it is well known that anti - de sitter ( ads ) gravity coupled to a scalar field with mass at or slightly above the breitenlohner - freedman bound @xcite admits a large class of boundary conditions , defined by an essentially arbitrary real function @xmath0 .
for all ( regular ) @xmath0 , the conserved charges are well defined and finite @xcite , despite the fact that the scalar field falls off slower such that @xmath5 corresponds to turning off the independent subleading term in the asymptotic expansion of the scalar field .
the usual boundary conditions instead keep this term and turn off the leading term . ] than usual .
theories of this type have been called designer gravity theories @xcite , because their dynamical properties depend significantly on the choice of @xmath0 ( see e.g.  @xcite ) .    in supergravity theories with a dual conformal field theory ( cft ) description ,
the ads / cft duality @xcite relates @xmath0 to a potential term @xmath6 in the cft action , where @xmath7 is the field theory operator that is dual to the bulk scalar for @xmath5 boundary conditions @xcite .
this led @xcite to conjecture that ( a ) there is a lower bound on the gravitational energy in those designer gravity theories where @xmath0 is bounded from below , and that ( b ) the solutions locally minimizing the energy are given by the spherically symmetric , static soliton configurations found in @xcite .
more recently , the stability of designer gravity theories has been studied using purely gravitational arguments . in particular ,
a lower bound on the conserved energy in terms of the global minimum of @xmath0 was rigorously proven within a specific ads gravity theory by relating the hamiltonian charges to spinor charges  @xcite .
arguments were given in  @xcite suggesting that these bounds hold more generally .
however , it was subsequently discovered  @xcite that solutions with arbitrarily negative energy can be constructed numerically for certain theories with @xmath8 .
this raised a puzzle , which we resolve in this paper .
our resolution focuses on an auxiliary construct , the  superpotential " @xmath9 built from the bulk scalar potential @xmath10 .
this superpotential is an important ingredient in constructing the spinor charge . in @xcite
, it was shown that any @xmath10 satisfying the breitenlohner - freedman bound _
perturbatively _ admits an appropriate superpotential @xmath9 .
it was of course recognized that the global existence of @xmath9 was required for the proof of an energy bound , and that this global existence may impose constraints on @xmath10 .
what is interesting about the counter - examples of @xcite is that they _ do _ admit a globally defined superpotential , but nevertheless violate the proposed bound .
the issue turns out to be that superpotentials associated with a given @xmath10 can be of two types , which we call @xmath4 and @xmath3 .
a particular @xmath10 may admit ( distinct ) superpotentials of both types , or it may admit only the @xmath4 type .
the proof requires existence of a @xmath3-type superpotential , while the examples of @xcite admit only the @xmath4-type can admit both @xmath4 and @xmath3 superpotentials was used to study asymptotically ads domain wall solutions in @xcite . ] .
we verify this claim below and also confirm various other details of the arguments of @xcite .
after briefly listing our conventions in section [ prelim ] , we review the proof of the lower bound in section [ two ] , illustrating why a @xmath3-type superpotential is essential ( and why a @xmath4-type superpotential is not sufficient ) .
section [ solitons ] confirms that the counter - examples of @xcite admit _ only _ @xmath4-type superpotentials and numerically explores the energy bound in a number of examples .
we find evidence that the global existence of @xmath3 may be necessary ( as well as sufficient ) for any lower bound to hold .
section [ spinors ] investigates other aspects of the proof from @xcite .
arguments for positivity of the spinor charge require witten spinors , whose global existence can be difficult to demonstrate .
questions about this global existence were raised in @xcite .
however , we show that the argument for global existence given in @xcite for a particular @xmath3 extends to the general case . as a check
, we also explicitly demonstrate the existence of witten spinors in the context of spherical symmetry by analyzing an associated ordinary differential equation .
we evaluate these spinors numerically for a particular example and use the results to check the relation between the spinor and hamiltonian charges derived in @xcite .
we close with some discussion in section [ disc ] .
our conventions and our definition of asymptotically anti - de sitter spacetimes follow those of @xcite . in particular , we consider gravity theories minimally coupled to a scalar field with lagrangian density given by @xmath11   \ , , \ ] ] where we have set @xmath12 . here
the scalar potential @xmath10 is of the form @xmath13 near @xmath14 . for simplicity
we assume that @xmath15 is even .
the constant @xmath16 is the cosmological constant , given by @xmath17 with @xmath18 a positive length that we may set to one by rescaling the metric and scalar field .
the spacetime dimension is denoted @xmath19 , and we assume that @xmath20 .
we will furthermore assume that the scalar field is tachyonic ( @xmath21 ) , with mass in the breitenlohner - freedman range  @xcite @xmath22 where @xmath23 .
the metric of exact ads space of unit radius ( and @xmath14 ) , given by @xmath24 is an exact solution of the theory , where @xmath25 is the unit - radius round metric on @xmath26 . as part of our boundary conditions
, we assume that the metric of a general solution asymptotically approaches ( [ pureads ] ) in the manner described in @xcite , and that the scalar field is asymptotically of the form @xmath27 where @xmath28    to obtain a well - defined dynamics for the linearized theory , it is necessary to impose a boundary condition at @xmath29 on the scalar field , i.e. we must impose a relation between @xmath30 and @xmath31 in  .
