text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

Randall and Sundrum’s recent proposal for an alternative to standard Kaluza-Klein (KK) compactification in Refs.  has attracted a lot of attention from many quarters: from a phenomenological point of view, it is a new and fresh proposal to understand the hierarchy between gauge and gravitational interactions, while from a purely gravitational point of view it rises many interesting problems concerning the relation between bulk and brane gravitational phenomena. In any case, these models provide a new arena in which one can study new and old problems of Theoretical Physics.

It is worth trying to extend this framework. Here we will present generalizations of the Randall-Sundrum (RS) scenario which could be used as alternatives to KK compactification. They are solutions of the Einstein equations with arbitrary cosmological constant in $`\widehat{d}`$ dimensions and lead to $`d=(\widehat{d}1)`$-dimensional metrics which solve the Einstein equations with arbitrary $`d`$-dimensional cosmological constant. They have a property which one should require of any framework with extra dimensions: when the $`d`$-dimensional metric is maximally symmetric (and, therefore, is the lower-dimensional vacuum) the corresponding $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional metric is also maximally symmetric (and, therefore, the upper-dimensional vacuum). This holds in any consistent standard KK compactification: vanishing matter fields and Minkowski metric in lower dimensions (the $`d`$-dimensional vacuum) correspond to Minkowski times a torus metric in upper dimensions (the $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional vacuum). The same can be said of supersymmetry although there are subtleties that in many cases will make impossible to define lower-dimensional supersymmetry.

In order to exploit these “bulk” solutions for dimensional reduction, we introduce brane sources, find the modified solutions and study the dynamics of gravitons in the new backgrounds. We also find the effective gravity actions and Newton constants in lower dimensions and study supersymmetry on the brane-worlds.

In finding the solutions with branes, we have to allow for cosmological constants that are piecewise constant functions, a fact which comes naturally when dualizing it. Therefore we consider gravity coupled to a volume-form field strength and coupled to a generic $`(\widehat{d}2)`$-brane action.

## 1 Bulk Solutions

We are interested in “warped metrics” of the form444We work in arbitrary dimension $`\widehat{d}`$ with mostly minus signature. All $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional objects carry hats. We choose $`x^{\widehat{d}1}y`$ as the spacelike holographic coordinate and thus, we split the $`\{\widehat{x}^{\widehat{\mu }}\}=\{x^\mu ,y\}`$. Unhatted objects are $`d(=\widehat{d}1)`$-dimensional.

$$d\widehat{s}^2=a^2(y)ds^2dy^2,ds^2=g_{\mu \nu }(x)dx^\mu dx^\nu ,$$
(1.1)
solving the equations

$$\widehat{R}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }},R^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }g^{\mu \nu },$$
(1.2)
where $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are respectively the $`\widehat{d}`$ and $`d`$-dimensional cosmological constants whose signs are, in principle, arbitrary. We define $`\widehat{g}`$ and $`g`$ by

$$\widehat{g}^2=\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{(\widehat{d}1)},g^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{(d1)}.$$
(1.3)
The solutions fall into two classes:

$$\mathrm{𝟏}.\widehat{𝐠}\mathrm{𝟎}a(y)=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\pm g^2/\widehat{g}^2}\left(e^{\widehat{g}y}\pm e^{\widehat{g}y}\right),$$
(1.4)
where the sign has to be chosen such as to make $`a(y)`$ real. This is always possible except for the case $`\widehat{g}𝕀,g`$. In the other cases we have555The case in which $`a`$ is not real can be fixed by Wick-rotating $`y`$ into a timelike coordinate., with $`g0`$

$$(𝐚)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cosh}\widehat{g}y,$$
(1.5)
$$(𝐛)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠𝕀a=ig/\widehat{g}\mathrm{sinh}\widehat{g}y,$$
(1.6)
$$(𝐜)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠𝕀a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cos}i\widehat{g}y.$$
(1.7)
In this case, the coordinate $`y`$ naturally lives in a circle of length $`\frac{2\pi }{i\widehat{g}}`$.

With $`g=0`$ the only possibility is $`\widehat{𝐠}`$ and

$$a=e^{\pm \widehat{g}y}.$$
(1.8)
$$\mathrm{𝟐}.\widehat{𝐠}=\mathrm{𝟎}a=igy,$$
(1.9)
which means that we must have $`g𝕀`$.

The main property of these solutions is that, if $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is the maximally symmetric metric in $`d`$ dimensions with curvature given by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, then $`\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$ is the maximally symmetric metric with curvature given by $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. The RS solution  fits in the $`\widehat{g},g=0`$ case: if $`g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, we have upstairs (locally) anti-De Sitter (aDS). Other possibilities that we are introducing here are: to have either aDS or DS both upstairs and downstairs, to have aDS upstairs and DS downstairs and to have Minkowski upstairs and DS downstairs. The most interesting options (at least from the supersymmetry point of view) are the RS solution and the one with Minkowski upstairs and DS downstairs.

In any dimension, in absence of other fields, the gravitino supersymmetry transformation law will take the form666Depending on the dimension, we will have one or another kind of minimal spinors associated to representations of the gamma matrices with special properties. This will never be an issue in what follows and our results can be adapted to all the cases of interest.

$$\delta _{\widehat{ϵ}}\widehat{\psi }_{\widehat{\mu }}=\widehat{𝒟}_{\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{ϵ},$$
(1.10)
where $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\widehat{\mu }}`$ is the aDS ($`\widehat{g}`$) or Lorentz ($`\widehat{g}=0`$) covariant derivative777Formally we can also consider the DS case ($`\widehat{g}𝕀`$). DS supergravities do exist even though they are inconsistent as quantum theories.

$$\widehat{𝒟}_{\widehat{\mu }}=_{\widehat{\mu }}\frac{1}{4}\widehat{\omega }_{\widehat{\mu }}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{a}\widehat{b}}\widehat{\gamma }_{\widehat{a}\widehat{b}}^{}\frac{i}{2}\widehat{g}\widehat{\gamma }_{\widehat{\mu }}.$$
(1.11)
Then, the Killing-spinor equation $`\delta _{\widehat{ϵ}}\widehat{\psi }_{\widehat{\mu }}=0`$ has the following solutions:

$$\mathrm{𝟏}.\widehat{𝐠}\mathrm{𝟎}\widehat{ϵ}=\frac{1}{2}\left(e^{\widehat{g}y/2}+\phi e^{\widehat{g}y/2}\right)ϵ_++\frac{1}{2}\left(e^{\widehat{g}y/2}\phi e^{\widehat{g}y/2}\right)ϵ_{},$$
(1.12)
where $`\phi =(g/\widehat{g})/|g/\widehat{g}|`$ and where $`ϵ_\pm `$ are two spinors that satisfy

$$\left(𝒟_\mu \frac{i}{2}g\gamma _\mu \right)ϵ_\pm =0,$$
(1.13)
$`𝒟_\mu `$ being the standard Lorentz covariant derivative and $`\gamma _a\widehat{\gamma }_a`$. These equations have maximal number of solutions when the $`d`$-dimensional space is maximally symmetric.

