format: text

text:
# Low-dimensional Bose liquids: beyond the Gross-Pitaevskii approximation

\[

## Abstract

The Gross-Pitaevskii approximation is a long-wavelength theory widely used to describe a variety of properties of dilute Bose condensates, in particular trapped alkali gases. We point out that for short-ranged repulsive interactions this theory fails in dimensions $`d2`$, and we propose the appropriate low-dimensional modifications. For $`d=1`$ we analyze density profiles in confining potentials, superfluid properties, solitons, and self-similar solutions.

\]

Experimental observation of Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) in trapped alkali vapors  has ushered in a new era of superlow temperature physics. The Gross-Pitaevskii (GP) mean-field theory  has proven to be an indispensable tool both in analyzing and predicting the outcome of experiments.

With rapid progress in the experimental exploration of BEC systems it is reasonable to anticipate that effectively one and two-dimensional systems are realistic prospects in the near future . For example, high aspect ratio cigar-shaped traps approximating quasi-one-dimensional BEC systems are already available experimentally . From the theoretical viewpoint low-dimensional systems are rarely well represented by mean-field theories which leads one to question the validity of the GP theory in one and two dimensions. In this paper we shall show that, indeed, the physics of dilute Bose systems requires a fundamental modification of the GP theory in low dimensions $`d2`$.

The GP theory is a quasi-classical (or mean-field) approximation which replaces the bosonic field operator $`\psi `$ by a classical order parameter field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐫,t)`$. For short-ranged interactions the interparticle potential $`U(𝐫)`$ is replaced by $`g\delta ^d(𝐫)`$, where $`g`$ is the pseudopotential. Then for a system of bosons in an external potential $`V`$, the energy functional and the equation of motion for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ take the following form:

$$F_{GP}=d^dr\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+V(𝐫)|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+\frac{g}{2}|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4\right],$$
(1)
and

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{\delta F_{GP}}{\delta \mathrm{\Phi }^{}}=\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}^2+V(𝐫)+g|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2\right]\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
(2)
The GP equations (1) and (2) are widely used to compute a variety of properties of Bose systems .

The GP approximation is a long-wavelength theory relying on the concept of the pseudopotential to account for interparticle interactions. However, for repulsive bosons the canonical pseudopotential vanishes in two dimensions , implying that an essential modification of the GP theory is necessary for $`d2`$. To see how to modify the theory, it is useful to rewrite the last integrand of (1) in terms of the particle density $`n=|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2`$, so that $`(g/2)|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4=(g/2)n^2`$. This can be recognized  as the lowest order term of a dilute expansion of the ground-state energy density for $`d>2`$. Thus the correct low-dimensional local density theory will instead have the ground-state energy density of the $`d2`$ dilute Bose system, which is not proportional to $`n^2`$.

Let us write the interparticle interaction in the form $`U(𝐫)=u_0\delta _a^d(𝐫)`$ where $`u_0`$ is the amplitude of the interparticle repulsion, and the notation $`\delta _a^d(𝐫)`$ denotes any well-localized function that transforms into the mathematical Dirac $`\delta `$ function when the range of interaction $`a0`$. The renormalization group analysis of this problem  reveals that two dimensionless combinations $`na^d`$ and $`\mathrm{}^2n^{(2d)/d}/mu_0`$ play an important role in defining the conditions of the dilute limit for $`d2`$.

In the dilute limit $`na1`$ and $`\mathrm{}^2n/mu_01`$, any one-dimensional Bose system with short-ranged repulsive interactions becomes equivalent to a gas of free-fermions  (or equivalently point hard-core bosons), with energy density $`\pi ^2\mathrm{}^2n^3/6m`$. This can be generalized for $`d<2`$ to the statement that for $`na^d1`$ and $`\mathrm{}^2n^{(2d)/d}/mu_01`$, the lowest order term of the ground-state energy density expansion is universal and given by $`(\mathrm{}^2C_d/2m)n^{(2+d)/d}`$, where $`C_d`$ is a $`d`$-dependent constant. This implies that the quartic nonlinearity $`|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4`$ in Eq.(1) should be replaced by $`|\mathrm{\Phi }|^{2(2+d)/d}`$. In particular, for the practically important case of one dimension, the system of equations (1) and (2) is modified to

$$F=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}𝑑x\left[\left|\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }}{dx}\right|^2+\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}^2}V(x)|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+\frac{\pi ^2}{3}|\mathrm{\Phi }|^6\right],$$
(3)
and

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left[_x^2+\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}^2}V(x)+\pi ^2|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4\right]\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
(4)
Similar considerations applied to the marginal two-dimensional case lead to the conclusion that in the dilute limit  a theory replacing the GP approximation starts from the energy functional

$$F=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}d^2r\left[|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}^2}V(x)|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+\frac{4\pi ^2}{|\mathrm{ln}(|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2a^2)|}|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4\right].$$
(5)
Ignoring the logarithmic factor will perhaps suffice for many practical purposes; then (5) is precisely of the GP form. Finding an experimental manifestation of the logarithmic correction is likely to be very challenging.

A detailed analytical and numerical study of the one and two-dimensional cases will be given in a longer publication; hereafter we restrict ourselves to only the salient features of one dimension where the deviations from the GP theory are largest.

Density profiles in external potentials: The stationary solution to Eq.(4) defined via $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,t)=\varphi (x)e^{i\mu t/\mathrm{}}`$ can be found by solving

$$\frac{d^2\varphi }{dx^2}+\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}^2}(\mu V(x))\varphi \pi ^2\varphi ^5=0,$$
(6)
subject to the condition of fixed total particle number $`N=𝑑x\varphi ^2`$ which determines the chemical potential $`\mu `$. For an external potential that varies slowly on the scale of the interparticle spacing the derivative term in (6) can be ignored: this gives the density profile in the Thomas-Fermi (TF) approximation:

$$n_{TF}(x)=\varphi _{TF}^2=\left[2m(\mu V(x))\right]^{1/2}/\pi \mathrm{},$$
(7)
with the density being zero in the classically forbidden region $`\mu <V(x)`$. For the practically important case of a harmonic trap, $`V=m\omega ^2x^2/2`$, and the density profile is elliptical:

$$n_{TF}(x)=\left[(2m\mu m^2\omega ^2x^2)\right]^{1/2}/\pi \mathrm{}.$$
(8)
The chemical potential is given by $`\mu _{TF}=\mathrm{}\omega N`$, the density in the center of the trap is $`n_{TF}(0)=(2m\mathrm{}\omega N)^{1/2}/\pi \mathrm{}`$, and the size of the trapped condensate is $`2(2m\mathrm{}\omega N)^{1/2}/\pi \mathrm{}`$.

