R}}\frac{x}{y}\right],$$
(16)
where $`G(r,t)=RR_{,rt}/R_{,r}`$. The definition of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ guarantees that $`G`$ is positive therein. The key part of the proof for null geodesics involves showing that $`d(x/y)/ds>0`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. But positivity in the null case ($`ϵ=0`$) clearly implies positivity in the time-like case ($`ϵ=+1`$), and so the result of Proposition 9 of mn1 (2) carries through. Thus we can state:

###### Proposition 3

Let $`\mu (r)`$ be such that there exist f.p. radial null geodesics emanating from the singularity. Then there exist f.p. radial and non-radial time-like geodesics emanating from the singularity.

This completes the proof of Theorem 2 and, together with the results of mn1 (2), gives a complete account of the causal geodesics emanating from the shell-focussing singularity in marginally bound spherical dust collapse.

In the next sections, we consider some implications of the existence of this array of geodesics emerging from the singularity.

## IV Structure of the singularity I: Causal structure

One more item is required to determine the causal structure of the singularity: the behaviour of ingoing radial null geodesics (IRNG’s). This behaviour is the same for every case which gives rise to a naked singularity and is summarised as follows:

###### Proposition 4

Let $`m`$ be such that the initial data give rise to a naked singularity. Then there exists a unique ingoing radial null geodesic which terminates at $`t=t_0,r=0`$.

Proof: To see that such geodesics must exist, consider an outgoing radial null geodesic $`\gamma `$ which emerges from $`r=0`$ at some time $`t_1<t_0`$. Then the radial ingoing null geodesics originating on $`\gamma `$ reach $`r=0`$ either before, at or after $`t=t_0`$. Let $`S_1`$ be the set of values of $`r`$ on $`\gamma `$ for which the first outcome holds, and let $`S_2`$ be the set for which the last outcome holds. Then any IRNG through points of $`\gamma `$ for which $`r`$ satisfies $`sup\{S_1\}rinf\{S_2\}`$ must terminate at $`r=0,t=t_0`$.

In order to prove uniqueness, let $`ϵ>0`$ and consider two IRNG’s $`t_1(r),t_2(r)`$ terminating at $`r=0,t=t_0`$ and satisfying $`t_1(r)<t_2(r)`$ on $`(0,ϵ)`$. Note that the geodesics cannot intersect in $`t<t_c(r)`$. The equation governing IRNG’s is

$$\frac{dt}{dr}=R_{,r}=12^{1/3}\frac{m_{,r}}{m^{2/3}}\frac{t_{sc}t}{(t_ct)^{1/3}},$$
(17)
and using $`t_1(r)<t_2(r)<t_0`$, we obtain

$$\frac{d}{dr}(t_2t_1)<12^{1/3}\frac{m_{,r}}{m^{2/3}}(t_ct_0)^{1/3}(t_2t_1).$$

If $`\mu ^{}(0)`$ and $`\mu ^{\prime \prime }(0)`$ are not both zero, then the coefficient of $`t_2t_1`$ on the right hand side is integrable on $`[0,ϵ)`$ and so $`t_2(0)t_1(0)=0`$ gives $`t_2t_10`$. In the case where $`\mu ^{}(0)=\mu ^{\prime \prime }(0)=0`$, $`\mu ^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)0`$ the transformation $`u=r^3`$, $`y=\frac{72}{\mu ^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)}\left(\frac{\mu _0}{3}\right)^{3/2}(t_0t)`$ casts the equation in a form such that exactly the same argument may be used. $``$

The fact that the visible portion of the singularity may be identified with a point $`(0,t_0)`$ on the boundary of a local coordinate chart means that this portion of the singularity must be null. The fact that there is a unique ingoing radial null geodesic terminating at this portion of the singularity indicates that it has the form of an ingoing rather than an outgoing null hypersurface. Thus the local causal structure of the singularity is as indicated in Figure 1. The global structure of the space-time depends on the initial radius of the dust sphere, which will determine whether the singularity is locally or globally naked. That is, if the initial radius of the dust sphere is sufficiently small, then future pointing radial null geodesics which emerge from the singularity will enter the vacuum region prior to the formation of the apparent horizon. Since the apparent horizon meets the event horizon at the boundary of the star, such geodesics must therefore lie in the portion of the Schwarzschild space-time outside the event horizon, and extend to $`𝒥^+`$, giving a globally naked singularity. There are also cases where all f.p. causal geodesics emerging from the singularity cross the apparent horizon and terminate at the future singularity. In those cases the singularity is locally naked.

## V Structure of the singularity II: Some useful limits.

In this section, we consider the limits of various quantities along different causal geodesics terminating at and emanating from the singularity.

### V.1 Causal geodesics running into the singularity

We consider first the congruence of future-pointing time-like geodesics $`r=r_00`$ with tangent $`\stackrel{}{u}=\frac{}{t}`$. This is the congruence formed by the world-lines of the dust particles and $`t`$ is proper time along each member of the congruence. We study the approach to the singularity from the point of view of the behaviour of the characteristic lengths $`l_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,2,3`$ along the eigen-directions of the expansion tensor $`\theta _{ab}=_au_b`$, defined by

$$\frac{\dot{l}_\alpha }{l_\alpha }=\theta _\alpha ,$$

where $`\theta _\alpha `$ is the eigenvalue associated with the direction $`\alpha `$. The geodesics in question have eigenvalues

$$\theta _1=\frac{R_{,rt}}{R_{,r}}=\frac{1}{3}(t_ct)^1(t_{sc}t)^1$$

and

$$\theta _2=\theta _3=\frac{R_{,t}}{R}=\frac{2}{3}(t_ct)^1.$$

Then the characteristic lengths $`l_\alpha `$ along $`r=0`$ satisfy (by virtue of $`t_c(0)=t_{sc}(0)=t_0`$)

$$l_1=l_2=l_3=(t_0t)^{2/3}.$$

Thus this singularity is a ‘point’ in the Thorne classification (see e.g. chapter one of dsincosmo (5)). On the other hand, the characteristic lengths along $`r=r_0>0`$ satisfy

$`l_1`$ $`=`$ $`(t_{sc}(r_0)t)(t_c(r_0)t)^{1/3}`$
$``$ $`(t_{sc}(r_0)t_c(r_0))(t_c(r_0)t)^{1/3},`$
$`l_2`$ $`=`$ $`l_3=(t_c(r_0)t)^{2/3},`$
so these singularities (i.e. the different endpoints of these geodesics) are ‘cigars’ in this classification. Apart from the issue of visibility, this is the first indication of a significant distinction between the singularities $`𝒫_0`$ and $`𝒮_0`$.

The shear and expansion scalars of this congruence are given by

$`\sigma ^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}((t_{sc}t)^1(t_ct)^1)^2,`$
$`\theta `$ $`=`$ $`((t_{sc}t)^1+(t_ct)^1),`$
while the density and Weyl invariant are

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}(t_ct)^1(t_{sc}t)^1,`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{9}}(t_ct)^2(t_{sc}t)^1(t_ct_{sc}).`$
The limiting behaviour of ratios of these terms have significance in the study of singularities, in particular in the context of the Weyl curvature hypothesis and the study of isotropic singularities which has grown up around this. See gw (9) for the ideas which motivate this study, and se (18) for a more recent review of the topic. The hypothesized scenario which these studies seek to corroborate or deny is that the initial cosmological singularity has low ‘gravitational entropy’ penrose (8) and consequently sub-dominant Weyl curvature, while singularities arising from the end-state of collapse are highly entropic and so are accompanied by dominant Weyl curvature.

We recall that isotropic singularities have been put forward as a model of the initial cosmological singularity, and the sub-dominance of the Weyl curvature is manifest in these models in that

$$W^2:=\frac{C_{abcd}C^{abcd}}{R_{ef}R^{ef}}0$$
(18)
in the limit as the singularity is approached gw (9). Other limits may also be derived for the case of isotropic singularities gw (9), for example

$$lim\{\frac{A}{\theta ^2},\frac{\sigma ^2}{\theta ^2},\theta \}=\{\frac{1}{3},0,+\mathrm{}\},$$

where $`A=G_{ab}u^au^b`$ and $`u^a`$ is tangent to a time-like congruence. The limit is taken along this congruence, which is assumed to have a certain degree of regularity.

Now, in the present case, along the central world-line $`T_0`$, we find the following limits:

$$\underset{tt_0}{lim}\{W^2,\frac{A}{\theta ^2},\frac{\sigma ^2}{\theta ^2},\theta \}=\{0,\frac{1}{3},0,\mathrm{}\},$$

which reveals an interesting comparison with isotropic behaviour summarised above. In fact, the equality holds identically for the first three limits. The sign difference in the last term arises from the fact that we are studying collapse.