$`\mathrm{𝟐}.\widehat{𝐠}=\mathrm{𝟎}`$. The solution in this case is any $`y`$-independent spinor $`\widehat{ϵ}`$ satisfying

$$\left(𝒟_\mu \frac{i}{2}g\gamma _\mu \right)\widehat{ϵ}=0,$$
(1.14)
where now $`\gamma _a\widehat{\gamma }_a\widehat{\gamma }_y`$. In this case we had to take $`g𝕀`$ and thus this is the $`d`$-dimensional DS covariant derivative. This equation has a maximal number of solutions when the $`d`$-dimensional spacetime is DS.

Observe that, although DS supergravity is inconsistent, any pure gravity solution of that theory can be considered a warped compactification of standard (Poincaré) supergravity in one dimension more.

Although we have managed to reduce the $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional Killing-spinor equation to a $`d`$-dimensional-looking Killing-spinor equation, this does not mean that we have supersymmetry in the $`d`$-dimensional space. In the $`\widehat{g}0`$ case, we cannot have two different signs for $`g`$. Keeping only one means keeping either $`ϵ_+`$ or $`ϵ_{}`$, but this truncation is only consistent with $`d`$-dimensional Lorentz invariance when $`g=0`$ (the RS case). On the other hand in the $`\widehat{g}=0`$ it seems that there is no problem to have DS supersymmetry. The supersymmetry of the RS solution has also been studied in Refs.  and . We will make further comments on their results in the next section.

## 2 Brane-World Solutions

Now, mimicking Randall and Sundrum we consider the gravity plus brane-sources equations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \widehat{R}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}& =& \widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{\chi }\left[g^{\rho \sigma }\delta _\rho {}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }}\delta _{\sigma }^{}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\nu }}\frac{1}{\widehat{d}2}\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}(\widehat{g}^{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}_{\rho \sigma })\right]_nT_n\delta (yy_n),\hfill \\ & & \\ \hfill R^{\mu \nu }& =& \mathrm{\Lambda }g^{\mu \nu }.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.1)
Although we write cosmological constants, we will have to allow for piecewise constant functions of $`y`$. Then, by making identifications if necessary we can restrict ourselves to a domain in which they are really constant.

With the same Ansatz for the metric Eq. (1.1) these equations reduce to

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 0& =& a^{\prime \prime }+\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\widehat{d}1}a+\frac{2\widehat{\chi }}{\widehat{d}2}a_nT_n\delta (yy_n),\hfill \\ & & \\ \hfill 0& =& (a^{})^2+\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\widehat{d}1}a^2\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{d1}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.2)
It is straightforward to see that the solutions take now the form

$$\mathrm{𝟏}.\widehat{𝐠},𝐠\mathrm{𝟎}a(y)=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\pm g^2/\widehat{g}^2}\left(e^{_nc_n|yy_n|+C}\pm e^{_nc_n|yy_n|C}\right),$$
(2.3)
where $`\widehat{g}`$ and $`g`$ are defined as before but now $`\widehat{g}`$ takes the value

$$\widehat{g}=\underset{n}{}c_n[2\theta (yy_n)1],$$
(2.4)
and $`g`$ is proportional to $`\widehat{g}`$ with an arbitrary proportionality constant so $`\widehat{g}/g`$ is a true (purely real or imaginary) constant. The simultaneously purely real or imaginary constants $`c_n`$ are given by

$$c_n=\frac{\widehat{\chi }T_n}{2(\widehat{d}2)}\mathrm{tanh}^1\left(\underset{m}{}c_m|yy_m|+C\right)|_{y=y_n}.$$
(2.5)
$$\mathrm{𝟐}.\widehat{𝐠}\mathrm{𝟎},𝐠=\mathrm{𝟎}a(y)=e^{_nc_n|yy_n|},$$
(2.6)
where $`\widehat{g}`$ and the simultaneously purely real constants $`c_n`$ are given by

$$\widehat{g}=\underset{n}{}c_n[2\theta (yy_n)1],c_n=\frac{\widehat{\chi }T_n}{2(\widehat{d}2)},$$
(2.7)
so

$$a(y)=e^{\frac{\widehat{\chi }}{2(\widehat{d}2)}_nT_n|yy_n|}.$$
(2.8)
$$\mathrm{𝟑}.\widehat{𝐠}=\mathrm{𝟎}a=\underset{n}{}c_n|yy_n|+C,$$
(2.9)
with

$$g=\underset{n}{}c_n[2\theta (yy_n)1],c_n=\frac{\widehat{\chi }T_n}{2(\widehat{d}2)}\frac{1}{_mc_m|yy_m|+C}|_{y=y_n}.$$
(2.10)
In general the equations for the constants $`c_n`$ only have solution if all of them (and, therefore, the tensions $`T_n`$) have the same sign. In particular, a system with two branes only has solution if both branes have the same tension. The exception is the $`g=0`$ (RS) case in which one can get solutions for arbitrary tensions (Eq. (2.8)).

The problem of finding the different $`c_n`$’s does not show up if one considers an infinite periodic array of branes and anti-branes with opposite tensions. We can restrict ourselves to a fundamental region bounded by two branes or anti-branes with an anti-brane (resp. brane) in the middle. The system is mirror symmetric with respect to the middle (anti-) brane and we can make a further $`_2`$ identification that leaves us with a piece of spacetime bounded by a brane and an anti-brane in which $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are constant (and in which only one constant $`c_n`$ matters). In these conditions, taking as fundamental region the interval $`y[0,\mathrm{}/2]`$ with an anti-brane placed at $`y=0`$ and a brane at $`y=\mathrm{}/2`$ the warp function $`a(y)`$ takes the same form as if there was only one brane in the whole spacetime:

1. $`\widehat{𝐠},𝐠\mathrm{𝟎}`$

$$(𝐚)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cosh}\left(\widehat{g}|y|+C\right),\widehat{g}=\frac{\widehat{\chi }T\mathrm{coth}(C)}{\widehat{d}2}.$$
(2.11)
$$(𝐛)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠𝕀a=ig/\widehat{g}\mathrm{sinh}\left(\widehat{g}|y|+C\right),\widehat{g}=\frac{\widehat{\chi }T\mathrm{tanh}(C)}{\widehat{d}2}.$$
(2.12)
$$(𝐜)\widehat{𝐠},𝐠𝕀a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cos}\left(i\widehat{g}|y|+C\right),\widehat{g}=i\frac{\widehat{\chi }T\mathrm{coth}(C)}{\widehat{d}2}.$$
(2.13)
In this case, $`\mathrm{}`$ must be an integer fraction of the period of $`y`$ i.e. $`\mathrm{}=\frac{2\pi }{in\widehat{g}}`$.
2. $`\widehat{𝐠}\mathrm{𝟎},𝐠=\mathrm{𝟎}`$. $`\widehat{𝐠}`$

$$a=e^{\widehat{g}|y|},\widehat{g}=\widehat{\chi }T/2.$$
(2.14)
3. $`\widehat{𝐠}=\mathrm{𝟎}`$

$$a=ig|y|+C,g=i\frac{\widehat{\chi }TC}{\widehat{d}2}.$$
(2.15)

