NUCLEAR PHYSICS B

ELSEVIER Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

Black hole thermodynamics and global monopoles

Hong-Wei Y u
*

CCAST (World Laboratory), P.O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080, China Institute of Physics and Physics Department, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, Hunan 410081, China

Received 17 January 1994; revised 10 August 1994; accepted 12 August 1994

Abstract The thermodynamics of a static spherically symmetric black hole-global monopole system is investigated by two methods: surface gravity and the euclidean path integral. It is shown that if the mass of the black hole that swallows the monopole is sufficiently large compared to that of the monopole, then the Hawking temperature is decreased and the horizon area is raised by the presence of a global monopole, but the entropy-horizon area relation S = 1A, where S is the entropy and A is the horizon area, is unaltered. It is found that the coalescence of a sufficiently heavy black hole with a global monopole is thermodynamically permissible because it is in accord with the second law of thermodynamics, i.e., the Hawking area theorem; such a black hole with a global monopole, if it exists in the first place, will not decay to a black hole without a global monopole neither by collapse nor by annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation. Also it is noted that the first law of black hole thermodynamics proposed by Bardeen, Carter and Hawking should be modified.

I. Introduction P h a s e t r a n s i t i o n s in t h e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e early universe c a n give rise to t o p o l o g i cal s t a b l e d e f e c t s [1,2]. T h e s e d e f e c t s a p p e a r w h e n s p o n t a n e o u s local o r global s y m m e t r y b r e a k i n g occurs. T h e r e a r e m a n y kinds o f d e f e c t s such as d o m a i n walls, cosmic strings, m o n o p o l e s a n d textures, d e p e n d i n g on t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e m a n i fold M o f d e g e n e r a t e v a c u u m states. In p a r t i c u l a r , m o n o p o l e s a r e f o r m e d if t h e h o m o t o p y g r o u p -a'z(M) of t h e m a n i f o l d o f d e g e n e r a t e v a c u o is nontrivial.

* Mailing address: Institute of Physics and Physics Department, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, Hunan 410081, China. 0550-3213/94/$07.00 1994 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved SSDI 0550-3213(94)00339-4

428

H.-W. Yu /Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

Monopoles produced during the G U T phase are called local or gauge monopoles, because they are the by-product of a chain of local symmetry breaking down to SU(3) S U ( 2 ) U(1). They may be produced in a huge quantity in the early universe according to the Big Bang [3], so one has to invoke an adequate mechanism, such as inflation, to avoid their observation. Effects have been made to detect them, and very tight bounds on the monopole flux can be given from the X-ray excess limit for a neutron star [4] and by the survival of galactic magnetic fields [5]. Recently we have discussed the gravitational fields of such monopoles [6,7]; we find that, because of the fact that their masses are concentrated in a very tiny core and the energy of the gauge fields outside of the monopole is exactly compensated by the Higgs fields, thus yielding a localized energy density, they generate a Reissner-Nordstrom-like metric and may lead to colored black holes. Until recently [8], however, little attention has been paid to global monopoles resulting from the global symmetry breaking. For such monopoles the variation of the long-range N a m b u - G o l d s t o n e field is not compensated by a gauge field, so the energy density of the Higgs field goes like r -2 and the total energy is linearly divergent. Global monopoles and anti-monopoles are attracted by a confining force independent of their mutual distance [8], and it would be impossible to form an isolated monopole in flat space. But if the global symmetry in question breaks down while the early universe is expanding and cooling down, one expects that the cosmological horizon at their formation (t ~ t~ua-) can serve as a natural cutoff on their energy density. The situation is analogous to that of straight global strings with a logarithmically divergent energy per unit length [2]. If the global monopoles exist, they would share with other topological defects, such as domain walls and strings, curious and rather unconventional gravitational effects. With a large energy in the Goldstone fields surrounding global monopoles it would be reasonable to expect that space-time would be highly curved nearby. The gravitational field of a global monopole has been discussed [8,9] and it has been shown [8,9] that the gravitational field of a global 0(3) monopole corresponding to the following lagrangian of the Goldstone fields: =
1 a

(Oa o

22 -no),

(1.1)

with a = 1, 2, 3 and the 0(3) group index, can be described by the metric

ds2

--

2 mg )
r

dt 2 -

1 _ 87rG'q 2 - 2 Gm g r

-1 d_r 2

-- r2(d02 + sin20 d(b2),

(1.2)

where r/o is the symmetry breaking scale, A the coupling constant and mgm the mass of the global monopole. A numerical analysis of the coupled Einstein-scalar equations shows that mgrn is approximately --67rr/0A-1/2 [9]. It is remarkable that the gravitational effects produced by a global monopole are analogous to that of a deficit angle plus a tiny negative mass at the origin, of the order of the mass in the core.