for example , one can impose @xmath32 , leaving @xmath31 totally unspecified .
we refer to this option as  fast fall - off boundary conditions . " alternatively , one may set @xmath33 , leaving @xmath30 unspecified .
one may also impose more general boundary conditions of the form @xmath34 where @xmath35 is an arbitrary smooth function . under the ads
/ cft duality , this function @xmath0 appears as an additional potential term in the action for the dual field theory @xcite .
an elegant way to prove energy bounds is witten s spinor method  @xcite , which proceeds by constructing a manifestly positive `` spinor charge , '' and then comparing it to the energy of the gravitational solution .
witten s argument was originally given in the context of asymptotically flat spacetimes , but it can be generalized to the asymptotically ads situation . when the matter satisfies the dominant energy condition apart from the negative cosmological constant term ( regarded as a contribution @xmath36 to @xmath37 ) , witten s argument may simply be modified by the addition of a term @xmath38 to the covariant derivative which acts on the spinor , where @xmath1 is a constant proportional to @xmath39 .
this term is needed to deal with the negative energy associated with the cosmological constant .
our interest here is in tachyonic scalars @xmath40 , whose potential energy may in fact be unbounded below and does not satisfy the dominant energy condition .
as shown by @xcite for @xmath41 ( based on @xcite , and extended to higher dimensions by @xcite ) , many such settings may be addressed by generalizing the constant @xmath1 to a real `` superpotential '' @xmath9 satisfying @xmath42 where @xmath10 is the scalar potential .    taking @xmath43 to be the ads vacuum , we are interested in potentials for which @xmath44 . the value
@xmath45 then determines the cosmological constant . with fast fall - off boundary conditions ( @xmath32 ) ,
the proof @xcite requires only that there be a solution to ( [ vtop ] ) with @xmath46 and @xmath47 .
perturbatively , i.e. , in the sense of formal power series , a solution of this form always exists when @xmath48 sets the scalar field mass to satisfy the breitenlohner - freedman bound . in fact , there are two such perturbative solutions : @xmath49 where @xmath50 are given by ( [ roots ] ) .
however , the proof of @xcite requires that @xmath9 be well - defined ( and real ) for all @xmath40 , and this imposes further restrictions on @xmath10 .    in both the fast @xcite and slow fall - off cases
@xcite , the proof proceeds by using @xmath51 to construct a spinor charge @xmath52 . in the fast fall - off case one
may show ( e.g. , following the basic method outlined by @xcite ) that @xmath53 , where @xmath54 is the conserved energy .
the proof of @xcite is identical no matter which superpotential is used , and it is sufficient that only @xmath4 existboth @xmath4 and @xmath3 exist near @xmath14 .
however , a real solution ceases to exist if ( [ vtop ] ) forces @xmath55 to become imaginary ; i.e. , if @xmath56 .
since @xmath57 near @xmath14 , and since this in turn implies @xmath58 , one finds @xmath59 for all @xmath60 and global existence of @xmath3 implies global existence of @xmath4 , but not vice versa . ]
. however , in order to derive an energy bound with slower fall - off conditions , @xcite assumed the existence of @xmath3 .
we verify in subsection [ critical ] below that this choice is critical in this context , and that @xmath4 alone does not lead to an energy bound .
this turns out to resolve the issue raised in @xcite .
a simple example is discussed in section [ simple ] .
we now quickly repeat the derivation of the energy bound from @xcite , examining both the original argument ( using @xmath61 ) and an analogous argument based on @xmath62 . for either superpotential ,
the spinor charge is defined as @xmath63 where the integrand is the hodge dual of a suitably defined nester two - form  @xcite @xmath64 } \widehat{\nabla}^e \psi + \textrm{h.c.}\ , , \ ] ] and @xmath65 is a surface at spatial infinity that bounds a spacelike surface @xmath66 . in ( [ nester ] ) , @xmath67 is a dirac spinor and the covariant derivative is defined in terms of @xmath1 ( @xmath68 ) as @xmath69 we require that the spinor field @xmath67 approaches a covariantly constant spinor ( i.e. a killing spinor ) of pure ads , @xmath70 , at infinity .
we furthermore assume that asymptotically @xmath71 . using gauss s theorem
we can rewrite the spinor charge @xmath72 ( @xmath73 ) as @xmath74 where @xmath75 is the integration element on @xmath66 , and @xmath76 the unit normal . letting @xmath77 denote directions in the tangent space of the surface @xmath66 , one
can then show @xcite that the integrand of ( [ q2 ] ) is @xmath78 \ , , \ ] ] where @xmath79 the first and third terms in  ( [ divb ] ) are manifestly nonnegative as written . a negative contribution from the second term
can be avoided by imposing the witten condition @xcite @xmath80 which is essentially the spatial dirac equation . in section  [ spinors ] , we recall the argument  @xcite that globally smooth spinors satisfying   with the above boundary conditions exist in designer gravity .
this establishes @xmath81 .
however , an energy bound can be derived only once we relate @xmath72 to the physical energy @xmath54 .
while these coincide for fast fall - off boundary conditions , they differ in the slow fall - off case .
one consequence of this is that @xmath72 is not in general conserved .
another is that @xmath72 may now depend on whether the spinor charge is defined using @xmath4 or @xmath3 .
