Singularities of plane gravitational waves and their memory effects

Tongzheng Wang1,2 ,∗ Jared Fier3 ,† Bowen Li3 ,‡ Guoliang Lü2 ,§

Zhaojun Wang2 ,¶ Yumei Wu1,3 ,∗∗ and Anzhong Wang1,3††
1
Institute for Advanced Physics & Mathematics, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, 310032, China
2
School of Physical Science and Technology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi, 830046, China
3
GCAP-CASPER, Department of Physics, Baylor University, Waco, TX, 76798-7316, USA
(Dated: July 26, 2018)
Similar to the Schwarzschild coordinates for spherical black holes, the Baldwin, Jeffery and Rosen
coordinates for plane gravitational waves are often singular, and extensions beyond such singularities
are necessary, before studying asymptotic properties of such spacetimes. In this paper, we study the
nature of the singularities and find that some of them actually represent real spacetime singularities,
so they already represent the boundaries of such spacetimes and extensions beyond them are not
needed. As a result, such spacetimes cannot be used to study their asymptotical properties, such
arXiv:1807.09397v1 [gr-qc] 24 Jul 2018

as memory effects and soft graviton theorems.

I. INTRODUCTION such spacetimes, and no extensions are needed.

The memory effects of gravitational waves (GWs) have
been attracted lots of attention (see, for example, [1–4]
and references therein), especially after the recent ob-
servations of several gravitational waves (GWs) emitted
from remote binary systems of either black holes [5–8]
or neutron stars [9]. Such effects might be possibly de-
tected by LISA [10] or even by current generation of de-
tectors, such as aLIGO and aVIRGO [11]. Recently, such
investigations gained new momenta due to the close rela-
tions between asymptotically symmetric theorems of soft
gravitons and GW memory effects [12, 13].
The characteristic feature of these effects is the per-
manent displacement of a test particle after a burst of a
GW passes [14–19]. In addition, the passage of the GW
affects not only the position of the test particle, but also
its velocity. In fact, the change of the velocity of the
particle is also permanent [20–24].
When far from the sources, the emitted GWs can be
well approximated by plane GWs, a subject that has been
extensively studied, including their nonlinear interactions
[25, 26]. The spacetimes for plane GWs can be cast in
various forms, depending on the choice of the coordinates
and gauge-fixing. One of them one was originally due
to Baldwin, Jeffery and Rosen (BJR) [27, 28]. Despite
its several attractive features, the BJR coordinates often
singular within a finite width of the waves, and when
studying the asymptotic behavior of the spacetime, ex-
tension beyond this singular surface is needed. In this
paper, we study the nature of such singularities and find
that some of them actually represent real spacetime sin-
gularities, so they already represent the boundaries of
∗ tongzheng.wang@qq.com
†
Jared Fier@baylor.edu
‡ distortions of freely falling observers. In particular, we
Bowen Li@baylor.edu
§ guolianglv@xao.ac.cn
¶ wzj@xju.edu.cn
∗∗ Yumei Wu@baylor.edu
†† Corresponding authors: Anzhong Wang@baylor.edu and Zhaojun Wang
In general relativity (GR), there are powerful Hawking-
Penrose theorems [29], from which one can see that space-
times with quite “physically reasonable” conditions are
singular. However, the theorems did not tell the nature
of the singularities, and Ellis and Schmidt divided them
into two different kinds, spacetime curvature singularities
and coordinate singularities [30] (Its applications to Ho-
rava theory [31] (See a recent review of the theory [32])
was carried out in [33]). The former is real and cannot
be made disappear by any Lorentz transformations,
µ
xµ → x′ = ζ µ t, xi ,


(1.1)
while the latter is coordinate-dependent, and can be
made disappear by proper Lorentz transformations. One
famous example is the coordinate singularity of the
Schwarzschild solution in the spherical coordinates at the
Schwarzschild radius r = 2M G, where M is the mass of
the Schwarzschild black hole.
Spacetime curvature singularities are further divided
into two sub-classes, scalar curvature singularities and
non-scalar curvature singularities. If any of the 14 scalars
[34], constructed from the 4-dimensional Riemann tensor
σ
Rµνλ and its derivatives is singular, then the spacetime
is said singular, and the corresponding singularity is a
scalar one. If none of these scalars is singular, space-
times can be still singular. In particular, tidal forces
and/or distortions (which are the double integrals of the
tidal forces), experienced by an observer, may become in-
finitely large [35]. These kinds of singularities are usually
referred to as non-scalar curvature singularities.
In the spacetimes of plane GWs, all the 14 indepen-
dent scalars vanish identically [36], so the singularities
appearing in the BJR coordinates are either non-scalar
singularities or coordinate ones. In this paper, we shall
clarify this important point, by studying tidal forces and
find that the singularities can be in general characterized
by
χ ≡ e−U/2 = (u − us )α χ̂(u),
(1.2)
 2

where the plane GWs are moving along the null direc- the linearly polarized case in which we have W = 0, so
tion of u = Constant, and α > 0, χ̂(us ) 6= 0. But, the the metric takes the simple form,
Einstein vacuum field equations require 0 < α ≤ 1 (See  
the discussions given in the next section). Then, we find ds2 = −2dudv + e−U(u) eV (u) dy 2 + e−V (u) dz 2 (2.3)
.
that the tidal forces and distortions are finite across the
singular surface u = us only when It can be shown that the corresponding Riemann ten-
sor has only two independent components, given, respec-
1 tively, by
(i) α = , or (ii) α = 1. (1.3)
2 1 −(U−V ) 
2 (U ′′ − V ′′ ) − (U ′ − V ′ )2 ,

