arX

iv:g

r-qc

/060

7070

v1 1

8 Ju

l 200

6 On a new symmetry of the solutions of the waveequation in the background of a Kerr black hole

Horst R. Beyer, Irina Craciun∗

Louisiana State University (LSU)Center for Computation and Technology (CCT),

330 Johnston Hall&

Department of Mathematics,148 Lockett Hall

Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA†

19th November 2017

∗Gratefully acknowledges financial support from CCT and the Department of Mathematics†E-mail: horst@cct.lsu.edu,Home Page:http://www.aei.mpg.de/~horst.

1

Abstract

This short paper derives the constant of motion of a scalar field in the grav-itational field of a Kerr black hole which is associated to a Killing tensor ofthat space-time. In addition, there is found a related new symmetry operatorS for the solutions of the wave equation in that background. That operatoris a partial differential operator with a leading order time derivative of thefirst order that commutes with a normal form of the wave operator. Thatform is obtained by multiplication of the wave operator fromthe left withthe reciprocal of the coefficient function of its second order time derivative.It is shown thatS induces an operatorS that commutes with the generatorof time evolution in a formulation of the initial value problem for the waveequation in the setting of strongly continuous semigroups.

1 Introduction

In a remarkable paper, Carter discovered that the Hamilton-Jacobi equation is com-pletely separable for the Kerr space-time (M, g).[11] This result was unexpectedsince (M, g) admits only a two-parameter group of isometries which by Noether’stheorem leads to two independent conserved quantities for fields in a Kerr back-ground.

The complete separability of the equation pointed to the existence of another lessobvious ‘symmetry’ of (M, g). Indeed, this property could be traced back to theexistence of a Killing tensor fieldK which is not induced by the isometries of(M, g).[48] It turned out that, together with the existence of two linearly inde-pendent Killing vector fields and the existence of a further Killing-Yano tensorfield, this fact implies also the complete separability of the equations for Spin0, 1/2, 1 and 2 fields for Kerr space-time.[13, 31, 29, 30] On the other hand, allthese equations have been separated before without reference to that tensor fieldwhich might be the reason that some consequences of the additional symmetryproperty of (M, g) are apparently not generally known.[11, 14, 15, 16]

Such a consequence is that toK there are also associated symmetry operators1

which commute with the differential operator defining those field equations.[12,1 Here and in the following, we call an operator a symmetry operator (for the solutions of) a field

equation if it induces a map between classical solution spaces containing solutions with compo-nents belonging to a certainCk-class for somek ∈ N∗.

2

13, 39, 29, 30] For instance in the case of scalar fields, with respect to a local chartx = (x0, . . . , x3) of M, such an operator is given by1

:=1√−|g|∂a

√−|g|Kab∂b . (1.0.1)

It commutes with the wave operator

:=1√−|g|∂a

√−|g| gab∂b ,

i.e., ( −

)u = 0

for all C4-functionsu defined on the domain ofx. In this, | | denotes the determi-nant function.

As a consequence, it follows by Noether’s theorem the existence of constants ofmotion that are associated to classical solutions of the field equations of sufficientlyhigh order of differentiability. Considering the importance of constants ofmotionin the analysis of physical systems, these quantities couldplay an important rolein the stability discussion of fields on a Kerr background where they have not beenused so far.[1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 17, 19, 25, 23, 24, 27, 31, 34, 35, 37, 38, 42, 47, 46, 49, 52]Such potential importance is also suggested by the fact thatin the description ofclassical point particles the constant of motion

K(c, c) , (1.0.2)

which is associated toK given by (2.0.4), is strictly positive on non-trivial light-like and time-like geodesicsc werec denotes the tangent vector field alongc. Thisis different from the constant of motion (‘energy’) correspondingto the (‘Killing-’)time coordinate vector field associated with Boyer-Lindquist coordinates that canassume negative values. The same is also true for scalar fields which considerablycomplicates their stability discussion in a Kerr background. It might be possible tosimplify the last problem by taking into account the additional symmetry propertyof (M, g).1 In the following, Einstein’s summation convention is adopted whereby a repeated index implies

summation over all values of that index. In particular, Latin indices run from 0 to 3. The symbol∂a denotes the partial derivative operator in thexa-th coordinate direction for everya ∈ 0, . . . ,3.

3

For these reasons, in this paper, we derive the constant of motion which is as-sociated toK for the case of the Klein-Gordon field in a Kerr background usingBoyer-Lindquist coordinates. The derivation is an application of a more generaldiscussion of Noether’s theorem for PDEs that does not invoke a variational prin-ciple. That approach is essentially hidden in [12] and is briefly sketched in theAppendix.