The accuracy of these predictions can be tested against the exact solution of a dilute system of bosons with repulsive interactions: an ideal candidate being a system of point impenetrable bosons. The boson-fermion equivalence implies that in the many-body system, the single-particle energy levels $`E_n=\mathrm{}\omega (n+1/2)`$ of the harmonic oscillator are occupied in a fermionic fashion, i.e. with no more than one particle per state. The chemical potential is then given by $`\mu =\mathrm{}\omega (N+1/2)`$, which for large $`N`$ approaches our TF result $`\mu _{TF}=\mathrm{}\omega N`$. Similarly the density profile can be computed as a sum of squares of the single-particle wave functions:

$$n(x)=\frac{1}{(\pi l)^{1/2}}\underset{k=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\frac{1}{2^kk!}H_k^2(x/l)\mathrm{exp}(x^2/l^2),$$
(9)
where $`H_k`$ are Hermite polynomials and $`l=(\mathrm{}/m\omega )^{1/2}`$. The density distribution (9) is plotted in Fig.1 where it is compared with a) the numerical solution of (6) with $`V=m\omega ^2x^2/2`$, and b) the TF result (8), for different numbers of particles. The main flaw of the theory based on (6) is that it does not reproduce density oscillations due to algebraic ordering of the particles. This is not surprising as (akin to the GP approximation) the discreteness of the particles, which is responsible for the density oscillations, is ignored. Otherwise, the agreement between the approximate and the exact profiles is very good; in the limit of large particle number the differences become imperceptible. These results can be directly tested experimentally; as a comparison we note that the one-dimensional GP theory in the TF approximation predicts  $`n_{TF}\mu V(x)`$, which is quite distinct from (7), and agrees very poorly with the exact result.

Solitons: Gray solitons  have been recently created and their dynamics was observed in cigar-shaped condensates of $`{}_{}{}^{87}Rb`$ vapors , which makes it important to understand solitonic properties of the system (3) and (4). Let us look for solutions to (4) (with $`V=0`$) of the form $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,t)=\varphi (x,t)e^{i\mu t/\mathrm{}}`$. The function $`\varphi `$ then obeys the equation

$$i\mathrm{}_t\varphi =\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left[_x^2\varphi +\pi ^2(|\varphi |^4\varphi _0^4)\varphi \right],$$
(10)
where the chemical potential $`\mu =\pi ^2\mathrm{}^2\varphi _0^4/2m`$ is selected so that the particle density $`n_0=\varphi _0^2`$ is constant at infinity. In dimensionless variables $`f=\varphi /\varphi _0`$, $`y=\pi n_0x`$, $`\tau =\pi ^2n_0^2\mathrm{}t/m`$, Eq.(10) simplifies to

$$2i_\tau f=_y^2f+(|f|^41)f.$$
(11)
We will be looking for a localized traveling wave solution  to (11) of the form $`f(y,\tau )=f(y\beta \tau )`$ where the dimensionless velocity $`\beta `$ is measured in units of the sound velocity $`c=\pi \mathrm{}n_0/m`$. This problem can be solved exactly. The results are conveniently described in terms of the amplitude $`A`$ and phase $`\theta `$ of the dimensionless order parameter $`f=Ae^{i\theta }`$:

$`A^2`$ $`=`$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{3(1\beta ^2)}{2+(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}[2(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}(y\beta \tau )]}}`$ (12)
$`2\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}^1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(3\beta ^2/A^2)1}{(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}}}\right].`$ (13)
The spatial behavior given by (12) is shown in Fig.2.

The amplitude in (12) describes a moving depression (particle deficit) with the minimal value at the soliton center given by $`A^2(0)=(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}1`$. The soliton exists only for $`\beta <1`$ (i.e. the soliton velocity cannot exceed the speed of sound); for $`\beta =1`$ (12) gives the uniform result $`A^2=1`$. On the other hand, for $`\beta =0`$ (i.e. a vortex, or dark soliton ) the minimal value of the amplitude at the soliton center drops to zero.

The phase expressed in (12) varies rapidly in the vicinity of the amplitude dip, staying approximately constant far away from it. The total phase shift across the soliton can be found as $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =\mathrm{cos}^1[(3\beta ^21)/(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}]`$. It is a continuous function of the soliton velocity varying between $`\pi `$ (when $`\beta =0`$) and zero (when $`\beta =1`$). Antisolitons may be defined as having opposite signs of $`d\theta /dy`$, and there are no constraints on $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ for the open line or ring geometries (provided the number of solitons matches the number of antisolitons). However, if there is an imbalance of solitons and antisolitons in the ring geometry, then the uniqueness of the order parameter $`f(y,\tau )`$ implies that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ is a fraction of $`2\pi `$ for any excess soliton; this will in turn mean that the excess soliton velocity is quantized.

The solution (12) bears some similarity with the one-dimensional soliton of the GP theory ; the main qualitative difference (seen after recovering the original units) is that in the dilute limit the soliton size is of order $`1/(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}n_0`$ independent of the amplitude of the interparticle repulsion .

General methods  can be used to compute the soliton energy $`E`$ and momentum $`P`$. For their dimensionless counterparts $`ϵ=2mE/\pi ^2\mathrm{}^2n_0^2`$ and $`𝒫=P/\pi \mathrm{}n_0`$ we find

$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{\pi }}(1\beta ^2)\mathrm{ln}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{2+[3(1\beta ^2)]^{1/2}}{(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}}}\right\}`$ (14)
$`𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{(1\beta ^2)}}ϵ+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}\mathrm{cos}^1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3\beta ^21}{(1+3\beta ^2)^{1/2}}}\right].`$ (15)
The dependencies $`ϵ(\beta )`$ and $`𝒫(\beta )`$ parametrically define the soliton dispersion law $`ϵ(𝒫)`$ which should be identified  with the “hole” branch of the elementary excitations spectrum . To assess the accuracy of $`ϵ(𝒫)`$ given in (14) we compare it with the exact result of Lieb for the system of $`\delta `$-interacting bosons in the dilute limit $`\mathrm{}^2n/mu_01`$: $`ϵ_{\mathrm{exact}}(𝒫)=2|𝒫|𝒫^2`$, for $`|𝒫|1`$. Since the velocity $`\beta `$ in (14) varies between zero and unity, the momentum (which we choose to be positive) computed from (14) varies between unity and zero in correspondence with the exact result. It is straightforward to show that for $`𝒫1`$, the elimination of $`\beta `$ in (14) leads to $`ϵ=2𝒫`$ which is again in agreement with the exact result. The behavior $`ϵ(𝒫)`$ implied by (14) in the vicinity of the end-point of the spectrum $`𝒫=1`$ is qualitatively similar, and quantitatively close to the exact dependence. To illustrate these statements we have plotted the dispersion law (14) in Fig.3 against the exact result.