that is , @xmath82 .    in  @xcite , the covariant phase space method of  @xcite , was used to show ( following @xcite ) that energy in designer gravity takes the form ) describes the generic case .
additional terms are present for special cases .
see @xcite . ] : [ generale ] e = - _ c e_ab ^a ds^b - ( _ + - _ - ) _ c _ b ds^b , where @xmath83 is the time translation conjugate to @xmath54 , @xmath84 is the integration element on the cut @xmath85 of the ads conformal boundary @xmath86 , and @xmath87 is the suitably rescaled electric part of the weyl tensor , which is smooth at @xmath86 as a consequence of our boundary conditions .
the numerical value of @xmath54 is independent of the particular choice of the cut .
one can derive the relation between @xmath52 and the energy @xmath54
@xcite by expanding the metric and the spinors in an asymptotic series in @xmath88 , using the witten equation , and using einstein s equation .
the result is : @xmath89 d\omega + \frac{1}{2 } \lim_{r \to \infty } ( \lambda_{\pm}-\lambda_- ) \
, r^{d-1 - 2\lambda_- } \int_{c_r } \alpha^2\ , d\omega \ ,   , \ ] ] where for simplicity we have chosen @xmath90 to be a cut of constant @xmath91 so that @xmath92 is the integration element of the unit sphere @xmath26 . in the final term , @xmath93 is a large sphere of radius @xmath94 in @xmath66 .
choosing @xmath3 and using @xmath95 yields the bound @xmath96 where @xmath97 is the volume of the unit - radius @xmath26 . on the other hand , for @xmath98 choosing @xmath4 causes the final term in ( [ qew ] ) to diverge .
since @xmath54 and @xmath0 are manifestly finite , it follows that @xmath99 is infinite .
it is also infinitely larger than @xmath54 , and its positivity yields no lower bound on @xmath54 .
thus , the energy bound  ( [ bound ] ) has been established only if the theory admits a @xmath3 superpotential ; the existence of @xmath4 alone is not sufficient .
let us consider a simple example shown in @xcite to have an energy @xmath54 which is unbounded below .
we take @xmath41 and the superpotential @xmath100 this choice corresponds to @xmath101 ( that is , @xmath102 ) , and since the coefficient of @xmath103 is @xmath104 , we see from ( [ series ] ) that ( [ simpleex ] ) is of the @xmath4 type . to see that the corresponding @xmath3 does not exist ,
let us write  ( [ vtop ] ) as @xmath105     for the example presented in the text .
the dashed line corresponds to the @xmath4 solution , which is stationary at the global minimum of the potential , @xmath106 .
the solid line corresponds to the @xmath3 solution , whose derivative vanishes at @xmath107 .
hence , @xmath3 does not meet the global existence criterion . , width=336 ]    one may solve ( [ dp ] ) by integrating out from @xmath108 and matching to the expansion ( [ series ] ) for small @xmath40 .
such solutions exist until the quantity @xmath109 becomes negative .
now , note that  ( [ series ] ) implies @xmath110 for all nonzero @xmath40 and similarly for their derivatives . in our example , @xmath4 has a maximum at the global minimum of the potential occurring at @xmath111 , so @xmath112 vanishes there . but
this means that @xmath113 must vanish at some @xmath114 .
in fact , it must vanish linearly at @xmath115 , since @xmath116 would force @xmath117 by ( [ vtop ] ) .
thus a real @xmath3 can not exist for @xmath118 .
this is illustrated in figure  [ pprime ] using numerical solutions of  ( [ dp ] ) .    since only @xmath4 exists for all @xmath40
, one does not expect ( [ bound ] ) to hold for solutions which explore large values of @xmath40 . indeed , @xcite found solutions with @xmath119 and arbitrarily negative energy for this potential .
in order to confirm the above resolution of the puzzle raised in @xcite , we now numerically investigate energy bounds in a simple class of examples . for designer gravity boundary conditions that preserve the full ads symmetry group ,
the existence of solitons has proven to be a reliable indicator whether or not a theory satisfies a positive energy theorem @xcite .
when the theory has a static spherical soliton solution , no such theorem can hold because ads - invariant gravitational solitons can always be rescaled to obtain solutions with arbitrarily negative energy that obey the same boundary conditions .    in this section
we consider a one - parameter class of scalar potentials and construct spherical solitons numerically .
we find that if the boundary conditions are specified by a @xmath0 which is i ) ads - invariant and ii ) bounded below , then solitons exist _ if and only if
_ @xmath3 does not exist .
this provides a strong test of the above stability proof , and it suggests that the existence of @xmath3 is both a sufficient and a necessary condition for the energy to be bounded from below in designer gravity .
we consider the following class of potentials in @xmath41 dimensions : [ pot ] v()=-3- ^2 -2 3 ^6 + a ^8 , where @xmath120 is a free parameter .
these yield scalar potentials with a negative maximum at @xmath14 , and with two global minima at @xmath121 .
small fluctuations around @xmath14 have @xmath122 , which is within the range ( [ range ] ) . hence asymptotically
the scalar generically decays as [ genfall2 ] = r + r^2 +  and the asymptotic behavior of the @xmath123 metric component reads [ asmetric2 ] g_rr = 1 r^2 - ( 1+^2/2 ) r^4 + o ( r^-5 ) .
