On The Status of Wormholes in Einstein's Theory
On The Status of Wormholes in Einstein's Theory
On The Status of Wormholes in Einstein's Theory
overview
Peter K. F. Kuhfittig*
arXiv:2312.05266v1 [gr-qc] 6 Dec 2023
∗
Department of Mathematics, Milwaukee School of Engineering,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202-3109, USA
Abstract
It has been claimed that wormholes are just as good a prediction of Einstein’s the-
ory as black holes, but they are subject to severe restrictions from quantum field
theory. The purpose of this paper is to show that the claim can be substantiated in
spite of these restrictions.
1 Introduction
The laws of physics are often used to make solid inferences. For example, Newton’s
laws allow the determination of the motion of a weight hanging on a spring. In other
situations, the laws may simply allow something to happen. For example, Einstein’s
theory allows backward time travel but does not imply that backward time travel can
actually be achieved. Similar comments can be made about macroscopic traversable
wormholes: while wormholes are just as good a prediction of Einstein’s theory as black
holes, they are subject to severe restrictions from quantum field theory. An example is
the need to violate the null energy condition, calling for the existence of “exotic matter”
(defined below) to hold a wormhole open. Its problematical nature has caused many
researchers to consider such wormholes solutions to be completely unphysical.
The continuing interest in wormholes is based on the observation that the Schwarzschild
solution and therefore black holes describe a (nontraversable) wormhole. More recent
developments involving entanglement have suggested that a special type of wormhole,
called an Einstein-Rosen bridge, may be the best explanation for entanglement [1]. We
will therefore assume that a basic wormhole structure can be hypothesized.
∗
kuhfitti@msoe.edu
1
While there had been some forerunners, macroscopic traversable wormholes were first
studied by Morris and Thorne [2], who proposed the following static and spherically
symmetric line element for a wormhole spacetime:
where
1
e2α(r) = b(r)
. (2)
1− r
(We are using units in which c = G = 1.) In the now customary terminology, Φ = Φ(r) is
called the redshift function, which must be finite everywhere to prevent the occurrence of
an event horizon. The function b = b(r) is called the shape function since it determines
the spatial shape of the wormhole when viewed, for example, in an embedding diagram
[2]. The spherical surface r = r0 is the throat of the wormhole. In a Morris-Thorne
wormhole, the shape function must satisfy the following conditions: b(r0 ) = r0 , b(r) < r
for r > r0 , and b′ (r0 ) < 1, called the flare-out condition in Ref. [2]. In classical general
relativity, the flare-out condition can only be met by violating the null energy condition
(NEC), which states that for the energy-momentum tensor Tαβ
Matter that violates the NEC is called “exotic” in Ref. [2]. Applied to a wormhole setting,
observe that for the radial outgoing null vector (1, 1, 0, 0), the violation reads
Here T t t = −ρ(r) is the energy density, T r r = pr (r) is the radial pressure, and T θ θ =
T φ φ = pt (r) is the lateral (transverse) pressure. Our final requirement is asymptotic
flatness:
b(r)
limr→∞ Φ(r) = 0 and limr→∞ = 0. (5)
r
The problematical nature of exotic matter in conjunction with the need to violate the
NEC has suggested solutions beyond the classical theory. For example, it was proposed by
Lobo and Oliveira [3] that in f (R) modified gravity, the wormhole throat could be lined
with ordinary matter, while the violation of the NEC can be attributed to the higher-
order curvature terms. There exist a number of other modified theories of gravity that
could be called upon to address these issues.
The primary goal of this paper is to accommodate the energy violation without mod-
ifying Einstein’s theory.
2
to the realization that Einstein’s theory is the low-energy limit of string theory (with its
extra dimensions), just as Newton’s theory is the weak-gravity and low-velocity limit of
Einstein’s theory. To be consistent with our goal, we will consider an extra dimension to
be a natural extension of Einstein’s theory, rather than a modification. So much of our
interest is going to be centered on Refs. [4] and [5], which hypothesize an extra static and
time-dependent spatial dimension, respectively. These topics are covered in Sections 3-5.