Let us now consider the bulk and world-brane supersymmetry of these solutions. We can only have supersymmetry on the brane in the RS case $`\widehat{g}0,g=0`$ and in the Minkowski-DS case $`\widehat{g}=0,g0`$ and imaginary. In these two cases the amount of supersymmetry preserved depends on the $`d`$-dimensional (brane) metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$. If it is maximally symmetric, then there will be maximal supersymmetry on the brane.

Generic branes generically break $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional bulk supersymmetry.888We are not going to include sources in the supersymmetry transformation rules as in Ref. . We think one really needs proper $`\kappa `$-symmetric brane-sources in order to study in a fully consistent way the supersymmetric source problem. However, in these cases, supersymmetry is not broken locally in the bulk, in between any pair of branes, since there the metric has exactly the same form as in the absence of branes.

One may want to have unbroken supersymmetry globally, an not just in between the branes. First, we need to be able to define the Killing-spinor equation globally. In order to do this, we have to allow for a $`\widehat{g}`$ which is piecewise constant instead of globally constant (the main characteristic of these branes is that the value of $`\widehat{g}`$ is different in both sides). We have implicitly accepted this generalization in this section in order to find the solutions. On the other hand, one can use a dual formulation in which the cosmological constant is replaced by a $`d`$-form potential as in Ref. , an idea which will be investigated in Sec. (4). Once we accept this generalization, the necessary condition to have global unbroken supersymmetry is to be able to match the solutions of the Killing-spinor equation in both sides of a given brane. Let us take, for simplicity, one brane placed at $`y=0`$. Both $`\widehat{g}`$ and $`g`$ change sign across the brane. In the $`y>0`$ side of the brane, the solutions of the Killing-spinor equation are those exhibited in the previous section. In the $`y<0`$ side of the brane we find solutions of the same form, where, now, the spinors appearing in the general solution satisfy

the same equations but with the sign of $`g`$ reversed. We need to set $`g=0`$ which means that in the second case all supersymmetry is broken unless we have a trivial solution.

In the first case, it is not enough to have $`g=0`$ which brings us the the RS case again. It turns out that we also need to impose the condition

$$i\widehat{\gamma }_y\widehat{ϵ}=+\widehat{ϵ},$$
(2.16)
on the Killing-spinor, which reduces supersymmetry to a half. This is the same condition we would impose if we were orbifolding the space between branes.

We would like to stress that our results apply strictly to the cases we are considering: the infinitely thin branes described by the above solutions which make the metric across them discontinuous. Thus, our results do not contradict those of Linde and Kallosh  who did not study just pure supergravity but included supersymmetric matter. In that paper the authors tried to find supersymmetric thick domain walls for which the metric is smooth using consistent superpotentials but did not find any.

### 2.1 4-$`d`$ Action and Newton Constant

The action from which the equations of motion Eqs. (2.1) follow has the form

$$\widehat{S}=\frac{1}{2\widehat{\chi }}d^{\widehat{d}}\widehat{x}\sqrt{|\widehat{g}|}\left[\widehat{R}(\widehat{d}2)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right]+\mathrm{branes},$$
(2.17)
and for $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional metrics of the warped form Eq. (1.1) it reduces to

$$S=\frac{1}{2\widehat{\chi }}𝑑ya^{\widehat{d}3}d^dx\sqrt{|g|}\left[R(d2)\mathrm{\Lambda }\right].$$
(2.18)
Comparing, we find that the $`d`$-dimensional Newton constant $`\chi `$ is related to the $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional one $`\widehat{\chi }`$ by

$$\widehat{\chi }/\chi =𝑑ya^{\widehat{d}3}.$$
(2.19)
Taking $`\widehat{d}=5`$ for definiteness, we can calculate the proportionality factor in the different cases:

Case 1.a: $`a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cosh}\widehat{g}|y|`$

$$\chi =2\frac{\widehat{g}^3/g^2}{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\widehat{g}\mathrm{}\right)+\widehat{g}\mathrm{}}\widehat{\chi }.$$
(2.20)
Case 1.b: $`a=ig/\widehat{g}\mathrm{sinh}|\widehat{g}||y|`$

$$\chi =2\frac{|\widehat{g}|^3/(ig)^2}{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\widehat{g}\mathrm{}\right)\widehat{g}\mathrm{}}\widehat{\chi }.$$
(2.21)
Case 1.c: $`a=g/\widehat{g}\mathrm{cos}i\widehat{g}y`$

In this case the integration limits are $`0`$ and $`2\pi /i\widehat{g}`$:

$$\chi =\frac{\left(i\widehat{g}\right)^3}{\pi (ig)^2}\widehat{\chi }.$$
(2.22)
Case 3: $`a=ig|y|+C`$

In this case we have:

$$\chi =\frac{3}{2}\frac{ig}{\left(ig\mathrm{}/2+C\right)^3C^3}\widehat{\chi }.$$
(2.23)
## 3 Graviton Dynamics

Expanding the first of Eqs. (2.1) around a background which satisfies the same equation one finds the equation of motion for the perturbation $`\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$ and using the transverse traceless (tt) gauge

$$\widehat{}^{\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}=\widehat{h}=0,$$
(3.1)
where $`\widehat{h}=\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$ we get999All indices are raised and lowered with the full $`\widehat{d}`$-dimensional background metric $`\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \widehat{}^2\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}+2\widehat{R}_{\widehat{\rho }(\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{h}^\rho {}_{\widehat{\nu })}{}^{}+2\widehat{R}^{\widehat{\lambda }}{}_{(\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu })}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\sigma }}\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\sigma }}^{}2\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}& & \\ & & \\ \hfill +2\widehat{\chi }\{\widehat{g}^{\rho \sigma }[2\widehat{h}_{\rho (\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\nu })\sigma }\frac{1}{\widehat{d}2}(\widehat{h}_{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}+\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{g}_{\rho \sigma })]& & \\ & & \\ \hfill \widehat{h}^{\rho \sigma }(\widehat{g}_{\rho \widehat{\mu }}\widehat{g}_{\sigma \widehat{\nu }}\frac{1}{\widehat{d}2}\widehat{g}_{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }})\}_nT_n\delta (yy_n)& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.2)
Using now the first of Eqs. (2.1) to eliminate $`\widehat{R}_{\widehat{\rho }\widehat{\mu }}`$ we get

