Thread locks object or its method if it is synchronized. What will happen if the method is static type?

Why don't you try it? My guess is that any given time only one thread will be able to execute the method in question, the others will wait.

what will be there if a thread trying to access an static method whose object has not been initialized?

Why don't you try it? Probably an exception (or coredump).

> what will be there if a thread trying to access an static method whose object has not been initialized?

I don't know what is 'the object of a static method'

"Static methods" work the way they always do, whether or not the calls to them are "synchronized."

8.4.3.6 synchronized Methods:

Okay, okay, here's the skinny on both of these:

A [b]static method[/i] (what other languages call a "class method") is associated with the class itself ... not with any particular instance of the class. So, you do not have to possess a class-instance to call it.

Synchronized is a convenient, lazy man's way to wrap a mutual-exclusion mechanism around a method-call ... letting the language do the dirty-work so that you don't have to. (Furthermore, it hides the operating-system specific semantics ... "here's what I mean to do, so, mister language, now just go off and do it for me.")

Static methods load at the time of class loading but if object of that class is not initialized yet, then what?

> if object of that class is not initialized yet

We are talking about static methods, what object are you referring to?