Ruyuy = e
Specifically, the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II 4
we shall first give a brief review over the singularities ap- 1
= e−(U+V ) 2 (U ′′ + V ′′ ) − (U ′ + V ′ )2 ,(2.4)
 
Ruzuz
pearing in the BJR coordinates, and then study the tidal 4
forces and distortions felt by a typical class of observers, where U ′ ≡ dU/du, etc. All the fourteen independent
whose movements are confined within the (u, v)-plane, scalars [34], made of the Riemann tensor and its deriva-
and show explicitly that tidal forces and distortions of tives, vanish identically [36], so there are no scalar sin-
these observers are finite only in the two particular cases gularities in the spacetimes of plane gravitational waves.
given by Eq.(1.3). Since lots of studies of memory ef- Decomposing it into the Weyl and Ricci tensor [25,
fects of GWs have been carried out in the Brinkmann 26], we find that each of them has only one independent
coordinates [37], in Sec. III we consider the singular be- component. In particular, the independent component of
havior of the hypersurface u = us in the Brinkmann co- the Ricci tensor is given by,
ordinates, and find the singular behavior of the function
A(u), the only function that appears in the Brinkmann 1  ′2 2

Ruu = U ′′ − U +V′ , (2.5)
metric (2.10). The paper is ended in Sec. IV, where our 2
main conculsions are given, and some discussing remarks
are also presented. while the independent component of the Weyl tensor is
given by,
1
II. SINGULARITIES IN SPACETIMES OF Ψ4 ≡ −Cµναβ nµ m̄ν nα m̄β = − A2 (V ′′ − U ′ V ′ ) (2.6)
,
2
PLANE GRAVITATIONAL WAVES
which represents the plane gravitational waves propagat-
ing along the hypersurfaces u = Constant, where
The spacetimes for gravitational plane waves in the
BJR coordinates can be cast in the form [25, 26, 36], lµ ≡ A−1 δvµ , nµ ≡ Aδuµ , mµ = ζ 2 δ2µ + ζ 3 δ3µ ,
h m̄µ = ζ 2 δ2µ + ζ 3 δ3µ , (2.7)
ds2 = −2e−M dudv + e−U eV cosh W dy 2 − 2 sinh W dydz
i form a null tetrad, with A being an arbitrary function of
+e−V cosh W dz 2 , (2.1) u only, and

where M, U, V and W are functions of u only. The space- e(U−V )/2 e(U+V )/2
ζ2 ≡ √ , ζ3 ≡ i √ . (2.8)
time in general represents a gravitational plane wave 2 2
propagating along the null surfaces u = constant with
An over bar denotes the complex conjugate. As noticed
two polarizations, one is along the x-axis, often referred
in various occasions, the BJR coordinates are not har-
to as the “+” polarization, and the other is along an axis
monic, typically not global, and contain coordinate sin-
which is at a 450 degree with respect to the x-axis, often
gularities, see, for example, [2, 39, 40] and references
referred to as the “×” polarization [36, 38]. According to
therein.
the Petrov classifications, the corresponding spacetimes
To overcome these problems, the Beinkmann coordi-
belong to Petrov Type N [25, 26].
nates (û, v̂, ŷ, ẑ) are often used, defined by,
1 1
A. Linearly Polarized Plane Gravitational Waves
v̂ ≡ v + y 2 eV −U (V ′ − U ′ ) − z 2 e−V −U (V ′ + U ′ ) ,
4 4
û ≡ u, ŷ ≡ e(V −U)/2 y, ẑ ≡ e−(V +U)/2 z, (2.9)
R Note that by rescaling the null coordinate u → u′ =
e−M(u) du, without loss of the generality, one can always in terms of which, the metric (2.7) takes the form [37],
set 1
ds2 = −2dûdv̂ + dŷ 2 + dẑ 2 + A(û) ŷ 2 − ẑ 2 dû2(2.10)


,
2
M = 0, (2.2)
where
a gauge that will be adopted in this paper. In addition, 1h 2
i
for our current purpose, it is sufficient to consider only A(û) ≡ 2 (V ′′ − U ′′ ) + (V ′ − U ′ ) . (2.11)
2
 3