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \widehat{}^2\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}+2\widehat{R}^{\widehat{\lambda }}{}_{(\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu })}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\sigma }}\widehat{h}_{\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\sigma }}^{}+2\widehat{\chi }[(\widehat{g}^{\rho \sigma }\widehat{h}_{\rho (\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{h}^{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}_{\rho (\widehat{\mu }})\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\nu })\sigma }& & \\ & & \\ \hfill +\frac{1}{\widehat{d}2}(\widehat{h}^{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}_{\rho \sigma }\widehat{g}^{\rho \sigma }\widehat{h}_{\rho \sigma })\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}]_nT_n\delta (yy_n)& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.3)
Further, using the RS gauge

$$\widehat{h}_{\mu y}=\widehat{h}_{yy}=0,$$
(3.4)
and the fact that the warped general metric Eq. (1.1) is block-diagonal we see that the source terms vanish identically. The equations for $`\widehat{h}_{\mu y},\widehat{h}_{yy}`$ are satisfied identically and do not become constraints. The equation for the remaining piece of the perturbation is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill a^2\left[^2\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }+2R^\rho {}_{(\mu \nu )}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\sigma }\widehat{h}_{\rho \sigma }^{}\right]\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }^{\prime \prime }& & \\ & & \\ \hfill (\widehat{d}5)a^1a^{}\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }^{}+2[(\widehat{d}4)a^2(a^{})^2+a^1a^{\prime \prime }]\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.5)
Now we assume that the perturbation can be expanded in RS modes

$$\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }(x,y)=\underset{\alpha }{}f_\alpha (y)h_{\mu \nu }^{(\alpha )}(x),$$
(3.6)
of which we only keep the massless one $`h_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}h_{\mu \nu }`$. The sourceless equation of a massless graviton in a maximally symmetric background, in the tt gauge is

$$^2h_{\mu \nu }+2R^\rho {}_{(\mu \nu )}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\sigma }h_{\rho \sigma }^{}=0,$$
(3.7)
and, thus, we get for $`\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }=f_0(y)h_{\mu \nu }`$

$$\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }^{\prime \prime }=(5\widehat{d})a^1a^{}\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }^{}+2\left[a^1a^{\prime \prime }+(\widehat{d}4)a^2(a^{})^2\right]\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }.$$
(3.8)
which in $`\widehat{d}=5`$ is solved by

$$f_0(y)=a^2(y).$$
(3.9)
Depending on the specific solution we can have gravity confinement on the brane or not. In general, the inclusion of branes and the orbifolding procedure is necessary to have confinement on just one brane ($`a^2`$ has more than one maximum in the interval of interest). The only exception seems to be the RS case. The DS to DS case ($`\widehat{g},g`$ imaginary) deserves special mention because the holographic coordinate is naturally compact. No branes are needed to make the graviton wave-function normalizable, although we do need them if we want to think in terms of confinement. Some of the general results for a metric of the form (1.1) have also been obtained in Ref. .

## 4 A Brane action for the Randall-Sundrum Scenario

A constant can be understood as the dual of a volume-form field strength. A volume-form (i.e. a $`\widehat{d}`$-form which we will denote by $`\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}`$) is the field strength of a $`d(\widehat{d}1)`$-form potential $`\widehat{A}_{(d)}`$. The equation of motion forces the dual of $`\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}`$ to be constant (or, more generally, piecewise constant). Thus, one can generically substitute a constant in an action, and, in particular the cosmological constant, by a $`d`$-form potential $`\widehat{A}_{(d)}`$. The canonical example is the rewriting of Romans’ massive $`10`$-dimensional type IIA supergravity, which contains a mass parameter $`m`$, by a $`9`$-form Ramond-Ramond potential to which the D8-brane couples .

This implies a generalization of the theory since now one can have solutions in which the value of the cosmological constant is different in different regions of the spacetime: this is precisely what RS-like solutions need. The discontinuities are $`d`$-dimensional topological defects (domain walls) which act as sources for the $`d`$-form potential and can be interpreted as the worldvolumes of $`(\widehat{d}2)`$-branes charged under the $`d`$-form potential (D8-branes in the case of Ref. ). A worldvolume action for these branes should, therefore, contain a Wess-Zumino term: the integral of the pullback of the $`d`$-form potential.

All this seems to work very well in the D8-brane case and, in fact, the rewriting in terms of a 9-form potential proves necessary and even crucial. It is natural to try something similar here. Therefore, we propose an action consisting in a bulk action containing gravity, $`\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$, coupled to a $`d`$-form potential $`\widehat{A}_{(d)}`$ and a bunch of standard worldvolume actions of $`(\widehat{d}2)`$-branes containing the above-mentioned WZ terms with dynamical coordinate fields $`\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}`$, i.e.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \widehat{S}& =& \frac{1}{2\chi }d^{\widehat{d}}\widehat{x}\sqrt{|\widehat{g}|}\left[\widehat{R}+\frac{(1)^{\widehat{d}2}}{2\widehat{d}!}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}^2\right]\hfill \\ & & \\ & & +_n\{\frac{T_n}{2}d^d\xi _n\sqrt{|\gamma _n|}[\gamma _n^{ij}_i\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}_j\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}(\widehat{X}_n)(\widehat{d}3)]\hfill \\ & & \\ & & +\frac{(1)^d\mu _n}{d!}d^d\xi _n\widehat{A}_{(d)\widehat{\mu }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\mu }_d}(\widehat{X}_n)_{i_1}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\mu }_1}\mathrm{}_{i_d}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\mu }_d}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_d}\}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.1)
The field configurations that minimize this action satisfy the equations of motion for the metric

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \widehat{G}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}+\frac{(1)^{(\widehat{d}2)}\mu _n}{2d!}\left[\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}^{}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\nu }}{}_{\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}{}^{}\frac{1}{2\widehat{d}}\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}^2\right]+& & \\ & & \\ \hfill +\frac{\chi }{\sqrt{|\widehat{g}|}}_nT_nd^d\xi _n\sqrt{|\gamma _n|}\gamma _n^{ij}_i\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}_j\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\nu }}\delta ^{\widehat{d}}(\widehat{x}\widehat{X}_n)& =& 0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.2)
the $`d`$-form potential

$$\widehat{}_{\widehat{\mu }}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}+\frac{2\chi }{\sqrt{|\widehat{g}|}}\underset{n}{}\mu _nd^d\xi _nϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_d}_{i_1}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\mu }_1}\mathrm{}_{i_d}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\mu }_d}\delta ^{\widehat{d}}(\widehat{x}\widehat{X}_n)=0,$$
(4.3)
the worldvolume metric (after some manipulations)

$$\gamma _{nij}_i\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}_j\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{g}_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}(\widehat{X}_n)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},$$
(4.4)
and the (coordinate) worldvolume scalars

