Quasi-normal modes in a symmetric triangular barrier

Poulami Dutta Roy1 , Jagannath Das1 and Sayan Kar 1,2∗

1
Department of Physics
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, 721 302, India. and
2
Centre for Theoretical Studies
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, 721 302, India.

Quasi-normal modes (QNMs) of the massless scalar wave in 1 + 1 dimensions are obtained for a
symmetric, finite, triangular barrier potential. This problem is exactly solvable, with Airy functions
involved in the solutions. Before we obtain the QNMs, we first demonstrate how such a triangular
barrier can arise in the context of scalar wave propagation in a specifically tailor-made wormhole
geometry. Thereafter, we state the Ferrari-Mashhoon idea, in which the bound states in a well
potential may be used to find the QNMs in the corresponding barrier potential. We write down the
arXiv:1904.08163v1 [gr-qc] 17 Apr 2019

bound state condition in the exactly solvable triangular well and show how it can be transformed to
the condition for finding the QNMs. Specific values of the real bound state energies and the complex
QNMS are obtained by solving the corresponding transcendental equations. Finally, using the QNMs
found, we plot the time domain profiles for some of the frequencies and damping constants, in order
to show the ‘quasinormal ringing’. In summary, we believe that our example here, which goes beyond
the simplest well-studied case of a square barrier, will be of pedagogic value while introducing and
understanding QNMs for more complex and realistic systems, particularly in gravitational wave and
black hole physics.

I. INTRODUCTION

An oft-quoted example of the quasinormal mode is the ringing sound we hear when we strike a metal glass with a
metallic rod. The ringing decays in time–thus the mode is quasi-normal and not a usual normal mode. The decay
of the ringing obviously means that energy is lost in the environment –the system is open and hence dissipative. In
many ways, such systems are interesting and also realistic.
The earliest mention and discussion on such modes appear in the paper in 1900 by Horace Lamb [1] who calls them
peculiar vibrations, while analysing the wave system arising in the free vibrations of a nucleus in an extended medium.
Much of the early work on these modes (and also quite a bit of the later work as well) are thus in nuclear physics.
It was in 1970, in an article published in Nature [2], Vishveshswara first noted the quasinormal mode while working
on perturbations of black holes [3]. Following soon, came the work of Chandrasekhar and Detweiler in 1975 [4],
wherein, among other issues concerning the Schwarzschild black hole, the exact quasinormal modes in a toy model of
the rectangular barrier potential was discussed. Several other potentials also exhibit exact quasinormal modes (eg.
Poschl-Teller [5],[6]), which have been found and analysed in detail, over the years.
In the current wake of detection of gravitational waves [20] the study of quasi-normal modes has received great
interest. Such modes arise in the context of black hole stability and are discussed extensively in black hole
perturbation theory. Since there is loss of energy involved, the quasi-normal frequency must be complex with the real
part giving the actual energy carried by the wave and the imaginary part giving an idea about the damping time.
One must have the right sign for the imaginary part in order to have a decaying in time profile. In astrophysics, the
QNMs are important because they depend only on the source/system parameters (eg. mass, angular momentum
etc.) and not on the cause producing them. Through the nature of the solutions for the scalar or tensor QNMs, one
can differentiate various theories of gravity [7]. This can help us in obtaining information about the parameters of a
black hole or even a wormhole [19].

The central problem lies in calculating the modes. In most cases, the wave equation is not exactly solvable due to the
complexity of the effective potential and numerical methods are the only way out. Though various semi-analytical
techniques, like the WKB method [8] are there to provide a physical intuition on the behavior of these modes, to
get precise values, one has to take resort to different numerical techniques. The handful of scenarios where exact
solutions are possible are limited and therefore important. Such exact solutions, if not of any real value (in the sense
of observations), do have great utility in a pedagogic sense, to say the very least. In the past, there have been many

∗ Electronic address: poulamiphysics@iitkgp.ac.in, sayan@phy.iitkgp.ac.in

 2

reviews on the QNMs in simple, exactly solvable potentials [9]. Apart from the square barrier, there are several
other potentials for which exact expressions for the modes are available. In our work here, we study another simple
example–the case of a symmetric, finite, triangular barrier.
The triangular barrier potential and its inverse (the triangular well) are exactly solvable potentials whose solutions
are found in terms of the Airy functions [10]. The knowledge of the bound states of the potential (in terms of
Airy functions) shows the way towards finding the QNMs, using an interesting correspondence first found by
Ferrari and Mashoon. This Ferrari-Mashoon method shows how a given barrier potential, via a change of variables
and parameters, can be inverted into a well potential, in which bound states can be found. Using the inverse
transformation, one can extract the QNMs too, including the spatial wave functions. The QNMs which are directly
obtained from inverse transformation of the bound states are termed as the proper quasi-normal modes. However,
the QNMs can also be found by directly using the appropriate boundary conditions and without referring to the
corresponding bound-state problem in an inverted (well) potential. The Ferrari-Mashhoon correspondence also have
limited applicability; despite being an interesting idea.