Superflow: The dimensionless current density is given by $`j=A^2_y\theta `$, and below we look for solutions with fixed given current $`j`$ (i.e. the steady state) and $`_\tau A=_\tau \theta =0`$. Substituting $`f=Ae^{i\theta }`$ and $`j=A^2d\theta /dy`$ into (11), and imposing fixed chemical potential, we find:

$$\frac{d^2A}{dy^2}=\frac{j^2}{A^3}+A^5A.$$
(16)
In the spatially uniform state $`\frac{d^2A}{dy^2}=0`$ and one finds the dimensionless amplitude $`A_{\mathrm{}}^4=[1+(14j^2)^{1/2}]/2`$, which implies that superflow reduces the amplitude of the order parameter. The uniform solution, and thus superfluidity, cease to exist above the critical flow $`j_c=1/2`$ when the amplitude drops down to its minimal value $`A_{\mathrm{}}^c=2^{1/4}`$. These results imply that the critical velocity for superfluidity in the original units is $`c/\sqrt{2}`$.

The equation (16) also has an immobile well-localized solution in the form of a dip of the order parameter; far away from the dip the amplitude recovers to its uniform value. The dip solution is closely related to the soliton previously discussed. Indeed, in the reference frame moving with the flow, the dip solution is moving and thus is identical to a soliton. The functional form of the dip can be deduced from (12) by replacing $`\beta `$ by $`j/A_{\mathrm{}}^4`$, $`A`$ by $`A/A_{\mathrm{}}`$, and $`(y\beta \tau )`$ by $`yA_{\mathrm{}}^2`$. The dip solution disappears altogether for $`j>j_c`$.

Self-similar solutions: The results derived so far have their counterparts in the context of the one-dimensional GP approximation. However the theory based on Eqs.(3) and (4) allows self-similar solutions which do not exist in the one-dimensional GP theory . Below we only look at the cases consistent with the condition of conservation of total particle number. Consider the system of bosons placed in a harmonic trap. In dimensionless variables it is described by

$$2i_\tau f=_y^2f+[|f|^4+w^2y^2]f,$$
(17)
where $`w=m\omega /\pi ^2\mathrm{}n_0^2`$ is the dimensionless oscillator frequency ($`n_0`$ now has the meaning of a density introduced to make $`f`$ dimensionless; it should be determined from the complete solution of the problem). In contrast to (11) (and without loss of generality) we have shifted the origin of the chemical potential. The self-similar solution $`f=Ae^{i\theta }`$ derived from (17) has the form

$$A=\rho (\tau )^{1/2}h(y/\rho (\tau )),\theta =\theta _0(\tau )+\frac{1}{2}\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho }{d\tau }y^2,$$
(18)
where the functions $`\rho (\tau )`$ and $`h(v)`$ obey the equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\rho }{d\tau ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`w^2\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\rho ^3}}`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2h}{dv^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta h+h^5+\gamma v^2h`$ (20)
where $`\gamma `$ and $`\delta `$ are arbitrary constants. Eq.(20) for the scaling function $`h(v)`$ has localized solutions only for $`\delta >0`$ and $`\gamma 0`$: for $`\gamma =0`$ an explicit analytic solution to (20) can be written down, while for $`\gamma >0`$, (20) has the same functional form as the equation we encountered in determining the density profile in the harmonic trap (cf. (6) for $`V=m\omega ^2x^2/2`$\].

The dynamics of the length scale $`\rho (\tau )`$ can be understood by viewing (19) as a fictitious classical mechanics problem in the potential $`U=w^2\rho ^2/2+\gamma /2\rho ^2`$. This analogy implies that an initially localized cloud of bosons in free space ($`w=0`$) will expand asymptotically in a ballistic fashion: $`\rho (\tau )\tau `$. In the presence of the confining potential ($`w0`$) the scale $`\rho (\tau )`$ oscillates between maximum and minimum values: for $`\gamma =0`$ the dynamics of $`\rho `$ is the same as for a harmonic oscillator of frequency $`w`$.

We have also performed direct numerical integration of the non-linear equation (4), and have confirmed the existence of both the similarity solutions, and moving trains of solitons with quantized velocity, with amplitude and phase as given by (12). More details will be given in a future publication.

In conclusion we have presented a new continuum description of dilute Bose liquids appropriate for low dimensional systems. For the case of one dimension, we have derived stationary properties, along with solitonic and similarity solutions. In particular, the latter have no analog in the GP theory. It is our hope that these results will be testable in BEC experiments in the near future.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Many types of discrete symmetries appear in supersymmetric models. They are usually broken at intermediate scales and cause the cosmological domain wall problem, if the walls remain stable. The usual assumption is that non-renormalizable terms induced by gravitational interactions may explicitly break these symmetries and make such walls collapse on a cosmologically safe timescale.

On the other hand, many models of supersymmetry breaking involve particles with the masses of order the gravitino mass $`m_{3/2}`$ and Planck mass suppressed couplings. Coherent production of such particles in the early universe destroys the successful predictions of nucleosynthesis. This problem may be solved by a brief period of weak scale inflation.

In this paper we examine whether the usual criterion for the safe decay of the unstable domain walls can be applied when weak scale inflation takes place. In section 2 and 3 we review the usual condition for unstable domain walls and the basic idea of thermal inflation. In section 4 we show collective examples of discrete symmetries which appear in many supersymmetric models. In section 5 we examine whether the usual criterion for the safe decay of the cosmological domain wall is also applicable for supersymmetric models. We show that the decaying process of these unstable domain walls should be changed significantly if thermal inflation occurs. As a result, the scenario for the safe decay of the cosmological domain walls must be changed, depending on their scales and interactions.

We also make a brief comment on the cosmological structure formation which will be induced by the soft domain walls. If such walls are expanded during weak scale inflation, the conditions for the structure formation will be changed.