B. Spacetime Singularities where Rµνλρ ’s are given by Eq.(2.4).

To study the nature of the singularities at u = us , we
In the vacuum case, the Einstein field equations Rµν = assume that in the neighborhood of u = us , the function
0 has only one independent component, given by Ruu = χ(≡ e−U/2 ) takes the form,
0, and from Eq.(2.5) we find that it can be written as, α
χ(u) = (u − us ) χ̂(u), (2.19)
′′ 2
χ + ω χ = 0, (2.12) where α > 0 and χ̂(us ) 6= 0 and p is finite. Inserting it
where into Eq.(2.13), we find that V ∝ α(1 − α) Ṽ (u). Thus,
1 ′ to have V real, we must assume that 0 < α ≤ 1. Then,
χ ≡ e−U/2 , ω≡ V . (2.13) from Eqs.(2.4) and (2.18) we obtain,
2 p
Then, from Eq.(2.12) we can see that, for any given initial (1 − 2α) α(1 − α)
R(0)(2)(0)(2) = −R(0)(3)(0)(3) =
value, χ0 > 0, there always exists a moment, say, u = us (λ − λs )2
at which χ vanishes [2], +O (λ − λs )−1 (, 2.20)

χ(us ) = 0, or U (us ) = +∞, (2.14) where λs ≡ λ(us ). Then, we find that

that is, a singularity of the metric (2.3) appears at Z Z p
u = us , which is surely not a scalar singularity, since, dλ dλ R(0)(2)(0)(2) (λ) = (1 − 2α) α(1 − α)
as mentioned above, all the fourteen independent scalars
× ln(λ − λs ) + O (λ − λs )1 ,


made of the Riemann tensor in such spacetimes vanish (2.21)
identically. Doe this mean that the singularity must be which is always singular, unless
a coordinate one? The answer is not always affirmative.
This is because spacetime singularities can be not only 1
(i) α = , or (ii) α = 1. (2.22)
scalar ones but also non-scalar ones [30]. The non-scalar 2
spacetime singularities are indicated by the divergence of Therefore, we conclude that the singularities located at
distortions of a freely falling observer, which is the twice u = us are possibly coordinate ones, only in the cases
integrations of the tidal force with respect to the proper α = 1/2, 1. Otherwise, they are really spacetime singu-
time of the observer [35]. larities, and no extensions beyond it are physically pos-
To calculate distortions of a freely falling observer, let sible. As a result, they represent the spacetime bound-
us first consider the trajectory of freely falling observer, aries. Note that here “possibly” refers to the fact that
which follows the timelike geodesics. In the present pa- the spacetimes are not singular for the particular class
per, we just consider the ones laid in the (u, v)-plane, that of observers considered in this paper. So, our above
is, (u, v, y, z) = (u(λ), v(λ), y0 , z0 ), where λ denotes the analysis does not exclude the possibilities that even with
proper time of the observer, and y0 and z0 are constants. α = 1/2, 1 distortions of other kinds of observes may
Then, the timelike geodesics are simply given by diverge at u = us . So, the conditions (2.22) is consid-
λ ered only as the necessary conditions for the spacetime
u = γ0 λ, v= , y = y0 , z = z0 , (2.15) not being singular at u = us . On the other hand, our
2γ0
above analysis does show that they are indeed singular if
where γ0 is an integration constant. Define eµ(0) ≡ α 6= 1/2, 1.
dxµ /dλ, we can construct a tetrad, eµ(a) (a = 0, 1, 2, 3),
by
III. SINGULARITIES IN BRINKAMANN
1 µ 1 µ
eµ(0) = γ0 δuµ + δv , eµ(1) = γ0 δuµ − δ , COORDINATES
2γ0 2γ0 v
U −V U +V
eµ(2) = e 2 δyµ , eµ(3) = e 2 δzµ , (2.16) As mentioned previously, gravitational memory effects
are frequently studied in the Brinkamann coordinates.
which satisfies the relations, So, it would be very interesting to see how the metric
eµ(α) eν(β) gµν = ηαβ , eµ(α);ν eν(0) = 0, (2.17) behaves in the neighborhood of u = us .
From Eqs.(2.13) and (2.19), we find that
that is, they are unit orthogonal vectors and parallelly
U = −2α ln (u − us ) − 2 ln χ̂(u),
transported alone the timelike geodesics, so that they
2αχ̂′
 
form a freely falling frame [35]. Then, the projection ′2 4α(1 − α) 4 ′′
V = − χ̂ + , (3.1)
of the Riemann tensor onto this frame, R(a)(b)(c)(d) ≡ (u − us )2 χ̂ u − us
Rµνλρ eµ(a) eν(b) eλ(c) eρ(d) , yields two independent compo- where we can expand χ̂(u) in the neighborhood of u = us
nents, as,
R(0)(2)(0)(2) = γ02 eU−V Ruyuy , X n
χ̂(u) = χn (u − us ) . (3.2)
R(0)(3)(0)(3) = γ02 eU+V Ruzuz , (2.18) n=0
 4

Since χ̂(us ) 6= 0, we must assume that χ0 6= 0. u = us . We find that it is convenient to consider the
In the vacuum, Eq.(2.12) holds, from which we find cases, (i) 0 < α < 1/2, α =
6 1/2; (ii) α = 1/2; and (iii)
that α = 1, separately.
2 2
2U ′′ − U ′ = V ′ , (Rµν = 0). (3.3)
1
A. 0 < α < 1, α 6= 2
Then, Eq.(2.11) reduces to,
In this case, inserting Eqs.(3.1) and (3.2) into
A(u) = V ′′ − V ′ U ′ , (Rµν = 0). (3.4) Eq.(2.11), we find that