Another striking development is noncommutative geometry, which may be viewed
as another offshoot of string theory. As described in Sec. 6, point-like particles are
replaced by smeared objects, which is consistent with Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
What is critically important for our purposes is that the noncommutative effects can be
implemented in the Einstein field equations by modifying only the energy momentum
tensor while leaving the Einstein tensor intact, once again avoiding a modification of
Einstein’s theory. These topics are discussed in Sections 6 and 8.2.
The realization that moderately-sized wormholes are subject to an enormous radial
tension suggests that wormholes are actually compact stellar objects. A possible explana-
tion is sought in Sec. 7 by starting with a two-fluid model that was previously proposed
in Ref. [6]. Additional assumptions are unavoidable, however, as we will see in Sec. 7.
Exotic matter makes a brief comeback in Sec. 8. Small amounts that may arise from,
for example, the Casimir effect, call for striking a delicate balance between reducing the
amount of exotic matter and fine-tuning the metric coefficients.
Finally, it is shown in Sec. 9 that a noncommutative-geometry wormhole in a static
and spherically symmetric spacetime admitting conformal motion is stable to linearized
radial perturbations. Furthermore, both the redshift and shape functions are completely
determined from the given conditions.
In Sec. 10 we take another, more general, look at the low energy density in a
noncommutative-geometry setting by comparing the outcome to other low-density mod-
els, including the case ρ(r) ≡ 0; none of these have the special characteristics of the
former. Without these special features, the need for exotic matter cannot be avoided,
indicating that neither dark matter nor dark energy can support traversable wormholes,
at least not as long as the latter does not cross the phantom divide.
Sec. 11 discusses the possible detection of wormholes by means of gravitational lensing.
This tool calls for additional physical requirements beyond the existence of dark matter,
thereby confirming the above assertion.
3
So µ(r, l) could have any magnitude, to be discussed further below.
According to Ref. [4],
1 b′ (r0 ) − 1 r0 ∂µ(r0 , l)
(ρ + pr )|r=r0 = 1+ . (7)
8π r02 2 ∂r
∂µ(r0 , l) 2
<− , (8)
∂r r0
corresponding to the null vector (1, 1, 0, 0). Moving to the fifth dimension, the null vector
(1, 0, 0, 0, 1) yields
1 1 rb′ − b dΦ(r) ∂µ(r, l)
(ρ + pr )|r=r0 = − + < 0, (9)
8π 2 r 2 dr ∂r r=r0
dΦ(r0 ) ∂µ(r0 , l) 2
= −A < <− . (10)
dr ∂r r0
We conclude that the NEC is satisfied at the throat in the four-dimensional spacetime
but violated in the five-dimensional spacetime.
Remark 1: For the condition ρ(r0 ) + pr (r0 ) > 0 to hold for all null vectors, we must
also have b′ (r0 ) > 1/3 [4].
Remark 2: Condition (10) can be readily satisfied if Φ = Φ(r) is a positive differen-
tiable decreasing function of r for all r. The reason is that since Φ′ (r) < 0, the assumption
of asymptotic flatness implies that limr→∞ Φ′ (r) = 0.
4 Additional considerations
4.1 The function µ = µ(r, l)
We have already seen that Inequality (8) is a sufficient condition for ensuring that the
throat of a wormhole can be threaded with ordinary matter, while the unavoidable viola-
tion of the NEC can be attributed to the higher spatial dimension.
Here we need to emphasize another aspect of µ(r, l): as noted in the previous section,
|µ(r, l)| can be large or small. So in our model, it is entirely possible that µ be negative
with a large absolute value, resulting in a small value for eµ(r,l) . In other words, the extra
dimension could be compactified without sacrificing Inequality (8). The very existence
of a compactified extra dimension is consistent with string theory. So the assumptions
regarding µ(r, l) are physically reasonable.