## 2 Collision of the Cosmological Domain Walls

In this section we briefly review how to estimate the value of the pressure (i.e., explicit breaking) to safely remove the walls. The crudest estimate we can make is to insist that the walls are removed before they dominate over the radiation energy density in the universe. When the discrete symmetry is broken by gravitational interactions, the symmetry is an approximate discrete symmetry. The degeneracy is broken and the energy difference $`ϵ0`$ appears. Regions of higher density vacuum tend to shrink, the corresponding force per unit area of the wall is $`ϵ`$. The energy difference $`ϵ`$ becomes dynamically important when this force becomes comparable to the force of the tension $`f\sigma /R`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the surface energy density of the wall. For walls to disappear, this has to happen before the walls dominate the universe. On the other hand, the domain wall network is not a static system. In general, initial shape of the walls right after the phase transition is determined by the random variation of the scalar VEV. One expects the walls to be very irregular, random surfaces with a typical curvature radius, which is determined by the correlation length of the scalar field. To characterize the system of domain walls, one can use a simulation. The system will be dominated by one large (infinite size) wall network and some finite closed walls (cells) when they form. The isolated closed walls smaller than the horizon will shrink and disappear soon after the phase transition. Since the walls smaller than the horizon size will efficiently disappear so that only walls at the horizon size will remain, their typical curvature scale will be the horizon size, $`RtM_p/g_{}^{\frac{1}{2}}T^2`$. Since the energy density of the wall $`\rho _w`$ is about

$$\rho _w\frac{\sigma }{R},$$
(2.1)
and the radiation energy density $`\rho _r`$ is

$$\rho _rg_{}T^4,$$
(2.2)
one sees that the wall dominates the evolution below a temperature $`T_w`$

$$T_w\left(\frac{\sigma }{g_{}^{1/2}M_p}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(2.3)
To prevent the wall domination, one requires the pressure to have become dominant before this epoch,

$$ϵ>\frac{\sigma }{R_w}\frac{\sigma ^2}{M_p^2}.$$
(2.4)
Here $`R_w`$ denotes the horizon size at the wall domination. A pressure of this magnitude would be produced by higher dimensional operators which explicitly break the discrete symmetry.

The criterion (2.4) seems appropriate, if the scale of the wall is higher than $`(10^5GeV)^3`$. For the walls below this scale ($`\sigma (10^5GeV)^3`$), there should be further constraints coming from primordial nucleosynthesis. Since the time associated with the collapsing temperature $`T_w`$ is $`t_wM_p^2/g_{}^{\frac{1}{2}}\sigma 10^8\left(\frac{(10^2GeV)^3}{\sigma }\right)`$sec, the walls $`\sigma (10^5GeV)^3`$ will decay after nucleosynthesis. If the walls are not hidden and can decay into the standard model particles, the entropy produced when walls collide will violate the phenomenological bounds for nucleosynthesis. On the other hand, this simple bound ($`\sigma (10^5GeV)^3`$) is not effective for the walls which cannot decay into standard model particles. The walls such as soft domain walls, the succeeding story should strongly depend on the details of the hidden components and their interactions. These walls can decay late to contribute to the large scale structure formation.

## 3 Weak scale inflation

Supersymmetry is probably one of the most attractive extensions of the standard model. In virtue of supersymmetry, the hierarchy can be stabilized against the radiative corrections.

However, overviewing the cosmology of the supersymmetric models, one faces with various difficulties. One of the most obvious and famous problems is the gravitino problem. This problem still exists even if the universe experiences a primordial inflation, since the gravitino is reproduced during the reheating process. The mass of the gravitino depends on the mechanisms of supersymmetry breaking. In the supergravity mediated models of supersymmetry breaking, the gravitino has a mass of the electroweak scale ($`m_{3/2}10^{23}`$GeV), and it decays soon after big bang nucleosynthesis. High energy photons produced by the gravitino decay may destroy the usual assumptions for big bang nucleosynthesis. Another example is the gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking models, in which the predicted gravitino mass is much lighter than the supergravity mediated models. The gravitino mass is expected to be $`m_{3/2}10`$eV$`1`$GeV and cosmologically stable. If the gravitino mass is larger than $`1`$keV, the universe will be overclosed unless the gravitino is diluted at an earlier epoch.

The gravitino problem is a common feature of the superstring inspired models, because the moduli fields should play the same role as the gravitino. However, the cosmological moduli problem has a different feature. Because a moduli is a scalar field, it should have the potential which is inevitably flat but raised by the moduli mass $`m_\varphi m_{3/2}`$. In the supergravity mediated models of supersymmetry breaking, the moduli fields decay soon after big bang nucleosynthesis as the gravitino, causing to the same cosmological problem. For the gauge mediated models which predicts lighter mass for the moduli, the energy of the oscillation lasts and overcloses the universe for $`m_{3/2}<100`$MeV, or the decay of the moduli gives too much contribution to the x($`\gamma `$)-ray background spectrum for $`m_{3/2}10^110^4`$MeV.

The most promising way to evade these difficulties is to dilute these unwanted relics after the primordial inflation. One of such dilution mechanisms is the thermal inflation model proposed by Lyth and Stewart. Thermal inflation occurs before the electroweak phase transition and produces entropy before big bang nucleosynthesis, which dilutes the moduli density. During thermal inflation the flaton field (i.e., the inflation field for thermal inflation) is held at the origin by finite temperature effects. The potential energy during thermal inflation is the value $`V_0`$ of the flaton potential at the origin, which is of order $`m^2M^2`$. With $`M10^{12}`$GeV and $`m10^2`$GeV, this gives $`V_0^{1/4}10^7`$GeV which satisfies the condition to avoid the excessive regeneration of light stable fields. Thermal inflation starts when the thermal energy density falls below $`V_0`$ which corresponds to a temperature roughly of order $`V_0^{1/4}`$, and it ends when the finite temperature becomes ineffective at a temperature of order $`m`$. The number of e-folds is $`N_e^{th}=\frac{1}{2}ln(M/m)10`$, which is much smaller than the primordial inflation. There is also the intriguing possibility that two or more bouts of thermal inflation can occur in succession, allowing more efficient solution of the moduli problem. In such cases the number of e-folds will be about $`N_e=1025`$.

## 4 Unstable Domain Walls

The discrete symmetry appears in many supersymmetric models. The origins of such symmetries can be traced back to $`U(1)_R`$ anomaly in the dynamical sector, or the discrete symmetry in the superstring models which appears as the consequence of possible compactification schemes. In this section we make a collective review of such discrete symmetries. Here we consider a domain wall with the energy scale $`\sigma \mathrm{\Lambda }_w^3`$.

R-changed

In the supergravity mediated models for dynamical supersymmetry breaking, gaugino condensation in the hidden sector of order $`10^{1012}`$GeV is mediated by gravity, bulk fields or other interactions such as an anomalous $`U(1)_X`$ field and induces soft supersymmetry breaking terms in the observable sector. In the simplest hidden sector model (supersymmetric Yang-Mills), $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry in the hidden sector is broken by anomaly and a discrete R symmetry remains. The discrete R symmetry is then spontaneously broken when gaugino condensate. This is a well-known example of the BPS domain wall in the global supersymmetric gauge theory. One may expect that the domain wall structure in the hidden dynamical sector is a common feature of such models for dynamical supersymmetry breaking.