A drawback of the known symmetry operators that are associated to K is thattheir leading order time derivative is of the same or higher order than that of thefield equations.[13, 31, 29, 30] This is different from the symmetry operators in-duced by Killing vector fields and presents an obstacle for their use in a rigorousfunctional analytic treatment of fields in a Kerr background. In such a setting1,the field equation is reformulated as a differential equation of the form

u′(t) = −Gu(t)

for all t ∈ R. Hereu is a map from the real numbers into a Banach (‘state’-) spaceX, ′ denotes the ordinary derivative ofX-valued maps andG is a densely-defined,linear operator inX generating time evolution. See [4] for the details in the case ofthe Klein-Gordon equation in the background of a Kerr black hole.

In such a context, it would be desirable that a symmetry operator would ‘com-mute’ in the following sense withG. It should lead on an intertwining operator2 S, i.e., a densely-defined linear operator that intertwines between the operatorsof the group of time evolution generated byA.[33, 6] Only a symmetry opera-tor whose leading order time derivative is of smaller order than that of the fieldequation leads in a simple way to a candidate for the restriction of an intertwiningoperator to a dense domain inX.

In this paper, it will be shown that such a symmetry operatorS indeed existsfor the wave equation on a Kerr background in a normalized form. That formis obtained from the original geometric form by multiplication with the reciprocalof the coefficient of the leading order time derivative. Indeed, it is thelast formwhich is the starting point for the reformulation of the waveequation in a func-1 For instance, see [6, 8, 18, 20, 21, 22, 26, 28, 32, 36, 43, 45, 50].2 Such operators are also sometimes referred to as ‘constraint’ operators.

4

tional analytic setting.[4] As a consequence, differently to other known symmetryoperators connected toK, that symmetry operator leads on a operatorS which isdefined on dense domain ofX where it commutes with the infinitesimal generatorof time evolutionG given in [4]. HenceS satisfies the most basic requirement foran intertwining operator. It is ‘time-independent’ in the the sense that it does notcontain time derivatives of the components ofu. It is a candidate for the infinites-imal generator of a strongly continuous group or semigroup of symmetries on thedata spaceX which are compatible with the time evolution.

2 Constants of motion for the solutions of the Klein-Gordonequation in a Kerr background

In Boyer-Lindquist coordinates1 (t, r, θ, ϕ) : Ω→ R4 the Kerr metricg is given by[7]

g =

(1−

2MrΣ

)dt ⊗ dt +

2Mar sin2θ

Σ(dt ⊗ dϕ + dϕ ⊗ dt)

−Σ

∆dr ⊗ dr − Σdθ ⊗ dθ −

(r2 + a2 +

2Ma2r sin2θ

Σ

)sin2θ dϕ ⊗ dϕ

whereM is the mass,a ∈ [0,M] is the rotational parameter,

∆ := r2 − 2Mr + a2 , Σ := r2 + a2 cos2θ , r+ := M +√

M2 − a2 ,

Ω := R × (r+,∞) × (−π, π) × (0, π) .

As a reminder on the Kerr geometry, we give the following basic facts. The coor-dinate vector field∂/∂r becomes singular on the event horizon of Kerr space-timegiven byr = r+. The coordinate vector field∂/∂t is null on the ergosphere givenby

r = M +√

M2 − a2 cos2θ ,

it is space-likeinside andtime-likeoutside of ergosphere. Finally, the Kerr met-ric is globally hyperbolic outside the horizon and hence theCauchy problem for1 In the following, the symbolst, r, θ, ϕ denote coordinate projections if not otherwise indicated.

The domains of those projections will be obvious from the context.

5

the Klein-Gordon equation is well posed for data on any Cauchy surface. In thefollowing, we consider only solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation of the form

u(t, r, θ, ϕ) = u(t, r, θ) eimϕ

for (t, r, θ, ϕ) ∈ Ω wherem ∈ Z. The reduced wave operatorm, correspondingto by the replacement of∂ϕ through multiplication by the constant function ofvalueim, is given by

m :=1Σ

[(r2 + a2)2

∆− a2 sin2θ

]∂2

t +4imMar∆

∂t − ∂r∆∂r

−1

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ −m2

(a2

∆−

1

sin2θ

)

and the reduced Klein-Gordon equation for a fieldu of massm0 ≥ 0 by

mu+m20u = 0 . (2.0.3)

A Killing tensor K of the Kerr metric is given by

K = a2(1−

2Mr cos2θΣ

)dt ⊗ dt

−asin2θ

Σ

[r2(r2 + a2) + a2 cos2θ∆

](dt ⊗ dϕ + dϕ ⊗ dt)

− a2 cos2θΣ

∆dr ⊗ dr + r2 Σdθ ⊗ dθ

+sin2θ

Σ

[r2(r2 + a2)2 + a4 sin2θ cos2θ∆

]dϕ ⊗ dϕ . (2.0.4)

Hence it follows by (1.0.1) that the reduced operatorm, corresponding to bythe replacement of∂ϕ through multiplication by the constant function of valueim,is given by

m :=1Σ

a2

[r2 sin2θ + cos2θ

(r2 + a2)2

∆

]∂2

t

+2ima

(r2 + a2 cos2θ

r2 + a2

∆

)∂t − a2 cos2θ ∂r∆∂r

+r2

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ −m2

(r2

sin2θ+

a4 cos2θ∆

).

