How appropriate are the gravitational entropy proposals for traversable wormholes?
Samarjit Chakraborty, Sarbari Guha, Rituparno Goswami

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the applicability of two gravitational entropy proposals to traversable wormholes, finding that their validity varies and depends on the specific definition used, impacting the physical realism of such wormholes.
Contribution
It compares two different gravitational entropy definitions in the context of traversable wormholes, highlighting their applicability and limitations.
Findings
The geometric approach applies broadly but lacks thermodynamic basis.
The CET proposal is limited to Petrov type D and N spacetimes.
Gravitational entropy validity depends on the chosen definition.
Abstract
In this paper we have examined the validity of some proposed definitions of gravitational entropy (GE) in the context of traversable wormhole solutions of the Einstein field equations. Here we have adopted two different proposals of GE and checked for their applicability in the case of these wormholes. The first one is the phenomenological approach proposed by Rudjord et al \cite{entropy1} and expanded by Romero et al in \cite{entropy2}, which is a purely geometric method of measuring gravitational entropy. The latter one is the Clifton-Ellis-Tavakol (CET) proposal \cite{CET} for the gravitational entropy which arises in relativistic thermodynamics and is based on the Bel-Robinson tensor, which represents the effective super-energy-momentum tensor of free gravitational fields. Considering some of the Lorentzian traversable wormholes along with the Brill solution for NUT wormholes and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