On the other hand, in the gauge mediated models for dynamical supersymmetry breaking, $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry is strongly connected to the supersymmetry breaking. The presence of an $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry is a necessary condition for supersymmetry breaking and a spontaneously broken $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry is a sufficient condition provided two conditions are satisfied. These conditions are genericity and caliculability. This means that the domain wall structure in the dynamical sector is not a common feature of the gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking models. However, there are many models which do not satisfy the genericity condition where the $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry will be anomalous. In these models a discrete R symmetry is implemented and is spontaneously broken at relatively low energy scale of order $`10^{59}`$GeV. In these models for dynamical supersymmetry breaking, the dynamical sector may have a domain wall configuration at intermediate scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w10^{59}`$GeV.

The R-charged domain wall configuration may also appear as the consequence of the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the explicit $`Z_n^R`$ symmetry, which is sometimes imposed by hand in order to solve phenomenological difficulties such as the $`\mu `$-problem or the cosmological moduli problem. In these models the scales of the domain walls are determined by phenomenological requirements, typically at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w10^{510}`$GeV.

When the universe undergoes a phase transition associated with spontaneous breaking of such discrete symmetries, domain walls will inevitably form. These domain walls are generally not favorable if they are stable.

In ref. we have shown that a constant term in the superpotential always breaks the degeneracy of vacua when supergravity is turned on, and that the pressure induced by the constant term satisfies the usual condition for the safe decay of unwanted domain walls. In general, the constant term is required to make the cosmological constant very small, which is an inevitable feature of any phenomenological models for supergravity. The magnitude of the energy difference $`ϵ`$ induced by the constant term is $`ϵ\sigma ^2/M_p^2`$ where $`\sigma `$ is the surface energy density of the wall. This satisfies the usual condition for the safe decay of the cosmological domain wall. Although the model is technically non-generic because it includes a single term which explicitly breaks the $`Z_n^R`$ symmetry, it is still a reasonable model for a vanishing cosmological constant. In this sense, the basic idea is similar to the well-known mechanism for the mass generation of the R-axion.

Not R-charged

On the other hand, for the walls which do not have R charge, the explicit symmetry breaking term should be added by hand. Since the gravity interaction does not respect global symmetries such as the discrete symmetries we are concerned about, the explicit breaking terms may appear as higher order terms suppressed by the Planck mass. In this case, however, there is no reason to expect that the magnitude of the energy difference appears at their lowest bound $`ϵ\sigma ^2/M_p^2`$.

## 5 Unstable Domain Walls and Thermal Inflation

In this section we shall discuss the formation, evolution and collapsing process of the cosmological domain walls paying attention to the changes that should be induced by weak scale inflation.

In general, initial shape of the walls right after the phase transition is determined by the random variation of the scalar VEV. One expects the walls to be very irregular, random surfaces with a typical curvature radius, which is determined by the correlation length of the scalar field. To characterize the system of domain walls, one can use a simulation. The system will be dominated by one large (infinite size) wall network and some finite closed walls (cells) when they are produced. The isolated closed walls smaller than the horizon will shrink and disappear soon after the phase transition. As a result, only a domain wall stretching across the horizon will remain. The initial distribution of the cosmological domain walls after the primordial inflation is not determined solely from the thermal effect of reheating. In some cases non-linear dynamics of the fields (parametric resonance, for example) will be important. Here we do not discuss further on these topics and temporarily make a simple assumption that the walls are produced just after the end of the primordial inflation.

For the walls $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w<10^{11}`$GeV and $`ϵ\sigma ^2/M_p^2`$, thermal inflation occurs before they collapse. Such walls may experience a large though not huge number of e-folds. Extended structures arising from such weak scale inflations are not necessarily inflated away. Since the cells of the false vacuum cannot decay soon if they are much larger than the horizon scale222Here the bubble nucleation rate is extremely small. We do not consider the false vacuum annihilation induced by the bubble nucleation, because such a scenario is not realistic in our model., we expect that additional constraints should be required for such walls to decay.

When thermal inflation starts, the initial scale of the domain wall network is the same as the particle horizon. It is of order $`H_{th}^1(V_0^{1/2}/M_p)^1`$, where $`H_{th}`$ and $`V_0`$ denote the Hubble constant and the vacuum energy during thermal inflation. The cells inflate during thermal inflation, then become the scale of order $`l_e=H_{th}^1e^{N_{th}}`$. Here $`N_{th}`$ demotes the number of e-folds of thermal inflation. Since weak scale inflation may occur in succession , the number of e-folds $`N_{th}`$ will be the sum of these succeeding weak scale inflations; $`N_{th}1025`$.

At the end of weak scale inflation (at the time $`t=t_0`$),

$$\left(\frac{l}{d_H}\right)_{t=t_0}e^{N_{th}},$$
(5.1)
where $`d_H`$ denotes the particle horizon.

After thermal inflation, coherent oscillation of the inflation field $`\varphi `$ starts. The expansion during this epoch is estimated as

$$l=l_{t=t_0}\left(\frac{\rho _\varphi }{V_0}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}.$$
(5.2)
The horizon size during preheating is estimated as

$$d_H\left(\frac{\rho _\varphi ^{1/2}}{M_p}\right)^1.$$
(5.3)
Thus the ratio becomes

$$\left(\frac{l}{d_H}\right)_{t_{rad}>t>t_0}e^{N_{th}}\left(\frac{\rho _\varphi }{V_0}\right)^{1/6}.$$
(5.4)
Here $`t_{rad}`$ denotes the time when radiation domination starts. Thereafter $`l`$ grows like $`T^1`$, where $`T`$ denotes the temperature in the radiation dominated era. Assuming the radiation-dominated expansion, the ratio will be

$$\left(\frac{l}{d_H}\right)_{t>t_{rad}}\left(\frac{l}{d_H}\right)_{t=t_{rad}}\left(\frac{T(t)}{T_D}\right).$$
(5.5)
Here $`T_D`$ denotes the reheating temperature after thermal inflation.