Our work here is organised as follows. In Section II we briefly introduce the potential well and also the barrier on
which our work is based. Also in this section we construct a wormhole solution whose effective potential for scalar
wave propagation is a triangular barrier. In Section III, we discuss the idea of quasi-normal modes and explain the
Ferrari-Mashhoon idea. In Section IV we go on to find the bound states of the symmetric, finite triangular well and
the corresponding energy values. In Section V we obtain the QNMs of the triangular barrier independently and then
mention how the Ferrari-Mashhoon idea can be used. We explain and demonstrate how the temporal part of the wave
function displays a damped ringing oscillation by explicitly constructing the time-domain profile at a fixed value of
the spatial coordinate. We also calculate the frequency and corresponding damping time for different throat radius
of the wormhole. This shows whether there is a possibility of detecting such a wormhole using the existing gravi-
tational wave detectors. Finally, in the conclusion, we comment on the results obtained and their possible implications.

II. TRIANGULAR WELL AND BARRIER POTENTIALS

The symmetric, finite triangular potential well is given as-

(
V0 |x|
V (x) = a − V0 , −a ≤ x ≤ a
(1)
0 , x > a, x < −a ,

where 2a is width of the well and V0 is the depth of the well. In order to get the corresponding potential barrier we
invert the above potential-

(
V0 |x|
V0 − a , −a ≤ x ≤ a
V (x) = (2)
0 , x > a, x < −a .

(a) Potential well (b) Potential barrier

FIG. 1: V0 = a = 2
 3

Let us understand the physical significance of such a potential by constructing a wormhole geometry for which
we obtain an effective potential for massless scalar waves (spatial part of the wave function) , as represented by a
triangular barrier. To begin with let us assume the wormhole line element to be of the form-

ds2 = −dt2 + dx2 + r2 (x)(dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2 ), (3)

where the coordinate x (−∞ ≤ x ≤ ∞) is like the ‘tortoise’ coordinate commonly used in black hole physics and the
radial coordinate r is written in terms of x through the relation-

dr2
dx2 = . (4)
grr

The only unknown function in the line element is r(x) which, for a wormhole, is symmetric, r(x) = r(−x). Also,
r(x = 0) is finite, positive and non-zero. In addition, for asymptotic flatness, we usually assume that r → ±x as x
becomes large. However, in our example below, we will see that r(x) will tend to ±x at a finite x, exactly where
the triangular barrier will end and the potential will become zero. In other words, we have a wormhole ‘sandwiched’
between two flat regions.
If we intend to study the propagation of a massless scalar wave in such a wormhole spacetime we need to solve the
Klein-Gordon equation, given as:

✷Φ = 0 . (5)

After separation of variables using the ansatz-

Φ(x, t, θ, φ) = u(x) e−iωt Y (θ , φ) (6)

and writing the radial equation, we get-

d2 u 2r′ du  2 m(m + 1) 
+ + ω − u = 0, (7)
dx2 r dx r2
where the prime denotes a derivative w.r.t. x, m is related to the angular momentum. To find the effective potential,
we rewrite equation (7) in the form of the time-independent Schrödinger equation, by eliminating the first order
derivative term with a change of the dependent variable. Thus, assuming u(x) = A(x)B(x) and considering the
differential equation for A(x), we note that for the first derivative in A(x) term to vanish, we need B(x) to satisfy

B′ −r′
= . (8)
B r
Substituting this in equation (7) we find the equation for A(x)-

A′′  2 m(m + 1) r′′ 

+ ω − − = 0, (9)
A r2 r
so that our effective potential turns out to be-

m(m + 1) r′′ (x)

V (x) = + . (10)
r(x)2 r(x)

If we want the effective potential for the m = 0 mode to be a symmetric triangular barrier as shown in figure 1(b) then,

(
V0 |x|
r′′ V0 − a , −a ≤ x ≤ a
= (11)
r 0 , x > a, x < −a .
 4

On solving the above equation we get r(x) as-



 −x , x < −a
 h V0 x i h V0 x i
 V0 + a V0 + a
C Ai + D Bi , −a ≤ x ≤ 0


 V 2 V 2

 ( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
r(x) = (12)
 h V0 x i h V0 x i
 V0 − a V0 − a