6

Note that this operator reduces in the special case of a Schwarzschild metrica = 0to

m = −

(−

1sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ +

m2

sin2θ

).

The eigenfunctions of the Sturm-Liouville operator that isinduced by the last op-erator are used in the standard reduction of the wave equation in the gravitationalfield of a Schwarzschild black hole to a sequence of decoupledwave equations inone space and time dimension.

A hyperbolic symmetry operator used later on is given by

m := a2m− m =

1Σ

[2Ma2r(r2 + a2) sin2θ

∆∂2

t

−2ima∆

(r2 + a2)(∆ − a2 sin2θ)∂t − a2 sin2θ ∂r∆∂r −r2 + a2

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ

+m2(r2 + a2

sin2θ−

a4 sin2θ

∆

)].

In the following,m andm are assumed to haveC2(Ωr ,C) as their domains where

Ωr := R × (r+,∞) × (0, π) .

Using the approach to Noether’s theorem from Section5.1 in the Appendix andafter some calculation, it follows that the constant of motion corresponding to isgiven

K(u) := −i∫

Ω

[j(u, u)

]0 drdθdϕ (2.0.5)

= 2π∫

(r+,∞)×(0,π)sinθ

2ma

[(r2 + a2)Σ∆

|∂0u|2

+∆|∂r u|2 +

r2 + a2

∆|∂θu|

2

+m2Σ

∆ sin2θ|u|2 +

m20(r2 + a2)

∆(∆ − a2 sin2θ)|u2|

+ia2 sin2θ∆[(∂r∂0u)∗ ∂r u− (∂r u)∗∂r∂0u

]

+i(r2 + a2)2

∆

[(∂θ∂0u)∗ ∂θu− (∂θu)∗ ∂θ∂0u

]

7

+i∆

[m2

((r2 + a2)2

sin2θ− a4 sin2θ

)

−2m20a2Mr(r2 + a2) sin2θ

] ((∂0u)∗u− u∗∂0u

)drdθ

where for simplicityu ∈ C2(Ωr ,C) is assumed as a solution of (2.0.3) such thatu(t, ·) has a compact support contained in

Ωrs := (r+,∞) × (0, π)

for everyt from some open interval ofR.

Since constants of motion can be combined into other such constants, we givealso those corresponding to the Killing vector fields∂t and∂ϕ, i.e., the energyE(u)and the z-component of the angular momentumLz(u). In this again, for simplic-ity, it is assumed that ¯u ∈ C2(Ωr ,C) is a solution of (2.0.3) such thatu(t, ·) has acompact support contained inΩrs for everyt from some open interval ofR.

E(u) := −12

∫

Ω

[j(u, ∂0u)

]0 drdθdϕ

= π

∫

(r+,∞)×(0,π)sinθ

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

∆|∂0u|2 + ∆|∂r u|

2

+|∂θu|2 +m2

0Σ|u|2 +

m2

∆ sin2θ(∆ − a2 sin2θ)|u|2

drdθ

and

Lz(u) := −∫

Ω

[j(u, ∂ϕu)

]0drdθdϕ

= π

∫

(r+,∞)×(0,π)

sinθ∆

im

[(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

] [(∂0u)∗u

−u∗∂0u]+ 4m2Mar|u|2

drdθ .

3 A new symmetry of the solutions of the wave equationin the background of Kerr black hole

For the derivation of such an operator, we first give a proof ofthe fact thatm andm commute. This fact is a consequence of a more general result in [12]. For the

8

special case considered in this paper, a simpler direct proof is possible. Also, asimilar proof will be given for the new symmetry operator.

Theorem 3.1. Let u ∈ C4(Ωr ,C). Then

mmu = mmu .