H.-W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

429

Now imagine a interesting process during the G U T phase transition in which a Schwarzschild black hole swallows a global monopole; the result would be a black hole with " h a i r " in the form of global monopoles. The metric of such a black hole-global monopole combined system has the form as Eq. (1.2) [8], i.e., ds 2 =

1 - 87rGrt 2 - - -

2Gm) {
d/2r

1 - 8~rGr/2 - - -

2Gm)'
r

dr 2 (1.3)

- r2(d02 + sin20 dth2).

The mass m in Eq. (1.3) is given by m = m s - I mgm I, where m s represents the mass of the relevant Schwarzschild black hole and mg m the effective negative mass for the global monopole [9]. m s > ling m I is implied throughout the p a p e r for the discussions to be meaningful. Black holes are intriguing objects and worth studying in all possible varieties. The idea of black holes has been proved to be highly fruitful; particularly, the theoretical discovery by Hawking [10] of quantum radiation from black holes provide us with the understanding that black holes may play the role of a " R o s e t t a stone" to relative gravity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. Concerning the quantum aspects of the combined black hole-global monopole system one may ask what effects the global monopole hair will have on the Hawking radiation and whether the famous thermodynamic relations, such as the B C H laws [11] and the relation between the Bekenstein entropy [12] and the event horizon area, which was derived for a perfect fluid and electromagnetic fields [11], still hold in the present case. These questions are what we are going to investigate in this paper. We find that if the mass of the black hole that swallows the monopole is sufficiently large, then the Hawking t e m p e r a t u r e is decreased by the presence of the global monopole, and the black hole with an internal global monopole is cooler than one without the monopole but with the same mass. This result is contrary to a recent acclaim in the literature [9,13]. We also find that a sufficiently heavy black hole with a global monopole, if it exists in the first place, is thermodynamically stable because the spontaneous decay of it into a black hole without a global monopole will violate the second law of thermodynamics, i.e., the Hawking area theorem [14] and the e n t r o p y - h o r i z o n area relation which says that the entropy of the black hole is proportional to one-fourth of the horizon area seems to be quite general and still holds in the present case, but with the presence of a global monopole the energy and the mass of the black hole observed at infinity are no longer equal and the differential form of the first law of black hole thermodynamics given by B C H [11] should be slightly modified. The remaining part of the p a p e r is devoted to the derivation by two methods of the results described above. In Section 2 we use the surface gravity method and in Section 3 the euclidean path-integral method. Finally we conclude with Section 4 with some discussions. We adopt units where h = c = k B = 1 but retain the Newton gravitational constant G for convenience.

430

H.-W. Yu /Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

2. Surface gravity method

In the following discussion we assume that the mass of the Schwarzschild black hole is bigger than that of the global monopole. The Hawking temperature of a black hole is given in terms of its surface gravity by T = K/2~-. Note that the metric of Eq. (1.3) is no longer asymptotically flat, so the known formula = - - , r---~rH 2 ~gtt grr lim
1 Or gtt

(2.1)

where r H is the event horizon radius of the black hole for computing the surface gravity for a general spherically symmetric asymptotically flat metric, cannot be used. It is worth noting that although the metric (1.3) is not asymptotically flat, it is, however, asymptotically bounded. In order to get the Hawking temperature of the black holes with global monopoles, we first derive a general formula for calculating the surface gravity for asymptotically bounded (the asymptotically flat situation is a special case) spherically symmetric black hole space-time, then apply it to the case described by Eq. (1.3). A spherically symmetric asymptotically bounded space-time metric describing a black hole can, without loss of generality, be cast in the form ds2 = gtt d/2 - grr dr2 -- r2( d02 + sin20 dq~2), with the asymptotical behavior of the metric coefficients lim gtt = A < ~,
F ----> ~

(2.2)

lim grr = B < ~.