Summarizing the static case, Φ = Φ(r) is positive and decreasing, while b′ (r0 ) > 1/3.
Conditions (8) and (10) are physically reasonable and consistent with string theory.
4
4.2 The radial tension at the throat
At this point, we need to return to Ref. [2] to discuss the radial tension at the throat.
To that end, we need to recall that the radial tension τ (r) is the negative of the radial
pressure pr (r). According to Ref. [2], the Einstein field equations can be rearranged to
yield τ (r). Here we need to reintroduce c and G temporarily to get
b(r)/r − 2[r − b(r)]Φ′ (r)
τ (r) = . (11)
8πGc−4 r 2
So the radial tension at the throat becomes
2
1 41 dyn 10 m
τ (r0 ) = ≈ 5 × 10 . (12)
8πGc−4 r02 cm2 r0
As pointed out in Ref. [2], for r0 = 3 km, τ (r) has the same magnitude as the pressure
at the center of a massive neutron star. (For further discussion of this problem, see Ref.
[7].) So it follows from Eq. (12) that wormholes with a low radial tension could only exist
on very large scales.
(Ref. [5] also assumes that b and Φ are functions of r and l.) The expression for the null
energy condition is given by
b′ (r0 ) − 1 r0 ∂µ(r0 , l, t)
8π(ρ + pr )|r=r0 = 1+
r02 2 ∂r
" 2 #
2
∂ µ(r 0 , l, t) ∂µ(r 0 , l, t)
− e−2Φ(r0 ) + . (14)
∂t2 ∂t
To put this result to use, we can start with Ref. [8], which deals with a wormhole model
due to S.-W. Kim [9] in conjunction with a generalized Kaluza-Klein model:
!
2
dr
ds2 = −e2Φ(r) dt2 + [a(t)]2 b(r)
+ r 2 (dθ2 + sin2 θ dφ2 ) + e2Ψ(r) dq 2 . (15)
2
1 − kr − r
However, our primary concern is the effect of the time-dependent extra dimension, rather
than the overall cosmological model. So we can let k = 0 and assume that the line element
has the form
dr 2
ds2 = −e2Φ(r) dt2 + b(r)
+ r 2 (dθ2 + sin2 θ dφ2) + [a(t)]2 e2µ(r,l) dl2 , (16)
1− r
5
using our earlier notation for the last term. Since [a(t)]2 e2µ(r,l) = e2(ln a(t)+µ(r,l)) , we let
∂µ(r0 , l, t) 2
≤− (21)
∂r r0
since
∂U ∂µ
= .
∂r ∂r
In other words, from Eq. (19), we now have
6
Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The original idea was to eliminate the divergences that
normally occur in general relativity [10, 11, 12]. According to Ref. [11], this objective can
be met by asserting that spacetime can be encoded in the commutator [xµ , xν ] = iθµν ,
where θµν is an antisymmetric matrix that determines the fundamental cell discretization
of spacetime in the same way that Planck’s constant ~ discretizes phase space. More
concretely, the smearing
√ can be modeled by using a so-called Lorentzian distribution of
minimal length β instead of the Dirac delta function [13, 14]. As a consequence, the
energy density of a static and spherically symmetric and particle-like gravitational source
is given by √
m β
ρ(r) = 2 2 . (24)
π (r + β)2
The implication is that the gravitational
√ source causes the mass m to be diffused through-
out the region of linear dimension β due to the uncertainty.
Returning to line element (1), let us list the Einstein field equations next:
b′
ρ(r) = , (25)
8πr 2
1 b b Φ′
pr (r) = − 3 +2 1− , (26)
8π r r r
and
1 b ′′ b′ r − b ′ ′ 2 Φ′ b′ r − b
pt (r) = 1− Φ − Φ + (Φ ) + − 2 . (27)
8π r 2r(r − b) r 2r (r − b)
Eq. (24) now provides a physical basis for checking the NEC, i.e.,
√
α β m β 1 b b Φ′
Tαβ k k = ρ(r) + pr (r) = 2 2 + − 3 +2 1−
π (r + β)2 8π r r r r=r0
√
m β 1 b(r0 )
= 2 2 − < 0 (28)
π (r0 + β) 2 8π r03
√
since β ≪ m. So the violation of the NEC can be attributed to the noncommutative-
geometry background, rather than some hypothetical “exotic matter,” at least locally.