Note that in writing the above expression we used the An (u − us )n ,

X
A(u) = (3.5)
coordinate transformations (2.9), from which we simply n=−2
find u = û. Inserting Eqs.(3.1) and (3.2) into Eq.(3.4),
we can find the behavior of A(u) in the neighborhood of where the first six coefficients are given by,

p 4χ1 α(1 − 2α)

A−2 = −2(1 − 2α) (1 − α)α, A−1 = p ,
χ0 (1 − α)α
α h i
A0 = − 3/2 2
χ21 α(7 − 12α + 8α2 ) + 2χ0 χ2 (1 − α + 8α2 − 8α3 ) ,
[(1 − α)α] χ0
4 h
A1 = 3 p χ31 α(2 − 6α + 5α2 − 2α3 ) − 3χ20 χ3 (1 − α)2 (1 + α + 2α2 )
χ0 (1 − α)2 (1 − α)α
i
− χ0 χ1 χ2 (1 + 5α − 13α2 + 13α3 − 6α4 ) ,
1 n
A2 = − 4 16χ30 χ4 (1 − α)3 α(9 + 8α + 8α2 ) + χ41 α2 (39 − 138α + 204α2 − 112α3 + 32α4 )
4χ0 (1 − α)2 [(1 − α)α]3/2
−4χ0 χ21 χ2 α(1 + 17α − 122α2 + 176α3 − 104α4 + 32α5 ) + 4χ20 (1 − α)2 4χ1 χ3 α(3 + 10α − 6α2 + 8α3 )

o
+χ22 (3 + 16α + 26α2 − 16α3 + 16α4 ) ,
(
1
A3 = − 5 4χ0 χ31 χ2 α(3 + 21α − 96α2 + 208α3 − 202α4 + 86α5 − 20α6 )
2χ0 (1 − α)3 [(1 − α)α]3/2
+40χ40 χ5 (1 − α)4 α(4 + 3α + 2α2 ) − χ51 α2 (21 − 102α + 180α2 − 176α3 + 72α4 − 16α5 )
h i
+8χ30 (1 − α)3 χ1 χ4 α(6 + 17α − 3α2 + 10α3 ) + χ2 χ3 (6 + 22α + 23α2 − 7α3 + 10α4 )
)
h i
+4χ20 χ1 (1 − α)2 2χ1 χ3 α2 (1 + 35α − 19α2 + 10α3 ) + χ22 (3 + 8α + 12α2 + 80α3 − 42α4 + 20α5 ) . (3.6)

Note that in writing the above expressions, without loss in the last section, the spacetime now is singular, and
of the generality, we had adopted only the “+” sign of no extension beyond this surface is possible, so u = us
V ′ given by Eq.(3.1). In the rest of this section, we shall represents a real boundary of the spacetime.
adopt the same convention without any further explana-
From Eq.(3.1) we find that
tion.
Since 0 < α < 1 and α 6= 1/2, we have A−2 6= 0, so
the leading divergent term now is (u − us )−2 , and A(u)
behaves as U (u) = −2αln (u − us ) + Û (u),
p
A−2 (α) χ1 Aˆ−1 (α) V (u) = 2ǫ α(1 − α) ln (u − us ) + V̂ (u), (3.8)
A(u) = 2 + χ (u − u ) + A0 (χ0 , χ1 , χ2 )
(u − us ) 0 s

+O (u − us ) , (3.7)
in the neighborhood of u = us , where Aˆ−1 (α) is a func-
tion of α only, which is also non-zero for 0 < α < 1 and
α 6= 1/2, as it can be seen from Eq.(3.6). As mentioned
where ǫ = ±1, and Û and V̂ are regular and finite func-
tions of u across the hypersurface u = us . It should be
noted that Û and V̂ are not independent, as they must
satisfy the field equation (3.3).
 5

1
B. α= 2
is the Brinkmann metric (2.10) with
n
X
A(u) = Bn (u − us ) , (3.9)
In this case, the singularity at u = us is a coordi- n=0
nate singularity, which can be removed by the coordi-
nate transformations of Eq.(2.9), and the resulted metric where

6(χ21 + 2χ0 χ2 ) 48
B0 = − , B1 = − 2 (χ1 χ2 + χ0 χ3 ) ,
χ20 χ0
6
B2 = − 4 3χ41 + 12χ0 χ21 χ2 + 22χ20 χ22 + 20χ20 χ1 χ3 + 20χ30 χ4 ,


χ0
24 
B3 = − 5 χ51 + 14χ0 χ31 χ2 + 10χ20 χ21 χ3 + 2χ20 χ1 (12χ22 + 5χ0 χ4 ) + 10χ30 (3χ2 χ3 + χ0 χ5 ) .

(3.10)
χ0

Clearly, in this case A(u) is well-behaved in the neigh-
borhood of u = us , and the Brinkmann metric (2.10)
can be considered as its extension beyond the hypersur-
face u = us . If such obtained A(u) is analytical, then the
extension is unique.
On the other hand, from Eq.(3.1) we find that
where χ̂ takes the form of Eq.(3.2) with χ0 6= 0. Thus,
depending on values of χ1 , χ2 and χ3 , the function A(u)
can have different singular behaviors. Therefore, in the
following, let us consider them separately.