 C Ai V 2 + D Bi V 2 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a
( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3




x ,x > a


where Ai and Bi are the Airy functions of first and second kind respectively and C and D are constants. For the
regions x > a and x < −a the spacetime is flat which is defined with V (x) = 0. The metric there is Minkowskian.
One must notice that the differential equation for region 0 ≤ x ≤ a will have a general solution with the argument
V0 x
V0 −
of the Airy function being −V
a
2 . Since we require r(x) to be a continuous function over the entire region, we take
( a0 )3
1 1
only one root of (−1) i.e. -1, which, when squared becomes 1. The other two roots of (−1) 3 , which we do not use,
3
±2iπ
correspond to Airy functions having factors e 3 in the argument.
We need to ensure that the function r(x) thus constructed, is continuous and so is it’s first derivative across the
boundary. This requirement will lead to two matching conditions-

CAi[0] + DBi[0] = a (13)

 V  −1
0 3
CAi′ [0] + DBi′ [0] = − . (14)
a
Taking the ratio of the above equations we get-

C zBi′ [0] + Bi[0]

=− (15)
D zAi′ [0] + Ai[0]
1
where z = (V0 a2 ) 3 . Since we wish to construct a wormhole geometry, r(x = 0) cannot be zero. Hence we must
consider the even set of solutions for which r′ (x = 0) = 0. Imposing this condition we get-

C Bi′ [z]
=− ′ . (16)
D Ai [z]
Thereafter, combining equations (15) and (16), we arrive at a transcendental equation of the form-

Bi′ [z] zBi′ [0] + Bi[0]

= (17)
Ai′ [z] zAi′ [0] + Ai[0]
Solving the above equation, gives the value of z = 1.58377.
This value imposes a condition on V0 and a given as-

1
z = (V0 a2 ) 3 = 1.58377 (18)

which, in turn implies that the m = 0 mode effective potential of the scalar wave (spatial part) is a symmetric
triangular barrier.
The constants C and D have the dimension of length due to the overall factor ‘a’ present in their expressions. Solving
equations (13) and (14)-

Bi′ [0] + 1z Bi[0] 0.44 + z1 0.61

C =a ′ ′
=a (19)
Ai[0]Bi [0] − Ai [0]Bi[0] 0.318
1
′
Ai [0] + z Ai[0] −0.26 + z1 0.35
D =a ′ = a . (20)
Ai [0]Bi[0] − Ai[0]Bi′ [0] −0.318
 5

Finally, we arrive at the expression of r(x) given as,



 −x , x < −a
V x i V0 x i
0.44+ z1 0.61 −0.26+ z1 0.35
 h h
 V0 + 0a V0 + a
a Ai + a Bi , −a ≤ x ≤ 0


 0.318 V 2 −0.318 V 2

 ( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
r(x) = (21)
V x i V0 x i
0.44+ z1 0.61 −0.26+ z1 0.35
h h
V0 − 0a

 V0 − a

 a 0.318 Ai V 2 + a −0.318 Bi V 2 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a
( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3




x ,x > a


In order to visualise the wormhole geometry, let us consider V0 = a. Thus, V0 = a = 1.58377, which gives the values
of the constants as C = 4.16233 and D = 0.172416. The throat radius (b0 ) of the wormhole thus constructed, is given
as:
 0.44 + 1 0.61 −0.26 + z1 0.35 
z
b0 = r(x = 0) = a Ai[z] + Bi[z] = a(0.39098) = 0.619222 . (22)
0.318 −0.318
The plot below shows the behavior of r(x) with respect to x. It should be noted that the second derivative of r(x)
is discontinuous which is reflected in the fact that the wormhole we constructed has matter in it till −a ≤ x ≤ a.
Beyond x = a, −a, the metric is that of flat spacetime. At the boundaries, the curvature tensors have a discontinuity
reminiscent of the construction of a ‘sandwich’ spacetime.

FIG. 2: Variation of r(x)

III. QUASINORMAL MODES AND BOUND STATES

A. Quasi-normal modes

Quasi-normal modes are a discrete set of complex frequencies which satisfy the boundary conditions of purely ingoing
and outgoing waves at x → ±∞ for an open system [11]. To find the QNMs in a given problem we begin with the
standard 1 + 1 dimensional wave equation in the presence of a potential V (x), i.e. we have

∂2φ ∂2φ
− + V (x)φ = 0 . (23)
∂t2 ∂x2
Using φ(t, x) = e−(iωt) ψ(x), the spatial wave function ψ(x) obeys a time-independent Schrödinger equation:

d2 ψ(x) d2 ψ(x)
+ (E − V (x))ψ(x) = 0 −→ + (ω 2 − V (x))ψ(x) = 0 . (24)
dx2 dx2
The coordinate x is a spatial coordinate ranging from −∞ to +∞ and E = ω 2 . Time t runs from 0 to infinity.
The equation for ψ(x) needs to be solved with proper outgoing boundary conditions at the spatial infinities, if
ω is to represent a complex quasi-normal frequency. The corresponding φ(x, t) is the quasi-normal mode with
φ(x, t) = e−iωt ψ(x). For an asymptotically flat, static spacetime, the potential is positive and satisfies,