The domain wall network enters the particle horizon at the time $`t_s`$ when the ratio becomes unity. Assuming that this occurs before radiation energy dominates the universe, $`\rho _\varphi `$ at the time $`t_s`$ is

$$\rho _\varphi |_{t=t_s}e^{6N_{th}}V_0.$$
(5.6)
In the case that the expansion during thermal inflation is about $`10^5`$ and $`V_0^{1/4}`$ is about $`10^7`$GeV, $`\rho _\varphi |_{t=t_s}`$ is estimated as $`\rho _\varphi |_{t=t_s}10^2(GeV)^4`$. Here we assumed that the reheating temperature of the thermal inflation is very low ($`T_D<1GeV`$) in order to ensure sufficient entropy production. As we have discussed in Sec.2, the walls that do not decay until they dominate the universe must be excluded. In this case, the walls that dominate the universe when they enter the horizon (i.e.,$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w10^6`$GeV) are ruled out. This bound seems very severe, since the walls below this scale should be further constrained by primordial nucleosynthesis. On the other hand, one may think that the walls of the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w<10^7`$ should be produced during thermal inflation and suffer less expansion. Including this effect, the above constraint can be relaxed to allow the walls of the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w10^{56}`$GeV.

As a result, in many types of supersymmetric theories, walls of the intermediate scale produced just after primordial inflation cannot decay before they dominate the energy density of the universe, even if they satisfy the usual condition. It must also be noted that this result does not depend on the magnitudes of the explicit breaking terms. If the magnitudes of the explicit breaking terms exceed the Vilenkin’s lowest bound, the domination by the false vacuum energy begins at earlier epoch. As a result, the situation becomes worse for such larger magnitudes of the explicit breaking terms. Of course, there may be an exception that the explicit breaking terms are quite large so that the walls decay before weak scale inflation. This may happen for the walls $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w>V_0^{1/4}`$, although the requirement becomes very severe. For example, when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_w=10^9`$GeV the required value of the energy difference is about $`ϵ>10^5\sigma ^2/M_p^2`$, which is more than $`10^5`$ times larger than the usual bound.

Another way to avoid the domain wall problem is to gauge the discrete symmetry so that there is really one vacuum. However, nontrivial anomaly cancellation conditions must be satisfied. Sometimes it requires fatal constraint on the components of the model.

## 6 Conclusions and Discussions

In this paper we have studied the decaying processes of unstable domain walls and shown that the processes should be changed significantly if weak scale inflation takes place. As a result, the usual condition for the safe decay of the cosmological domain wall must be changed. For walls which can decay into particles in the standard model, the energy scales of the walls are strongly restricted.

Although the above constraints looks severe, there are other possibilities related to the structure formation; cosmology with ultra-light pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons. Contrary to the ordinary types of cosmological domain walls which we have discussed above, expansion during thermal inflation is a good news for such scenarios. Late decay of the soft domain walls can be realized as a natural consequence of thermal inflation, and can contribute to the large scale structure formation. We will study this topic in the next paper.

## 7 Acknowledgment

We wish to thank N.Sakai, N.Maru, Y.Sakamura and Y.Chikira for many helpful discussions.


text:
# New way to achieve synchronization in spatially extended systems

## Abstract

We study the spatio-temporal behavior of simple coupled map lattices with periodic boundary conditions. The local dynamics is governed by two maps, namely, the sine circle map and the logistic map respectively. It is found that even though the spatial behavior is irregular for the regularly coupled (nearest neighbor coupling) system, the spatially synchronized (sometime chaotically synchronized) as well as periodic solution may be obtained by the introduction of three long range couplings at the cost of three nearest neighbor couplings.

Recently there have been lot of interests in the small world network systems . The small world network systems lie in between the regular and the random networks where only a small fraction of long range links are introduced at the cost of the equal number of regular short range links keeping the total number of links conserved. The properties of such systems have been thoroughly studied very recently because of the fact that many biological, technological or social networks fall in this category. Intuitively it is expected that the information or source in the small world network will spread quickly through out the system because of the presence of some long range links.

On the other hand a number of phase models have been proposed over the recent years to describe the dynamical behavior of large population of nonlinear oscillators subject to a variety of coupling mechanisms . A major phenomenon that can be observed is the possibility of self synchronization among the members of the population. These can represent the fire flies, heart pace maker cells, pancreatic beta cells, neurons etc. as well as the circuit arrays . Different cells (units) in different systems may be locally governed by some specific rule. For example it may be governed by the sine circle map, logistic map or some differential equations depending on the physical or biological system. Furthermore different cells may be coupled to each other in various possible ways.

Even if the local dynamics is regular, the spatial as well as the temporal behavior of the regularly coupled system may be irregular. It might happen other way also, i.e., the dynamics of regularly coupled chaotic oscillators may turn out to be regular. We are interested to confine ourselves in the parameter regime where the spatial behavior of a regularly coupled lattice becomes irregular. Then the question we ask is whether it is possible to control the spatial irregularity by introducing some small fraction of long range couplings at the cost of the equal number of nearest neighbor couplings keeping the total number of couplings conserved. If so, then that would be a new way to control spatial irregularity in a spatially extended systems. Furthermore, if the solution turns out to be synchronized spatially but chaotic temporally, it will find good application to the secret communication network. We would like to investigate these aspects in one dimensional lattice where the local dynamics of individual lattice site is governed either by the sine circle map or the logistic map . The coupling we consider here is the simple unidirectional nearest neighbor coupling. First we discuss the unidirectionally coupled map lattice with the local dynamics defined by the sine circle map and then by the logistic map.

Here we consider a one dimensional periodic lattice of size $`N`$. The local dynamics at any site is governed by the following rule:

$$x\left(t+1\right)=f\left(x\left(t\right)\right)=x\left(t\right)+\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{K}{2\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(2\pi x\left(t\right)\right)\mathrm{mod1}$$
(1)
where $`x`$ is the dynamical variable, $`t`$ is the time, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the frequency and $`K`$ is the nonlinearity parameter. The map given by Eq. (1) is known as the sine circle map and very much similar to the dynamical equation in the circuits of Josephson Junction arrays. If all the sites in the system are independent of each other, the dynamics of the individual sites will be governed by Eq. (1). However, we are interested in the dynamics of the system when all the sites are directly or indirectly coupled to each other. The lattice sites may interact with each other in a various possible ways. But, here, we consider the situation where the dynamical variable at the $`i^{th}`$ site may be governed by the following rule:

$`x_i(t+1)=(1ϵ)f(x_i(t))+ϵf(x_{i+1}(t));1i<N,`$ (2)
$`\mathrm{and}`$ (3)
$`x_N(t+1)=(1ϵ)f(x_N(t))+ϵf(x_1(t))`$ (4)
where $`ϵ`$ is the coupling parameter. The spatio-temporal behavior of the system has been studied extensively.  Even though the local dynamics is chaotic, the global dynamics of the system may turn out to be chaotic or regular depending on the parameters, initial condition, as well as the nature of the coupling. Our intention is to start with a random initial condition and fix the parameters such that the dynamics of the system becomes chaotic both spatially as well as temporally with the regular nearest neighbor coupling as described by Eq. (2).