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill ^2(\gamma )\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}+\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\widehat{\rho }\widehat{\sigma }}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }}(\widehat{g})_i\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\rho }}_j\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\sigma }}\gamma _n^{ij}+& & \\ & & \\ \hfill +\frac{(1)^d\mu _n}{T_nd!\sqrt{|\gamma _n|}}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }}{}_{\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}{}^{}_{i_1}^{}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\rho }_1}\mathrm{}_{i_d}\widehat{X}^{\widehat{\rho }_d}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_d}& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.5)
Eq. (4.4) simply states that the worldvolume metrics are those induced on the worldvolumes by the embedding coordinates $`\widehat{X}_n^{\widehat{\mu }}`$. Using worldvolume reparametrization invariance we can set $`d`$ coordinates (static gauge) to the values $`\widehat{X}_n^\mu =\delta _i^\mu \xi _n^i`$. Furthermore, our Ansatz for the remaining coordinate is

$$\widehat{X}_n^dY_n=y_n,$$
(4.6)
where the $`y_n`$’s are constants. We can perform the volume integrals in Eqs. (4.2,4.3) leaving only 1-dimensional delta functions $`\delta (yy_n)`$. Also, this implies for the worldvolume metrics (identifying worldvolume and $`d`$-dimensional spacetime indices)

$$\gamma _{n\mu \nu }=\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }=a^2(y_n)g_{\mu \nu }.$$
(4.7)
For the potential we have

$$\widehat{A}_{(d)\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _d}=ca^d\frac{ϵ_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _d}}{\sqrt{|g|}},\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})\underset{¯}{y}\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _d}=cda^d\mathrm{log}^{}a\frac{ϵ_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _d}}{\sqrt{|g|}},$$
(4.8)
where $`c`$ is a constant to be found and $`ϵ`$ is the $`d`$-dimensional Levi-Cività tensor calculated with the $`d`$-dimensional metric.

Let us solve Eqs. (4.5). The equations for the $`\widehat{X}_n^\mu `$’s are automatically solved. $`\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}`$ only contributes to the equations of the $`Y_n`$’s, which are solved for

$$c=T_n/\mu _nT/\mu .$$
(4.9)
This implies that all the quotients $`T_n/\mu _n`$ must have the same value, which is a characteristic of BPS objects. Observe that the $`\mu _n`$’s cannot vanish: had we tried uncharged brane sources we would have never succeeded.

The equation for the potential becomes

$$T/\mu d\mathrm{log}^{\prime \prime }a+2\chi \underset{n}{}\mu _n\delta (yy_n)=0,$$
(4.10)
which is solved by a warp factor of the RS type

$$a=e^{\frac{\chi \mu /T}{d}_n\mu _n|yy_n|}.$$
(4.11)
To solve the Einstein equations we first calculate the energy-momentum tensor of the form potential, i.e.

$$\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}^{}{}_{}{}^{\widehat{\nu }}{}_{\widehat{\rho }_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\rho }_d}{}^{}\frac{1}{2\widehat{d}}\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}\widehat{F}_{(\widehat{d})}^2=\left(\frac{\chi }{2}\underset{n}{}\mu _n[\theta (yy_n)1]\right)^2\widehat{g}^{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }},$$
(4.12)
which describes a piecewise cosmological constant. For only two branes with opposite tensions the Einstein equation is exactly the one in Ref.  in the intervals in which the cosmological constant is constant and therefore admits the same solutions. In fact, assuming that the $`d`$-dimensional metric is Ricci-flat $`R_{\mu \nu }=0`$, the Einstein equations are solved by the above warp factor if $`(\mu /T)^2=\frac{1}{2}d/(\widehat{d}2)`$ which implies, as in Sec. (2) and Refs. , that

$$a=e^{\frac{\chi }{(\widehat{d}2)}_nT_n|yy_n|}.$$
(4.13)
## 5 Conclusions

We have explored general solutions with warped metrics with and without branes and we have studied their supersymmetry properties and the effective theories on the branes, including supersymmetry.

Two cases are singled out by supersymmetry considerations: the well-known RS case and the case in which the total spacetime is Minkowski and on the brane one has DS spacetime. The brane breaks a half of the available supersymmetry in the RS case, a result also obtained in Ref. , while in the last case a brane seems to break completely the bulk supersymmetry although one can still speak of (DS) supersymmetry on the brane-world with its known problems.

In analogy with the D8-brane effective action, we considered a formulation of the problem in terms of a dynamical $`\widehat{d}2`$ brane with a $`\widehat{d}1`$ form potential.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Bert Janssen and Pedro Silva for many useful conversations. This work was partially supported by the E.U. TMR program FMRX-CT96-0012 and by the Spanish grant AEN96-1655.


format: text

text:
# A nongravitational wormhole

## I Introduction

There has been an increasing interest in recent years in earth-bound systems that can mimic gravitational and cosmological phenomena. These systems are of a very different nature: superfluid 3He-A and high-energy superconductors , supersonic acoustic flows , flowing dielectric fluids , and Bose-Einstein condensates . A common feature of some of these systems is that the propagation of disturbances in a fixed flat background is described by the equation of motion of a massless scalar field in a curved “effective” spacetime. The metric of this curved spacetime depends on the physical system under consideration. In this reformulation in terms of Lorentzian geometry it can be shown that, under certain hypothesis, black-hole analogues are possible in some of the abovementioned systems. There are even some chances to probe semiclassical quantum gravity in the laboratory, through the Hawking effect . We would like to study here yet another system in which an effective metric can be introduced to describe the propagation of waves. It is a well-known fact that Maxwell’s Lagrangian acquires nonlinear correction terms due to vacuum polarization. Novello et al  showed recently that in any nonlinear electromagnetic (EM) theory photons, in the geometrical optics approximation, do not propagate along null geodesics of the background geometry. They propagate instead along null geodesics of an effective geometry, which depends on the nonlinearities of the dynamics of the theory. This result was derived by Plebańsky in the case of Born-Infeld electrodynamics in 1968 , and was in  extended to encompass any nonlinear electromagnetic theory. The propagation of photons in nontrivial QED vacua has also been studied in . Very often these analysis have led to unexpected results. As examples, let us mention the possibility of faster-than-light photons , and the existence of closed timelike curves due to nonlinear EM effects . Morover, it was shown in  that the the motion of light through a nontrivial vacuum is equivalent to that of photons propagating according to Maxwell’s theory in a nonlinear medium. The medium induces modifications on the equations of motion which are identical to those produced by the nonlinearities of the field. We would like to address here some general features of this effective geometry, and also to show an example of a specific effective spacetime for photons: an electromagnetic wormhole.