Along the world-lines $`r=r_0>0`$, the corresponding limits are

$$\underset{tt_c(r_0)}{lim}\{W^2,\frac{A}{\theta ^2},\frac{\sigma ^2}{\theta ^2},\theta \}=\{+\mathrm{},0,\frac{1}{3},\mathrm{}\}.$$

Note that the shear is divergent in the approach to the singularity and that the first of these limits indicates the dominance of the Weyl curvature at $`𝒮_0`$. The latter actually holds for any causal curve running into $`𝒮_0`$. To see this we can write

$$W=\frac{1}{6}\frac{t_{sc}t_c}{t_ct}.$$

Since $`t_{sc}(r_0)>t_c(r_0)`$ for $`r_0>0`$, this quantity diverges to $`+\mathrm{}`$ in the approach to the singularity $`t=t_c(r),r>0`$ regardless of the direction of approach.

Again, we conclude that there is a significant difference between the behaviour at $`𝒫_0`$ and at $`𝒮_0`$.
As far as ingoing radial null geodesics are concerned it was already demonstrated in section IV that there is a unique ingoing radial null geodesic which terminates at $`𝒫_0`$. Repeating the arguments of the next section (from (19) onwards), we can shown that the Weyl-to-Ricci ratio $`W`$ is finite in the limit as the singularity is approached along this geodesic. This ratio diverges in the approach to $`𝒮_0`$ along ingoing radial null geodesics.

### V.2 Causal curves emerging from the singularity

As we have shown above, the singularity is naked if and only if there are time-like geodesics emerging the singularity. These results only show existence of such geodesics and give very little information about them, certainly not enough to carry out the analysis done in the previous section. However, there is one situation in which this analysis is possible, namely self-similar collapse. This requires the use of a slightly different gauge from the one used above. The line-element is given by (1), but the solution for $`R`$ is now dj92 (19)

$$R=r(1\lambda x)^{2/3},$$

where $`x=t/r`$ and $`\lambda `$ is a constant parameter. Note that $`t=0`$ is no longer a regular initial data surface, but any $`t=t_i<0`$ is such. The shell-focussing singularity occurs at $`x=\lambda ^1`$. The singularity $`(r,t)=(0,0)`$ is naked if and only if $`0<\lambda <\lambda _c0.64`$ dj92 (19). In the case where the singularity is naked, the surfaces $`x=`$constant are space-like for $`x<x_0`$ and for $`x>x_1`$, and time-like for $`x_0<x<x_1`$, where $`x_0,x_1`$ are respectively the smallest and largest positive roots of $`xR_{,r}(x)=0`$. $`x=x_0`$ is the Cauchy horizon, i.e. is the first outgoing radial null geodesic emerging from the singularity. All outgoing radial null geodesics in the region $`x_0xx_1,r>0`$ originate at the singularity $`(0,0)`$. Thus for $`x_c(x_0,x_1)`$, the curves $`t=x_cr`$,$`(\theta ,\varphi )=`$constant are time-like curves originating at the singularity. We analyse this congruence under the same headings as the previous section.

Writing $`R_{,r}=(1\lambda x)^{1/3}(1\lambda x)=F(x)`$, this congruence has unit tangent vector field

$$\stackrel{}{u}=\alpha (x)(x\frac{}{t}+\frac{}{r}),$$

where $`\alpha (x)=(x^2F^2)^{1/2}`$. The acceleration vector field is

$$\stackrel{}{a}=\frac{a(x)}{r}(\frac{}{t}+x\frac{}{r}),$$

where

$$a(x)=\frac{2}{9}\lambda ^2\alpha ^2F(1\lambda x)^{4/3}.$$

The eigenvalues of the expansion tensor are found to be all equal and are given by

$$\theta _1=\frac{\alpha (x)}{r}.$$

Any given member of this congruence has, from the form of $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ above,

$$\frac{dr}{d\tau }=\alpha (x_c),$$

and so the proper time $`\tau `$ satisfies $`\tau =r/\alpha (x_c)`$. Thus the characteristic lengths all satisfy

$$\frac{\dot{l}_\alpha }{l_\alpha }=\frac{1}{\tau },$$

giving $`l_\alpha =\tau `$ for $`\alpha =1,2,3`$. Again we see that a visible portion of the singularity consists of a singular region which are ‘points’ in Thorne’s classification.

As the expansion tensor has three equal eigenvectors, the shear of this congruence vanishes identically. The Weyl-to-Ricci ratio is

$$|\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_2}{\rho }|=\frac{1}{3}(1\lambda x)^1,$$

which is non-zero and finite in the limit as the singularity is approached along $`x=x_c`$. $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ and $`\rho `$ both individually diverge at the singularity. The expansion $`\theta =3\alpha (x)/r`$ diverges.

In the general (i.e. non-self similar case), we can analyze this last limit for the time-like geodesics emerging from the singularity whose existence has been proven in Proposition 3 above. The limit we wish to determine is

$`W_0`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{r0}{lim}|{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_2}{\rho }}|`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{r0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{t_{sc}t_c}{t_ct}},`$
where the limit is taken along the geodesic emerging from the singularity. The value of this limit may be obtained using l’Hopital’s rule:

$$W_0=\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{1}{6}\frac{t_{sc}^{}t_c^{}}{t_c^{}t^{}},$$
(19)
where $`t^{}`$ is the slope of the geodesic in the $`rt`$ plane. Referring to the proof of Proposition 9 in mn1 (2), we recall that along such geodesics, the slope $`t^{}(r)`$ of these curves in the $`rt`$ plane satisfies

$$R_{,r}t^{}(1+\delta )R_{,r},$$

for some $`\delta >0`$ and sufficiently small. The significance of $`R_{,r}`$ is that it gives the slope of the outgoing radial null geodesics and therefore the bounds above allow us to focus on the radial null geodesics. We know that such geodesics emerge into the region $`t_0<t<t_H(r)`$, where $`t=t_H(r)=t_c\frac{2}{3}m`$ is the apparent horizon. Using the latter bounds on $`t`$, we can obtain bounds on $`R_{,r}`$ (see equation (17)), i.e. on $`t^{}`$. These in turn may be integrated to improve the original bounds on $`t`$. Focussing on the case where $`m_1^{}(0)0`$ and carrying out this process twice yields bounds of the form

$$c_1r^{2/3}+u_1(r)t^{}c_2r^{2/3}+u_2(r),$$

where $`0<c_1<c_2`$ and $`u_i=o(r^{2/3})`$ for $`i=1,2`$. We can then take the limit in (19) and find that

$$W_0=\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{1}{6}\frac{t_{sc}^{}t_c^{}}{t_c^{}t^{}}=\frac{1}{9}.$$

In the case $`m_1^{}(0)=0,m_1^{\prime \prime }(0)0`$, the limit gives $`W_0=2/9`$. These limits are the same for every causal geodesic emerging from the singularity. Finally, for the case $`m_1^{}(0)=m_1^{\prime \prime }(0)=0`$, $`m_1^{\prime \prime \prime }(0)0`$, the existence of the limit is proved in the same way as above. In this case, the result depends on the value of the third derivative and on the geodesic in question.

Our principal conclusion is thus that the visible portion $`𝒩_0`$ of the singularity does not exhibit the Weyl-dominance which is thought to be characteristic of singularities arising in collapse. Nor does it exhibit the Weyl-sub-dominance (18) characteristic of isotropic singularities. In the case where the calculation may be carried out, the singularity is point-like.

As an aside, we remark that we can find examples where the quantity $`W^2`$ increases or decreases with time depending on the geodesics under consideration. This is potentially of interest to debates on gravitational entropy (see e.g. penrose (8), bonnor (20) and mt (21)) .

### V.3 Redshift

In order to make contact with recent results given in desh (3) we study briefly the redshift along outgoing geodesics.

Consider a photon which is emitted by a source with unit time-like tangent $`u_{(s)}^a`$ and received by an observer with tangent $`u_{(o)}^a`$. Let $`k^a`$ be the tangent to the photon’s world-line. Then the redshift $`z`$ relative to the emission and reception events $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ is given by

$$1+z=\frac{[k_au_{(s)}^a]_{P_1}}{[k_au_{(o)}^a]_{P_2}}.$$

The redshift of photons emerging from a naked singularity has been calculated in dwivedi98 (22) and desh (3) for various trajectories. The source and receiver are taken to be co-moving with the fluid: take the source to be $`r=r_0<<1`$ and the receiver to be $`r=r_1>r_0`$. Thus the source hugs the central world-line $`T_0`$ and the null singularity $`𝒩_0`$ and terminates at $`𝒮_0`$ near to the junction of $`𝒩_0`$ and $`𝒮_0`$. Then $`u_{(s)}^a=u_{(o)}^a=\delta _0^a`$, and $`1+z=\dot{t}_{P_1}/\dot{t}_{P_2}`$. Taking $`P_1`$ to be the past endpoint of a geodesic emerging into the future from the singularity places the photon source on the singularity and can be thought of as allowing $`r_00`$. In dwivedi98 (22), it was shown that the redshift thus measured is finite for singularities of classes (i) and (ii) of section II, but infinite for singularities of class (iii). In desh (3), the redshift is shown to be infinite for photons propagating along non-radial geodesics emerging from the singularity. This latter result is immediate as we see from (15): $`\dot{t}`$ diverges at the singularity $`R=0`$ for any non-radial causal geodesic which is not a radial null geodesic. This shows that the result - infinite redshift -also applies to particle de Broglie wavelengths ($`k^a`$ time-like). This is a possible (classical) indication that particles emerging from a naked singularity may not be associated with the transfer of infinite amounts of energy. Furthermore, if physical particles escaping from the singularity always travel along geodesics with some angular momentum, then they will always be infinitely redshifted to an outside observer. We emphasize that these results are purely classical and it would be interesting to study them using e.g. a semi-classical approximation.