V (x) → 0 as x → ±∞ (25)
 6

with the boundary conditions being:

ψ → e−iωx as x → −∞ and ψ → eiωx as x → ∞. (26)

For a black hole spacetime this is physically motivated and makes sense as at the horizon x → −∞, there shall only be
an ingoing wave, while at spatial infinity x → ∞ there will only be the outgoing wave carrying the energy away from
the system to infinity. Note that for ω with a negative imaginary part, the time part e−iωt behaves like a damped
oscillation and the spatial part diverges to infinity. Thus, the meaningful use of the QNMs appears to be through the
nature of the temporal part. The spatial part is evaluated at fixed x (finite) and its equation, when solved, yields the
QNMs.

B. Ferrari-Mashhoon method: a bound state–quasinormal mode correspondence

In their 1984 paper, Ferrari and Mashhoon[12] devised a new analytical technique for finding the QNMs of black hole
spacetimes. The method was based on the fact that there is a connection between the QNMs and the bound states
of the inverted potentials. Let us begin with the time independent Schrödinger equation for finding the bound states
(E < 0) of a potential well defined by −V (x, p), where p is some parameter appearing in the potential.
d2 ψ d2 ψ
− − V (x, p)ψ = −Eψ −→ + V (x, p)ψ = Eψ (27)
dx2 dx2
The bound state wavefunction and the corresponding frequency also depends on the parameter p, ψ = ψ(x, p) and
ω = ω(p).
Consider the transformation
x −→ −ix and p −→ ip (28)
such that the potential remains invariant
V (x, p) = V (−ix, ip). (29)
The equation (27) under this transformation becomes-
d2 ψ d2 ψ d2 ψ d2 ψ
−→ − ; − V (−ix, ip)ψ = −Eψ => − + V (x, p)ψ = Eψ (30)
dx2 dx2 dx2 dx2
which is nothing but a time-independent Schrödinger equation for scattering states from a potential barrier V (x, p).
Thus, the method says that if we can find a formula for bound state energy, then the QNMs can be obtained from the
bound states just by using the transformation of (28). We can take this as a QNM if it satisfies the proper boundary
conditions. To visualise, let us take a look at the Schrödinger equation for the potential well when V = 0 i.e. outside
the well-
d2 ψ
− Eψ = 0 . (31)
dx2
The solution is-
ψ(x, p) ∝ e±ωx ; x −→ ∓∞ . (32)
If we use the transformation x −→ −ix then the solution becomes
ψ ∝ e∓iωx as x −→ ∓∞ (33)
which is the boundary condition for QNMs. One can also check this by including the time part and writing the full
wave function φ(t, x).

IV. BOUND STATES OF THE TRIANGULAR WELL

In order to find the bound states (E < 0), let us divide the system as shown in figure 1(a) into three regions, region
I is −∞ < x < −a, region II is −a ≤ x ≤ a and region III is a < x < ∞.
 7

A. Solving the Schrödinger equation

Region I:
The Schrödinger equation is given as -

d2 ψ d2 ψ
− Eψ = 0 => − ω2ψ = 0 (34)
dx2 dx2
2m
√
where we have taken ~2 = 1 and ω = E. The solution is given by-

ψ(x) = Aeωx (35)

with A being arbitrary constant and ψ remaining finite as x → −∞.

Region III:

The Schrödinger equation remains the same as in Region I with the solution being-

ψ(x) = Be−ωx , (36)

B being some arbitrary constant which has to be equal to constant A for ψ to be symmetric or anti-symmetric and
ψ remaining finite for x → ∞.

Region II:
The equation in this region is given as-
 
V0 x

a + E − V0 ψ ,0 ≤ x ≤ a
d2 ψ


=  (37)
dx2 
V0 x

 −

+ E − V0 ψ , −a ≤ x ≤ 0
a

The equation is the Airy differential equation with its solution being-

 h V0 x i h V0 x i
+E−V +E−V

 C Ai a V0 2 0 + D Bi a V0 2 0 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a

 ( )3 a ( )3 a
ψ(x) = (38)
 h −V0 x i h −V0 x i
CAi a V+E−V +E−V0
 0

0
2 + DBi a
V0 2
, −a ≤ x ≤ 0
( a )3 ( a )3

where C and D are constants and Ai, Bi are the Airy functions of first and second kind respectively. Following the
argument mentioned in Section II for equation (12) here also we take only one root of (−1)1/3 i.e. -1 and squaring it
gives 1 in the denominator of the argument of the Airy functions for the solution of −a ≤ x ≤ 0.