For example, we chose the parameter values as $`ϵ`$=0.5, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$= 0.3 and $`K=\sqrt{2}`$. We consider the lattice size, $`N`$=90. We allow the system to evolve for 5000 steps before determining it’s state. The spatial behavior of the system described by Eq. (2) is shown in Fig. (1) where $`x_i`$’s are plotted as a function of $`i`$ for t=5001. We see that there is no regular spatial behavior. The temporal evolution for all the sites are also found to be irregular. The temporal evolution at the first site is shown in the Fig. (2) as an example.

We introduce the concept of small world network systems in the spatially extended system, namely, coupled map lattices. Suppose that we have a periodic one dimensional lattice of $`N`$ sites. If the lattice sites are coupled with its nearest neighbor site unidirectionally, there will be $`N`$ couplings or bonds. We will use the word bond in place of coupling for convenience. A fraction of these $`N`$ bonds are replaced by long range couplings. The replacement of nearest neighbor bond (coupling) by the long range bond is made randomly. In the process of replacement, we make sure that duplicates are not allowed and no part of the system becomes isolated. Under such rearrangements, the total number of bonds remain conserved. Since the replacement of bonds are done randomly, there will be many possible configurations for fixed number of bonds being replaced. Therefore, it is necessary to check if any of those configurations produces the synchronized solutions.

So, we consider the system where $`p`$ fraction of nearest neighbor bonds are replaced by randomly chosen long range bonds. The parameter values are are chosen to be same as in Fig. (1). Initially all the sites are populated randomly and then they evolve according to Eq. (2) with the replacement of $`p`$ fraction of bonds. The solution appears to be stable after 5000 iterations. Since there are large number of possible configurations, the numerical experiment is carried out for 1000 configurations for a fixed value of $`p`$. The simulation is also carried out for different values of $`p`$ between 0 and 1. It is found that only two to ten percentage of configurations lead to synchronized solutions for each value of $`p`$. For $`p=0.5`$ more number of configurations produce synchronized solution.

Thus we experience that there exist some configurations which may produce the synchronized solutions. Therefore, the control of the spatially chaotic behavior is possible by the above mentioned mechanism but the percentage value of configurations producing the synchronized solutions are very low. So, one has to go through various sets of re-wiring to achieve the synchronization and is therefore difficult to implement in the physical systems. One needs to know a re-wiring procedure where least number of bonds will be disturbed or replaced. Furthermore, one should know a systematic way of replacement of bonds to achieve the synchronization. Intuitively we suspect that the replacing of the nearest neighbor bonds may be made in a systematic manner and think that the bonds should be broken at regular interval in the lattice and the disturbed vertices should be connected in a regular fashion. More explicitly, let us divide the lattice into $`n`$ number of segments, each segment has length (L) equal to $`\frac{N}{n}`$. So, the bond between sites $`i`$ and $`i+1`$ should be broken and the $`i^{th}`$ site should be connected to $`(i+L)^{th}`$ site. Next, the bond between sites $`(i+L)`$ and $`(i+L+1)`$ should be broken and $`(i+L)^{th}`$ site should be connected to $`(i+2L)^{th}`$ site and so on. This procedure should be continued until the full lattice is covered. We note that if $`n=N`$ or $`L=1`$, then the modified lattice remains same as the regular one. Therefore, we expect that $`n`$ should be between 1 to $`N1`$. We therefore do the numerical experiment for $`n`$=1, 2, 3, 4 and so on. In fact we find that $`n`$=1 and 3 cases work very well. Although, ideally, $`n`$=1, would be the most suitable solution, we also study $`n`$=3, since it is the most ideal case for studying multiple rewirings. We find that $`n`$=2 and $`n`$=4 have lesser probability to synchronize than $`n`$=3, over wide regions of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }ϵ`$ phase space. We will discuss these concepts in details in a forthcoming article. For $`n`$=3, the re-wiring rule is given explicitly for a lattice of size 90:

The bonds between sites 1 and 2, 30 and 31, and 60 and 61 are broken and the links between sites 1 and 30, 30 and 60, 60 and 90 are established. Furthermore, any arbitrary site can be chosen as site 1. The spatial behavior for this configuration is shown in Fig. (3). The parameters values are same as used for Fig. (1). We notice that total synchronization is achieved. The synchronization behavior can be obtained for a lattice of any size with the above mentioned rule. The only difference is that for larger lattice it takes longer time to achieve the synchronization. This is in fact not surprising. However, the temporal evolution is chaotic. So, it may be called chaotic synchronization. We further note that even if the site 1 is coupled with any site around the $`30th`$ site with small width, synchronization is achieved. Thus a small defect in re-wiring does not matter in achieving the synchronization.

We clearly note that by disturbing only three regular nearest neighbor bonds and establish three long ranged bonds in a regular way, one can achieve synchronization over a wide range of parameters. The phase diagram in the $`ϵ\mathrm{\Omega }`$ plane for $`k=\sqrt{2}`$ is shown in Fig 4. The shaded region (in fig. 4) in the $`ϵ\mathrm{\Omega }`$ plane are the allowed parameter regime where one achieves the synchronized solution starting from a random initial conditions. We see that there is a large region in the $`ϵ\mathrm{\Omega }`$ plane where the synchronization is obtained through the re-wiring mechanism. The synchronized region for only one broken bond is larger than that of the 3 bond case by about 20-30 $`\%`$. However, for any other number of rewirings, the allowed part of the phase space is much smaller.

Here we consider the same system where the local dynamics is governed by the Logistic map. The logistic map has been extensively used to model a number of physical as well as biological phenomenon . The map is given by

$$x(t+1)=f\left(x(t)\right)=\mu x(t)\left(1x(t)\right)$$
(5)
where $`\mu `$ is the parameter controling the local dynamics. The the dynamics of the variable $`x_i`$ at the $`i^{th}`$ site is governed by the Eq. (2) with $`f\left(x(t)\right)`$ as given in Eq. (3) where $`t`$ represents the time, and $`ϵ`$ is the coupling strength. In this system also we find that one may obtain the spatially periodic solution and sometimes synchronized solution through the re-wiring rule as stated earlier.