(We will return to this point at the end of the section.)
For our purposes, it is sufficient to note that, according to Ref. [15], the shape function
B is given by
r
B √ =
β
2
r r
√ √0
4m 1 r −1 r β r r0 r β r0
√ tan √ − 2 − √ tan−1 √ + √ 2 + √ (29)
π r β β √r
β β β r0 β
β
+1 √
β
+1
7
which corresponds to b(r0 ) = r0 . It follows that the throat radius is macroscopic. (See
Ref. [15] for details.)
This outcome naturally raises the question whether a modification of Einstein’s the-
ory has really been avoided. It is argued in Ref. [15] that noncommutative geometry in
the form discussed above is a fundamental property and that the outcome, a macroscopic
throat size, is an emergent property. By definition, emergent phenomena are derived from
some fundamental theory, an idea that dates at least from the time of Aristotle. For
example, life emerges from totally lifeless objects, such as atoms and molecules. This pro-
cess is not reversible: living organisms tell us little about the particles in the fundamental
theory. Similarly, our emerging macroscopic scale does not yield the smearing effect in
the fundamental theory. In the usual terminology, we have obtained an effective model for
a macroscopic wormhole in the sense that the short-distance effects have been discarded:
these are meaningful only in the fundamental theory. The above local violation of the
NEC, Tαβ k α k β < 0, can therefore be viewed as a fundamental property. So the emergent
macroscopic phenomenon in Eq. (30) avoids a modification of Einstein’s theory.
7 Neutron stars
With Sec. 4.2 in mind, wormholes should be viewed as compact stellar objects. The
reason is that τ (r) has the same magnitude as the pressure at the center of a massive
neutron star. Moreover, Eq. (12) implies that a wormhole with a low radial tension could
only exist on a very large scale, i.e., with a sufficiently large r = r0 . According to Ref.
[16], for smaller wormholes, even the boundary condition b(r0 ) = r0 only makes sense if
the wormhole is a compact stellar object.
It is interesting to note that a combined model consisting of neutron-star matter and
a phantom/ghost scalar field yields a wormhole solution [17]. Another example of a two-
fluid model can be found in Ref. [6]. For this approach to work, we need to follow Ref.
[18] which assumes that quark matter exists at the center of neutron stars. While this may
seem like a strong assumption, it is by no means unreasonable: the extreme conditions
could presumably cause the neutrons to become deconfined, resulting in quark matter.
Armed with this assumption, the energy momentum tensor of the two-fluid model is given
by [6]
T00 ≡ ρeffective = ρ + ρq , (31)
T11 = T22 ≡ −peffective = −(p + pq ). (32)
Here ρ and p correspond to the respective energy density and pressure of the baryonic
matter, while ρq and pq correspond to the respective energy density and pressure of
the quark matter. The left-hand sides are the effective energy density and pressure,
respectively, of the combination.
The two-fluid model is based on the MIT bag model [19]. In this model, the equation
of state is given by
1
pq = (ρq − 4B), (33)
3
8
where B is the bag constant, which is given as 145 MeV/(fm)3 in Ref. [19]. For normal
matter, we can use the rather idealized equation of state [20]
p = mρ, 0 < m < 1. (34)
For our purposes, it is sufficient to note that Ref. [18] gives the following solution:
ρ = ρ0 e−Φ(1+m)/2m (35)
and
ρq = B + ρ(q,0) e−2Φ , (36)
where ρ0 and ρ(q,0) are integration constants. Ref. [18] then goes on to derive the shape
function b = b(r), as well as its derivative
′ −α(r) d −α(r)
b (r) = 1 − e +r − e , (37)
dr
where eα(r) = 1/(1 − b(r)/r). (See Ref. [18] for details.) It is subsequently shown that the
flare-out condition is met, indicating a violation of the null energy condition, a necessary
condition for the existence of wormholes. This violation can be attributed to the extreme
conditions at the center of neutron stars.