(2.3)

Note that one has A (and B ) = 1 for the asymptotically flat case. The surface gravity for the black holes described by Eq. (2.2) can be found from the relation [11,151 K2=
-- ~p,;v

11

1~;" ~

[ r=r H,

(2.4)

where U is the time-like Killing vector normalized so that it would have lim r _~=l~P" = 1. For Eq. (2.2) we have P' = 6~ lim ~ g t t .
t - ---~ o o

(2.5)

Putting Eq. (2.5) into Eq. (2.4) and using Eq. (2.2), we find after some calculation K 2 = lC2gttgrr(gtt.r)2[r=rH, where C 2 = lim g "
/ , ----) o o

(2.6)

(2.7)

H.-W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

so

431

"

2vgt

O r

gtt r=rH"
7/

(2.8)

This is the general formula we obtain for computing surface gravity for spherically symmetric asymptotically bounded black hole space-time and it reduces to Eq. (2.1) for the asymptotically flat case where we have C = 1. Now introducing a dimensionless c o n s t a n t T] 2 = 8 7 " / ' G T ] 2 , the horizon ria for the combined black hole-global monopole described by Eq. (1.3) is given by
rH

2Gm 1 - r t 2.

Substituting the above result into Eq. (2.8) yields the surface gravity for a black hole-global monopole, K = (1
-

72) -1/2 Gm r2

(1

T/2)3/2 (2.9)

4Gm

So the Hawking temperature is (1 T=

-

'r/2) 3/2

8~rGm

K - --.

2re

(2.10)

The area of the horizon will be

167rG2m 2

A = "r'''f= g~g%~ rr~ dO d~b = 4-n'r 2 -

(1 - ~ 2-z')

(2.11)

To seek the relation between the entropy S and the horizon area A, we follow the method given in Ref. [16] by Aryal, Ford and Vilenkin. Use the thermodynamic relation dS= dE T ' (2.12)

where E is the energy of the black hole as measured by an observer at infinity. With the presence of a global monopole the space-time is no longer asymptotically flat and the energy and the mass observed at infinity may not be identical which is different from the case without a global monopole in which one has E = M. It should be pointed out that theoretically the total mass of the black hole-global monopole combined system would be divergent due to the linearly divergent energy contained in the surrounding N a m b u - G o l d s t o n e fields, but this will not pose a problem for our discussion because we are only concerned with the thermodynamics of the black hole space-time and furthermore, as we have emphasized previously, the cosmological horizon can play the role of a natural cutoff on the linearly divergent energy.

432

H.-W. Yu /Nuclear PhysicsB430 (1994) 427-440

Let T,, be the energy-momentum tensor for some matter field propagating on the background space-time; it could represent either Hawking radiation or classical matter being thrown into the black hole; then P'T,v is a covariantly conserved vector current, and the rate of flow of energy in or out of the black hole may be written as [16]

E= fl'~T., dE ~,

(2.13)

where the surface integral is taken over the horizon. The metric for a global monopole charged black hole with slowly changing mass is of the form of Eq. (1.3) with m=m(t)=m0+rht, where m 0 and rh are constants. The Einstein tensor for the metric can be expressed as

c.. =
1

+ G.T + O( h2).

Application of the Einstein equation G.~ = 8rGT.~ then leads to - 8~'G fr=ru o~"P" d E "
1

2Gm
=rH
r 2

(1 - . 2 ) - 1 / 2 ~

dO d~b (2.14)

87rG

= (1 - ~Tz)-l/Zrh.

Consequently in the presence of a global monopole, the energy at infinity E and the mass parameter m are not identical, which is analogous to the situation with a cosmic string [16]. Using the above result d E = ( 1 - r/Z)-l/Zdm and putting Eq. (2.14) into Eq. (2.12), we have

S= fTdE=
4 rrGm z (1 - " 0 2 ) 2

f (1 __ r/2)3/2dE = f
4GA"
1

87rGm

8~'Gm --(-1- "2) 2 d m

(2.15a)

If we further adopt units where G = 1 then Eq. (2.15a) becomes S =lzA, (2.15b)

of which the form is perhaps more familiar to us [17,18]. So we find that the relation S = A seems to be quite general and is unaltered by the presence of a global monopole. For a typical G U T symmetry breaking scale rio ~ 1 0 1 6 GeV and '17 2 : 8~-G~ 2 ~ 10 -6, much less than unity, and we assume r / < 1 throughout the paper. To find

H.-W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

433

out the real effect of the presence of a global monopole on the Hawking temperature and the horizon area let us recall that

m=ms-[mgml,
1

m s > Imgml,

and that the Hawking temperature T s and horizon area A s are respectively

Ts = 8rcGm-~' As = 16"n'GZm~"
Then we find

AT=T-Ts>O~

I mgml < ms <

[mgm[
1 - (1
-

T]2)3/2'