Proof. Following [29], we define for everyn ∈ Z the linear operatorsDn,D+n , Ln, L+n :C1(Ωr ,C)→ C(Ωr ,C) by

Dnv :=

∂r +

1∆

[(r2 + a2)∂t + ima

]+

2n(r − M)∆

v ,

D+nv :=

∂r −

1∆

[(r2 + a2)∂t + ima

]+

2n(r − M)∆

v ,

Lnv :=[∂θ +

(−ia sinθ ∂t +

msinθ

)+ n

cosθsinθ

]v ,

L+nv :=[∂θ −

(−ia sinθ ∂t +

msinθ

)+ n

cosθsinθ

]v

for everyv ∈ C1(Ωr ,C). In addition, we defineD2, L2, L+n : C2(Ωr ,C)→ C(Ωr ,C)by

D2v := (D1D+0 + D+1 D0)v

=2∆∂r∆∂r −

2∆2

[(r2 + a2)2∂2

t + 2ima(r2 + a2)∂t −m2a2]v ,

L2v := (L1L+0 + L+1 L0)v

= 2

(1

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ + a2 sin2θ ∂2

t + 2ima∂t −m2

sin2θ

)v

for everyv ∈ C2(Ωr ,C). As a consequence, it follows that

m v = −1

2Σ

(∆D2 + L2

)v , m v = −

12Σ

(a2 cos2θ∆D2 − r2L2

)v

for all v ∈ C2(Ωr ,C) and, finally, that

[m,m]u =

[1

2Σa2 cos2θ∆D2,

12Σ

L2]u−

[r2

2ΣL2,

12Σ∆D2

]u

9

=∆a2 cos2θ

2ΣD2 1

2ΣL2 u−

12Σ

L2∆a2 cos2θ2Σ

D2u−r2

2ΣL2 ∆

2ΣD2u

+∆

2ΣD2 r2

2ΣL2u =

∆

2ΣD2 a2 cos2θ

2ΣL2 u+

∆

2ΣD2 r2

2ΣL2u

−1

2ΣL2∆a2 cos2θ

2ΣD2u−

12Σ

L2 r2∆

2ΣD2u

=∆

4ΣD2L2u−

14Σ

L2∆D2u = 0 .

Formally, the ‘removal’ of the highest order time derivative fromm can be achievedas follows. For this, let ¯u be a solution of

mu = 0 . (3.0.6)

The last equation can be solved for the second order time derivative of u. Bysubstitution of that derivative into the expressionmu, there is obtained a partialoperatorS satisfying

mu = Su

with a leading order time derivative which is of the first order. That operator hasan obvious extension toC2(Ωr ,C) which we denote by the same symbolS. It isgiven by

S u=1

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θPu , (3.0.7)

Pu :=

[−2ima(r2 + a2)Σ∂t − a2 sin2θ∆∂r∆∂r −

(r2 + a2)2

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ

+m2Σ

sin2θ(Σ + 2a2 sin2θ)

]u

for everyu ∈ C2(Ωr ,C). By construction,S is a symmetry operator for the so-lutions of (3.0.6) since it mapsC4-solutions of (3.0.6) into C2-solutions. On theother hand, it is not difficult to see thatS does not commute withm. The com-mutator is given in formula6.0.4in the Appendix. Somewhat surprisingly, it turnsout thatS commutes with the operator

∆Σ

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θm = ∂

2t +

4imMar

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ∂t

10

+1

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

[−∆∂r∆∂r −

∆

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ

+m2

sin2θ(∆ − a2 sin2θ)

].

Theorem 3.2. Let u ∈ C4(Ωr ,C). Then

∆Σ

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θm S u= S

∆Σ

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θmu .

Proof. To simplify notation in the following, we define

Σ :=(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

∆=

(r2 + a2)2

∆− a2 sin2 θ .

Then it follows from (3.0.6) that

∆Σ

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θm v = −

1

2Σ

(∆D2 + L2

)v

for everyv ∈ C2(Ωr ,C). Further, by a straightforward calculation, it follows that

Pv= −12

[a2 sin2 θ∆2D2 + (r2 + a2)2L2

]v

and hence that

S v= −12

1

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

[a2 sin2 θ∆2D2 + (r2 + a2)2L2

]v

= −1

2Σ

[a2 sin2 θ∆D2 +

(r2 + a2)2

∆L2

]v

for everyv ∈ C2(Ωr ,C). Finally, it follows that

[S,ΣΣ−1m]u =

14

1

Σ

[a2 sin2 θ∆D2 +

(r2 + a2)2

∆L2

],

1

Σ(∆D2 + L2)

u

=1

4Σ

[a2 sin2 θ∆D2 1

ΣL2 − ∆D2 1

Σ

(r2 + a2)2

∆L2

]u

11

+1

4Σ

[(r2 + a2)2

∆L2∆

ΣD2 − L2 1

Σa2 sin2 θ∆D2

]u

=∆

4ΣD2 a2 sin2 θ − ((r2 + a2)2/∆)

ΣL2u

+∆

4ΣL2 ((r2 + a2)2/∆) − a2 sin2 θ

ΣD2u

= −∆

4ΣD2 L2u+

∆

4ΣL2 D2u = 0 .