9
referring once again to line element (1). Finally, v is the velocity of a boosted observer
relative to a static frame. For the right-hand side of Inequality (38) to be defined and real,
we must have v 2 > b′0 . So if b′0 ≈ 1, the inequality is trivially satisfied, thereby meeting
the Ford-Roman constraints. However, to study the region away from the throat, where
b′ (r0 ) < 1, Inequality (38) has to be extended, as we will see shortly.
Before continuing, we need to take a closer look at the exotic region
Z r
′
l(r) = eα(r ) dr ′. (40)
r0
So l(r1 ) is the amount of exotic matter in the interval [r0 , r1 ]. (This is a more precise way
of saying that the exotic matter is confined to the spherical shell of inner radius r = r0
and outer radius r = r1 .)
Now consider the extended quatum inequality from Ref. [21]:
1/4 √
1/2
rm 1 δ lp
≤ . (41)
r v 2 b(r) − b′ (r) − 2v 2Φ′ (r) 1 − b(r) f r
r r
~cπ 2
p(a) = −3 (42)
720a4
10
and the density is
~cπ 2
ρC (a) = − . (43)
720a4
Here ~ is Planck’s constant and c is the speed of light.
At this point we are going to return to noncommutative geometry by recalling the
form of the energy density in Eq. (24) and its interpretation: the gravitational source
causes
√ the mass m of a particle to be diffused throughout the region of linear dimension
β due to the uncertainty. Here we are going to be more concerned with a smeared
spherical surface of which the throat of a wormhole is our primary example. According
to Ref. [22], the energy density ρs is given by
√
µ β
ρs (r − r0 ) = 2 , (44)
π [(r − r0 )2 + β]2
where µ now denotes the mass of the surface. So the smeared particle is replaced by a
smeared surface.
To connect the Casimir effect to the noncommutative-geometry background, we first
observe from Eq. (24) that the energy density ρ as a function of the separation a is
√
m β
ρ(a) = 2 2 . (45)
π (a + β)2
According to Eq. (44), in the vicinity of the throat, i.e., whenever r − r0 = a, we get
√
µ β
ρs (a) = 2 2 . (46)
π (a + β)2
which is the sought-after connection. More precisely, it is argued in Ref. [22]√ that the
separation a, although small, is still macroscopic. So we can assume that β = ( β)2 ≪ a2 .
Moreover, since β is an additive constant, it becomes negligible in the denominator of Eq.
(47); thus
p ~cπ 4
β= . (48)
720µ
Since ~ = 1.0546 × 10−34 J · s, we obtain
p 4.28 × 10−27
β= . (49)
µ
Given that µ is the mass of the throat r = r0 , a spherical surface of negligible
√ thickness,
it is hard to quantify, but it does have a definite value, thereby defining β in Eq. (49).
11
It is proposed in Ref. √
[22] that we could give a direct physical interpretation to the
smearing effect by letting β = a. Then Eq. (47) yields
µa ~cπ 2
= (50)
π 2 (a2 + a2 )2 720a4
or
~cπ 4
µa = , (51)
180
a fixed quantity. So there are many possible choices for a and µ.