## VI Structure of the singularity III: Topology

In the previous section, we classified the different portions of the singularity using Thorne’s point-cigar-barrel-pancake classification. This describes the behaviour of a co-moving fluid element carried by a time-like congruence meeting the singularity. However, this does not address another question which relates to the topology of the singularity and which we shall now describe. In the conformal diagram of Figure 1, each point in the two-dimensional representation of the non-singular part of the space-time manifold represents a 2-sphere: the point $`(r,t)`$ of this diagram represents the 2-sphere with radius $`R=R(r,t)`$ at time $`t`$. The question we address here is the following: does each point on the singular boundary $`𝒫_0𝒩_0𝒮_0`$ represent topologically a 2-sphere or a point? Christodoulou has shown that the future outgoing null (and hence censored) singular boundary which can arise in the collapse of a self-similar scalar field is foliated by points, while the space-like singular boundary that arises in another sector of the space of solutions is foliated by 2-spheres christo-scalar (6).

Christodoulou’s argument runs as follows. Any radial null geodesic of the space-time actually represents a 2-sphere’s worth of null geodesics. Consider a radial null geodesic $`\gamma `$ running into a future outgoing null singular boundary $`𝒩_1`$. This actually represents a family $`\gamma ^\xi ,\xi 𝐒^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ of radial null geodesics running into the singularity. From this family, choose a fixed member $`\gamma ^N`$ and the antipodal member $`\gamma ^S`$ ($`N,S`$ for north, south). Now let $`\{p_n^{N,S}\}`$ be causally increasing sequences of points along $`\gamma ^{N,S}`$ respectively, chosen so that the singularity is reached in the limit $`n\mathrm{}`$ and for each $`n`$, the points $`p_n^{N,S}`$ are antipodal on the same 2-sphere $`𝐒_𝐧^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ . Christodoulou shows that the causal pasts $`J^{}(p_n^{N,S})`$ of $`p_n^{N,S}`$ satisfy

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}J^{}(p_n^N)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}J^{}(p_n^S),$$

and so the ideal boundary points $`lim_n\mathrm{}p_n^{N,S}`$, having the same causal past, are, by definition, identical. See Figure 2.

The key ingredient required for this argument is to show that past-directed non-radial null geodesics through $`p_n^N`$ orbit the axis $`R=0`$ sufficiently quickly (in the limit as $`n\mathrm{}`$) so that the causal past of $`p_n^S`$ is contained in the causal past of $`p_n^N`$. That is, the rapidly orbiting non-radial null geodesics have enough ‘time’ to get around from the north to the south pole of $`𝐒_𝐧^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and so have a look at what is to be seen from there. See Figure 2.

We argue here that, at least in the self-similar case, the topology of the naked portion of the singularity is not uniform, being point-like on one region and spherical on another. This requires a fairly thorough analysis of the behaviour of null geodesics emerging from the singularity.
In the self-similar case, the line element may be written (see e.g. dj92 (19))

$$ds^2=dt^2+F^2(x)dr^2+r^2U^2(x)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(20)
where $`x=t/r`$ and

$$U(x)=(1\lambda x)^{2/3},F(x)=(1\lambda x)^{1/3}(1\frac{\lambda }{3}x).$$

The shell-focussing singularity occurs at $`x=\lambda ^1`$. The equations governing outgoing radial null geodesics (ORNG’s) may be written as

$$\frac{dx}{dr}=\frac{Fx}{r}.$$

Then it can be shown that the singularity is naked for $`\lambda `$ in the range $`(0,\lambda _c)`$, in which case $`Fx`$ has two positive roots $`x_0<x_1<\lambda ^1`$. The curves $`x=x_0`$ and $`x=x_1`$ are outgoing radial null geodesics emerging from the singularity $`(t,r)=(0,0)`$. We recall that $`x_0`$ corresponds to the Cauchy horizon, i.e. the boundary of the future of a regular initial data surface $`t=t_i<0`$.

ORNG’s initially in the region $`x(x_0,x_1)`$ remain in this region and satisfy $`x^{}(r)=(Fx)/r<0`$. Thus along such a geodesic, $`x`$ increases as $`r0`$. But $`x`$ is bounded above by $`x_1`$, and so must have a finite limit as $`r0`$. This limit $`(lim\frac{t}{r}=lim\frac{dt}{dr})`$ must solve $`x=F`$ and so must equal $`x_1`$. A similar argument applies for ORNG’s in $`x(x_1,\lambda ^1)`$. Hence all ORNG’s emerging from the singularity, except for the single ORNG $`xx_0`$, originate at $`(0,0)`$ with $`x=x_1`$. However as we will see, non-radial null geodesics may emerge with different values of $`x`$ in this limit. We note that this indicates that considering only radial null geodesics does not give a complete picture of the singular boundary.
We now consider the question raised above. Each of the radial null geodesics emerging from $`(0,0)`$ represents a 2-sphere’s worth of ORNG’s emerging from the singularity. To address the issue of the topology of the singularity, we consider non-radial null geodesics (NRNG’s) emerging from the singularity.

The homothetic Killing vector field which generates the self-similarity of (20) is

$$\stackrel{}{\xi }=t\frac{}{t}+r\frac{}{r}.$$

If $`k^a`$ is tangent to a null geodesic, then $`g_{ab}\xi ^ak^b`$ is constant along the geodesic. This is a first integral of the null geodesic equations, which we may therefore write as

$`\dot{t}^2+F^2\dot{r}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{r^2U^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (21)
$`\dot{t}+{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{x}}\dot{r}+{\displaystyle \frac{k}{rx}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (22)
where $`L`$ is the conserved angular momentum and $`k`$ is the constant generated by $`\stackrel{}{\xi }`$. We can assume that $`k0`$, as a change of sign in $`k`$ corresponds to a change in sign of the affine parameter. Our principal result which is of significance for the topology of the singularity is the following:

###### Proposition 5

(i) Through every point of $`\{(t,r):x_0<x<x_1\}`$, there exists a non-radial null geodesic which emerges from the singularity $`(0,0)`$. Along this geodesic, $`\dot{\varphi }`$ is a non-integrable function of the affine parameter $`\tau `$, and $`\varphi `$ diverges to $`\mathrm{}`$ in the limit as the singularity is approached.
(ii) Through every point of $`\{(t,r):x_1<x<\lambda ^1\}`$, there exist non-radial null geodesics which emerge from the singularity $`(0,0)`$. Along every such geodesic, $`\varphi `$ has a finite limit as the singularity is approached.

The proof is given in the appendix. Proposition 5 allows us to deduce the following results regarding the topological nature of the singularity $`𝒩_0`$, from the causal boundary perspective.

We start by recalling that radial null geodesics emerge into the region $`x_0<x<x_1`$. Now, on any such geodesics, we may choose a point $`p^N`$ sufficiently close to the singularity such that there exists a non-radial null geodesic through $`p^N`$ with the property than this NRNG reaches the antipodal point of the 2-sphere (on which $`p^N`$ lies) before the radial geodesic reaches the singularity. The significance of this is that in the limit as the point $`p^N`$ approaches the singularity, this point and its antipodal partner $`p^S`$ must be considered to have the same causal future, and so are identified as points of the causal boundary. Therefore, the corresponding section of $`𝒩_0`$ is foliated by points.

On the other hand, the results obtained for NRNG’s in the region $`x_1<x<\lambda ^1`$ indicate that the NRNG’s through a point $`p^N`$ do not have enough time to reach the antipodal point $`p^S`$ before the singularity is reached. Hence in the limit as the singularity is approached, the causal futures of $`p^N`$ and $`p^S`$ will not match up with one another, and hence these points cannot be identified as points of the causal boundary. In fact $`p^N`$ will not have the same limiting causal future as any other point on the same 2-sphere, and so the corresponding portion of $`𝒩_0`$ is foliated by 2-spheres.