B. Constructing even states and matching at boundary

The even states are constructed from the above solution as follows-


 Aeωx , x < −a
 h −V0 x i h −V0 x i
 +E−V0 +E−V0
C Ai a
+ DBi a
, −a ≤ x ≤ 0


 V 2 V 2

 ( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
ψ(x) = (39)
 h V0 x i h V0 x i
a +E−V0 a +E−V0


 C Ai V 2 + DBi V 2 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a
( 0 )3 ( a0 ) 3


 −ωx a


Ae ,x > a.
 8

Since the wavefunction and it’s derivative are continuous over the entire region so we match ψ and ψ ′ across x = a.
h E i h E i
Ae−ωa = C Ai V 2 + D Bi V 2 (40)
( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
 V  13  h E i h E i
0
−ωAe−ωa = C Ai′ V 2 + D Bi′ V 2 . (41)
a ( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
Hence by taking the ratio of equations (40) and (41) we get -
h i 1
h i
Bi VE 2 + ( √1E ) ( Va0 ) 3 Bi′ VE 2
C 0
( )3 0
( )3
=− h a i h a i. (42)
D E 1 V
Ai V0 2 + ( √E ) ( a ) 3 Ai VE
0
1
′
2
( )3 0 ( )3
a a

Since the coefficients C and D are undetermined, we use another condition. For an even wavefunction, ψ ′ (0) = 0. We
have to explicitly apply this condition as our wavefunctions are not inherently symmetric or anti-symmetric. Applying
C
this we get the ratio D as -
h i
Bi′ E−V 0
2
C V
( 0 )3
=− h a i. (43)
D Ai′ E−V 0
2
V0
( a )3

Hence the final transcendental equation we get whose roots are the bound state energies is given as-
h i 1
h i h i
Bi V0E 2 + ( √1E ) ( Va0 ) 3 Bi′ VE 2 Bi ′ E−V0
V 2
( )3 ( 0 )3 ( 0 )3
h a i 1
h a i = h a i. (44)
V
E 1
Ai V0 2 + ( √E ) ( a0 ) 3 Ai′ V0 2 E
Ai′ E−VV0 2
0
( a )3 ( a )3 ( a )3

C. Constructing odd states and matching at boundary

The odd states are constructed as follows-


ωx
−Ae h −V x

 i h −V0 x i
, x < −a
 0 +E−V +E−V0
0


 −C Ai a
V 2 − DBi a
V 2 , −a ≤ x ≤ 0

 ( a0 ) 3 ( a0 ) 3
ψ(x) = (45)
 h V0 x i h V0 x i
C Ai a V+E−V a +E−V0
 0

 2 + DBi V 2 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a
 ( 0 )3 ( a0 ) 3
 −ωx a


Ae ,x > a.
Proceeding similar to the case of even states we match the wavefunction and it’s derivative at the boundary to get -
h i 1
h i
Bi VE 2 + ( √1 ) ( V0 ) 3 Bi′ E
2
C ( 0 )3 E a V
( 0 )3
=− h a i h a i. (46)
D Ai VE 2 + (
1
√1 ) ( V0 ) 3 Ai′ E
2
0 ( E
)3 a V0
( )3
a a

C
Here, since we have odd states, to determine the ratio we evaluate ψ(0) = 0 which gives-
D
h i
Bi E−V 0
V0 2
C ( )3
=− h a i. (47)
D Ai E−V 0
V0 2
( a )3

Hence the final transcendental equation becomes-

h i 1
h i h i
Bi VE 2 + ( √1 ) ( V0 ) 3 Bi′ E
2 Bi E−V0
2
( 0 )3 E a V
( 0 )3
V
( 0 )3
h a i 1
h a i = h a i. (48)
Ai VE 0
2 + ( √1E ) ( Va0 ) 3 Ai′ VE 0
2 Ai E−VV0 2
0
( a )3 ( a )3 ( a )3
 9

D. Finding even and odd eigenstates

We consider the following cases: Va0 > 1, Va0 < 1 and Va0 = 1. The energy eigenvalues are listed below with the
normalised wavefunction shown in Fig 3 for V0 = 5 , a = 2.

Even state Odd state

V0 = a = 2 0.99364 0.000266614
V0 = 5, a = 2 3.12575 0.775377
V0 = 2, a = 5 0.254455 0.731984
V0 = a = 1 0.173819 No odd state

TABLE I: Energy eigenvalues for even and odd states.

(a) Even state of V0 = 5, a = 2 (b) Odd state of V0 = 5, a = 2

FIG. 3: Normalised wavefunction for V0 = 5, a = 2.