Successfully connecting the experimentally confirmed Casimir effect to noncommu-
tative geometry has some important consequences. Here we can follow the arguments
proposed in Ref. [11], starting with the assertion that the noncommutative effects can be
implemented in the Einstein field equations Gµν = 8πG c4
Tµν by modifying only the energy
momentum tensor Tµν , while leaving the Einstein tensor Gµν intact. The reason given in
Ref. [11] is that a metric field is a geometric structure defined over an underlying manifold
whose strength is measured by its curvature, but the curvature, in turn, is nothing more
than the response to the presence of a mass-energy distribution. Moreover, the noncom-
mutativity is an intrinsic property of spacetime, rather than a superimposed geometric
structure. So it stands to reason that noncommutative geometry has an effect on the
mass-energy and momentum distributions, which, in turn, determines the spacetime cur-
vature. None of this affects the Einstein tensor. So the length scales can be macroscopic.
(Recall that we already saw in Sec. 6 that the throat radius can be macroscopic.)
In summary, by invoking noncommutative geometry, we have seen that the Casimir
effect, although a small effect, may very well support a macroscopic wormhole.
9 Stability
The possible existence of macroscopic traversable wormholes has naturally led to numerous
studies regarding the stability of such structures. We are going to confine ourselves to
Ref. [26] because the assumption of conformal symmetry in [26] can be combined with
the noncommutative-geometry background to produce a complete wormhole solution. It
is assumed in Ref. [26] that our static and spherically symmetric spacetime admits a one-
parameter group of conformal motions. This assumption is equivalent to the existence of
conformal Killing vectors such that
where the left-hand side is the Lie derivative of the metric tensor and ψ(r) is the conformal
factor [26]. According to the usual terminology, ξ generates the conformal symmetry and
the metric tensor gµν is said to be conformally mapped into itself along ξ. This type of
symmetry has been used extensively in classical general relativity.
Before returning to the stability question, we need to recall the usual strategy in the
theoretical construction of a Morris-Thorne wormhole: retain complete control over the
geometry by specifying the redshift and shape functions and then manufacture or search
the Universe for materials or fields that produce the required stress-energy tensor. Ref.
12
[27] addresses this problem in a direct manner: the noncommutative-geometry background
produces the shape function and the conformal symmetry yields the redshift function.
Adding the assumption of the conservation of mass-energy then yields the stress-energy
tensor. The result is a complete wormhole solution determined from the given conditions.
Finally, it is shown that the wormhole is stable to linearized radial perturbations.
where rs is the characteristic scale radius and ρs the corresponding density. Since ρ(r) in
Eq. (54) is very small, we would normally satisfy the flare-out condition b′ (r) < 1 for all r,
thereby yielding a wormhole solution. However, without the noncommutative-geometry
background and its many special properties, we can no longer assume the validity of Eq.
(53) for an arbitrary ρ(r), unless, of course, we return to the exotic-matter requirement
once again. While this outcome does not invalidate the solutions, it does call into question
their relevance: if exotic matter is needed anyway, then what is the role of dark matter, if
any? In other words, if exotic matter cannot be eliminated, then dark matter alone could
not support traversable wormholes. The same comments apply equally well to dark-energy
models that do not cross the phantom divide. To clarify this point, we need to recall that
for phantom dark energy, the (isotropic) equation of state is p = ωρ, ω < −1, which
implies that ρ + p = ρ + ωρ = ρ(1 + ω) < 0. Since the NEC has been violated, phantom
dark energy could in principle support traversable wormholes [30]. Such wormholes could
only exist on very large scales, however, as we already noted in Sec. 4.2.
13
11 A solution uncovered via gravitational lensing
We know from the previous section that neither dark matter alone nor dark energy alone
can support a Morris-Thorne wormhole: the former requires the existence of exotic mat-
ter and the latter the equation of state p = ωρ, ω < −1. Another possibility is a
noncommutative-geometry background, as we saw in Sec. 6. This section considers yet
another approach, discussing the effect of gravitational lensing. While primarily a tool
for detecting wormholes, it has its own physical requirements, as described in Ref. [31].
To facilitate the discussion, the line element is written in the following more convenient
form:
ds2 = −A(x) dt2 + B(x) dx2 + C(x)(dθ2 + sin2 θ dφ2 ), (55)
where x is the radial distance defined in terms of the Schwarzschild radius x = r/2M.