Note that the constants of motion associated to a solution ¯u of the reduced waveequation (3.0.6) and the operatorsm, m,S are, apart from a sign, the same since

mu = − mu = −Su .

In [4], it was proved the well-posedness of the initial value problem for the re-duced Klein-Gordon in a Kerr background in the setting of strongly continuoussemigroups of operators, the domain of the corresponding infinitesimal generatorG was investigated and its resolvent given in terms of spheroidal functions. Fur-ther, the stability of the solutions was proved if the mass ofthe field exceeds acertain combination of the ‘magnetic quantum number’m ∈ Z relative to the rota-tion axis, the mass and the rotational parameter of the blackhole. For details referto [4]. In particular for (u, v) ∈ C2

0(Ωrs,C) ×C0(Ωrs,C)

G(u, v) = (−v, (A+C)u+ iBv)

where

(A+C)u =1

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θ

[−∆∂r∆∂r −

∆

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ

+m2

sin2θ(∆ − a2 sin2θ)

]u ,

Bv=4mMar

(r2 + a2)Σ + 2Ma2r sin2θv .

It is not difficult to see that in the setting of [4], S induces the operatorS definedby

S(u, v) =1

∆Σ

(Psu− 2ima(r2 + a2)Σv, 2ima(r2 + a2)Σ(A+C)u

12

+ Psv− 2ma(r2 + a2)ΣBv)

(3.0.8)

for all u, v ∈ C20(Ωrs,C) where

Psu :=

[−a2 sin2θ∆∂r∆∂r −

(r2 + a2)2

sinθ∂θ sinθ ∂θ

+m2Σ

sin2θ(Σ + 2a2 sin2θ)

]u .

Then the following holds

Theorem 3.3. Let (u, v) ∈ C40(Ωrs,C) ×C2

0(Ωrs,C). Then

SG(u, v) = GS(u, v) . (3.0.9)

Proof. First, it follows from Theorem3.2that(−2ima

[(r2 + a2)Σ

∆Σ,A+C

]+ i

[1

∆ΣP, B

])w1 = 0 ,

[1

∆ΣP,A+C

]w2 = 0 (3.0.10)

for all w1 ∈ C20(Ωrs,C) andw2 ∈ C4

0(Ωrs,C). Further, it follows

SG(u, v)

=1

∆Σ(−2ima(r2 + a2)Σ(A+C)u− Pv+ 2ma(r2 + a2)ΣBv,

P(A+C)u− 2ma(r2 + a2)ΣB(A+C)u

− 2ima(r2 + a2)Σ(A+C)v+ iPBv− 2ima(r2 + a2)ΣB2v)

GS(u, v)

=1

∆Σ(−2ima(r2 + a2)Σ(A+C)u− Pv+ 2ma(r2 + a2)ΣBv,

∆Σ(A+C)1

∆ΣPu− 2ma(r2 + a2)ΣB(A+C)u

− 2ima∆Σ(A+C)(r2 + a2)Σ

∆Σv+ iBPv

− 2ima(r2 + a2)ΣB2v)

and hence by (3.0.10) the validity of (3.0.9).

13

4 Discussion and open problems

The results open up a number of interesting new questions forfuture research.

It would be interesting to know whether and, if applicable, when the new constantof motion K(u) 2.0.5 (or some combination with the other constants of motion)has a definite sign like its classical counterpart (1.0.2). For instance, a definite signof K(u) in the case of a vanishing mass of the field would open up the road to asimpler and independent proof of the stability of the solutions of the wave equa-tion in a Kerr background.[23] In addition, it could lead to a sharper estimate ona possible onset of instability in the case of a non-vanishing mass of the field.[4, 35]

Connected to the new symmetry operatorS (3.0.7) are technical questions whetherthe closure of the induced operatorS is an intertwining operator and/or is the in-finitesimal generator of a strongly continuous group or semigroup. Also, with thehelp of the new symmetry operatorS, it should be possible to further reduce thewave equation (3.0.6), in a proper sense, to an equation in ‘one space dimension’.For this, a deeper study of the properties ofS is necessary. In addition, it would beinteresting to explore whether there can be made a connection of the results hereto those of [49]. Finally, it remains the question whether such a symmetry operatorcan also be found for a non-vanishing mass of the scalar field.