Finally, one further point of relevance may be deduced from the proof of Proposition 5: In every case considered, the future evolution of the NRNG’s terminates at $`x=\lambda ^1`$ at some $`r>0`$. The limiting behaviour of $`\dot{r}`$ and $`\dot{x}`$ in terms of $`x`$ can be read off from the governing equations, and can be used to obtain the limiting behaviour of $`\dot{R}=\dot{r}U+rU^{}\dot{x}`$. This can be integrated, and generically yields a result indicating integrability of $`1/R^2`$. Hence $`\varphi `$ has a finite limit along any NRNG approaching the singularity $`x=\lambda ^1`$ at some $`r>0`$. Thus the singularity $`𝒮_0`$ is foliated by 2-spheres.

## VII Conclusions and comments

We have extended the result of mn1 (2) to all f.p. causal geodesics by proving that for the marginally bound spherical dust collapse there are radial and non-radial timelike geodesics which emanate from the ensuing singularity if and only if there are radial null geodesics which emanate from the singularity. It remains to be seen whether this result is true in general in spherical symmetry, at least for singularities at zero radius. The fact that the naked singularity always has time-like geodesics emerging therefrom leads to interesting possibilities in terms of the spectrum of particles that may be created by such a singularity: such particles may be massive as well as massless. This would seem to be vital if the information lost in the process of collapse is to re-emerge at a later stage in the form of a black hole or naked singularity explosion Harada-etal00 (23).

We have studied the structure of the singularity from several points of view. We started by studying the behaviour of limits of various quantities along causal geodesics terminating at the singularity and emanating from the singularity. In this way we have classified different sectors of the singularity as points and cigars. We have then considered the topological properties of the singularity. These studies were motivated by the fact that the existence of non-radial null geodesics emerging from the singularity suggests that it must have some non-pointlike structure. Naively, one might expect that the singularity $`𝒩_0`$ of Figure 1 must by cylindrical, i.e. foliated by 2-spheres, since points thereon emit a full 2-spheres worth of non-radial null geodesics. This is in contrast to a regular center of a spherically symmetric space-time, through which non-radial null geodesics cannot pass. However detailed calculations indicate that while the topology of $`𝒮_0`$ is that of a 2-sphere, the topology of $`𝒩_0`$ (in the sense of ideal boundary points) may be either that of a 2-sphere or of a point.

The calculations in section V of various limits at the singularity seem to us to be of interest beyond merely classifying the different portions of the singularity. The question of what constitutes a genuine space-time singularity is not yet settled. This is of particular relevance for cosmic censorship hypothesis: a visible singularity which is mild in some suitably (and rigorously) defined way should not be considered a counter-example to the hypothesis. The following two definitions have proved to be useful. Both involve the question of predictability to the future of a singularity.

We mention first that of Clarke clarke (24). Put simply, a singularity is considered inessential if it does not present any obstruction to the evolution of test fields in space-time. The question of global hyperbolicity of the space-time (cosmic censorship) is redirected to the question of generalized hyperbolicity of fields on the space-time. Examples of space-times admitting singularities in the classical sense of $`C^2`$ geodesic incompleteness but satisfying a generalized hyperbolicity condition have been given in clarke (24), vic-wil1 (25) and vic-wil2 (26).

The second definition is that of an isotropic singularity gw (9). As mentioned above, this was introduced in the study of the initial cosmological singularity and hypotheses related to this penrose (8). The connection with cosmic censorship is perhaps not immediately obvious, but becomes so when one acknowledges that the initial cosmological singularity is naked: every past-directed causal geodesic meets the singularity. The isotropic singularity program has produced the following profound result: the big bang can be considered a regular initial data surface for the Einstein field equations. (Different matter models have been studied; polytropic perfect fluids in ang-tod1 (27), the Einstein-Vlasov model in ang-tod2 (28). These rely on results for singular differential operators due to Newman-Claudel new-claud (29).) Thus with isotropic singularities, we see that it is possible to have global hyperbolicity of the space-time to the future of a singularity.

So with a view to addressing the question of whether or not the naked singularities studied here should be considered genuine counter-examples to cosmic censorship we could ask: do we have any evidence that the singularity is either (i) inessential in Clarke’s sense or (ii) isotropic? We will not address the first of these here. Regarding the second, we contend that there is some evidence that, at least in the self-similar case, the singularity $`𝒩_0𝒫_0`$ has characteristics in common with isotropic singularities.

As we have seen, the Weyl-sub-dominance property (18) - a characteristic of isotropic singularities - is not satisfied for the congruence of time-like curves emerging from the singularity which we studied in Section 5.2. Nevertheless, we speculate that the fact that the ratio $`W^2`$ is finite (but not zero) may turn out to be an indication of good behaviour of $`𝒩_0`$ regarded as an initial data surface. As evidence in favour of this, consider the following details which relate again to the self-similar case. From the calculations in the appendix, we know that outgoing radial null geodesics emerging from the singularity fall into two classes. The first class contains a single member, the ORNG $`x=x_0`$, which emerges from $`𝒫_0`$ in Figure 1. The second class consists of all other ORNG’s emerging from the singularity: these emerge from $`𝒩_0`$. Along these geodesics, the limit $`xx_1`$ is satisfied as the singularity is approached. Hence the congruence of time-like curves $`x=x_c(x_0,x_1)`$ \- call it the similarity congruence - considered in §V.B must be considered to emerge from $`𝒫_0`$. This resembles the behaviour of the initial singularity in certain FLRW universes, namely those filled with a perfect fluid satisfying a equation of state $`p=\alpha \rho `$, with $`\alpha (1,1/3]`$. In these space-times, the entire fluid congruence emerges from a single point of the singularity and a null portion of the singularity forms a portion of the causal future of this point. See seno (4) for details. This resemblance is borne out by writing the line-element in coordinates adapted to the similarity congruence. Introduce a time function $`T=rH(x)`$ chosen so that the similarity congruence is orthogonal to $`T=`$constant. Then the line-element becomes

$$ds^2=\frac{r^2}{(x^2F^2)}\left\{(x^2F^2)^2\frac{dT^2}{T^2}+F^2dx^2+U^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2\right\}.$$

This applies for $`r>0`$ and $`x(x_0,x_1)`$, wherein $`x^2F^2>0`$. The function $`H`$ satisfies

$$\frac{H^{}}{H}=\frac{x}{x^2F^2},$$

and therefore is finite on $`(x_0,x_1)`$. The line-element may be written as $`ds^2=T^2d\overline{s}^2`$, where

$$d\overline{s}^2=a^2(x)\frac{dT^2}{T^2}+b^2(x)dx^2+c^2(x)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$

with $`a,b,c`$ finite and non-zero on $`(x_0,x_1)`$. $`T`$ is the exponential of proper time along the similarity congruence. This decomposition of the metric into an overall scaling factor (which vanishes at the singularity) times a non-singular metric (when written in terms of $`\tau =\mathrm{ln}T`$) is exactly the same decomposition which exists for the FLRW metrics mentioned above, and is similar to the decomposition whose existence defines isotropic singularities (the difference is that $`\tau \mathrm{}`$ at the singularity currently under discussion).

So while there is still no direct evidence that this naked singularity does not break the future predictability of the space-time, the question appears to be worthy of future investigation.

## Acknowledgements

We thank T. Harada, M. MacCallum, J. Senovilla and R. Tavakol for interesting discussions. BCN acknowledges support from DCU under the Albert College Fellowship Scheme 2001, and thanks the Relativity Group at Queen Mary, University of London, the Department of Theoretical Physics, University of the Basque Country and the Department of Mathematics, University of Minho for hospitality. FCM thanks CMAT, Univ. Minho, for support and FCT (Portugal) for grant PRAXIS XXI BD/16012/98.

## Appendix A Proof of proposition 5

(i) Given $`x_c(x_0,x_1)`$, it is straightforward to show that there are NRNG’s confined to this time-like hypersurface which have the desired properties. Substituting $`x=`$constant into (21) and (22) yields

$$r\dot{r}=\pm \frac{L}{U}(x^2F^2)^{1/2}=k(x^2F^2)^1,$$

which is valid since $`x^2>F^2`$ in $`(x_0,x_1)`$. Choosing $`k,L`$ so that these two match, which gives a 1-parameter solution, gives the geodesic in question. A sign choice is required in order that the geodesic is future pointing $`\dot{t}>0`$. Note that $`r\dot{r}=c`$, which is positive for the future-pointing choice and so $`r^22c\tau `$ as $`\tau 0`$, choosing the origin of the affine parameter $`\tau `$ to coincide with the singularity. Then

$$\dot{\varphi }\frac{L}{2c}\tau ^1,$$

and so $`\varphi `$ diverges to $`\mathrm{}`$ as the singularity is approached.