U (u) = −ln (u − us ) + Û (u),

1. χ1 6= 0
V (u) = ǫln (u − us ) + V̂ (u), (α = 1/2) , (3.11)

where Û and V̂ are regular and finite functions of u In this case, we find that
across the hypersurface u = us , and are related through
Eq.(3.3).
U = −2 ln (u − us ) + Û (u),
√ 1/2

3/2

V = 4 2ǫD1 (u − us ) + O (u − us ) ,
C. α=1
1 X
A= 3/2
Cn (u − us )n , (3.13)
In this case, from Eq.(3.1) we find that (u − us ) n=0

U = −2 ln (u − us ) + Û (u), p
 ′
χ̂ 8 4χ̂′′ where D1 ≡ −χ1 /χ0 , Û is regular and finite functions
′2
V =− − , (3.12) of u across the hypersurface u = us , and
χ̂ u − us χ̂

√ 3 3
χ21 + 5χ0 χ2 , C2 = − √ 4 3 9χ41 − 14χ0 χ21 χ2 + 21χ20 χ22 − 56χ20 χ1 χ3 ,



C0 = 3 2 D1 , C1 = − √ 2
2 χ0 D1 4 2χ0 D1
3 h
6 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2
i
C3 = − √ 6 5
25χ 1 − 81χ 0 χ 1 χ 2 + 81χ χ
0 2 + 32χ χ
0 1 χ 3 − 216χ 0 χ 1 χ 2 χ 3 + χ χ
0 1 (31χ 2 + 240χ 0 χ 4 ) ,
8 2χ0 D1
3 h
C4 = √ 5 3 245χ81 − 1100χ0χ61 χ2 + 1485χ40χ42 + 912χ20 χ51 χ3 − 4752χ40χ1 χ22 χ3 + 2χ20 χ41 (435χ22 − 64χ0 χ4 )
64 2χ0 χ1 D1
i
+ 4χ30 χ21 (57χ32 + 528χ0 χ23 + 880χ0χ2 χ4 ) − 64χ30 χ31 (16χ2 χ3 + 55χ0 χ5 ) ,
3 h
C5 = √ 7 3 3 567χ10 8 5 5 2 7 5 3 2 6 2
1 − 3185χ0 χ1 χ2 + 7371χ0 χ2 + 3040χ0 χ1 χ3 − 28080χ0 χ1 χ2 χ3 − 6χ0 χ1 (−685χ2 + 368χ0 χ4 )
128 2χ0 χ1 D1
+9χ40 χ21 χ2 (99χ32 + 2496χ0χ23 + 2080χ0χ2 χ4 ) − 16χ30 χ51 (327χ2 χ3 + 28χ0 χ5 )
i
−64χ40 χ31 (51χ22 χ3 + 260χ0 χ3 χ4 + 195χ0 χ2 χ5 ) + 2χ30 χ41 (−141χ32 + 1728χ0χ2 χ4 + 32χ0 (37χ23 + 182χ0 χ6 )) . (3.14)

It is interesting to note that in the current case the Brinkmann metric is still singular at u = us , although
 6

the distortions felt by the freely falling observers defined lieve that it might belong to the first possibility. In the
by Eq.(2.15) are all finite. So far, there are two possibil- next section, we shall come back to this issue again.
ities: (i) Distortions felt by other freely falling observers
diverge at u = us , so the singularity is a real spacetime
singularity, and the spacetime cannot be extended be- 2. χ1 = 0, χ2 6= 0
yond this surface. (ii) Distortions felt by any of freely
falling observers are finite, and the singularity is a coor- When χ1 = 0 and χ2 6= 0, we find that
dinate one. Note that proving the latter is not an easy
task, and it might be more effective to find coordinate U = −2 ln (u − us ) + Û (u),
transformations that bring the BJR metric (2.3) to a non- √ 
2

V = 2 6ǫD2 (u − us ) + O (u − us ) ,
singular one, if the singularity is indeed a coordinate one.
Clearly, the ones given by Eq.(2.9) fail to do so, and we 1 X
A= Dn (u − u1 )n , (3.15)
need to find other one(s), that bring the singular BJR u − us n=0
metric to a non-singular one(s). Unfortunately, we have
not been successful in this direction, and intend to be-
p
where D2 ≡ −χ2 /χ0 , Û is regular and finite functions
of u across the hypersurface u = us , and

√
√
p
6 6D2 χ3 4 2/3D23 (3χ32 − 3χ0 χ23 + 10χ0 χ2 χ4 )
D0 = 4 6D2 , D1 = , D2 = − ,
χ2 χ32
5 2/3D23 (6χ32 χ3 + 3χ0 χ33 − 10χ0 χ2 χ3 χ4 + 15χ0 χ22 χ5 )
p
D3 =− ,
χ42
1
45χ62 + 45χ20 χ43 − 80χ0 χ42 χ4 − 180χ20 χ2 χ23 χ4 + 20χ20 χ22 (5χ24 + 9χ3 χ5 ) − 6χ0 χ32 (5χ23 + 42χ0 χ6 ) ,
 
D4 = √ 3 3
6χ0 χ2 D2
D2 h
D5 = √ 2 5 − 315χ62 χ3 + 147χ20 χ53 − 700χ20χ2 χ33 χ4 + 186χ0 χ52 χ5 + 70χ20 χ22 χ3 (10χ24 + 9χ3 χ5 )
2 6χ0 χ2
i
− 4χ0 χ32 (6χ33 + 175χ0χ4 χ5 + 147χ0 χ3 χ6 ) + 4χ0 χ42 (47χ3 χ4 + 196χ0 χ7 ) . (3.16)

p
Thus, now the Brinkmann metric is also singular near where D3 ≡ −χ3 /χ0 and
the hypersurface u = us . Similar to the last case, it is
difficult to see the nature of the singularity, and further
investigations are needed.