It is to expect that the results of the paper can be generalized to the Dirac, Maxwelland the linearized Einstein’s field equation around the Kerrmetric. If that turns outbe the case, it would be interesting to investigate their potential for finding a gen-eralization to fields on a Kerr background of the Regge-Wheeler-Zerilli-Moncriefdecomposition of fields on a Schwarzschild background.[44, 51, 40]

5 Appendix

5.1 An approach to Noether’s theorem not invoking a variational prin-ciple

In this Section, we briefly give an approach to the derivationof conservation lawsfrom transformations mapping classical solution spaces ofa linear scalar PDE intoone another. The approach is essentially hidden in [12] and is not invoking a vari-ational principle. The derivation of the constants of motion in Section2 is an

14

application of this approach.

For this, we consider the equation

1ρ

∂

∂xa

(ρgab ∂u

∂xb

)+ V u= 0 (5.1.1)

wheren ∈ N∗, Ω is a non-empty open subset ofRn+1, gab ∈ C1(Ω,R) for alla, b ∈ 0, . . . , n such thatgab = gba for all a, b ∈ 0, . . . , n, ρ ∈ C1(Ω,R) such thatRanρ ⊂ (0,∞), V ∈ C(Ω,R) andu ∈ C2(Ω,C).

For solutionsu, v of (5.1.1), it can be derived a corresponding conservation law.First, it follows that

u∗

ρ

∂

∂xa

(ρgab ∂v

∂xb

)+ V u∗v = 0 ,

vρ

∂

∂xa

(ρgab ∂u

∗

∂xb

)+ V vu∗ = 0

where∗ denotes complex conjugation. The difference of these equations gives

0 =u∗

ρ

∂

∂xa

(ρgab ∂v

∂xb

)−

vρ

∂

∂xa

(ρgab ∂u

∗

∂xb

)

=1ρ

[∂

∂xa

(u∗ρgab ∂v

∂xb

)−∂

∂xa

(vρgab ∂u

∗

∂xb

)]

=1ρ

∂

∂xaρgab

(u∗∂v∂xb− v∂u∗

∂xb

)

and hence1ρ∂a ρ

[j(u, v)

]a= 0

where the vector fieldj(u, v) ∈ C1(Ω,Rn+1) is defined by

[j(u, v)

]a= gab

(u∗∂v∂xb− v∂u∗

∂xb

)

for all a ∈ 0, . . . , n. If F : Ck(Ω,C) → C2(Ω,C) for somek ∈ 2, 3, . . . mapsCk-solutions of (5.1.1) into C2-solutions of (5.1.1), then it follows the constraint

1ρ∂a ρ

[j(u, F(u))

]a= 0

15

for everyCk-solutionu of (5.1.1).

As a short example, we consider the special case of a wave equation in flat space-time

∂2u

∂t2− ∆u+ Vu= 0 (5.1.2)

whereV ∈ C(Ω,R) is such that∂V∂t= 0

andu is assumed as real-valued. Ifu is aC3-solution of (5.1.2), then

0 =∂

∂t

(∂2u

∂t2− ∆u+ Vu

)=∂2

∂t2∂u∂t− ∆∂u∂t+ V∂u∂t

and hence∂u/∂t is aC2-solution of (5.1.2). As a consequence,

∂

∂t

[j

(u,∂u∂t

)]0

= −

n∑

k=1

∂

∂xk

[j

(u,∂u∂t

)]k

.

Further,[j

(u,∂u∂t

)]0

= u∂2u

∂t2−

(∂u∂t

)2

= u · (∆u− Vu) −

(∂u∂t

)2

= u∆u−

(∂u∂t

)2

+ Vu2

= ∇ (u∇u) −

(∂u∂t

)2

+ |∇u|2 + Vu2

= ∇ (u∇u) − 2ǫ(u)

where

ǫ(u) :=12

(∂u∂t

)2

+ |∇u|2 + Vu2

and∇ denotes the gradient in the spatial coordinates. In addition,[j

(u,∂u∂t

)]k

= −

(u∂2u∂xk∂t

−∂u∂t∂u∂xk

).

Hence it follows that

∂

∂t[∇ (u∇u) − 2ǫ(u)] = ∇

(u∇∂u∂t−∂u∂t∇u

).

16

The last implies that∂

∂t(−2ǫ(u)) = −2∇

(∂u∂t∇u

)

and, finally, the conservation law

∂ǫ(u)∂t= ∇

(∂u∂t∇u

). (5.1.3)

As is well-known, in physical applications,ǫ(u) is called the energy density and

∂u∂t∇u

is the energy flux density associated withu. We note that (5.1.3) is true also forC2-solutions of (5.1.2) since for such anu

∂ǫ(u)∂t− ∇

(∂u∂t∇u

)=∂

∂t12

(∂u∂t

)2

+ |∇u|2 + Vu2

− ∇(∂u∂t∇u

)

=∂u∂t∂2u

∂t2+ (∇u) · ∇

∂

∂tu+ Vu

∂u∂t−

(∇∂

∂tu

)· (∇u) −

∂u∂t∆u

=∂u∂t

(∂2u

∂t2− ∆u+ Vu

)= 0 .