Then
r0
x0 = (56)
2M
denotes the closest approach of the light ray. As noted in Ref. [31], the deflection angle
α(r0 ) is given by
α(r0 ) = I(x0 ) + a, (57)
where a is a constant that depends on the size of the wormhole. Next,
Z ∞ p Z a
B(x) dx
I(x0 ) = 2 q = Q(x) dx. (58)
C(x) C(x)A(x 0)
p
x0
C(x0 )A(x)
− 1 x0
Here Q(x) depends on the parameters in the Navarro-Frenk-White model, Eq. (54). (See
Ref. [31] for details.)
So while we are still dealing with dark matter, the wormhole solution requires several
other conditions besides the simple existence of dark matter as previously claimed. In
particular, the deflection angle depends on both the redshift and shape functions.
12 Conclusion
Given that wormholes are just as good a prediction of Einstein’s theory as black holes,
we can assume that Morris-Thorne wormholes, as proposed in Ref. [2], are theoretically
possible, but subject to severe restrictions from quantum field theory. The purpose of this
paper is to show that these restrictions can be met without a modification of Einstein’s
theory.
Adhering to the widely held view that the need for exotic matter renders any wormhole
solution unphysical, we follow Ref. [15] which proposes the following static and spherically
symmetric line element to describe a wormhole spacetime:
dr 2
ds2 = −e2Φ(r) dt2 + b(r)
+ r 2 (dθ2 + sin2 θ dφ2) + e2µ(r,l) dl2 ,
1− r
where l is the extra coordinate. The extra dimension can be either static or time de-
pendent. For this approach to work, we do need to make some additional assumptions.
14
For the static case, the redshift function is positive and decreasing for all r. (Asymptotic
flatness is part of the structure of a Morris-Thorne wormhole.) Furthermore, Inequalities
(8) and (10) have to be met, while the condition b′ (r0 ) > 13 ensures that the NEC is
satisfied at the throat for all null vectors. So the throat of the wormhole can be lined
with ordinary matter, while the unavoidable violation of the NEC can be attributed to
the higher spatial dimension. Finally, the extra dimension can be small or even curled
up.
For the time-dependent case, we obtain a similar conclusion using the slightly more
general condition ∂µ(r0 , l, t)/∂r ≤ −2/r0 , provided that a′′ (t) < 0.
The next part of this paper invokes a noncommutative-geometry background, thereby
assuming that point-particles are replaced by smeared objects, as detailed in Sec. 6.
This assumption is consistent with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and therefore
independent of Einstein’s theory. The particle-like gravitational source is given by
√
m β
ρ(r) = 2 2 . (59)
π (r + β)2
So the gravitational source causes
√ the mass m of the particle to be diffused throughout
the region of linear dimension β due to the uncertainty.
The shape function B meets all the usual requirements; in particular,
r0 r0
B √ =√ . (60)
β β
√
The throat radius r0 / β is therefore macroscopic.
It is argued in Sec. 6 that the noncommutative-geometry background is a fundamental
property and the outcome, a macroscopic wormhole, is an emergent phenomenon. The
result is an effective model that does not depend on the short-distance effect that is
characteristic of noncommutative geometry, thereby avoiding a modification of Einstein’s
theory. It is interesting to note that the compactified extra spatial dimension in Sec. 4.1
can also be viewed as a fundamental property, again making the macroscopic wormhole
an emergent phenomenon.
It was pointed out in Sec. 4.2 that for a wormhole with a throat radius of 3 km, the
radial tension has the same magnitude as the pressure at the center of a massive neutron
star, suggesting that a Morris-Thorne wormhole should be viewed as a compact stellar
object. This case is taken up in Sec. 7 by first noting that quark matter is believed to
exist near the center of neutron stars, thereby calling for a combined model consisting of
quark matter and ordinary matter. For this type of wormhole, the violation of the null
energy condition can be attributed to the extreme conditions at the center of the neutron
star.