The structure of the paper is the following. In Section II we review the derivation of the effective geometry for photons in nonlinear electrodynamics, and we point out some of its general features. In Section III we show how a wormhole can be constructed out of the effective geometry in the case of Born-Infeld electrodynamics, and we analize its properties. We close with a discussion of the results.

## II Effective geometry for photons

In this section we present the method of the effective geometry . Let us start with a Lagrangian density that is a function of $`F=F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }`$ only 111 The more general case in which $`=(F,F^{})`$, where $`F^{}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }`$ and $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ is the dual of $`F^{\mu \nu }`$, can be found in .. We will follow Hadamard’s technique  to study the propagation of the discontinuities of the EM field. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ a surface of discontinuity of $`F_{\mu \nu }`$, with equation $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(x^\mu )=\mathrm{const}`$. We assume that the EM tensor is continuous when crossing $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, but its derivative has a finite discontinuity. These assumptions can be stated as

$$[F_{\mu \nu }]_\mathrm{\Sigma }=0,[_\lambda F_{\mu \nu }]_\mathrm{\Sigma }=f_{\mu \nu }k_\lambda .$$
(1)
The operation $`[]_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ on a tensor $`J`$ is defined by

$$[J]_\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{lim}_{\delta 0^+}\left(J|_{\mathrm{\Sigma }+\delta }J|_{\mathrm{\Sigma }\delta }\right),$$
(2)
and represents the discontinuity of the tensor $`J`$ through $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. The tensor $`f_{\mu \nu }`$ is the discontinuity of the field, and $`k_\lambda =_\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the propagation vector.

If we apply $`[]_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to the nonlinear equations of motion

$$(\sqrt{\gamma }_FF^{\mu \nu })_{,\nu }=0,$$
(3)
($`_F`$ is the derivative of the Lagrangian density w.r.t. $`F`$, $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ is the metric of Minkowski’s spacetime in an arbitrary coordinate system, and $`\gamma `$ is the corresponding determinant) we obtain

$$_Ff^{\mu \nu }k_\nu +2_{FF}\xi F^{\mu \nu }k_\nu =0,$$
(4)
where $`\xi F^{\alpha \beta }f_{\alpha \beta }`$. The same operation on the cyclic identity yields

$$f_{\mu \nu }k_\lambda +f_{\nu \lambda }k_\mu +f_{\lambda \mu }k_\nu =0.$$
(5)
This equation can be rewritten after contraction with $`k_\alpha \gamma ^{\alpha \lambda }F^{\mu \nu }`$. The result is

$$\xi k_\mu k_\nu \gamma ^{\mu \nu }+2F^{\mu \nu }f_\nu ^\lambda k_\lambda k_\mu =0.$$
(6)
We can eliminate the tensor $`f_{\mu \nu }`$ from Eqs.(4) and (6). If we assume that $`\xi `$ and $`_F`$ are nonzero, we get

$$(_F\gamma ^{\mu \nu }4_{FF}F^{\mu \alpha }F_\alpha {}_{}{}^{\nu })k_\mu k_\nu =0.$$
(7)
This expression suggests that the self-interaction of the field $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ can be interpreted as a modification on the spacetime metric $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ which is described by the effective geometry

$$g_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mu \nu }=_F\gamma ^{\mu \nu }4_{FF}F_{}^{\mu }{}_{\alpha }{}^{}F^{\alpha \nu }.$$
(8)
Note that only in the particular case of linear electrodynamics the discontinuities of the electromagnetic field propagate along null paths in the Minkowski background.

In the derivation of Eq.(8) we assumed that $`\xi `$ and $`_F`$ do not have zeros. It can be proved (see ) that photons such that $`\xi =0`$ propagate along geodesics of the Minkowskian geometry. To analyse the other restriction, note that $`_F`$ is a function of the coordinates $`x^\mu `$ through the EM tensor $`F_{\mu \nu }(x^\mu )`$. If the theory given by $``$ and the field configuration under study are such that $`_F`$ has one or more zeros for certain values $`x_0^\mu `$ of the coordinates, Eq.(4) will in general not be satisfied in those $`x_0^\mu `$. However, the equation is valid for points that are arbitrarily close to $`x_0^\mu `$, and hence the effective metric tensor is everywhere well-defined except for these zeros.

The general expression of the effective geometry can be equivalently written in terms of the vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor, given by

$$T_{\mu \nu }\frac{2}{\sqrt{\gamma }}\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }}{\delta \gamma ^{\mu \nu }},$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the effective action

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }d^4x\sqrt{\gamma }.$$
(10)
In the case of one-parameter Lagrangians, $`=(F),`$ we obtain

$$T_{\mu \nu }=4_FF_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }F_{\alpha \nu }\eta _{\mu \nu },$$
(11)
where we have chosen a Cartesian coordinate system in which $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ reduces to $`\eta _{\mu \nu }.`$ In terms of this tensor the effective geometry Eq.(8) can be re-written as222 For simplicity, we will denote the effective metric as $`g^{\mu \nu }`$ instead of $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mu \nu }`$ from now on.

$$g^{\mu \nu }=\left(_F+\frac{_{FF}}{_F}\right)\eta ^{\mu \nu }+\frac{_{FF}}{_F}T^{\mu \nu }.$$
(12)
This equation shows that the stress-energy distribution of the field is the true responsible for the departure of the effective geometry from its Minkowskian form. It is also seen that for $`T_{\mu \nu }=0`$, the conformal modification in Eq.(12) clearly leaves the photon paths unchanged.

At this point several remarks are in order:

* Note that there are two metric tensors present in the problem. One is the Minkowskian metric $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$. In the absence of forces, ordinary matter moves on geodesics of this metric. The second is the effective metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, and only influences the motion of the photons.
* The properties of the effective geometry depend on the specific theory under consideration (through $``$ and its derivatives), and also on the specific field configuration. The latter is determined by solving the nonlinear Eqns.(3) together with $`_{[\mu }F_{\nu \rho ]}=0`$.
* The effective geometry defined by Eq.(8) admits an everywhere nonzero conformal factor. This freedom is due to the fact that the effective geometric structure is valid only for photons. It follows that only concepts that do not depend on the choice of the conformal factor have a definite meaning in this framework.
* The use of the effective geometry is not mandatory. Some results can be also obtained by other methods, although these require an average over the polarization states .
* Although we shall restrict here to flat backgrounds, the effective geometry can and must be used in the presence of curved backgrounds. In this case, the flat spacetime metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ is replaced by the curved spacetime metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$. The latter is consistently determined by Einstein’s equations. We must point out that if the change in the path of the photons described by the effective metric is not taken into account, the resultant description of the spacetime under consideration is incomplete. For instance, it was shown in  that an apparently “regular” black hole generated by a certain nonlinear electrodynamics is actually singular, the singularities in the effective geometry being associated to the nonlinearities of the theory.