V. FINDING THE QUASI-NORMAL MODES

Let us now move on towards finding the QNMs in the barrier potential. Using the Ferrari-Mashhoon idea we define a
transformation which will keep the potential unchanged (except for the overall sign). This transformation is given as,
x −→ −ix . (49)
In our case the magnitude of the potential remains invariant since a −→ −ia. The solutions for the different regions
can directly be obtained from the bound states by simply imposing the transformation mentioned above. One may
find the QNMs directly by solving the Schrödinger equation for a barrier with proper QNM boundary conditions.
However, since our potential is invariant under the transformation (49) one can also get the QNMs by making use of
the Ferrari-Mashhoon method. It is important to note that while doing so, one must keep in mind that we need to
1 ±2iπ
consider only (i) 3 = −i as the other roots of (i)1/3 can be absorbed by considering e 3 in the argument of the Airy
function and remembering that they do not give any new solution [15]. Thus the even set of solutions in the three
regions of the barrier (fig 2b) becomes-


 Ae−iωx , x < −a
 h V0 x i h V0 x i
 −E+V 0 −E+V
C Ai
a
+ DBi a V0 2 0 , −a ≤ x ≤ 0


 V 2
 ( a0 ) 3 ( a )3
ψ(x) = (50)
 h −V0 x i h −V0 x i
 −E+V 0 −E+V 0


 C Ai a V0 2 + DBi a V0 2 ,0 ≤ x ≤ a

 ( a )3 ( a )3
 iωx

Ae ,x > a.
For the odd set of wavefunctions there will be a negative sign for ψ(x) in the region −∞ < x < 0. The quasi-normal
modes for the even and odd states are obtained by solving the transcendental equations (51) and (52) respectively
 10

which again has been obtained by imposing the transformation on equations (44) and (48). In the argument of the
Airy functions of equations (44) and (48) we impose a → −ia which gives (i)2/3 . Now as mentioned earlier we take
(i)1/3 = −i and squaring it gives -1 thus
E a→−ia −E
2 −−−−→ 2 . (51)
( Va0 ) 3 ( Va0 ) 3
√
Also the factor of ( Va0 )1/3 provides the additional factor of i multiplied with E. Hence we get the transcendental
equations as
h i h i h i
V0 13 ′ V0 −E
Bi V−E 2 + ( 1
√
i E
) ( a ) Bi ′ −E
V 2 Bi V 2
( 0 )3 ( 0 )3 ( 0 )3
h a i 1
h a i = h a i (52)
V0 3 ′ V0 −E
Ai V−E0
2 + ( 1
√
i E
) ( a ) Ai ′ −E
V0
2 Ai V0
2
( a )3 ( a )3 ( a )3

h i 1
h i h i
Bi V
+ ( i√1E ) ( Va0 ) 3 Bi′ V−E
−E
2 2 Bi V0 −E
V 2
( a0 )3 ( 0 )3 ( 0 )3
h i 1
h a i = h a i. (53)
V
Ai V−E
0
2 + ( i√1E ) ( a0 ) 3 Ai′ V−E 0
2 Ai VV00−E2
( a )3 ( a )3 ( a )3

A. Solving the transcendental equations

In order to find the roots of the transcendental equations (51) and (52) we do a contour plot in Mathematica by
equating the real and imaginary parts of LHS and RHS so that the intersection points will give us the initial guess
for the quasinormal frequencies. Next we use the FindRoot command of Mathematica to explicitly find the numerical
value of the root using the initial guess obtained from the contour plot. In the table below some of the QNM frequencies
are mentioned for different potentials. The plot in Figure 4 shows the even and odd QNM for the V0 = a = 1.58377
which we had obtained in Section II. Thus the QNMs shown in fig 4 will also be the QNMs for a wormhole geometry
under scalar perturbation for the m = 0 mode.

Even states Odd states

V0 = a = 2 1.37818 − i 0.377625 1.84536 − i 0.916893
V0 = 5, a = 2 2.08866 − i 0.323045 2.32235 − i 0.723801
2.92932 − i 0.947045 3.62696 − i 1.17254
V0 = 2, a = 5 1.2607 − i 0.184607 1.2408 − i 0.263773
1.43577 − i 0.252766 1.66907 − i 0.367693
V0 = a = 1.58377 1.21957 − i0.58865 2.03544 − i1.40477

TABLE II: Values of ωQN M for different potentials.

(a) Even QNM (b) Odd QNM

FIG. 4: QNMs for V0 = a = 1.58377.