( 0,0 ) ( 90,201)@xmath124 ( 388,22)@xmath125     designer gravity boundary conditions .
the dashed line shows a potential that violates the positive energy theorem for designer gravity boundary conditions , but satisfies such a theorem for fast fall - off boundary conditions ( @xmath126).,width=336 ]    to construct the corresponding superpotentials @xmath2 we solve ( [ vtop ] ) , starting with @xmath127 and with @xmath128 .
a solution to ( [ vtop ] ) exists unless @xmath109 becomes negative .
as we integrate out from @xmath14 , @xmath1 is initially increasing and @xmath109 remains positive because the scalar satisfies the breitenlohner - freedman bound . for sufficiently large values of @xmath129 the global minima at @xmath130 will not be very much lower than the local maximum at @xmath14 , so one expects global solutions for @xmath2 to exist , with @xmath131 .
by contrast , if the global minima are too deep , the quantity under the square root may become negative before the global minimum is reached , and consequently a real superpotential @xmath1 will not exist .
clearly there are two distinct critical potentials ( with parameters @xmath132 ) , corresponding to those where @xmath133 just vanishes as the global minimum is reached . numerically solving ( [ vtop ] ) for a range of values for @xmath129
, one finds @xmath134 , and @xmath135 .
we plot the latter critical potential in figure 2 ( full curve ) .
the dashed line in figure 2 shows a potential with @xmath136 .
we now look for static spherical soliton solutions of the theory ( [ pot ] ) satisfying ads - invariant boundary conditions with @xmath0 bounded below .
since @xmath137 and @xmath138 , ads - invariant boundary conditions are given @xcite by @xmath139 for real @xmath140 .
we see that @xmath0 is bounded below only for @xmath141 , so that only solitons with @xmath33 lead to violations of ( [ bound ] ) .
the metric of a general such solution takes the form [ metric ] ds^2=-h(r)e^-2(r)dt^2+h^-1(r)dr^2+r^2d_2 ^ 2 , and the field equations read [ hairy14d ] h_,rr+(+_,r^2h+h_,r ) _ , r = v _ , , [ hairy24d ] 1-h - rh_,r-_,r^2h = r^2v ( ) , [ hairy34d ] _ , r = -1 2r _ , r^2 .
regularity at the origin requires @xmath142 and @xmath143 at @xmath144 .
rescaling @xmath91 shifts @xmath145 by a constant , so its value at the origin is arbitrary .
thus soliton solutions can be labeled by the value of @xmath40 at the origin and the set of all soliton solutions of a particular potential with a negative maximum is found by integrating the field equations ( [ hairy14d])-([hairy34d ] ) for different values of @xmath40 at the origin . for @xmath146
the scalar asymptotically behaves as ( [ genfall2 ] ) with constant @xmath147 .
the soliton therefore defines a point in the @xmath148 plane for each such @xmath149 .
repeating for all @xmath150 yields a curve @xmath151 . given a choice of boundary condition @xmath152 , the allowed solitons are simply given by the points where the soliton curve intersects the boundary condition curve : @xmath153 .
here we are interested in the existence of @xmath154 solitons , for potentials of the form ( [ pot ] ) .
figure 3 shows how the value of @xmath125 for the @xmath154 soliton changes when one increases the potential parameter @xmath129 , from @xmath155 to its critical value @xmath156 .
this corresponds to deforming @xmath15 from the potential given by the dashed line in figure 2 , to the critical potential at which @xmath3 begins to exist .
one sees that @xmath157 precisely when @xmath158 .
furthermore , for @xmath159 the @xmath151 curve intersects the @xmath154 axis only at the origin , so no nontrivial soliton solution exists in this parameter regime is further decreased to @xmath160 , an intersection point at finite @xmath124 appears between @xmath161 and the @xmath126 axis .
this supports the claim of @xcite that the theory admits a positive energy theorem for @xmath126 scalar boundary conditions only when @xmath15 can be derived from a superpotential ( @xmath162 ) . ] .
it appears , therefore , that regular spherical @xmath5 soliton solutions cease to exist precisely when @xmath158 .
( 0,0 ) ( 90,201)@xmath129 ( 388,22)@xmath125     for the @xmath5 soliton in a range of theories with different values for @xmath129 , the coefficient of the @xmath163 term in ( [ pot ] ) .
one sees that regular spherical @xmath5 soliton solutions cease to exist precisely when @xmath164 .
, width=336 ]    the existence of scalar solitons with ads - invariant boundary conditions for @xmath165 implies there are negative energy solutions in these theories .
this can be seen as follows @xcite . starting with a static soliton @xmath166 ,
consider the one parameter family of configurations @xmath167 . because we chose conformally invariant boundary conditions ,
these are again satisfied by the rescaled data .
it then follows from the constraint equations that the total energy of the rescaled configurations takes the form e_=
^-3 e_1 + ^-1 e_2 where @xmath168 is independent of the potential and is manifestly positive , and both @xmath169 are finite and independent of @xmath170 .
furthermore , because the static soliton extremizes the energy @xcite , one has 0=d
e_d|_=1 = -3 e_1 -e_2 and hence @xmath171 .
therefore the contribution to the energy that scales as the volume , which includes the potential and scalar terms , is negative .
this means that rescaled configurations are initial data for time dependent ( but time - symmetric ) solutions . for sufficiently small @xmath170 one
has a large central region where @xmath40 is essentially constant and away from an extremum of the potential .
hence one expects the field to evolve to a spacelike ` big crunch ' singularity @xcite . ]
@xmath172 with @xmath173 must have negative total energy , and hence violate the energy bound ( [ bound ] ) .
thus , the energy is unbounded below for potentials with @xmath174 and @xmath5 , indicating that existence of @xmath3 is necessary for energy in designer gravity to be bounded below .