3. χ1 = χ2 = 0, χ3 6= 0

In this case, we find that

U = −2 ln (u − us ) + Û (u),
√
8 3  
V = ǫD3 (u − us )3/2 + O (u − us )5/2 ,
3
1 X
A= 1 En (u − u1 )n , (3.17)
(u − us ) 2 n=0
 7
√
√ 35D3 χ4 5 3D3 (−5χ24 + 18χ3 χ5 )
E0 = 10 3D3 , E1 = √ , E2 = ,
3χ3 4χ23
D3 (2808χ43 + 1375χ0 χ34 − 4950χ0 χ3 χ4 χ5 + 8316χ0χ23 χ6 )
E3 = − 3 √ ,
72( 3χ43 )
13D33 h i
E4 = − √ 5 11232χ43χ4 − 3125χ0 χ44 + 13500χ0χ3 χ24 χ5 − 540χ0 χ23 (15χ25 + 28χ4 χ6 ) + 24192χ0χ33 χ7 ,
1728 3χ3
5 h
E5 = √ 3 3 3 21875χ0χ54 + 75168χ53χ5 − 112500χ0χ3 χ34 χ5 + 8100χ0 χ23 χ4 (15χ25 + 14χ4 χ6 )
3456 3χ0 χ3 D3
i
− 15120χ0χ33 (9χ5 χ6 + 8χ4 χ7 ) + 432χ43(53χ24 + 432χ0 χ8 ) . (3.18)

p
Again, in this case the Brinkmann metric is also singular, where D4 ≡ −χ4 /χ0 , and
and it is not clear if the singularity is a coordinate one
or not. To clarify the nature of this singularity, further
investigations are needed.

4. χ1 = 0 = χ2 = χ3 = 0, χ4 6= 0

In this case, we find that

U = −2 ln (u − us ) + Û (u),
√ 2

3

V = 2 5ǫD4 (u − us ) + O (u − us ) ,
n
X
A= Gn (u − us ) , (3.19)
n=0

√ √
√ 12 5D4 χ5 3 5D4 (−15χ25 + 56χ4 χ6 ) 3D4 (135χ35 − 504χ4χ5 χ6 + 896χ24 χ7 )
G0 = 12 5D4 , G1 = , G2 = , G3 = √ ,
χ4 8χ24 16 5χ34
3D43 h i
G4 = − √ 76800χ54 − 23625χ0χ45 + 105840χ0χ4 χ25 χ6 − 3136χ0 χ24 (21χ26 + 40χ5 χ7 ) + 215040χ0χ34 χ8 ,
2560( 5χ54 )
3D43 h
G5 = − √ 6 76800χ54χ5 + 14175χ0χ55 − 75600χ0χ4 χ35 χ6 + 4032χ0χ24 χ5 (21χ26 + 20χ5 χ7 )
1280( 5χ4 )
i
− 2048χ0χ34 (49χ6 χ7 + 45χ5 χ8 ) + 153600χ0χ44 χ9 . (3.20)

In this case, it is clear that the Brinkmann metric be- ample, in [2, 41], the function A(u) was chosen as
comes non-singular, and Eq.(2.9) represents an extension 2
of the singular BJR metric (2.3) beyond the hypersurface 1 d3 e−u 2
= 2u 3 − 2u2 e−u .


A(u) = (3.21)
u = us . So, in this case it is sure that the singularity en- 2 du3
countering in the BJR metric is a coordinate one, and the Once A(u) is given, we can solve Eqs.(2.11) and (3.3),
Brinkmann metric (2.10) is one of its extensions. Note
2
that the extension will be unique, if such obtained A(u) 2 (V ′′ − U ′′ ) + (V ′ − U ′ ) = 2A(u), (3.22)
is analytical across u = us . ′′ ′2 ′2
2U − U =V , (3.23)
to find U and V . However, due to the nonlinearity of
these equations, usually it is difficult to find analytical
D. Examples of A(u) solutions. In [2] it was found numerically that the singu-
larity in the BJR coordinates happen at us ≃ 0.593342.
In the studies of gravitational wave memory effects, From Eq.(3.24) we can see that A(u) is finite and well-
several interesting cases have been considered. For ex- behaved in the neighborhood of this point. So, it must