 11

B. Plotting time domain profile

The time domain profile of a wavefunction shows its evolution with time at a particular value of spatial position.
The time domain profile can also be used to obtain the QNM frequencies as described in [13] and [14]. The total
wavefunction at any particular spatial point can be written as a superposition of damped exponentials with the QNM
frequencies. Once we know the QNM frequencies we can plot them for a particular value of ‘x’ and varying time
thus generating a time domain profile. This plot will help us in visualising the damped nature of the temporal part
of the wavefunction which occurs due to the imaginary part of the frequency being negative. The amplitudes of the
exponentials will be given by the spatial part of the wavefunction which we have calculated earlier at a particular
value of ‘x’. Hence, we can write the total wavefunction as-

φ(x, t) = ψ(x)e−iωt , (54)

where the ψ(x) has been obtained in the previous section (equation (50)). For large positive ‘x’, the spatial part has
a form eiωx . Hence the total wavefunction for a spatial point x = 10 is given by-
X
φ(x = 10, t) = eiωj 10 e−iωj t . (55)
j

The summation is over the number of QNM frequencies that have been superimposed to get the time domain profile.
In order to plot this we take the real part, so that our wavefunction becomes-
X i i
φ(x = 10, t) = (e−ωj 10 cos(ωjr 10))cos(ωjr t)eωj t (56)
j

where ωjr and ωji are respectively the real and imaginary parts of the j th QNM frequency. As the imaginary part of ω
is negative, the wave functions remain finite at large time but diverges at spatial infinity. The plots show the variation
of the real part of the wave function with time. In the plots, the y-axis shows the logarithm of the absolute value of
the wave function that we have obtained in equation (55). The time domain profile has been shown for the even and
odd states with a particular value V0 and a. Figure 5(a) shows the even state for V0 = a = 2 with the superposition
of two QNM frequencies- 1.37818 − 0.377625i and 2.58151 − 1.21218i while in figure 5(b) the odd state case is shown
for same values of V0 and a with one QNM frequency 1.84536 − 0.916893i. The characteristic QNM ringing pattern
is quite evident in the plots.

(a) Even state for V0 = a = 2 (b) Odd state for V0 = a = 2

FIG. 5: Time domain profile showing quasinormal ringing

C. VARIATION OF QNMs WITH THROAT RADIUS

The QNM frequencies have the special characteristic that they depend only on the parameters of the source, like for
a black hole the only parameters are it’s mass, charge and spin. In our case the parameters are the potential height
V0 and the width of the potential barrier 2a which in turn control the throat radius b0 of the wormhole constructed
by us as given in equation (22). So in order to observe how the QNM frequencies change for a real physical wormhole
 12

(assuming wormholes exist in nature) we need to observe the dependence of the frequency and damping time of the
signal on the throat radius. For simplicity let us consider only the even states. If we take the throat radius in the
−1
units of solar mass (M⊙ ) then we get the ωQN M in the units of (M⊙ ). In order to convert this into Hertz we need
3
to multiply a factor of c /GM⊙ where G is the gravitational constant, c being the velocity of light and M⊙ being the
mass of Sun. The following table lists some of the values of the frequency ν = ωre /2π and damping time τ = 1/ | ωim |
with corresponding b0 .

b0 (M⊙ ) ν (KHz) τ (1 × 10−5 sec)

0.5 48.92 0.674
0.8 30.57 1.078
1 24.46 1.348
1.2 20.38 1.617
1.5 16.31 2.022
1.8 13.59 2.426
2 12.23 2.696
2.5 9.78 3.37

TABLE III: Variation of frequency and damping time with throat radius.

(a) Variation of frequency with throat radius. (b) Variation of damping time with throat radius.

FIG. 6: QNMs corresponding to even state

We observe that as throat radius increases the energy carried by the wave and hence the frequency decreases. This
can be interpreted in the following way: if we assume that the wormhole is produced as a result of the merger of
two bodies (merger of two bodies can result in vivid astrophysical objects and not only black holes [21] ) then as the
throat radius of the wormhole increases, less amount of energy of the collision is transferred to the wave to carry it
away and hence the frequency of the signal decreases. As the LIGO sensitivity is being enhanced at high frequencies
(above 500 Hz) so it may be possible to detect QNM signals, in future detections, from wormholes with larger throat
radius [18], [22].