(2.16a)

AT=T-Ts<O~

ms>

]mgm[ 1 -- (1 -- r/E) 3/2'

(2.16b)

AA =A - A s > 0 ~ m s > - 772 AA=A-As<O~

Imgml
- r/2 -

(2.16c)

Imgml < m s <

Imgml

(2.16d)

An analysis of the above results shows that if the mass of the original Schwarzschild black hole m s is larger than or equal to I mgm[/~72 (note that I m ~ l / r / 2 > [mg m I / [ 1 - ( 1 - ~72)3/2] for ~7 less than unity), then a black hole with a global monopole has a larger (or equal) horizon area than the original Schwarzschild black hole and its Hawking temperature decreases contrary to a recent acclaim in the literature [9,13], so the trapping by a black hole of a global monopole is in accord with the Hawking area theorem and the resulting system is thermodynamically permissible thus thermally stable against spontaneous decay by collapse to form a regular Schwarzschild black hole. If otherwise, then the coalescence of a black hole with a global monopole violates the Hawking area theorem thus is perhaps thermodynamically forbidden, and if anyway such objects existed in the first place due to some perturbation, then they might spontaneously decay by collapse to the black holes without global monopoles. Now we have seen that a heavy black hole with a global monopole (m s > ] mg m [/'r/2) cannot spontaneously decay by collapse to a simple black hole without violating the second law of thermodynamics. But such a black hole with the monopole quantum charge may decay to a regular Schwarzschild black hole via Higgs radiation due to the annihilation of the monopole quantum number. To find out whether this can occur, we should estimate the entropy in Higgs radiation and then the total entropy change in such a transition. For this purpose let us note that the energy of a monopole-anti-monopole pair is ~ G-lrlZR, where R is the distance between the pair. The attracting force acting on the pair is F = dE~OR ~ G - l r / z . Under the action of this distance-independent force, the pair oscillates and

434

H.-W. Yu /Nuclear PhysicsB430 (1994) 427-440

loses energy by emitting Goldstone bosons. The energy-loss rate can be roughly approximated as follows using the method similar to that for the radiation of Goldstone bosons by global strings [19]. The radiation energy flux at a distance r from the pair is ~ T/ ~Ot~ a ~i~) a ~ ~72/r 2. Hence the /~ ~ 4~r2T/O~ gt.r i..-,-1 r/.2 Taking into account the fact that the lifetime of the pair is r ~ R and large pair separations are exponentially suppressed by analogy with the monopoles connected by strings [20], we can calculate the entropy in the Higgs radiation SI_ I by considering the annihilation of the global monopole with a anti-monopole just outside the black hole horizon r H = 2 G m . That is

SH=fd.~_~

fr=2Grn
. Jo .

. dt (1 -9"/2) 3/2

47rr/2m

8~'Gn2m 2 -----(1 - ' 0 2 ) 3/2"

(2.17)

Consequently the total entropy change in the transition is

AS . . . . (1--~2) 2

4 m2I m 2
mss

[1 - 2r/2(1 - ,q2)1/2] - (1 - r/2)2

(2.18)

Demanding that AS > 0 and noting that r/ is much less than unity yields approximately ms>

]mgml ,1/4

(2.19)

Summarizing all the discussions performed as far, we can draw the following conclusions: If m s < I mgm I/r/2, then the system resulting from the trapping by a black hole of a global monopole is thermally unstable, for it can decay to a regular Schwarzschild black hole either by collapse or by annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation; if I m g m I/'/12 < ms < I m g m I/r/a, the resulting system is "metastable", for it cannot decay to a regular Schwarzschild black hole by collapse but can do that by annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation; if m s > I mgm I/'74, the resulting system is thermally stable, for it can decay to a regular Schwarzschild black hole neither by collapse nor by annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation. To get a more concrete picture of the above analysis, let us recall that m g m is of the order 6~-%A-]/2 [9], then I mgm I'q-2 = (VrA - rt)-I _~ 6, the size of the monopole core. We see that m s > (<)1 mgmlr/ 2 means that the original Schwarzschild radius r s of the black hole is larger (smaller) than the size of the monopole core a, therefore the black hole-global monopole system may be classified into two categories, r s > 6 and r s < 6. The former case can be identified as the "black hole with an internal global monopole", while the later can be called the "black hole in a global monopole" (for closely related concepts see Refs. [21,22]). The above analysis may be considered as a strong indication of the thermal stability of a sufficiently heavy "black hole with an internal global monopole" (m s > I mgm I//774) and the thermal instability of the "black hole in a global monopole".