(ii) To prove this part of the proposition requires the study of all non-radial null geodesics in the region $`(x_1,\lambda ^1)`$. The equations (21) and (22) yield a quadratic equation for $`\dot{r}`$, which has solutions given by

$$r\dot{r}=\frac{1}{F^2x^2}[k\pm \frac{x}{F}(k^2+\frac{L^2}{U^2}(F^2x^2))^{1/2}].$$
(23)
These give

$$\dot{x}=\pm \frac{1}{r^2F}(k^2+\frac{L^2}{U^2}(F^2x^2))^{1/2}.$$
(24)
The solutions with the lower sign require the change $`\tau \tau `$ in order to be explicitly future-pointing. Implementing this, the equations are (any two of)

$`r\dot{r}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2x^2}}[k+{\displaystyle \frac{x}{F}}(k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{U^2}}(F^2x^2))^{\frac{1}{2}}]>0,`$ (25)
$`\dot{x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2F}}(k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{U^2}}(F^2x^2))^{1/2}>0,`$ (26)
$`\dot{t}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{x}}\dot{r}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{rx}}>0.`$ (27)
Recall that $`k0`$. Positivity of $`\dot{x}`$ immediately gives

$$t<x_ir$$
(28)
for any point $`(t,r)`$ preceding a chosen initial point $`(t_i,r_i)`$. Positivity of $`\dot{r}`$ and $`k`$ yields

$`r{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{dr}}`$ $`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^2x^2}{x}}`$
$`<`$ $`2(F_1^{}1)(xx_1)+M(xx_1)^2.`$
There latter inequality arises from using Taylor’s theorem on $`F`$, which is analytic at $`x_1`$. $`2M>0`$ is a bound on the closed interval $`[x_1,x_i]`$ of the (continuous) second derivative of $`(F^2x^2)/x`$. $`F_1^{}=F^{}(x_1)`$, and this number is always bigger than 1. Integrating over $`[r,r_i]`$, where $`0<r<r_i`$ yields

$$t>x_1r+(\frac{c_1}{1c_2r^A})r^{A+1},$$
(29)
where $`c_{1,2}`$ are positive constants and $`A=2(F_1^{}1)>0`$. Combining (28) and (29), we see that these geodesics all originate at $`(t=0,r=0)`$.

The rate at which $`r`$ shrinks to zero can be obtained as follows. We have

$$r\dot{r}\frac{2k}{F^2x^2}\frac{k}{x_1(F_1^{}1)}(xx_1)^1,$$

while

$$\dot{x}\frac{k}{x_1}r^2.$$

These may be integrated to give

$$rk\tau ^{1/(F_1^{}+1)}=k\tau ^\alpha $$

where $`\alpha <1/2`$ and so

$$\varphi (\tau )=_0^\tau \frac{L}{R^2(\nu )}𝑑\nu $$

converges to a finite value in the limit as $`\tau 0`$.

Next we consider the solutions corresponding to the choice of upper sign in (23) and (24). We note that $`\dot{t}>0`$ and $`\dot{x}>0`$ are automatic consequences of this choice. On the other hand, $`\dot{r}>0`$ if and only if $`H(x)>0`$, where

$$H=\frac{L^2}{U^2}\frac{k^2}{x^2}.$$

We note that $`H^{}(x)>0`$. Then for any initial value $`H(\tau _0)`$ of $`H`$, the increase of $`x`$ brings about the increase of $`H`$ to positive values. Then $`\dot{r}`$ becomes and remains positive, and so the geodesic must run into the singularity $`x=\lambda ^1`$. The past evolution requires more careful attention. We deal with the case $`k>0`$ first.

We have $`r\dot{r}=r\dot{r}(x)`$, and by using a Taylor expansion centered on $`x_1`$, we find

$$r\dot{r}(x)=\frac{H(x_1)}{2k}+O(xx_1).$$

If in the past evolution we reach $`\tau _1<\tau _0`$ whereat $`H(\tau _1)<0`$ and $`x(\tau _1)>x_1`$, then $`H<0`$ for all $`\tau <\tau _1`$. Hence $`r`$ increases into the past, and so the geodesic inevitably extends back to $`x=x_1`$ at some $`r>0`$, thus avoiding the singularity. This situation is obtained if and only if $`H(x_1)<0`$.

So it remains to consider the cases $`H(x_1)0`$. If $`H(x_1)>0`$, then the argument above shows that $`r\dot{r}>0`$ for all $`x>x_1`$.

We can obtain the bound $`rx^{}(r)>(F^2x^2)/x`$. Integrating over $`[r,r_i]`$ ($`0<r<r_i`$) yields

$$_r^{r_i}\frac{x}{F^2x^2}𝑑x>\mathrm{ln}|\frac{r_i}{r}|.$$

Thus if the geodesic approaches $`r=0`$ in the past, then the integral on the left hand side here must diverge. This can only occur if we also have $`xx_1`$ as the singularity is approached. Let this occur at $`\tau =\tau _s`$. But then

$`x_1`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\tau \tau _s}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{r}}`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{r0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dr}}`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{xx_1}{lim}({\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{x}}+{\displaystyle \frac{k}{xr\dot{r}}})`$
$`=`$ $`x_1+2{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{x_1}}({\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{U_1^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{x_1^2}})^1,`$
which yields a contradiction. Therefore these geodesics must extend back to $`x=x_1`$ before reaching $`r=0`$. This argument applies when $`H(x_1)>0`$ and requires only slight modification to be applied to the case $`H(x_1)=0`$. Note that there is a finite (rather than infinitesmal) interval of affine parameter between an initial point on the geodesic and the point corresponding to entry into the region $`xx_1`$.

Finally, we need to consider the NRNG’s with $`k=0`$. Note that in this case, the choice of sign in (23) and (24) is only of a time-orientation and so without loss of generality we only treat the choice of upper sign. The argument leading up to (29) may be repeated to show that in this case, there exist geodesics emerging from $`(0,0)`$, and that $`xx_1`$ along these geodesics as the singularity is approached. It remains to determine the rate at which $`r`$ approaches zero for these geodesics.

From the governing equations, we have $`\dot{x}=G(x)r^2`$, where

$$G(x)=\frac{L}{FU}(F^2x^2)^{1/2}.$$

We can also write

$$(r^2)^{}=2r^2x(F^2x^2)^1\dot{x}.$$

These yield the second order equation

$$\ddot{x}=J(x)\dot{x}^2,$$

where

$`J(x)`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{G^{}}{G}}{\displaystyle \frac{2x}{F^2x^2}})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{F_1^{}3}{F_1^{}1}})(xx_1)^1+O(1)\text{as}xx_1.`$
This equation may be integrated to obtain the $`\tau `$dependence of $`x`$ as $`xx_1`$. Then using $`r^2=H/\dot{x}`$, we obtain

$$r^2c^2\tau ^{2/(F_1^{}+1)}\text{as}r0.$$

Recalling that $`F_1^{}>1`$, we see that the power here is less than one. Hence

$$\dot{\varphi }=\frac{L}{R^2}\frac{L}{U^2(x_1)r^2}$$

is integrable in the limit as the singularity is approached, giving a finite limit for the value of $`\varphi `$.

To summarise: NRNG’s in $`x>x_1`$ either exit this region at some finite radius, taking a finite amount of time to do so, or emerge from the naked singularity $`(0,0)`$. In the latter case, $`\varphi `$ has a finite limit in the approach to the singularity. This concludes the proof of the proposition.


text:
# MgB2: synthesis, sound velocity, and dynamics of the vortex phase

## SYNTHESIS AND REAL STRUCTURE

Magnesium diboride powder was obtained by synthesis from the elements Mg (98% pure) and B (99.5% pure) in an argon medium. The powder was sintered in a high-pressure chamber of the anvil-cell type with a lenticular cell. The necessary compression was provided by a hydraulic press with a 6300 kN force. The powder was heated to the required temperature, not by the conventional indirect heating,1  but by passing a current through the cylindrical samples to be sintered, which gave a more uniform temperature distribution over the volume of the sample. The preliminary compaction of the powder was done by a cold two-sided pressing at pressures of up to 1.3 GPa. The pressed sample was placed in a capsule of graphitic boron nitride, which was mounted in the working channel of the high-pressure chamber. After completion of the sintering cycle the material was cooled under pressure, and then the pressure was reduced to atmospheric. The rate of buildup and relief of the pressure was 0.5 GPa/s. During the heating and cooling stages the temperature was changed at a rate of 100 deg/s. The chosen construction of the cell of the high-pressure chamber provided for hydrostatic compression of the material to be sintered to pressures of up to 4.5 GPa and heating to temperatures of up to 2000 K with holds of up to 300 s.

According to the data of an x-ray analysis the samples contained magnesium diboride MgB2 and an insignificant amount of manganese oxide MgO.

Microstructural and fractographic studies of the samples were carried out on a Camebax CX-50 setup. The x-ray microspectral analysis established the presence of the characteristic lines of magnesium, boron, and oxygen.