belong to either the case with α = 1/2, or the case with
α = 1 and χi = 0 (i = 1, 2, 3). Some modified versions of
the above example were considered in [3, 24, 42]. Another
example with
2 ε3
A(u) = , (3.24)
π (u2 + ε2 )2
was considered in [4], where ε is a constant. When ε is
very small, the above expression gives rise to an impulse
gravitational waves, recently studied in [42]. Clearly, in
all of these models, A(u) is always finite and well-behaved
across the singularity located at u = us in the BJR co-
ordinates. So, they all belong to the non-singular cases
(either α = 1/2 or α = 1, χi = 0 (i = 1, 2, 3)), presented
in the current paper.
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSING
REMARKS
The memory effects of gravitational waves are tightly
related to the asymptotical properties of the spacetime at
the future null infinity (see Ref. [4, 10, 24] and references
therein), and so are the soft gravitons and black holes
[12, 13]. However, it is well-known that in the BJR coor-
dinates (2.3), the metric coefficients often become singu-
lar, and extensions beyond the singularities are needed
before studying these important issues.
In this paper, we first pointed out that such exten-
sions are not always possible, as some of these singulari-
ties are physically real singularities. In particular, distor-
tions experienced by freely falling observers in the (u, v)-
plane can be divergent, and any objects trying across
the singular surface will be killed by these distortions
[cf. Eq.(2.21)]. As a result, in these cases the singulari-
ties sign out to be the boundaries of the spacetimes. In
particular, if the metric coefficient e−U vanishes at the
singularity u = us as,
α
χ ≡ e−U/2 = (u − us ) χ̂(u), (4.1)
where α > 0 and χ̂ (us ) 6= 0, we found that distortions
experienced by such freely falling observers always di-
verge, unless α = 1/2 or α = 1. Therefore, only in the
cases where α = 1/2 or 1, the spacetimes at u = us are
[1] L. Bieri, D. Garfinkle, N. Yunes, Gravitational Waves
and Their Mathematics, AMS Notices, 64, no. 07
(2017) [arXiv:1710.03272]; Gravitational wave memory
in λCDM cosmology, Class. Quantum Grav. 34 (2017)
215002 [arXiv:1706.02009].
[2] P.-M. Zhang, C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons and P. A. Hor-
vathy, The memory effect for plane gravitational waves,
Phys. Lett. B4, 2191-2197 (2017).
8
possibly non-singular, and extensions of the spacetimes
beyond this surface is needed, whereby we are able to
study the memory effects of gravitational waves and soft
gravitons and black holes.
Coordinate transformations from the BJR coordinates
to the Brinkmann ones are carried out by Eq.(2.9). It
is interesting to note that in the Brinkmann coordinates
there is only one unknown function A, while in the BJR
coordinates there are two, U and V . However, the vac-
uum Einstein field equation (3.3) relates U to V , so finally
there is only one independent component, too. In fact,
for any given V , from Eq.(3.3) one can find U , and then
the function A is uniquely determined by Eq.(3.4). It
is also interesting to note that the inverse is not unique,
that is, for any given A(u), Eqs.(3.22) and (3.23) will
have a family of solutions of the form, U (u, u1 , u2 ) and
V (u, v1 , v2 ), where ui ’s and vi ’s are the integration con-
stants.
With the above in mind, we find that A is finite and
well-behaved across u = us for α = 1/2 [cf. Eq.(3.9)].
However, in the case α = 1, we found that A is finite and
well-behaved across u = us only when χ1 = χ2 = χ3 = 0,
where χn are the expansion coefficients of χ̂(u), given in
Eq.(3.2). If any of these three coefficients is not zero,
A(u) will be singular across u = us , although the dis-
tortions of the freely falling observers considered in this
paper are finite. There are two possibilities for these
cases: (i) The corresponding spacetimes are indeed sin-
gular, and distortions become unbounded across u = us
for other kinds of observers. (ii) The corresponding sin-
gularities are coordinate ones, but the proper coordinate
transformations are not given by Eq.(2.9), and instead
they are given by somethings else. Then, it would be
very interesting to find them, although it is clearly not
an easy task.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank J. Oost for his earlier collabora-
tion and valuable comments and suggestions. This work
was supported in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Nos. 11473024, 11363005,
11763007, 11503008, 11365022, 11375153 and 11675145,
and the XinJiang Science Fund for Distinguished Young
Scholars under No. QN2016YX0049.
[3] J. W. Maluf, J. F. da Rocha-Neto, S. C. Ulhoa,
and F. L. Carneiro, Plane Gravitational Waves,
the Kinetic Energy of Free Particles and the Memory
Effect,http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170706874M,
2017.
[4] K. Andrzejewski, and S. Prencel, Memory effect, confor-
mal symmetry and gravitational plane waves, Phys. Lett.
B782, 421 (2018).