6 The commutator of the wave operator and S

In the following we give without proof the commutator of the wave operator andthe new symmetry operatorS:

[ ,S]u = (C1 +C2∂r +C3∂θ) u (6.0.4)

where

C1 :=2Ma2

Σ(∆Σ)3

sin2θ

(T1T2 − ∆Σ∆T3

)

+2r(r2 + a2)3[∆Σ (2 cos2θ − sin2θ) + 4a2∆ sin2θ cos2θ

],

T1 := (r4 − a4)Σ + 2a2r2∆ sin2θ ,

T2 := 2[(r − M)∆Σ + 2r(r2 + a2)∆ − 2M(r4 − a4)

],

17

T3 := 2[r(r4 − a4) + 2r3Σ + 2a2r∆ sin2θ + 2a2r2(r − M) sin2θ

],

C2 := −4Ma2∆ sin2θ [(r4 − a4)Σ + 2a2r2∆ sin2θ]

Σ(∆Σ)2,

C3 :=8Ma2r(r2 + a2)3 sinθ cosθ

Σ(∆Σ)2

andu ∈ C4(Ωr ,C). Note that the form of the commutator (6.0.4) generalizes thatin the definition of a symmetry operator given in [39] to symmetry operators of thesecond order.

References

[1] Andersson N, Laguna P, Papadopoulos P 1998,Dynamics of scalar fieldsin the background of rotating black holes. II. A note on superradiance,Phys. Rev. D,58, 87503.

[2] Andersson N, Glampedakis K 2000,A superradiance resonance cavityoutside rapidly rotating black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.,84, 4537-4540.

[3] Batic D, Schmid H, Winklmeier M 2005,On the Eigenvalues of theChandrasekhar-Page Angular Equation, J. Math. Phys.,46, 012504.

[4] Beyer H R 2001,On the stability of the Kerr metric, Commun. Math.Phys.,221, 659-676.

[5] Beyer H R 2002,A framework for perturbations and stability of differen-tially rotating stars, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A,458, 359-380.

[6] Beyer H R, 2005,Beyond partial differential equations: A course onlinear and quasi-linear abstract hyperbolic evolution equations, OnlineLos Alamos Archive Preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0510097.

[7] Boyer R H, Lindquist R W 1967,Maximal analytic extension of the Kerrmetric, J. Math. Phys.,8, 265-281.

[8] Butzer P L, Berens H 1967,Semi-groups of operators and approximation,Springer: New York.

18

[9] Cardoso V, Dias O J C, Lemos J P S, Yoshida S 2004,Black-hole bomband superradiant instabilities, Phys. Rev. D,70, 44039.

[10] Carter B 1968,Global structure of the Kerr family of gravitational fields,Phys. Rev. D,174, 1559-1571.

[11] Carter B 1968,Hamilton-Jacobi and Schroedinger separable solutions ofEinstein’s equations, Commun. Math. Phys.,10, 280-310.

[12] Carter B 1977,Killing tensor quantum numbers and conserved currentsin curved space, Phys. Rev. D,16, 3395-3414.

[13] Carter B, McLenaghan R G 1979,Generalised total angular momentumoperator for the Dirac equation in curved space, Phys. Rev. D,19, 1093-1097.

[14] Chandrasekhar S 1971,The solution of Dirac’s equation in Kerr geome-try, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,349, 571.

[15] Chandrasekhar S 1983,The mathematical theory of black holes, OxfordUniversity Press: Oxford.

[16] Cohen J M, Kegeles L S 1979,Constructive procedure for perturbationsof spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D,19, 1641.

[17] Damour T, Deruelle N, Ruffini R 1976,On quantum resonances in sta-tionary geometries, Lett. Nuovo Cimento,15, 257.

[18] Davies E B 1980,One-parameter semigroups, Academic Press: London.

[19] Detweiler S L 1980,Klein-Gordon equation and rotating black holes,Phys. Rev. D,22, 2323-2326.

[20] Dunford N, Schwartz J T 1957,Linear operators, Part I: General theory,Wiley: New York.

[21] Engel K-J, Nagel R 2000,One-parameter semigroups for linear evolutionequations, Springer: New York.

[22] Fattorini H O 1983,The Cauchy Problem, Addison-Wesley: Reading,Massachusetts.