( note that we have already proven that it is sufficient . )
as explained in section  [ two ] , the derivation of the lower bound for the energy @xmath54 uses the positivity of the spinor charge .
this requires the global existence of smooth spinors satisfying the witten condition l = 0 on a constant time surface @xmath66 with suitable asymptotic behavior , where @xmath175 is the operator in the witten equation , [ witteneq ] l = ^i _ i . here
, @xmath176 is the first order covariant differential operator defined in eq .  , taken in directions @xmath177 tangent to the spacelike surface @xmath66 .
global existence of such solutions is non - trivial to establish , and indeed it was suggested in @xcite that some subtle failure of such spinors to exist might be responsible for the lack of energy bounds in the systems studied there .
in contrast , we have now proposed that the failure of those examples to satisfy ( [ bound ] ) was due solely to the fact that such potentials do not admit a @xmath3-type superpotential . in order to dispel any remaining concerns about the global existence of spinors
, we reexamine this issue below .
section [ again ] essentially follows @xcite and proves global existence of the witten spinors in general , but we deviate slightly from  @xcite to correct an error in this proof . in order to correct this proof
, we need to work on a maximal slice @xmath66 ( i.e. , one for which the trace of the extrinsic curvature satisfies @xmath178 ) in the spacetime that intersects scri transversely .
this proof is in fact quite abstract and draws on certain very non - trivial results in the mathematics literature .
we therefore restrict attention in section [ sphere ] to the particular case of maximal ( e.g. , time - symmetric ) , spherically symmetric hypersurfaces , which is enough to address any concerns raised by @xcite . in this case
we are able to give a more explicit construction of the witten spinors by reducing the problem to ordinary differential equations .
existence of solutions is then straightforward to show .
finally , we numerically solve for the witten spinors in section [ numerics ] and evaluate the corresponding spinor charges , verifying the relationship between @xmath72 and @xmath54 derived in section [ two ] .      if @xmath66 is a maximal slice in the spacetime , then the witten operator @xmath175 in eq .
can be written as [ witteneq1 ] l = ^i ( d_i + p ( ) _ i ) , where @xmath179 is now the spin - connection intrinsic to @xmath66 . on slices with @xmath180
, there would be another term proportional to @xmath181 in the above expression for @xmath175 .
for the proof to work , we must assume that such a slice exists .
below , we will briefly outline how one might construct such a @xmath66 .
we would like to find a smooth spinor field @xmath67 on @xmath66 with the property that @xmath182 , and that @xmath67 tends to a suitable exact killing spinor of ads - space near infinity . following @xcite , the first step in the proof is to find a formal power series solution @xmath183 to the witten spinor equation of the form [ asympt ] ~_0 + r^-1 _ 1 + r^-2 _ 2 +  + r^-n _
n +  , where @xmath184 , and where @xmath70 is a killing spinor in exact ads - space ( i.e. , @xmath185 in exact ads with vanishing @xmath40 ) such that - ( ) ^a = _ 0 ^a _ 0^ . the spinor fields @xmath186 are determined recursively by the condition that @xmath183 be a formal power series solution to the witten equation
. it can be proven that @xmath187 are uniquely determined for @xmath188 by making a split of the witten equation into a part containing an @xmath94-derivative and a part containing derivatives tangent to a sphere of constant @xmath94 .
the explicit form of the first coefficients @xmath187 in terms of the spacetime curvature near infinity is given in  @xcite .
the formal power series solution satisfies the equation l= j , where @xmath189 is a smooth source vanishing faster than any inverse power of @xmath94 near @xmath86 .
we may terminate the expansion   at some large finite @xmath190 , thus obtaining a @xmath189 vanishing faster than @xmath191 .
the next step is to obtain from the formal power series solution @xmath183 a global solution @xmath67 to the witten equation .
this step requires some global analysis .
the idea is to write the global solution @xmath67 that we seek as = + , where @xmath192 is a smooth spinor field to be determined .
thus , @xmath192 should satisfy @xmath193 , and @xmath192 should vanish at least as fast as @xmath194 in order that @xmath67 have the same asymptotics as @xmath183 to leading order .
the global existence of such a @xmath192 can be established using the following key inequality   which holds whenever @xmath195 is a solution to the einstein equations satisfying the asymptotic conditions given in @xcite . to state the inequality , consider any smooth spinor field @xmath196 on @xmath66 that vanishes outside some compact region in @xmath66 , and introduce the following norm on such @xmath196 : [ normu ] u ^2 = _ ds .
then there exists a positive constant independent of @xmath196 such that [ ineq ] const.^-1 u ^2 _
|l u|^2 ds u ^2 .
the proof of the inequality uses a similar technique as in the `` hardy - inequality , '' combined with the key identity  .
it may be found in  @xcite .
we now use the inequality to establish a solution to the equation @xmath193 .
we will do this by first constructing a distributional solution @xmath192 , and then showing that it is in fact smooth .
let @xmath197 be the linear functional on smooth compactly supported spinors @xmath196 defined by f(u ) = -_(nj)^u ds , where @xmath198 , and @xmath76 is the unit timelike normal to @xmath66 . note that @xmath199 , and that [ hermitian ] n l^= l n due to the fact that @xmath178 . by the cauchy - schwartz inequality and the first half of the inequality  , we get |f(u)| & & ( _ |u|^2 ( 1+r^2)^-1 ds ) ^1/2 ( _ |j|^2 ( 1+r^2 ) ds ) ^1/2 + & & const .