H.-W.. Yu /Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

435

Using Eq. (2.10), (2.12), (2.14), (2.15), we find dm = (1 - r/z) 1/2 ~--~dA,

(2.20)

which is different from dm = (K/87r) dA associated with a black hole without a global monopole formulated by BCH [11]. The reason for this is that with the presence of a global monopole the mass and the energy of the black hole are no longer identical. So the differential form of the first law of thermodynamics for a black hole with a global monopole should take the form

K
d E = 8--~dA. (2.21)

3. Euclidean path-integral method

It is desirable to construct the thermodynamics of black holes in a manner that incorporates the role of quantum gravity, as stressed by Hawking [17]. In this section we will use the euclidean path-integral method to discuss thermodynamics of the combined black hole-global monopole system. For this purpose, we shall follow Gibbons and Hawking [18,17] in assuming that the partition function
z = f~[g]~[~] e -*tg'*l

(3.1)

contains the first-order classical euclidean actions of a hole as its leading term, where I is the euclidean action of the system and a sum over all possible metrics gu~ and matter fields 4) consistent with certain constraint conditions is implied [18]. In order to apply the euclidean path-integral method to the black hole described by Eq. (1.3) we first introduce the coordinate transformation

t "-> (1 --'r/2"1/2) t,
and new parameters

r ~ (1 -- "r/2)-i/2r

(3.2a)

M= (1-'q2)-3/2m,

b=l-r/2,
2 G M ~ -1

(3.2b)

and then we can rewrite metric Eq. (1.3) as d s 2 = (1 2GM ) d t 2 - (1 r . ~ d r 2 - r Z b ( d O 2 +sin20 d~b2). (3.3)

This metric is, apart from the deficit solid angle, very similar to the Schwarzschild metric and we will use it in our following discussion. We may formally euclideanize it by setting t ---) i r to yield as 2 = 1 r dr 21 dr 2 - r 2 b ( d O 2+sin20d4~2), (3.4)

436

H.-W. Yu/NuclearPhysicsB430(1994)427-440

representing the euclidean section of a static space-time describing a black hole-global monopole. However, we now see that the former lorentzian coordinate singularity at r = 2 G M is in danger of becoming a real singularity in euclidean space, since the metric changes its signature from four to zero for r < 2 G M . So we should discard the entire t < 2 G M region, retaining the (analytic continuation of) that region that was outside the outermost horizon (i.e. r >>.2 G M ) as the only region of relevance in our euclidean section. Constructing a new variable p by taking p2 = 1 6 G 2 M e r - l ( r _ 2 G M ) we see that

ds 2= -p 2 d

4-~

do 2-

4G2M2b

d~(2 2

(3.5)

near r = 2 G M , which shows that z must be identified with period/3 = 8 r r G M , and that r and z are analogous to cylindrical polar coordinates on a plane. This periodicity in imaginary (euclidean) time is interpreted as evidence of a thermal bath of temperature T = 1//3 [18], and the Hawking temperature is therefore identified as 1 (1 - ~/2)3/2
8zrGm

T=
be

8~GM

Take the total euclidean action for the black hole-global monopole system to

I=
and define Ig=

-~M
R

16~G R )~

d4xq- G1 f0. (K-K)~/T d3x

(3.6)

- 1- -d a
d4x,

d4x,

(3.7) (3.8) (3.9) (3.10)

I M= f~Mvrg 1

I1 - 8~'G fo.~Kvt~ dBx'

1

lsubstract- 87rG faz Kx/~ d3x'

where X is the space-time region with metric Eq. (3.4), K is the trace of the extrinsic curvature of the boundary OX (r = const.), and 3' is the determinant of the metric induced by Eq. (3.4) on the boundary. We find

V/T=br 2 sin 0(1

2GM) 1/2

(3.11) (3.12) (3.13)

K=

2-( lr

2aM) -1/2, 2GM) 1/2 GM( 12 - - r

11 = 1 2 r r b G M 2 - 8~rbMr.