Let us now turn to a far-reaching analogy between nonlinear EM on one side and linear EM in the presence of dielectrics on the other. In  was shown that it is possible to describe the propagation of waves governed by Maxwell electrodynamics inside a medium in terms of a modification of the underlying spacetime geometry using the framework developed above. The electromagnetic field inside a material medium can be represented by two antisymmetric tensors, the EM field $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ and the polarization $`P_{\mu \nu }`$, which in the absence of sources obey the equations

$$^\nu P_{\mu \nu }=0,^\nu F_{\mu \nu }^{}=0.$$
(13)
From these equations and Eq.(3) we see that the nonlinear theory in vaccum is equivalent to Maxwell’s theory in an isotropic medium characterized by an electric susceptibility $`ϵ`$ and a magnetic permeability $`\mu `$ given by

$$ϵ=_F\mu =\frac{1}{_F}$$
(14)
(see  for details). Therefore, the simple class of effective Lagrangians $`=(F)`$ may be used as a convenient description of Maxwell theory inside isotropic media; conversely, results obtained in the latter context can as well be similarly restated in the former one 333 Let us remind the reader that $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ are functions of the EM field, and so their derivatives are discontinuous on the wavefront..

## III A wormhole for photons

In this section we show that there exists a field configuration in Born-Infeld nonlinear EM theory that generates an effective geometry which is a wormhole for photons. We shall restrict here to a spherically symmetric and static effective metric. It can be proved (see Appendix) that the effective metric tensor expressed in spherical coordinates of the Minkowskian background takes the form

$$ds_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=\mathrm{\Phi }^1(dt^2dr^2)\mathrm{\Psi }^1r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(15)
where

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=_F4_{FF}A^2,$$
(16)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }=_F+4_{FF}B^2r^4\mathrm{sin}^2\theta ,$$
(17)
and the only nonzero components of the EM tensor are $`AF^{tr}`$ and $`BF^{\theta \phi }`$. From the nonlinear Eqs.(3) and the cyclic identity, we get

$$A=\frac{\alpha }{_Fr^2},B=\frac{\beta }{r^4sin\theta },$$
(18)
with $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ arbitrary constants. From these equations, it is seen that the electromagnetic tensor $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ must satisfy

$$F=\frac{2}{r^4}\left(\beta ^2\frac{\alpha ^2}{_F^2}\right).$$
(19)
We now adopt as an example Born-Infeld electrodynamics . The Lagrangian density is given by

$$=b^2\left(1\sqrt{1+\frac{F}{2b^2}}\right).$$
(20)
Note that $`_F`$ and $`_{FF}`$ are nonsingular functions of $`r`$ for this Lagrangian. The constraint Eq.(19) gives in this case

$$F=2b^2\frac{\beta ^216\alpha ^2}{b^2r^4+16\alpha ^2}$$
(21)
and the metric functions are

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{4b^2r^2}\frac{(r^4b^2+16\alpha ^2)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{b^2r^4+\beta ^2}},$$
(22)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{1}{4b^2r^4}\frac{\sqrt{b^2r^4+16\alpha ^2}(b^4r^816\alpha ^2\beta ^2)}{(b^2r^4+\beta ^2)^{3/2}}.$$
(23)
We see that the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ has a zero, and as a result, the metric coefficient $`\mathrm{\Psi }^1r^2`$ will be singular. From now on we restrict to the case in which only the electric field is nonzero, i.e. $`\beta =0`$. In this case, the metric functions are

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{(b^2r^4+16\alpha ^2)^{3/2}}{4b^3r^6},$$
(24)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{\sqrt{b^2r^4+16\alpha ^2}}{4br^2}.$$
(25)
Due to the freedom in the conformal factor of the definition of the effective metric (see remarks above) we shall analyze the features of the metric

$$ds^2=dt^2dr^2\mathrm{\Delta }(r)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(26)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(r)r^2\mathrm{\Phi }/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{b^2r^4+16\alpha ^2}{b^2r^2}=r^2+\frac{r_{\mathrm{th}}^4}{r^2},$$
(27)
with $`r_{\mathrm{th}}2\sqrt{|\alpha |/b}`$. Note that the metric is singular in $`r=0`$. However, this divergence is an artifact of the coordinate system that comes from the behaviour of the spherical coordinates at $`r=0`$.

From the function $`\mathrm{\Delta }(r)`$ we can calculate the area of the 2-surface $`t=\mathrm{const}`$, $`r=\mathrm{const}`$, which is given by $`A^{(2)}=4\pi \mathrm{\Delta }(r)`$. The function $`A^{(2)}`$ has a minimum at $`r=r_{\mathrm{th}}`$, and does not have zeros. For large values of $`r`$, $`A^{(2)}4\pi r^2`$ and the metric goes into the flat spacetime metric. At $`r=0`$, $`A^{(2)}`$ diverges due to the singularity of the metric. This analysis shows that the effective geometry for the photons is in fact a wormhole , with a throat located at $`r_{\mathrm{th}}`$, and two different asymptotic regions.

The wormhole structure may also be displayed by making a coordinate change to write the metric in the standard form. By setting

$$\rho ^2r^2+\frac{r_{\mathrm{th}}^4}{r^2};$$
(28)
and inverting this relation, we can write the metric Eq.(26) in the form

$$ds^2=dt^2\frac{1}{1\frac{b_\pm (\rho _\pm )}{\rho _\pm }}d\rho _\pm ^2\rho _\pm ^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(29)
with

$$b_\pm (\rho _\pm )=\frac{2\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^4\rho _\pm ^4\pm \rho _\pm ^2\sqrt{\rho _\pm ^4\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^4}}{\rho _\pm ^3\pm \rho _\pm \sqrt{\rho _\pm ^4\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^4}},$$
(30)
and $`\rho _{\mathrm{th}}\rho _\pm <\mathrm{}`$. The “$`+`$” patch covers the region $`r_{\mathrm{th}}r<\mathrm{}`$, and the “$``$” patch, the region $`0<rr_{\mathrm{th}}`$. The functions $`b_\pm (\rho _\pm )`$ satisfy the requirements needed in order to have a wormhole geometry , with a throat located at $`\rho _{\mathrm{th}}\sqrt{2}r_{\mathrm{th}}`$. Because two different shape functions $`b(\rho )`$ are needed, the wormhole is asymmetric under the interchange $`\rho _+\rho _{}`$. Note also that only the region covered by the “+” patch is asymptotically flat.

The same analysis can be carried out for the magnetic case, i.e. $`\alpha =0`$, $`\beta 0`$. It follows that the effective metric also describes a wormhole, with a throat located at $`r_{\mathrm{th}}=\sqrt{|\beta |/b}`$, and asymptotic regions as in the electric case.