A study of the real structure of the samples was done by the thin-foil and diffraction microanalysis methods with the use of a PÉM-U transmission electron microscope.

The results of the study showed that the samples are characterized by appreciable scatter in the grain sizes: in addition to very fine particles ($`d0.1`$ $`\mu `$m) there are also rather large ones (up to 30 $`\mu `$m), in agreement with the results of Ref. 2, .

Some of the large grains are highly fragmented, apparently as a result of the deformation during the preparation of the sample. It was noticed that those grains had a high density of defects, contained fine microcracks and pores, and had large dislocation pileups (Fig. 1). The data of electron microanalysis also attest to strong fragmentation: most of the reflections were smeared into arcs.

In addition to the fragmented grains, there were also rather large ($`d>5`$ $`\mu `$m) low-defect grains having a cubic configuration, which is characteristic of the compound MgO, which crystallizes in a cubic structure.

In certain parts of the structure, in particular, near pores and along the boundaries of individual, clearly faceted grains, the presence of interlayers of an amorphous phase, similar to that observed in Ref. 3, , was noted.

## SOUND VELOCITY

As far as we know, no experimental results from measurements of the sound velocity in MgB2 have been published yet. In imperfect samples the most reliable data on the sound velocity can be obtained only by analysis of the first signal, which has passed through the sample along the shortest path. Interconversion of different modes at inhomogeneities (including at grain boundaries) makes the more distant reflections less suitable for measurements, as does to use of some version of a resonance methods.

The method used in this paper was modified somewhat from that described in Ref. 4, . In essence it consists in the measurement, in a fixed frequency interval, of the phase–frequency characteristics of two acoustic lines, consisting of delay lines with a sample between them and delay lines without a sample (Fig. 2). The difference of the phase–frequency curves in the absence of interference distortions in the sample is a straight line with a slope determined by the sound velocity that is sought (Fig. 2). For millimeter sample lengths the error of measurement of the absolute value of the frequency at frequencies of $`55`$ MHz lies in the range 0.2–0.3% at a signal-to-noise ratio of $`3`$.

The velocity values measured at $`T=77`$ K (acoustic path length $`5`$ mm), viz., $`V_t=4.83\times 10^5`$ cm/s and $`V_l=8.2\times 10^5`$ cm/s are only effective values, since defects (pores, microcracks) decrease the sound propagation velocity.5  The MgB2 sample under study had a well-defined geometric shape, making it possible to estimate its porosity ($`0.13)`$ rather accurately by a simple weighing. Using the approach proposed in Ref. 5, , we obtained the corrected values of the velocities: $`V_t=5.12\times 10^5`$ cm/s and $`V_l=8.76\times 10^5`$ cm/s. Finally, the limitations imposed in the porous-medium model make this procedure much more uncertain than the error of measurement of the effective values of the velocity. The values obtained are considerably lower than the calculated values,6  although it may be that the correction introduced is not complete, since it does not make allowance for the presence of microcracks. Starting from the corrected values of the velocities and the x-ray density, we calculated the bulk modulus ($`B_0=110`$ GPa) and Debye temperature ($`\mathrm{\Theta }_D=787`$ K). The latter value is close to that corresponding to the quantities obtained from heat-capacity measurements ($`\mathrm{\Theta }_D=746`$$`800`$ K; see the literature cited in Ref. 6, ).

## DYNAMICS OF THE VORTEX PHASE

The critical temperature ($`T_c=37`$ K) and transition width ($`\delta T_c2`$ K) are determined from the measurements of the high-frequency magnetic susceptibility.

To estimate the dynamical parameters of the vortex lattice we have for the first time used the method proposed in Ref. 7, , wherein they are extracted from data on the conversion of transverse sound into an electromagnetic field. The sound wave vector $`𝐪`$ was oriented parallel to the external magnetic field $`𝐇`$ and orthogonal to the MgB2–free-space interface. The electromagnetic radiation was registered by a coil oriented with the plane of its windings also parallel to $`𝐇`$. The amplitude and phase of the Hall component of the electromagnetic field were measured (the electric field vector $`𝐄_H`$ was orthogonal to the displacement vector u in the sound wave). Such experiments had been done before (only the amplitude $`𝐄_H`$ had been recorded) on either low-temperature8  or high-temperature9  superconductors, and a simplified theoretical approach to their description is proposed in Ref. 10, . However, the relations obtained in Ref. 10,  do not admit a correct passage to the limit of the normal state, as will be necessary in order to obtain quantitative information (see below).

A more detailed analysis in the framework of the continuum approximation and the two-fluid model7  leads to the relation

$$E_H=\frac{1}{c}B\dot{u}\left(\frac{k_L^2+k_{ns}^2}{q^2+k_L^2+k_{ns}^2}\right)\left(\frac{\alpha ^{}}{\alpha ^{}+q^2\frac{B^2}{4\pi }\frac{k_L^2}{q^2+k_L^2+k_{ns}^2}}\right),$$
(1)
Here $`B`$ is the induction in the sample, which is practically equal to the external field $`H`$ except in a narrow field region around $`H_{c1}`$. The wave numbers appearing in (1) have the following model dependences on temperature and field:

$`k_L^2=\lambda ^2(1t^4)(1b)`$ , $`k_{ns}^2=2i\delta ^2(1(1t^4)(1b))`$ ,

where $`\lambda `$ is the low-temperature penetration depth in the Meissner phase, $`\delta `$ is the skin penetration depth ($`\delta ^2=2\pi \omega \sigma _n/c^2`$; $`\sigma _n`$ is the conductivity of the normal metal), $`t=T/T_c`$, and $`b=B/B_{c2}`$ ($`T_c`$ and $`B_{c2}`$ are the critical values of the temperature and magnetic field).

The complex quantity $`\alpha ^{}=i\omega \eta +\alpha _L`$ ($`\eta `$ is the coefficient of friction and $`\alpha _L`$ is the Labusch “spring” parameter) describes the dynamics of the vortex lattice, which vibrates during the propagation of an elastic wave. Bardeen and Stephen11  gave a simple estimate for $`\eta `$: $`\eta =BB_{c2}\sigma _n/c^2`$. It may be noted that $`\alpha _L0`$ for $`b1`$.

For $`b=1`$ we have $`k_L=0`$ and $`k_{ns}^2=2i\delta ^2`$, and Eq. (1) reduces to the known expression for a normal metal in the local limit.12  In the normal state the phase of $`E_H`$ leads $`\dot{u}`$ by $`\phi _0=\mathrm{arctan}(q^2\delta ^2/2)`$, and $`|E_Hc/\dot{u}|`$ varies linearly with $`H`$, with a slope $`(1+\mathrm{tan}^2\phi _0)^{0.5}`$. According to published data,13  for MgB2 the penetration depth $`\lambda `$ lies in the range 800–2000 Å. At the frequencies used here $`q\delta ^110^3`$, and therefore for $`(1b)>10^2`$ and at practically any temperature we have $`k_Lq,|k_{ns}|`$, and relation (1) reduces to

$$E_H=\frac{1}{c}B\dot{u}\left(\frac{\alpha ^{}}{\alpha ^{}+q^2\frac{B^2}{4\pi }}\right),$$
(2)
which is suitable all the way down to the Meissner state. We emphasize that the factor multiplying $`q^2`$ in Eq. (2), unlike the situation in Eq. (1), is not identical to the bending modulus $`C_{44}`$ of the vortex lattice, since the latter should soften as $`H_{c2}`$ is approached.14  For $`(1b)1`$ ($`\omega \eta 2B_{c2}^2/4\pi \delta ^2`$, $`\alpha _L0`$, $`k_{ns}^22i\delta ^2)`$ both Eqs. (2) and (1) reduce to the corresponding relation for the normal metal at any value of $`k_L^2`$. This means that even in an ideally homogeneous sample the electric field $`E_H`$ changes continuously (without a jump) at the transition of $`H`$ through $`H_{c2}`$. As $`H`$ is decreased further, the evolution of $`E_H`$ depends on the relationship between $`\omega \eta `$, $`\alpha _L`$, and the elastic modulus $`C_{44}=B^2/4\pi `$ of the vortex lattice. Obviously, sooner or later the situation $`|\alpha ^{}|C_{44}`$ will arise, and in that case the phase of $`E_H`$ will coincide with the phase of $`\dot{u}`$, and $`|E_Hc/\dot{u}|`$ will also vary linearly with the field, but now with a unit slope. Thus in the case $`\lambda ^2q^2,\delta ^2`$ relation (2) describes the behavior of $`E_H`$ in the entire field interval from $`H_{c2}`$ to $`H_{c1}`$.