H.-W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

437

The subtraction term involving K normalizes the action to zero for the limiting s p a c e - t i m e ( M = 0) with the given "deficit solid angle" boundary and K is the extrinsic curvature trace calculated for ~ isometrically embedded in this s p a c e time. A suitable four-metric is
ds 2 = -dr 2 dr 2 -

r 2 b ( d O 2 + sin

0 2 dq~2),

(3.14)

where z has period [23]

y= [8og/2

= 8

-CM 1 -

--r

'

(3.15)

which is the proper length of the ~- circle. We find ~ thus

[subtract =

= r Z b sin 0 and K = - 2 r - 1,

-G-lbCl'r

= -8~bMr

(3.16)

The subtraction has been constructed by requiring the thermal energy to be equal to zero for the given geometry with M = 0. Hence, the subtraction is analogous to removing the zero-point energy for a collection of harmonic oscillations at a fixed temperature, which does not influence the entropy [23]. To get the total action we should also calculate Ig and I M. It is obvious to see that Ig and I M are divergent individually, and at the first sight this divergence which is directly related to the linear divergence of the energy contained in the N a m b u - G o l d s t o n e fields will make our discussion problematic, but careful analysis shows on the contrary that the sum of Ig and I M is convergent (in fact is zero) as will be shown. Making use of the approximation for the global monopole configuration given in Ref. [8],
~)a = T l O x a / r ,

(3.17)

with x a x a = r 2 which leads to the metric Eq. (1.2), and putting it into Eq. (1.1) and using Eq. (1.3), yields
L M = - ~ 7 2 1 r 2.

(3.18)

(Note that if we use Eq. (3.3) for calculation, then we should multiply Eq. (3.17) by because in going from Eq. (1.3) to Eq. (3.3) we have introduced a coordinate transformation Eq. (3.2a)). On the other hand a straightforward calculation from the metric leads to R 2"r/2 r2 16~'Gr/~ r2 (3.19)

Consequently I~ + I M vanishes although they are divergent when treated individually. Thanks to this fact we can now proceed our discussion. We have / = b 12~rGM 2 - 8 7 r M r + 8 ~ r M r 1
r '

(3.20)

438

H.- W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

where the factor b has come in through integration on the solid angle. Throughout the paper, b is considered a fixed parameter and not a thermodynamic variable. The classical contribution to the partition function is given by Z = e-* (3.21)

The total thermodynamic energy associated with the combined black hole-global monopole system is then [23,24]

E 013 ~ 11 -

]
(3.22)

in the limit when r goes to infinity, E goes to E = b M = (1 - ,/.]2) l/2m, which is the value we obtained previously (Eq. (2.14)). The total entropy can be calculated from Eq. (3.21) to be [23,24] fl 0(ln
S = Z) I = 4rcbGM 2 4rcGm 2

0]3

(1 -- "/72) 2 '

(3.23)

and the horizon area for Eq. (3.3) is now 167rG2m 2

A = 4rrb(2GM) 2 = 16rrbG2M z -

(1 - ~2) 2"

(3.24)

As a consequence of Eqs. (3.23), (3.24) the entropy is proportional to one-fourth of the horizon area, as was shown in the preceding section by a different argument.

4. Discussion

We have seen that the trapping of a global monopole by a Schwarzschild black hole with a sufficiently large mass will decrease its Hawking temperature and increase its horizon area which is in accord with Hawking's area theorem, i.e., the second law of black hole thermodynamics, but the entropy-horizon area relation remains unaltered. If a global monopole is trapped in a Schwarzschild black hole w i t h [ m g m 1/7}2 < m s < [ m g m [//T/4 in the first place, then the spontaneous decay by collapse of the resulting system, i.e., a black hole with an internal global monopole, violates the second law of thermodynamics but the decay by annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation is possible. So such black holes with internal global monopoles are referred to as being "metastable". However, if m s > [ mem I/T] 4, then the decay both by collapse and annihilation of the monopole quantum number via Higgs radiation of the resulting system, i.e., a sufficiently large black hole with an internal global monopole, violates the second