19

[23] Finster F, Kamran N, Smoller J 2006, Yau S-T 2005,Decay of Solutionsof the Wave Equation in the Kerr Geometry, Commun. Math. Phys.,264,465-503.

[24] Finster F, Kamran N, Smoller J, Yau S-T 2003,The Long-Time Dynam-ics of Dirac Particles in the Kerr-Newman Black Hole Geometry, Adv.Theor. Math. Phys.,7, 25-52.

[25] Furuhashi H, Nambu Y 2004,Instability of Massive Scalar Fields inKerr-Newman Spacetime, Prog. Theor. Phys.,112, 983-995.

[26] Goldstein J A 1985,Semigroups of linear operators and applications,Oxford University Press: New York.

[27] Hartle J B, Wilkins D C 1974,Analytic properties of the Teukolsky equa-tion, Commun. Math. Phys.,38, 47-63.

[28] Hille E, Phillips R S 1957,Functional Analysis and Semi-Groups, Re-vised ed., AMS: Providence.

[29] Kalnins E G, Miller W, Williams G C 1989,Killing-Yano tensors andvariable separation in Kerr geometry, J. Math. Phys.,30, 2360-2365.

[30] Kalnins E G, Miller W, Williams G C 1996,Intrinsic characterization ofthe separation constant for spin one and gravitational perturbations inKerr geometry, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,452, 997-1006.

[31] Kamran N, McLenaghan R G 1984,Separation of variables and con-stants of the motion for the Dirac equation on curved spacetime, Bull.Cl. Sci. Acad. R. Belg.,70, 596.

[32] Kato T 1966, Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators,Springer: NewYork.

[33] Kato T 1993,Abstract evolution equations, linear and quasilinear, revis-ited in: Komatsu H (ed) 1993,Functional analysis and related topics,1991, Proceedings of the International conference in memory of profes-sor Kosaku Yosida held at RIMS, Kyoto University, Japan, July 29-Aug.2, 1991, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1540, Springer: Berlin.

20

[34] Strafuss M J, Khanna G 2005,Massive scalar field instability in Kerrspacetime, Phys. Rev. D,71, 24034.

[35] Konoplya R A, Zhidenko A 2006,Stability and quasinormal modes of themassive scalar field around Kerr black holes, Phys. Rev. D,73, 124040.

[36] Krein, S G 1971,Linear differential equations in Banach space, AMS:Providence.

[37] Krivan W, Laguna P, Papadopoulos P 1996,Dynamics of scalar fields inthe background of rotating black holes, Phys. Rev. D,54, 4728-4734.

[38] Krivan W, Laguna P, Papadopoulos P, Andersson, N. 1997,Dynamicsof perturbations of rotating black holes, Phys. Rev. D,56, 3395-3404,(1997).

[39] Miller W 1977,Symmetry and separation of variables, Addison-Wesley.

[40] Moncrief V 1974Gravitational perturbations of spherically symmetricsystems. I. The exterior problem, Annals of Physics,88, 323-342.

[41] Pazy A 1983,Semigroups of linear operators and applications to partialdifferential equations, Springer: New York.

[42] Press W H, Teukolsky S 1973,Perturbations of a rotating black hole. IIDynamical stability of the Kerr metric, ApJ,185, 649-673.

[43] Reed M, Simon B, 1980, 1975, 1979, 1978,Methods of modern mathe-matical physics, Volume I, II, III, IV, Academic: New York.

[44] Regge T, Wheeler J A 1957Stability of a Schwarzschild Singularity,Phys. Rev.,108, 1063-1069.

[45] Tanabe H 1979,Equations of evolution, Pitman: London.

[46] Teukolsky S A 1973,Perturbations of a rotating black hole. I. Funda-mental equations for gravitational, electromagnetic, andneutrino-fieldperturbations, ApJ,185, 635-647.

[47] Stewart J M 1975,On the stability of Kerr’s space-time, Proc. R. Soc.London, Ser. A,344, 65-79.

21

[48] Walker M, Penrose R,On quadratic first integrals of the geodesic equa-tions for type [22] spacetimes, Commun. Math. Phys.,18, 265-274.

[49] Whiting B F 1989,Mode stability of the Kerr black hole, J. Math. Phys.,30, 1301-1305.

[50] Yosida K 1957,Lectures on semi-group theory and its application toCauchy’s problem in partial differential equations, Tata Institute of Fun-damental Research: Bombay.

[51] Zerilli F J 1970,Tensor harmonics in canonical form for gravitationalradiation and other applications, J. Math. Phys.,11, 2203.

[52] Zouros T J M, Eardley D M 1979,Instabilities of massive scalar pertur-bations of a rotating black hole, Ann. Phys. (N. Y.),118, 139-155.

22