The measured $`E_H`$ curves are presented in Fig. 3. In view of the limited range of magnetic fields accessible in our measurements, informative experiments could be done only at rather high temperatures. We see that the phase of the signal at the transition of $`H`$ through $`H_{c2}`$ changes by approximately $`\phi _050^{}`$ (Fig. 3a). The ratio of the slopes ($`1.6)`$ in the regions of linear variation of $`|E_H|`$ is in good agreement with the value that follows from our analysis: $`\sqrt{1+\mathrm{tan}^2\phi _0}`$ (Fig. 3b). Knowing $`\phi _0`$, we can estimate the depth of the skin layer in the normal phase at the frequencies used here ($`\delta 2.3\times 10^3`$ cm) and the resistivity at $`TT_c`$ ($`\rho _n=12.5`$ $`\mu \mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cm})`$.

Relation (2) can easily be inverted to extract the real and imaginary parts of $`\alpha ^{}`$ from experimental data without any additional assumptions. Of course, this can be done in the case when one is able to track the variation of both the modulus and phase of $`E_H`$ in the accessible magnetic field region. It is also obvious that this procedure is doable only in that field region where the amplitude and phase of $`E_H`$ deviate noticeably from their limiting values. The result of such a construction is shown in Fig. 4.

As expected, $`\eta `$ varies practically linearly with applied field. For a known $`\sigma _n`$, the slope of this relation is determined, in accordance with Ref. 11, , by the value of $`H_{c2}`$. Extrapolation of the data in Fig. 4 by a straight line passing through the origin gave $`H_{c2}3.2`$ T, practically equal to the field that determines the beginning of the change in the phase of $`E_H`$ at $`T=28`$ K (Fig. 3a). This means that in the MgB2 sample under study, $`H_{c2}`$ is limited by the condition of overlap of the cores of the vortices and not by the Clogston paramagnetic limit.12

It is seen from the results presented in Fig. 3 that the main change in the phase of $`E_H`$ is practically finished by the start of the deviation of $`|E_H|`$ from the linear dependence characterizing the normal phase. This means that in this stage the inequality $`\omega \eta <\alpha _Lq^2C_{44}`$ holds, and $`\alpha _L`$ can be estimated either by inverting relation (2) with $`\alpha ^{}\alpha _L`$ or simply from the relation $`\alpha _Lq^2H_m^2/4\pi `$, where $`H_m`$ is the characteristic field at which the transition of $`|E_H|`$ from one linear trend to another occurs. In particular, for $`T=20`$ K an estimate of the Labusch parameter gives $`\alpha _L4\times 10^{13}`$ dyn/cm4. Using the order-of-magnitude relation $`\alpha _LBI_c/cr`$, where $`I_c`$ is the critical current and $`r`$ is the characteristic spatial scale of the pinning potential, which for $`HH_{c1}`$ is close to the period of the vortex structure, we obtain $`I_c3\times 10^4`$ A/cm2 ($`T=20`$ K, $`H3`$ T).

This study was supported by the Government Foundation for Basic Research of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine.

This paper was pubilshed in Low Temp. Phys. No. 3, March 2002, p.270-274;


text:
# Casimir stress for cylindrical shell in de-Sitter space

## 1 Introduction

The Casimir effect is one of the most interesting manifestations of nontrivial properties of the vacuum state in quantum field theory . Since its first prediction by Casimir in 1948  this effect has been investigated for different fields having different boundary geometries \[4-7\]. The Casimir effect can be viewed as the polarization of vacuum by boundary conditions or geometry. Therefore, vacuum polarization induced by a gravitational field is also considered as Casimir effect. The types of boundary and conditions that have been most often studied are those associated to well known problems, e.g. plates, spheres, and vanishing conditions, perfectly counducting conditions, etc. The cylindrical problem with perfectly counducting conditions was first considered in , for a recent study ref..
In the context of hot big bang cosmology, the unified theories of the fundamental interactions predict that the universe passes through a sequence of phase transitions. These phase transitions can give rise to string structures determined by the topology of the manifold $`M`$ of degenerate vacuua . If $`M`$ is disconnected, i.e. if $`\pi (M)`$ is nontrivial, then one can pass from one ordered phase to the other only by going through a domain wall. If $`M`$ has two connected components, e.g. if there is only a discrete reflection symmetry with $`\pi _0(M)=Z_2`$, then there will be just two ordered phase separated by a domain wall.
The time evolution of topological defects have played an important role in many branches of physics, e.g., vortices in superconductors  and in superfluid , defects in liquid crystals , domain wall , cosmic string  and a flux tube in QCD .
Casimir effect in curved space-time has not been studied extensively. Casimir effect in the presence of a general relativistic domain wall is considered in  and a study of the relation between trace anomaly and the Casimir effect can be found in . Casimir effect may have interesting implications for the early universe. It has been shown, e.g., in  that a closed Robertson-Walker space-time in which the only contribution to the stress tensor comes from Casimir energy of a scalar field is excluded. In inflationary models, where the dynamics of bubbles may play a major role, this dynamical Casimir effect has not yet been taken into account. Let us mention that in  we have investigated the Casimir effect of a massless scalar field with Dirichlet boundary condition in spherical shell having different vacuua inside and outside which represents a bubble in early universe with false/true vacuum inside/outside. In this reference the sphere have zero thickness. In another paper  we have extended the analysis to the spherical shell with nonvanishing thickness. Parallel plates immersed in different de Sitter spaces in- and out-side is calculated in .
Our aim is to calculate the Casimir stress on a cylindrical shell in which the coordinate $`z`$ is absent with constant comoving radius having different vacuua inside and outside, i.e. with false/true vacuum inside/outside. Our model may be used to study the effect of the Casimir force on the dynamics of the cylindrical domain wall appearing in the simplest Goldston model. In this model potential of the scalar field has two equal minima corresponding to degenerate vacuua. Therefore, scalar field maps points at spatial infinity in physical space nontrivially into the vacuum manifold . Domain wall structure occur at the boundary between these regions of space. One may assume that the outer regions of cylinder are in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}`$ vacuum corresponding to degenerate vacuua in domain wall configuration. In section two we calculate the stress on cylinder with Dirichlet boundary conditions. The case of different de Sitter vacuua inside and outside the cylinder, is considered in section three. The last section concludes and summarizes the results.

## 2 Scalar Casimir effect for a cylindrical shell in flat space

In this section we calculate the Casimir energy of a massless scalar field in flat space which satisfies Dirichlet boundary condition on a cylinder.
The Casimir energy of a scalar field is given by

$$E_0=\frac{1}{2}\zeta (s1/2)\mu ^{2s},$$
(1)
where

$$\zeta (s)=\underset{n}{}\lambda _n^s,$$
(2)
is the zeta function of the corresponding Laplace operator. The arbitrary parameter $`\mu `$ has the dimension of a mass.
In our problem one can think of the circular problem in the plane, because in the problem which we consider here, the coordinate $`z`$ is absent. The zeta function for interior region of circle is given by

$$\zeta ^{int}(s)=\frac{1}{a}[\frac{16+\pi }{128\pi }(\frac{1}{s+1}+\mathrm{ln}a)+\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{1}{s+1}+0.00985],$$
(3)
and for exterior region we have

$$\zeta ^{out}(s)=\frac{1}{a}[\frac{16\pi }{128\pi }(\frac{1}{s+1}+\mathrm{ln}a)\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{1}{s+1}0.0085].$$
(4)
The eigenvalues $`\lambda _n`$ which enter the zeta function (2) are determined by

$$\phi _n(x)=\lambda _n\phi _n(x).$$
(5)
Therefore, using Eqs.(1,2), the Casimir energies inside and outside of cylinder are give by

$$E_{in}=\frac{1}{2\mu }\zeta ^{int}(1)=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[\frac{16+\pi }{128\pi }(\frac{1}{\epsilon }+\mathrm{ln}a)+\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{1}{\epsilon }+0.00985],$$
(6)
$$E_{out}=\frac{1}{2\mu }\zeta ^{out}(1)=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[\frac{16\pi }{128\pi }(\frac{1}{\epsilon }+\mathrm{ln}a)\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{1}{\epsilon }0.0085].$$
(7)
Each of the energies for inside and outside of the cylinder is infinite, and cutoff dependent. The Casimir energy $`E`$ is the sum of Casimir energies $`E_{in}`$ and $`E_{out}`$ for inside and outside of the cylinder.

$$E=E_{in}+E_{out}=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[\frac{1}{64}(\frac{1}{\epsilon }+\mathrm{ln}a)+0.00135].$$
(8)
As one can see, the Casimir energy $`E`$ is also infinite and dependent to the cutoff $`\epsilon `$. At this stage we introduce the classical energy for inside and outside separately and try to absorb divergent parts into these classical energies. This technique of absorbing an infinite quantity into a renormalized physical quantity is familiar in quantum field theory and quantum field theory in curved space . Here we use a procedure similar to that of bag model  ( to see application of this renormalization procedure in Casimir effect problem in curved space refer to ). The classical energy of cylinder in which the $`z`$ coordinate is absent may be written as

$$E_{class}=\sigma a^2+Fa+K+\frac{h}{a}.$$
(9)
The total energy of the cylinder inside and outside may be written as