H.-W. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

439

law of thermodynamics and is thus forbidden. Consequently, we may conclude that such black holes with global monopoles inside are thermodynamically stable. But if a global monopole is swallowed by a Schwarzschild black hole with m s < [ mgm I / r l 2 by some perturbation in the first place, then the resulting system is unstable and will probably spontaneously decay to a black hole without a global monopole. These properties are rather different from that of a black hole with a cosmic string passing through it [16]. Ref. [16] studied the thermodynamics of a black hole with a cosmic string passing through it and found that neither the Hawking t e m p e r a t u r e nor the e n t r o p y - h o r i z o n area relation is modified by the presence of a cosmic string, but that the merging of a black hole with a cosmic string has an apparent violation of the Hawking area theorem. It should be noted, however, that the e n t r o p y - h o r i z o n area seems to be quite general for it is neither modified by the presence of a global monopole nor by that of a cosmic string. The first law of black hole thermodynamics given by B C H [11] should be modified and takes the form Eq. (2.18) because of the fact that the energy and the mass of the black hole observed at infinity are not longer identical in the presence of a global monopole. One may ask whether it is possible to achieve zero surface gravity in the presence of a global monopole, i.e., is the third law of thermodynamics still valid? This issue depends on the possible value of the symmetry breaking scale ~/0. It is physically reasonable to assume that W0 < mplanck ~ 1019 GeV, for example, one has "00 ~ 1016 G e V for the typical G U T scale, s o "r/0//mplanck --~ 10 - 3 < 1. Therefore we may conclude that it is very likely that the surface gravity will not reach zero in a physically reasonable situation. But one may argue that although it is highly implausible physically to have a r/0 reaching the Planck scale which will set K to be zero, nevertheless one cannot completely exclude the possibility of having such a scale so that we in danger of violating the third law. We want to point out here that this is not so serious as it seems to be at the first sight because if r/0 approaches the Planck scale then the gravity may substantially change the structure of the monopole at small distance and the condition which leads to the metric Eq. (1.2) will not apply, so the situation may have different features and may require a complete quantum treatment rather than the semiclassical one we have used in this paper. Finally we would like to comment on an interesting effect that a global monopole will have on the Hawking radiation in the final stages. Suppose that the black hole evaporates down to r n - - - 1 / G r l o (still larger than that of a global monopole) and its t e m p e r a t u r e is already T = rl0 at which the global symmetry that resulted in the monopole might be restored. One could imagine that the black hole continues evaporating without raising its t e m p e r a t u r e but rather using its energy to restore the symmetry as much as possible around the monopole core, until the mass of the hole becomes comparable to the effective negative mass of the monopole and the horizon disappears! The analysis of such an interesting process is at present under investigation which requires taking into account the backreaction of the evaporating black hole and the high-temperature corrections to determine the monopole configuration and seeking a metric to model the evaporating process of the black hole with a global monopole trapped inside.

440

H.-W.. Yu / Nuclear Physics B430 (1994) 427-440

Acknowledgement
I t is a p l e a s u r e t o e x p r e s s m y s i n c e r e t h a n k s t o P r o f e s s o r W . J . W a n g Professor Z.M. Tang for their constant encouragement and support. and

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] T.W.B. Kibble, J. Phys. A 9 (1976) 1387. A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rep. 121 (1985) 263. J.P. Preskill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 1365. E.W. Kolb et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1373. E.N. Parker and T.J. Bogdan, Phys. Rev. D 26 (1982) 1296. H.W. Yu and K.J. Wang, Sci. China A 35 (1991) 1233. H.W. Yu et al., Nuovo Cimento 107 B (1992) 863. M. Barriola and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989) 341. D. Harari and C. Lousto, Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 2626. S.W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199. J.M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S.W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 31 (1973) 161; B. Carter, in Black holes, eds. C. DeWitt and B.S. DeWitt (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1973). J.D. Bekenstein, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 4 (1972) 737; Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 2333; D 9 (1974) 3292. C. Lousto, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 6 (1991) 3613. S.W. Hawking and G.F.R. Ellis, The large scale structure of space-time (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1973) p. 318. R.M. Wald, General relativity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984) p. 332. M. Aryal, UH. Ford and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 34 (1986) 2263. S.W. Hawking, in General relativity, eds. S.W. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1979) p. 746. G.W. Gibbons and S.W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 2752. R.L. Davis, Phys. Rev. D 32 (1985) 3172. A. Everett, T. Vachaspati and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 31 (1985) 1925; E. Copeland et al., Nucl. Phys. B 298 (1988) 445. K. Lee, V.P. Nair and E.J. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 2751. D. Kastor and J. Traschen, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 5399. J.W. York Jr., Phys. Rev. D 33 (1986) 2092. N.D. Birrell and P.C.W. Davies, Quantum fields in curves spaces (Cambridge, U.P., Cambridge, 1982).