( _ |lu|^2 ds ) ^1/2 .
the constant is finite because by construction @xmath189 drops off sufficiently rapidly at infinity .
we interpret this inequality as saying that @xmath197 is a bounded functional with respect to the positive definite scalar product given by v | u = ( lv)^lu ds .
let @xmath200 be the hilbert space defined by this inner product ( which , by the second half of inequality   is identical to the hilbert space obtained from the norm @xmath201 ) . by the riesz representation theorem , there is hence an element @xmath202 such that @xmath203 for all @xmath204 .
again by the inequality  , every element in @xmath200 is locally square integrable , so in particular a distribution on @xmath66 .
thus , @xmath205 is a solution in the distributional sense of the equation @xmath206 .
next , we apply @xmath207 to this equation , use eq .  , and put @xmath208 .
it follows that this @xmath192 is the desired distributional solution to @xmath193 , and @xmath209 is a global solution to the witten equation .
it remains to prove that @xmath67 is smooth , and that it satisfies the desired boundary conditions .
this will follow if we can show that @xmath192 is smooth and vanishes sufficiently fast at infinity .
it follows from our construction so far only that @xmath210 .
but since @xmath189 is smooth and vanishes quickly , one can now use the mapping properties of the parametrix of the operator @xmath175 established in  @xcite to prove that @xmath192 is indeed smooth and vanishes sufficiently fast .
the details of this argument are given in  @xcite .
finally , we outline how one might construct the desired @xmath178 slice @xmath66 in the type of spacetimes that we consider .
first , let @xmath211 be any ( weakly ) spacelike hypersurface in spacetime , @xmath212 its domain of dependence .
if @xmath211 is such that the closure of @xmath212 is contained in a globally hyperbolic subregion of spacetime ( note that the full spacetime need _ not _ be globally hyperbolic ) , then a theorem of bartnik  @xcite guarantees that there exists a sufficiently regular maximal slice @xmath66 with prescribed extrinsic curvature and boundary @xmath213 .
unfortunately , it is not immediately clear how to apply this theorem when the surface @xmath211 touches the conformal boundary .
however , by considering a sequence @xmath214 eventually touching the conformal boundary transversely , we obtain a corresponding sequence @xmath215 of maximal slices .
presumably it can be shown that these have a subsequence that is convergent in a sufficiently strong sense .
we now explicitly describe the solution to the witten equation for a slice @xmath66 which is both spherically symmetric and maximal ( i.e , @xmath178 ) though not necessarily static .
such a slice automatically exists when the initial data are time - symmetric .
since this case is sufficient to address the concerns of @xcite , we explain the analysis in some detail .
our conventions will be as follows . for simplicity , we restrict attention in this subsection to the case @xmath41 .
we denote by @xmath216 indices on a flat internal space ( while @xmath217 are spacetime indices ) .
the gamma matrices satisfy @xmath218 and we choose the explicit matrix representation @xmath219 where @xmath220 is the @xmath221 identity matrix , and where @xmath222 are the standard pauli matrices .
we wish to address spherical spacetimes .
let @xmath66 be a maximal ( @xmath178 ) , spherically symmetric spacelike slice on which we set @xmath223 , e.g. , a surface of time - symmetry .
though such spacetimes are not in general static , on @xmath66 they may nevertheless be written in the form ( [ metric ] ) , which may be described by the orthonormal frame @xmath224 because @xmath178 , the witten equation   only depends on the geometry intrinsic to @xmath66 , i.e. , @xmath225 .
we further assume that the scalar field on @xmath66 is a function of @xmath94 alone , and that @xmath226 , @xmath227 are known functions .
the intrinsic covariant derivative acting on spinor fields is in general given by @xmath228 where the intrinsic spin connection is determined by the relation @xmath229 .
for the metric  ( [ metric ] ) , we find @xmath230    with the above ingredients in hand , the witten condition becomes the explicit equation @xmath231\psi   + \frac{3}{2 } p(\phi ) \psi \,.\ ] ] writing @xmath67 in terms of two - component spinors as @xmath232 ( [ witcon ] ) implies @xmath233\psi_2   + \frac{3}{2 } p(\phi ) \psi_1 , \\
\label{witcon22 } 0 & = & i \left[\sigma_{3 } \sqrt{h } \left(\partial_r + \frac{1}{r } \right ) + \frac{1}{r } \ , \rlap/\!\nabla_{\ !