VI. CONCLUSION

In our work we have found the quasi-normal modes of a finite, symmetric triangular barrier. The transcendental
equations which arise in the bound state problem can lead to those for QNMs, a correspondence known as the Ferrari-
Mashhoon method. We begin by finding the bound states of the triangular well which may then be used to find the
QNMs via a suitable transformation. It is useful to note that one can also find the QNMs completely independently,
without referring to the bound state problem at all.
Further, to provide a context for the triangular barrier, we have constructed a ‘sandwich’ wormhole geometry whose
effective potential under scalar wave propagation will be a finite, symmetric triangular barrier, for the m = 0 mode.
The wormhole, thus constructed, has matter, with negative energy density, sandwiched over a finite region between
 13

two flat spacetimes. We also observe that the energy carried by the wave decreases as the throat of the wormhole
gets larger.
In most realistic cases in gravitational wave or black hole physics the effective potentials are far more complicated. In
order to find QNMs for such scenarios, numerical approaches are extensively employed. There are various numerical
techniques available for finding QNMs such as direct integration [4],[17] by Chandrasekhar- Detweiler, Prony fit
method [14], continued fraction method by Leaver [16], to name a few. Generically, most of these potentials are
barrier type and may be modeled using rectangular [23] or triangular barriers, in appropriate limits.
We conclude by noting that this simple, exactly solvable model problem is primarily an example which goes a little
beyond the standard rectangular barrier which is normally used as a pedagogic illustration, while introducing QNMs.
Additionally, it is also true that this example may be used to introduce students to Airy functions and its applications.

[1] H. Lamb, On a Peculiarity of the WaveSystem due to the Free Vibrations of a Nucleus in an Extended Medium, Proc.
Lond. Math. Soc.,s1-32 (1) (1900), pp. 208-213, 10.1112/plms/s1 − 32.1.208.
[2] C. V. Vishveshwara, Scattering of Gravitational Radiation by a Schwarzschild Black-hole, Nature,volume 227, pages:936–
938 (1970).
[3] C. V. Vishveshwara, Stability of the Schwarzschild Metric, Phys. Rev. D 1, 2870 (1970).
[4] S. Chandrasekhar and S. Detweiler, The quasi-normal modes of the Schwarzschild black hole, Proc.R.Soc.Lond. A344,441-
452 (1975).
[5] G. Pöschl and E. Teller,Z. Phys.83, 143 (1933).
[6] A. F. Cardona and C. Molina,Quasinormal modes of generalized Pschl-Teller potentials, Class. Quantum Grav. 34 (2017)
245002.
[7] S. Bhattacharyya and S. Shankaranarayanan, Quasinormal modes as a distinguisher between general relativity and f(R)
gravity: Charged black-holes, arXiv:1803.07576v3 [gr-qc].
[8] B. F. Schutz and C. M. Will, Black hole normal modes - A semianalytic approach,Astrophys. J. , L291:3336 (1985).
[9] P. Boonserm and M. Visser, Quasi-normal frequencies: Key analytic results, arXiv:1005.4483v3 [math-ph].
[10] A. K. Ghatak, E. G. Sauter and I. C. Goyal, Validity of the JWKB formula for a triangular potential barrier , European
Journal of Physics, Vol.18, No.3.
[11] V.Cardoso, Quasinormal Modes and Gravitational Radiation in Black Hole Spacetimes, arXiv:0404093v1 [gr-qc], Section:
1.1.2.
[12] V. Ferrari and B. Mashhoon, New approach to the quasinormal modes of a black hole, Phys. Rev. D 30, 295 (1984).
[13] C. Gundlach, R. Price and J. Pullin, Late-time behavior of stellar collapse and explosions.I.Linearized perturba-
tions,Phys.Rev.D 49 ,883 (1994).
[14] R.A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Quasinormal modes of black holes:From astrophysics to string theory,Reviews of Modern
Physics 83(3), 793 (2011).
[15] Digital Library of Mathematical Functions: Section 9.2 (v); https://dlmf.nist.gov/9.2.
[16] E.W. Leaver, An Analytic Representation for the Quasi-Normal Modes of Kerr Black Holes, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A 402,
285-298 (1985).
[17] Paolo Pani, Advanced Methods in Black-Hole Perturbation Theory, arXiv:1305.6759v2 [gr-qc].
[18] D.V. Martynov, E.D. Hall, B.P.Abbott et. al., The Sensitivity of the Advanced LIGO Detectors at the Beginning of
Gravitational Wave Astronomy, arXiv:1604.00439v3 [astro-ph.IM].
[19] S. Aneesh, S. Bose and S. Kar, Gravitational waves from quasinormal modes of a class of Lorentzian wormholes, 10.1103/
Phys.Rev.D. 97 .124004.
[20] B.P.Abbott et. al, Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys.Rev.Letts. 116,
061102(2016).
[21] C.Chirenti and L.Rezzolla, Did GW150914 produce a rotating gravastar, Phy. Rev. D 94, 084016 (2016).
[22] M. Page, J. Quin, J. L. Fontaine, C. Zhao, L. Ju and D. Blair, Enhanced detection of high frequency gravitational waves
using optically diluted optomechanical filters, arXiv:1711.04469v2 [astro-ph.IM].
[23] F. A. Handler and R. A. Matzner, Gravitational wave scattering, Phys. Rev. D 10, Vol. 22 (1980).