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{in}=E_{in}+E_{class}^{in}$$
(10)
$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{out}=E_{out}+E_{class}^{out}.$$
(11)
In order to obtain a well defined result for the Casimir energies inside and outside cylinder, we have to renormalize the parameter $`h`$ of classical energy according to below

$$h^{in}h^{in}+\frac{1}{256\mu \epsilon }$$
(12)
$$h^{out}h^{out}+\frac{1}{256\mu \epsilon }.$$
(13)
Hence the effect of the vacuum fluctuation of scalar quantum field is to change, or renormalize parameter $`h`$ of classical energy inside and outside of cylinder. Therefore, we rewrite Eqs.(10,11) as

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{in}=E_{in}+\stackrel{~}{E}_{class}^{in}=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[0.00985\mathrm{ln}a(\frac{1}{128}+\frac{1}{8\pi })]+\frac{h^{in}}{a},$$
(14)
$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{out}=E_{out}+\stackrel{~}{E}_{class}^{out}=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[0.0085+\mathrm{ln}a(\frac{1}{128}+\frac{1}{8\pi })]+\frac{h^{out}}{a}.$$
(15)
We finally obtain for the total zero point energy of our system

$$\stackrel{~}{E}=\frac{1}{2a\mu }[0.00135\frac{\mathrm{ln}a}{64}].$$
(16)
Once, the infinite terms have been removed from $`E`$ in Eq.(8), the remainder is finite and will be called the renormalized Casimir energy. The Casimir stress on the cylinder due to the boundary conditions is then obtained

$$\frac{\overline{F}}{A}=\frac{1}{2\pi a}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}}{a}=\frac{1}{4\pi \mu a^3}[(0.00135\frac{\mathrm{ln}a}{64})+\frac{1}{64}].$$
(17)
## 3 Cylindrical shell in de Sitter space

Consider now a massless scalar filed in de Sitter space-time which satisfies Dirichlet boundary condition on a cylindrical shell. To make the maximum use of the flat space calculation we use the de Sitter metric in conformally flat form

$$ds^2=\frac{\alpha ^2}{\eta ^2}[d\eta ^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}(dx^i)^2],$$
(18)
where $`\eta `$ is the conformal time

$$\mathrm{}<\eta <0.$$
(19)
The constant $`\alpha `$ is related to the cosmological constant as

$$\alpha ^2=\frac{3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}.$$
(20)
Now we consider the pure effect of vacuum polarization due to the gravitational field without any boundary conditions (to see such problem for spherical shell and parallel plate geometry refer to ). The renormalized stress tensor for massless scalar field in de Sitter space is given by

$$<T_\mu ^\nu >=\frac{1}{960\pi ^2\alpha ^4}\delta _\mu ^\nu .$$
(21)
The corresponding effective pressure is

$$P=<T_1^1>=<T_r^r>=\frac{1}{960\pi ^2\alpha ^4},$$
(22)
valid for both inside and outside the cylinder. Hence the effective force on the cylinder due to the gravitational vacuum polarization is zero.
Now, assume there are different vacuua inside and outside corresponding to $`\alpha _{in}`$ and $`\alpha _{out}`$ for the metric (18). Now, the effective pressure created by gravitational part (22), is different for different part of space-time

$$P_{in}=<T_r^r>_{in}=\frac{1}{960\pi ^2\alpha _{in}^4}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}^2}{8640\pi ^2},$$
(23)
$$P_{out}=<T_r^r>_{out}=\frac{1}{960\pi ^2\alpha _{out}^4}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}^2}{8640\pi ^2}.$$
(24)
Therefore the gravitational pressure over shell, $`P_g`$, is given by

$$P_g=P_{in}P_{out}=\frac{1}{8640\pi ^2}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}^2).$$
(25)
Now we consider the effective pressure due to the boundary condition. Under the conformal transformation in four dimensions the scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,\eta )`$ is given by

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x,\eta )=\mathrm{\Omega }^1(x,\eta )\mathrm{\Phi }(x,\eta ),$$
(26)
with the conformal factor given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\eta )=\frac{\alpha }{\eta }.$$
(27)
And assuming a canonical quantization of the scalar field, and using the creation and annihilation operators $`a_k^{}`$ and $`a_k`$, the scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,\eta )`$ is then given by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,\eta )=\mathrm{\Omega }(\eta )\underset{k}{}[a_k\overline{u}_k(\eta ,x)+a_k^{}\overline{u}_k^{}(\eta ,x)]$$
(28)
The vacuum states associated with the modes $`\overline{u}_k`$ defined by $`a_k|\overline{0}=0`$, are called conformal vacuum. For the massless scalar field we are considering, the Green’s function $`\overline{G}`$ associated to the conformal vacuum $`|\overline{0}`$ is given by the flat Feynman Green’s function times a conformal factor . The two-point Green’s function, $`G(x,t;x^{},t^{})`$, is defined as the vacuum expectation value of the time-ordered product of two fields

$$G(x,t;x^{},t^{})=ı0|T\mathrm{\Phi }(x,t)\mathrm{\Phi }(x^{},t^{})|0.$$
(29)
Given the above flat space Green’s function, we obtain

$$\overline{G}=ı\overline{0}|T\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x,\eta )\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x^{},\eta ^{^{}})|\overline{0}=\mathrm{\Omega }^1(\eta )\mathrm{\Omega }^1(\eta ^{^{}})G.$$
(30)
Using this Green’s function we can obtain the Casimir stress inside and outside of the cylinder in de Sitter space

$$(\frac{\overline{F}}{A})_{in}=\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{in}^2}(\frac{F}{A})_{in},$$
(31)
$$(\frac{\overline{F}}{A})_{out}=\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{out}^2}(\frac{F}{A})_{out}.$$
(32)
Now, using Eqs.(14,15,17) and considering the zero point energy inside and outside we can write

$$(\frac{\overline{F}}{A})_{in}=\frac{1}{2\pi a}\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{in}^2}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{in}}{a}=\frac{1}{4\pi \mu a^3}\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{in}^2}[0.00985+(1\mathrm{ln}a)(\frac{1}{128}+\frac{1}{8\pi })],$$
(33)
$$(\frac{\overline{F}}{A})_{out}=\frac{1}{2\pi a}\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{out}^2}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{out}}{a}=\frac{1}{4\pi \mu a^3}\frac{\eta ^2}{\alpha _{out}^2}[0.0085+(lna1)(\frac{1}{128}+\frac{1}{8\pi })].$$
(34)
Therefore, the vacuum pressure due to the boundary condition acting on the cylinder is given by

$`P_b`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{F}}{A}})_{in}+({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{F}}{A}})_{out}={\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^2}{4\pi \mu a^3}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha _{in}^2}}[0.00985+(1\mathrm{ln}a)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{128}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi }})]`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha _{out}^2}}[0.0085+(1\mathrm{ln}a)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{128}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi }})]].`$
The total pressure on the circle, $`P`$, is then given by

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`P_g+P_b={\displaystyle \frac{1}{8640\pi ^2}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^2}{12\pi \mu a^3}}((1\mathrm{ln}a)[\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{128}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi }})`$
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{128}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi }})]+0.00985\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}0.0085\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}).`$
The $`\eta `$\- or time-dependence of the pressure is intuitively clear due to the time dependence of the physical radius of cylinder. Total pressure, may be negative or positive, depending on the difference between the cosmological constant in the two parts of space-time. Given a false vacuum inside of the cylinder , and true vacuum outside, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}>\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}`$, if $`1>\mathrm{ln}a`$, then the gravitational part is negative, and tends to contract the cylinder. In contrast, the boundary part is positive and will lead to the repulsive force. Therefore, the total effective pressure on the cylinder may be negative, leading to a contraction of the cylinder. The contraction, however, ends for a minimum of radius of the cylinder, where both part of the total pressure are equal. For the case of true vacuum inside the cylinder and false vacuum outside, i.e $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}<\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}`$, the gravitational pressure is positive. In this case, boundary part can be negative or positive depending on the difference between $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{in}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{out}`$. Hence, the total pressure may be either negative or positive.

## 4 Conclusion

We have considered a cylinder in which the coordinate $`z`$ is absent in de Sitter background with a massless scalar field, coupled conformally to it, satisfying the Dirichlet boundary conditions with constant comoving radius. Our calculation shows that for the cylindrical shell with false vacuum inside and true vacuum outside, the gravitational pressure part is negative, but the boundary pressure part is positive. In contrast for the case of true vacuum inside the cylinder and false vacuum outside, the gravitational pressure is positive, and boundary part can be negative or positive depending on the difference between cosmological constant inside and outside of cylinder. The result may be of interest in the case of formation of the cosmic cylinderical domain walls in early universe.