The reason I have given such a complicated description
of a relatively simple procedure is that most of the steps
generalize quite broadly. Let Δ be a nonexpanding horizon
[41,42], that is, a null (D − 1)-dimensional manifold with
null normal l such that:
(1) Δ has the topology ð0; 1Þ ×
ˆ
Δ, where
ˆ
Δ is usually
taken to be compact (a sphere for a black hole, a
torus for a black ring, etc.).
(2) The expansion θ
ðlÞ
of the null normal vanishes. If
the stress-energy tensor satisfies the null energy
condition for l, that is, T
AB
l
A
l
B
≥ 0, then this
condition further implies [42] that l has vanishing
shear and that
L
l
q
ab
¼ 0; ð3:1Þ
where L is the Lie derivative and q
ab
is the (degenerate)
induced metric on Δ.
A n onexpanding horizon generali zes the notion of a
Killing horizon, dropping the requirement of a Killing
vector but retaining a time translation symmetry on the
horizon itself. As in the Schwarzschild case, the integral
curves of l
a
on Δ are the null geodesic generators of Δ.
In the absence of a Killing vector, there is no preferred
time coordinate, but it may be shown that a generic non-
expanding horizon has a pr eferred foliation, a set of
“good cuts,” that generalize the constant time slices of
the Schwarzschild metric [43]. Hence, we c an again
construct an r–v plane and a Gaussian null coordinate
system near Δ.
The main change from the Schwarzschild case is that the
cross section
ˆ
Δ of a nonexpanding horizon need not have
any symmetries, so conventional Kaluza-Klein methods no
longer apply. As Yoon has shown, though, there is a
generalized Kaluza-Klein reduction even in the absence
of symmetries [44,45]. Start by writing the metric in the
general form
ds
2
¼ g
AB
dz
A
dz
B
¼ g
ab
dx
a
dx
b
þ ϕ
μν
ðdy
μ
þ A
a
μ
dx
a
Þðdy
ν
þ A
b
ν
dx
b
Þ;
ð3:2Þ
where lowercase roman indices (a,b ,…) run fr om 0 t o 1,
lowercase greek indices (μ; ν; …)runfrom2toD − 1,
and uppercase roman indices (A; B; …) run from 0 to
D − 1.The“x” coord inates label our preferr ed two -
dimensional manifold, while the “y” coordinates are the
transverse directions. Define the Kaluza-Klein-like
derivatives
ˆ
∂
a
¼ ∂
a
− A
a
μ
∂
μ
;
D
a
ϕ
μν
¼
ˆ
∂
a
ϕ
μν
− ð∂
μ
A
a
ρ
Þϕ
ρν
− ð∂
ν
A
a
ρ
Þϕ
ρμ
; ð3:3Þ
connections
ˆ
Γ
a
bc
¼
1
2
g
ad
ð
ˆ
∂
b
g
dc
þ
ˆ
∂
c
g
db
−
ˆ
∂
d
g
bc
Þ;
ˆ
Γ
ρ
μν
¼
1
2
ϕ
ρσ
ð∂
μ
ϕ
σν
þ ∂
ν
ϕ
σμ
− ∂
σ
ϕ
μν
Þ; ð3:4Þ
and curvatures
ˆ
R
ab
¼
ˆ
∂
c
ˆ
Γ
c
ab
−
ˆ
∂
a
ˆ
Γ
c
bc
þ
ˆ
Γ
c
ab
ˆ
Γ
d
cd
−
ˆ
Γ
c
ad
ˆ
Γ
d
bc
;
R
μν
¼ ∂
ρ
ˆ
Γ
ρ
μν
− ∂
μ
ˆ
Γ
ρ
νρ
þ
ˆ
Γ
ρ
μν
ˆ
Γ
σ
ρσ
−
ˆ
Γ
ρ
μσ
ˆ
Γ
σ
νρ
;
F
ab
μ
¼
ˆ
∂
a
A
b
μ
−
ˆ
∂
b
A
a
μ
;
ˆ
R ¼ g
ab
ˆ
R
ab
; R ¼ ϕ
μν
R
μν
: ð3:5Þ
A straightforward calculation of the Einstein-Hilbert
action then gives
I ¼
Z
d
D−2
yI
2
ð3:6Þ
with
I
2
¼
1
16πG
Z
d
2
x
ffiffiffiffiffiffi
−g
p
ffiffiffiffi
ϕ
p
ˆ
R þ
1
4
g
ab
g
cd
ϕ
μν
F
ac
μ
F
bd
ν
þ
1
4
g
ab
ϕ
μν
ϕ
ρσ
ðD
a
ϕ
μρ
D
b
ϕ
νσ
− D
a
ϕ
μν
D
b
ϕ
ρσ
Þ
þ
1
4
ϕ
μν
g
ab
g
cd
ð∂
μ
g
ac
∂
ν
g
bd
− ∂
μ
g
ab
∂
ν
g
cd
ÞþR
;
ð3:7Þ
where g and ϕ are the determinants of g
ab
and ϕ
μν
.
The first two lines in (3.7) look like an ordinary Kaluza-
Klein reduction, and can in fact be viewed as the action of a
Kaluza-Klein theory whose gauge group is the group of
diffeomorphisms of the transverse manifold [44]. A two-
dimensional interpretation of the third line is less obvious.
We can cure this, though, with a partial gauge fixing. First,
we can always choose local coordinates in which
g
ab
¼
−2h 1
10
: ð3:8Þ
Yoon calls this “Polyakov gauge,” after a similar choice in
two-dimensional field theories [46], while from the D-
dimensional point of view, it is essentially Bondi gauge
[47] or Gaussian null coordinates [39]. It is easy to see that
with this choice, even if h depends on the y
μ
,
ϕ
μν
g
ab
g
cd
ð∂
μ
g
ac
∂
ν
g
bd
− ∂
μ
g
ab
∂
ν
g
cd
Þ¼0: ð3:9Þ
For our purposes, Eq. (3.8) is too restrictive a gauge
choice—it hides a piece of the symmetry we are
trying to understand. But if we now allow an arbitrary
S. CARLIP PHYS. REV. D 101, 046002 (2020)
046002-4