In Sec. 8.1 we saw return to exotic matter, motivated in part by the fact that small
amounts of exotic matter can be made in the laboratory, as exemplified by the Casimir
effect. To get a valid wormhole solution, the wormhole has to satisfy the Ford-Roman
Inequality (38) or the extended version, Inequality (41). The conclusion is that one must
strike a balance between the thickness [r0 , r1 ] of the exotic region and the degree of fine-
tuning required to achieve this reduction. The degree of fine-tuning is a generic feature
15
of a Morris-Thorne wormhole. Sec. 8.2 then connects the aforementioned Casimir effect
with noncommutative geometry, suggesting that the former may be able to support a
macroscopic wormhole in spite of being a small effect.
Finally, it is shown in Sec. 9 that given a noncommutative-geometry background,
a Morris-Thorne wormhole in a static and spherically symmetric spacetime admitting
conformal motion is stable to linearized radial perturbations. Furthermore, the redshift
and shape functions are completely determined from the given conditions.
In Sec. 10 we return to Eq. (53) to observe that b′ (r) = 8πr 2 ρ(r) < 1 whenever
ρ(r) is extremely small, which is actually true in a dark-matter or dark-energy setting,
as well as for the zero-density case ρ(r) ≡ 0. So the NEC is automatically violated. The
same is true for ρ(r) in Eq. (24), the noncommutative-geometry case. The difference is
that the use of ρ(r) in Eq. (24) can be justified by appealing to the special properties of
the noncommutative-geometry background, thereby producing a valid wormhole solution.
Since these key properties are not possessed by any of the other cases, we conclude that
neither dark matter nor dark energy can support a Morris-Thorne wormhole, as long as
the latter does not cross the phantom divide. Other possible exceptions are noted in Ref.
[31].
Sec. 11 discusses the detection of wormholes by means of gravitational lensing. An
application of the method calls for additional physical requirements beyond the simple
existence of dark matter, confirming the earlier assertion that dark matter alone cannot
support traversable wormholes.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of
this paper.
References
[1] J. Maldacena and L. Susskind, Cool horizons for entangled black holes. Progress in
Physics 61, 781 (2013).
[2] M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar
travel: A tool for teaching general relativity. Am. J. Phys. 56, 395 (1988).
[3] F. S. N. Lobo and M. A. Oliveira, Wormhole geometries inf (R) modified theories of
gravity. Phys. Rev. D 80, 104012 (2009).
16
[7] P. K. F. Kuhfittig, A survey of recent studies concerning the extreme properties of
Morris-Thorne wormholes. arXiv: 2202.07431 [gr-qc] (2022).
[9] S.-W. Kim, Cosmological model with a traversable wormhole. Phys. Rev. D 53, 6889
(1996).
[10] A. Smailagic and E. Spallucci, Feynman path integral on the non-commutative plane.
J. Phys. A 36, L-467 (2003).
[12] P. Nicolini and E. Spallucci, Noncommutative geometry inspired dirty black holes.
Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 015010 (2010).
[18] P. K. F. Kuhfittig, Neutron star interiors and topology change. Adv. Math. Phys.
2013, 630196 (2013).
[20] F. Rahaman, M. Kalam, and K. A. Rahman, Wormhole geometry from real feasible
matter sources. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 48, 471 (2009).
17
[23] L. H. Ford and T. A. Roman, Averaged energy conditions and quantum inequalities.
Phys. Rev. D 51, 4277 (1995).
[24] L. H. Ford and T. A. Roman, Quantum field theory constrains traversable wormhole
geometries. Phys. Rev. D 53, 5496 (1996).
[28] M. Visser, Lorentzian wormholes: from Einstein to Hawking. (New York: American
Institute of Physics, 1995), Section 13.4.2.
[30] S. Sushkov, Wormholes supported by a phantom energy. Phys. Rev. D 71, 043520
(2005).
18