[5] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and
Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102
(2016).
[6] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and
Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241103
(2016).
[7] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and
Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221101
(2017).
[8] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and
Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141101
(2017).
[9] B. Abbott et. al. (Virgo, LIGO Scientific Collaboration),
Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 161101.
[10] M. Favata, Class. Quantum Grav. 27 (2010) 084036.
[11] P.D. Lasky, E. Thrane, Y. Levin, J. Blackman, Y. Chen,
Detecting gravitational wave memory with LIGO: impli-
cations of GW150914, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117(2016) 061102
[arXiv:1605.01415].
[12] S.W. Hawking, M.J. Perry, A. Strominger, Soft hair
on Black Holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 231301
[arXiv:1601.00921]; Superrotation charge and super-
translation hair on Black Holes, JHEP, 05 (2017)161
[arXiv:1611.09175].
[13] A. Strominger, Lectures on “Infrared Structure
of Gravity and Gauge Theory”, Harvard (2016),
arXiv:1703.05448.
[14] Ya. B. Zeldovitch and A. G. Polnarev, Astron. Zh. 51, 30
(1974).Sov. Astron. 18, 17 (1974).
[15] V. P. Braginsky and L. p. Grishchuk, Zh. Eksp. Teor.
Fiz. 89, 744 (1985) [JETP 62, 427 (1985)].
[16] D. Christodoulou, Nonlinear nature of gravitation and
gravitational wave experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67,
1486 (1991).
[17] L. Blanchet and T. Damour, Hereditary effects in gravi-
tational radiation, Phys. Rev. D46, 4304 (1992).
[18] K. Thorne, Gravitational-wave bursts with memory: the
Christodoulou effect, Phys. Rev. D 45, 520 (1992).
[19] A.I. Harte, Strong lensing, plane gravitational waves
and transient flashes, Class. Quantum Grav. 30 (2013)
075011 [arXiv:1210.1449].
[20] J.-M. Souriau, Ondes et radiations gravitationnelles, in:
Colloques Internationaux du CNRS, Paris, 220, 243
(1973).
[21] V.B. Braginsky, K.S. Thorne, Gravitational-wave bursts
with memory experiments and experimental prospects,
Nature 327 (1987) 123.
[22] H. Bondi, F.A.E. Pirani, Energy conversion by gravita-
tional waves, Nature 332 (1988) 212; Gravitational waves
in general relativity. 13: Caustic property of plane waves,
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A421 (1989) 395.
[23] L.P. Grishchuk, A.G. Polnarev, Gravitational wave
pulses with velocity coded memory, Sov. Phys. JETP 69
(1989) 653, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 96 (1989) 1153.
9
[24] P.-M. Zhang, C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons and P. A. Hor-
vathy, Velocity Memory Effect for polarized gravitational
waves, JCAP 5, 030 (2018).
[25] H. Stephani, D. Kramer, M. MacCallum, C. Hoenselaers,
and E. Herlt, Exact Solutions of Einstein’s Field Equa-
tions,Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics,
Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge, 2009), Chapters 24 & 25.
[26] J.B. Griffiths, Colliding Plane Waves in General Relativ-
ity (Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola, New York, 2016).
[27] O. R. Baldwin and G. B. Jeffery, The relativity theory of
plane waves, Proc. R. Soc. A111, 95 (1926).
[28] N. Rosen, Plane polarized waves in the general theory of
relativity, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion, 12, 366 (1937).
[29] S. Hawking and G.F.R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure
of Space-Time (Cambridge University Press, 1972).
[30] G.F.R. Ellis and B.G. Schmidt, Gen. Relativ. Grav. 8,
915 (1977).
[31] P. Horava, JHEP, 0903, 020 (2009) [arXiv:0812.4287];
Phys.Rev. D79, 084008 (2009) [arXiv:0901.3775]; and
Phys. Rev.Lett. 102, 161301 (2009) [arXiv:0902.3657].
[32] A. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D26, 1730014 (2017).
[33] R.-G. Cai and A. Wang, Singularities in HoravaLifshitz
theory, Phys. Lett. B686 (2010) 166 [arXiv:1001.0155].
[34] S.J. Campbell and J. Wainwright, Gen. Relativ. Grav. 8,
987 (1977).
[35] A. Ori, Phys. Rev. D61, 064016 (2000); B.C. Nolan,
ibid., 62, 044015 (2000); E. Hirschmann, A. Wang,
and Y. Wu, Class. Quantum Grav. 21, 1791 (2004)
[arXiv:gr-qc/0207121]; P. Sharma, A. Tziolas, and
A. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A26, 273 (2011)
[arXiv:0901.2676].
[36] A. Wang, Interacting Gravitational, Electromagnetic,
Neutrino and other waves in the context of Einstein’s
General Theory of Relativity (A dissertation submitted
to Physics Department in partial fulfillment of the re-
quirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, the
University of Ioannina, Greece, 1991).
[37] M. W. Brinkmann, Einstein spaces which are mapped
conformally on each other, Math Ann. 94, 119 (1925).
[38] J. Oost, M. Bhattacharjee, A. Wang, Plane-fronted grav-
itational waves with parallel rays in Einstein-aether the-
ory, arXiv:1804.01124.
[39] N. Rosen, Plane polarized waves in the general theory of
relativity, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion, 12, 366 (1937).
[40] H. Bondi, F. A. E. Priani and I. Robinson, Gravitational
waves in general realtivity. 3. Exact plane waves, Proc.
Roy. Soc. Lond. A 251, 519 (1959).
[41] G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, Theory of the De-
tection of Short Bursts of Gravitational Radiation, Phys.
Rev. D 772, 743-746 (1971).
[42] P.-M. Zhang, C. Duval, and P. A. Horvathy, Memory
effect for impulsive gravitational waves, Classical and
Quantum Grav. 35, 6 (2018).