To analyze the motion of the photons in the effective geometry, we can use the effective potential. In the case of a static and spherically symmetric spacetime, $`L`$ and $`E`$ represent constants of motion along a geodesic path:

$$g_{\phi \phi }\dot{\phi }=Lg_{tt}\dot{t}=E,$$
(31)
where the dot indicates derivation w.r.t. an affine parameter, and $`\theta =\pi /2`$. If we consider null curves we obtain

$$g_{tt}\dot{t}^2+g_{rr}\dot{r}^2+g_{\phi \phi }\dot{\phi }^2=0,$$
(32)
which can be rewritten as

$$\dot{r}^2=E^2V(r).$$
(33)
The effective potential $`V`$ is given by

$$V\frac{L^2}{g_{rr}g_{\phi \phi }}+E^2\left(1+\frac{1}{g_{rr}g_{tt}}\right).$$
(34)
In the coordinate $`r`$, the metric is given by Eq.(26), and the effective potential is

$$V(r)=\frac{L^2r^2}{r^4+r_{\mathrm{th}}^4}$$
(35)
The maximum of $`V(r)`$ is at $`V_M=L^2/2r_{\mathrm{th}}`$. The following plot gives the effective potential as a function of the $`r`$ coordinate for different values of the angular momentum, and a fixed $`r_{\mathrm{th}}`$.

From this plot we see that photons coming from $`r=\mathrm{}`$ with energy smaller than $`V_M`$ are reflected by the potential barrier. Hence they turn back without reaching the throat. Photons with $`E>V_M`$ will inevitably pass through the throat and will not turn back.

The motion of the photons can also be described from the plot of the effective potential in the $`\rho _\pm `$ coordinates. Let us recall first what happens in an ultrastatic spherically symmetric gravitational wormhole with the following metric:

$$ds^2=dt^2\frac{d\rho ^2}{1\frac{\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^2}{\rho ^2}}\rho ^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.$$
(36)
In this case the effective potential is given by

$$V=\left(1\frac{\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^2}{\rho ^2}\right)\left(\frac{L^2}{\rho ^2}E^2\right)+E^2.$$
(37)
From this expression, it is easily seen that only particles for which $`L^2/E^2<\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^2`$ will reach the throat. This feature is displayed in the next plot.

Because the metric given in Eq.(36) describes a symmetric wormhole, after passing through the throat the photon will feel the “mirror image” of this effective potential.

In our case, the expression for $`V`$ in the $`\rho _\pm `$ coordinates is

$$V(\rho _\pm )=2\left(\frac{L^2}{\rho _\pm ^2}E^2\right)\frac{\rho _\pm ^4\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^4}{\rho _\pm ^2(\rho _\pm ^2\sqrt{\rho _\pm ^4\rho _{\mathrm{th}}^4})}+E^2$$
(38)
The following plots give the “$`+`$” and “$``$” parts of the effective potential as a function of the $`\rho _\pm `$ coordinates, for a fixed value of the energy.

Because of the abovementioned asymmetry, here we need both Figs.(3) and (4). All the curves in these two figures intersect at $`\rho =\rho _{\mathrm{th}}`$, which corresponds to $`V=E^2=25`$. In these two plots (as well in Fig.(2)) the curves depend on the energy of the photon. This is illustrated in the subsequent plot.

Comparing Fig.(2) with Figs.(3) and (4) we see that a photon travelling in the effective metric given by Eq.(29) will be under the influence of the same type of effective potential as a photon travelling through a gravitational wormhole. Let us remark that because the path of the photons is invariant under conformal transformations, the wormhole discussed here does not depend on the election of the frame in which the metric is given.

The photons that go from the “$`+`$” patch to the “$``$” patch traverse the throat and inevitably escape to $`\rho _{}\mathrm{}`$ (see Figs.(3) and (4)). This motion takes place in the interval $`(0,r_{\mathrm{th}})`$ of the $`r`$ coordinate (see Fig.(1)).

## IV Conclusion

We have shown how a geometrical structure considered previously in a purely gravitational context can also arise in a nonlinear electromagnetic theory in a flat background. We would like to point out once more that this effective wormhole affects solely the motion of the photons; all other types of matter move according to the flat spacetime dynamical laws. Although we have worked out in detail an example based in Born-Infeld theory, in principle any nonlinear electromagnetic theory could generate analogues of gravitational structures in a given background. This statement also applies to nonabelian gauge theories with nonlinear dynamics.

Let us remark that the gravitational wormhole requires matter that violates the null energy condition as a source of Einstein’s equations. In the case analyzed here, the wormhole is generated through an electromagnetic field that obeys a nonlinear dynamics, and is linked to the metric via Eq.(8).

Finally, it should be stressed that the analogy between nonlinear EM and Maxwell’s EM in the presence of a nonlinear dielectric medium may open the door to an actual realization of this wormhole (and also of any other of these effective gravitational-like structures) in the laboratory. We will tackle this problem in a forthcoming article.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

FB would like to thank the members of the Gravitation and Cosmology group (LAFEX-CBPF) for their hospitality. SEPB would like to acknowledge financial support from CONICET (Argentina).

## appendix

The expression given in Eq.(8)

$`g^{\mu \nu }=_F\gamma ^{\mu \nu }4_{FF}F_{}^{\mu }{}_{\alpha }{}^{}F^{\alpha \nu },`$ (39)
may be viewed as a system of ten equations with the EM field components as unknowns. If we restrict our attention to diagonal $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ and $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, the equations

$$4_{FF}F_{}^{\mu }{}_{\alpha }{}^{}F^{\alpha \nu }=0,\mu \nu ,$$
(40)
impose several constraints on the degrees of freedom of the problem. It turns out that non-trivial solutions are obtained when only two components of $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ are different form zero: one electric and its dual magnetic component 444This situation is not improved when one considers $`=(F,F^{})`$, due to the property $`F_{}^{\mu }{}_{\lambda }{}^{}F^{\lambda \nu }=\frac{1}{4}F^{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }^{}\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ (see ).. In particular, we can choose a Minkowskian background in spherical coordinates for $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$. Setting $`F^{tr}A`$, $`F^{\theta \phi }B`$, and the rest of the components of $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ equal to zero in order to satisfy Eq.(40), we are led to the equations

$`g^{tt}`$ $`=`$ $`_F4_{FF}A^2,`$ (41)
$`g^{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`_F+4_{FF}A^2,`$ (42)
$`g^{\theta \theta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_F}{r^2}}4_{FF}r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta B^2,`$ (43)
$`g^{\phi \phi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_F}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}4_{FF}r^2B^2,`$ (44)
which is the effective metric given by Eq.(15).