\!s^2 } \right]\psi_1   - \frac{3}{2 } p(\phi ) \psi_2 \,.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here the operator @xmath234 is the dirac operator on the 2-dimensional sphere @xmath235 . to decouple the differential equations  ( [ witcon21 ] ) and  ( [ witcon22 ] ) ,
we define @xmath236 then the @xmath237 satisfy @xmath238 \psi_+ & = & 0 \\ \label{witcon32 } \left [ \sigma_{3 } \left(\partial_r + \frac{1}{r } \right ) + \frac{1}{r \sqrt{h } } \ , \rlap/\!\nabla_{\ ! \!s^2 } - \frac{3}{2 \sqrt{h } } p(\phi ) \right ] \psi_- & = & 0 \ , .\end{aligned}\ ] ]    next we wish to expand @xmath237 in spinor spherical harmonics , which are eigenfunctions of @xmath234 .
these are given , for example in  @xcite , by @xmath239 @xmath240 where @xmath241 are integers such that @xmath242 and @xmath243 .
the @xmath244 are jacobi polynomials and the spherical harmonics satisfy @xmath245 separating variables as @xmath246 @xmath247 we find from  ( [ witcon31 ] ) and  ( [ witcon32 ] ) that the radial functions satisfy the following differential equations : @xmath248 @xmath249    to pick the desired solution to the witten equation , we now impose our boundary conditions .
we demand that our solution be regular in the interior , and that it asymptotically approaches a suitable killing spinor @xmath70 of pure ads .
as we will see shortly , this @xmath70 has only @xmath250 components .
since the remaining modes are decoupled , they may be consistently set to zero .
thus we consider only @xmath251 below .    near the origin @xmath144 ,
the solutions behave as @xmath252 where @xmath253 are constants .
regularity at the origin then requires boundary conditions of the form @xmath254 the analysis for the @xmath255 solutions near the origin is exactly the same . as @xmath256
, we require that the solution to the witten condition approaches a killing spinor in exact ads space . for large @xmath94 , solutions to  ( [ radialde ] ) and  ( [ tradialde ] ) behave as @xmath257 the solution which grows as @xmath258 matches the known asymptotic behavior of killing spinors in exact ads space .
in particular , an explicit solution to the killing spinor equation is given by @xcite @xmath259 where @xmath260 is a constant spinor and @xmath261 the spinor @xmath260 is chosen so that @xmath70 satisfies the additional requirement @xmath262 , or equivalently @xmath263 .
one can achieve this normalization by taking @xmath264 with the choice  ( [ norm ] ) , one can rewrite  ( [ ks ] ) in terms of the spinor spherical harmonics as @xmath265 hence , the solution for the witten spinor is @xmath266 \end{array } \right ) \,.\ ] ] furthermore , comparing to  ( [ ks2 ] ) we see that the asymptotic conditions on the radial functions are @xmath267    comparing ( [ wcasym ] ) and ( [ wcbc ] ) with ( [ near0 ] ) and ( [ largerr ] ) demonstrates that the desired witten spinors exist .
one first notes that @xmath268 decouple from @xmath269 . to construct the desired @xmath268 , one simply enforces the boundary condition ( [ wcbc ] ) at @xmath144 for some @xmath270 and integrates ( [ radialde ] ) outward . from ( [ largerr ] ) ,
any solution will grow asymptotically as @xmath258 , and in fact will satisfy ( [ wcasym ] ) up to an overall scale . rescaling @xmath270 yields the desired solutions @xmath268 .
the analysis for @xmath271 is similar .
thus , witten spinors exist for any spherically symmetric maximal hypersurface @xmath66 satisfying our boundary conditions .
a final crucial aspect of the argument of section [ two ] is the detailed relation ( [ qew ] ) between the spinor charges @xmath52 and the energy @xmath54 .
since ( [ qew ] ) was derived via a tedious calculation , it is useful to verify the relation numerically
. let us consider the theory with potential @xmath272 which is just ( [ pot ] ) for @xmath273 .
this theory admits both a @xmath4 and a @xmath3 superpotential .
we take as initial data a soliton with @xmath274 and boundary condition @xmath275 for some constant @xmath276 ( so that @xmath0 is not conformally invariant ) .
we find that a soliton exists with @xmath277 and @xmath278 .
the energy of this soliton is @xmath279 .
numerical results for @xmath3-type witten spinors are shown in figures  [ rrm ] and  [ irm ] . ) with initial data given by the rescaled configurations @xmath280 discussed in section  [ solitons ] . ]    ) confirm the existence of witten spinors that are regular at the origin and have the correct behavior at large @xmath94 .
the solid line is @xmath281 , which by the arguments in the text asymptotically approach @xmath282 , shown here as the dashed line.,width=336 ]    , which by the arguments in the text asymptotically approach @xmath283 , shown here as the dashed line . ,
width=336 ]    using these solutions , we can also calculate the spinor charge and check  ( [ qew ] ) .
we obtain @xmath284 , thus confirming the relation @xmath285 .
similarly , for the @xmath4 case we find @xmath286 , in agreement with ( [ qew ] ) .
we have resolved the puzzle raised in @xcite concerning energy bounds in designer gravity . while the arguments of @xcite are correct as written , global existence of an appropriate superpotential is a subtle requirement . in particular , two types of superpotentials may ( or may not ) exist for a given scalar potential @xmath10 .
the proof of @xcite requires the global existence of a @xmath3-type superpotential .
if one attempts to follow the same argument with a @xmath4-type superpotential , one finds that the difference between the conserved energy @xmath54 and the associated spinor charge @xmath99 diverges , and in particular that @xmath99 diverges .
thus , positivity of @xmath99 does not yield a lower bound for @xmath54 , and the existence of a @xmath4-type superpotential alone is not sufficient to yield a positive energy theorem .
numerical explorations support this resolution .    a specific question raised in @xcite concerned the global existence of witten spinors .
we have demonstrated ( section [ spinors ] ) that no such difficulties arise , even for the models considered in @xcite .
the existence theorem of @xcite was shown to hold in general and , for the special case of spherical symmetry , existence of witten spinors on maximal ( e.g. , time - symmetric ) hypersurfaces was again demonstrated using simple arguments based on ordinary differential equations .
the spherical time - symmetric context is sufficient to address the concerns of @xcite .
this reinforces our claim that , when @xmath0 has a global minimum , the existence of a @xmath3-type superpotential is sufficient for the energy to be bounded below .
interestingly , our numerical explorations of particular examples ( section [ solitons ] ) suggest that global existence of @xmath3 may also be _ necessary _ for the energy to be bounded below
. such a property would be analogous to the claim of @xcite that the existence of a superpotential is necessary for an energy bound to hold in the case of fast fall - off boundary conditions @xmath287 .
however , in the fast fall - off case the relevant superpotential is @xmath4 , since either superpotential is sufficient and existence of @xmath3 implies existence of @xmath4 ( footnote [ exist ] ) . indeed , for @xmath32 the spinor charges @xmath52 satisfy @xmath288 and , in particular , @xmath289 when both potentials exist .
thus we find that each type of superpotential provides a stability criterion for ads gravity - scalar theories , with @xmath4 controlling the @xmath32 case and @xmath3 controlling cases with slower fall - off conditions on the scalar .
finally , a key tool in our investigation of particular examples was the argument from @xcite showing that the existence of designer gravity solitons satisfying ads - invariant boundary conditions implies that the energy is unbounded below .
we may thus interpret the lower bounds of @xcite in terms of the soliton content of such theories .
we conclude that designer gravity theories where @xmath3 exists can have no solitons when @xmath0 is both ads - invariant and bounded below .
the authors would like to thank gary horowitz for useful discussions .
s.h . would also like to thank piotr chrusciel and bob wald for discussions and the physics department at ucsb for its hospitality . d.m .
also thanks jim isenberg and robert bartnik for discussions .
a.a . and d.m
were supported in part by nsf grant phy0354978 , and by funds from the university of california .
p.  breitenlohner and d.  z.  freedman , `` stability in gauged extended supergravity , '' annals phys .
* 144 * ( 1982 ) 249 ; `` positive energy in anti - de sitter backgrounds and gauged extended supergravity , '' phys .
b * 115 * ( 1982 ) 197 .
m.  henneaux , c.  martinez , r.  troncoso and j.  zanelli , `` black holes and asymptotics of 2 + 1 gravity coupled to a scalar field , '' phys
.  rev .
d * 65 * , 104007 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0201170 ] .
m.  henneaux , c.  martinez , r.  troncoso and j.  zanelli , `` asymptotically anti - de sitter spacetimes and scalar fields with a logarithmic branch , '' phys .
d * 70 * , 044034 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0404236 ] .
t.  hertog and k.  maeda , `` stability and thermodynamics of ads black holes with scalar hair , '' phys .
d * 71 * , 024001 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0409314 ] .
j. m. maldacena , `` the large n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity , '' adv .
* 2 * ( 1998 ) 231 [ arxiv : hep - th/9711200 ] .
d.  z.  freedman , c.  nunez , m.  schnabl and k.  skenderis , `` fake supergravity and domain wall stability , '' phys .
d * 69 * , 104027 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0312055 ] .
a.  celi , a.  ceresole , g.  dallagata , a.  van proeyen and m.  zagermann , `` on the fakeness of fake supergravity , '' phys .
d * 71 * , 045009 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0410126 ]
. m.  zagermann , `` n = 4 fake supergravity , '' phys .
d * 71 * , 125007 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0412081 ] .
k.  skenderis and p.  k.  townsend , `` hidden supersymmetry of domain walls and cosmologies , '' phys .
* 96 * , 191301 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0602260 ] .
i.  papadimitriou ,  non - supersymmetric membrane flows from fake supergravity and multi - trace deformations , " [ arxiv : hep - th/0606038 ] .
k.  skenderis and p.  k.  townsend , `` pseudo - supersymmetry and the domain - wall / cosmology correspondence , '' arxiv : hep - th/0610253 .
s.  hollands , a.  ishibashi and d.  marolf , `` comparison between various notions of conserved charges in asymptotically ads - spacetimes , '' class
.  quant .
* 22 * , 2881 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0503045 ] .
m. heusler , n. straumann , `` scaling arguments for the existence of static , spherically symmetric solutions of self - gravitating system , '' class .
* 9 * ( 1992 ) 2177 ; m. heusler , `` a no hair theorem for selfgravitating nonlinear sigma models , '' j. math
* 33 * ( 1992 ) 3497 .
r. mazzeo : `` elliptic theory of differential edge operators i , '' commun
. part . diff .
equations * 16 * ( 10 ) ( 1991 ) , 1615 ; r. mazzeo : `` the hodge cohomology of a conformally compact metric , '' j. diff
* 28 * ( 1988 ) 309