In this system, we find that there is a critical value of the coupling strength $`ϵ`$ for each value of $`\mu `$. For example, all $`x_i`$’s are plotted as a function of $`ϵ`$ for $`\mu `$=4 in Figs. (5) and (6). Fig. 5 is for the system where all the sites are regularly coupled to its nearest neighbor. But Fig. 6 is for the rewired lattice. We clearly see from Fig. 5 that there is no spatial regularity. On the other hand, for the rewired lattice (Fig. 6) there is a critical value of $`ϵ`$, say $`ϵ_{cr}=0.35`$ above which the solution is spatially periodic of period four. The spatial nature of the solution for the rewired lattice is verified in the entire $`ϵ\mu `$ plane as shown in Fig 7. There are various regions corresponding to various kinds of solutions. The solution is spatially periodic with period one or four in the region I, the solution is temporally as well as spatially irregular in region II, the solution is spatially periodic of period four in region III and the solution is chaotically synchronized in region IV.

Thus we see that the re-wiring mechanism helps us to control the spatial irregularity in a large region of the parameter space. Furthermore we note the parameter region for both the spatial as well as temporal periodic solution also large. Therefore, this mechanism with the logistic map works well to control spatial and temporal irregularity in a large region of parameter space.

In summary, we have studied spatially extended system where the local dynamics are governed by the sine circle map and the logistic map. We have implemented the idea of small world network and investigated that spatial irregularity in the system can be controlled. We have shown that for a regularly coupled system showing irregular behavior spatially, synchronization can be achieved by disturbing a few regular links (nearest neighbor coupling) and establishing an equal number of long ranged links in a regular way. We notice that the region in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }ϵ`$ space where synchronization occurs depends on how many of these rewirings are done. For one and three rewirings, synchronization occurs over large regions of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }ϵ`$ space. We will establish the reason for this in a forthcoming article. Chaotic synchronization is achieved for the sine circle map with the re-wiring mechanism. On the other hand, spatially as well as temporally periodic solution is achieved for the logistic map. Thus we experience that the re-wiring mechanism helps us to achieve the chaotic synchronization for some local dynamics. The chaotic synchronization is an important solution in Josephson junction arrays. Furthermore it is very useful as far as the secret communication network is concerned. This mechanism may be tested with other local dynamics existing in physical or biological systems.


text:
# On 4-dimensional cosmological models locally embedded in a 5-dimensional Ricci-flat space

## Abstract

We employ a theorem due to Campbell to build some simple 4-dimensional cosmological models which originate from solutions describing waves propagating along the extra-dimension of a 5-dimensional Ricci-flat space. The dimensional reduction is performed in the Jordan frame according to the induced-matter theory of Wesson.

*Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università di Genova
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare,Sezione di Genova
Via Dodecaneso 33, 16146 Genova, Italy*

PACS numbers: 04.50.+h , 11.10.Kk

An interesting version of 5-dimensional General Relativity has been developed in recent years by Wesson . The central thesis of his induced-matter theory is that the 4D Einstein’s field equations with matter

$$G_{\alpha \beta }=8\pi T_{\alpha \beta }$$
(1)
are a subset of the 5D field equations for vacuum in terms of the Ricci tensor

$$R_{AB}=0$$
(2)
The theory also allows to obtain flat cosmological solutions containing the usual 4D perfect fluid energy-momentum tensor .

Due to its primary significance in the present context, it is worth quoting a theorem due to Campbell , which states as follows:

Theorem: *Any analytic Riemannian space $`V_n(s,t)`$ can be locally embedded in a Ricci-flat Riemannian space $`V_{n+1}(s+1,t)`$ or $`V_{n+1}(s,t+1)`$.*

This theorem has been recently brought to light by Romero et al.  and employed both in applying Wesson’s method  and in investigating the embedding of lower-dimensional spacetimes .

In this Brief Note we consider the cosmological solution describing waves propagating in the extra-dimension of a (4+1)-dimensional Ricci-flat space and, after selecting particular modes, we obtain the corresponding (3+1)-dimensional cosmologies. The final result will be written in the Jordan frame, according to the dimensional reduction prescribed by the “induced-matter theory of Wesson”.

We start from the 5D line element

$$ds_5^2=e^\omega (dr^2+d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)e^\nu dt^2+e^\mu dl^2$$
(3)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2=d\vartheta ^2+\mathrm{sin}\vartheta ^2d\phi ^2`$ and $`l`$ is the extra coordinate.

The metric coefficients $`\omega `$, $`\nu `$ and $`\mu `$ will depend in general on both $`t`$ and $`l`$, the dependence on $`r`$ being ruled out in the absence of sources. The case when sources are present and the metric coefficients depend only on $`r`$, has been treated in a more general context in ref. . Moreover we can put, by simmetry considerations, $`\nu =\mu `$.

The relevant Ricci equations are:

$`3\nu ^{}\omega ^{}3\omega _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}2\nu ^{\prime \prime }6\omega ^{\prime \prime }+3\dot{\nu }\dot{\omega }+2\ddot{\nu }=0`$ (4a)
$`3\nu ^{}\omega ^{}+2\nu ^{\prime \prime }+3\dot{\nu }\dot{\omega }3\dot{\omega }^22\ddot{\nu }6\ddot{\omega }=0`$ (4b)
$`\omega ^{}\dot{\nu }+\nu ^{}\dot{\omega }\omega ^{}\dot{\omega }2\dot{\omega ^{}}=0`$ (4c)
$`3\omega _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+2\omega ^{\prime \prime }3\dot{\omega }^22\ddot{\omega }=0`$ (4d)
Here partial derivatives with respect to $`t`$ and $`l`$ are denoted by an overdot and a prime respectively.

One can immediately see that equation (4d) admits 3-brane wave solutions, propagating along the fifth dimension of a 5-dimensional bulk, of the form $`\omega _\pm =\omega (t\pm l)`$ and $`\nu _\pm =\nu (t\pm l)`$. Denoting by an asterisk derivatives with respect to $`t\pm l`$, equations (4a), (4b) and (4c) all become, after substitution:

$$2\stackrel{}{\nu }_\pm \stackrel{}{\omega }_\pm \stackrel{}{\omega }_{\pm }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}2\stackrel{}{\omega }_\pm =0$$
(5)
Therefore, selecting a particular form of $`\omega _\pm `$, the other metric coefficients are given by

$$e^{\nu _\pm }=e^{\mu _\pm }=L\stackrel{}{\omega }_\pm e^{\frac{\omega _\pm }{2}}$$
(6)
where $`L`$ is a suitable constant of integration.

Starting from the above solutions, which describe waves propagating along the extra dimension of a 5-dimensional Ricci-flat spacetime with line element

$$ds_5^2=e^{\omega _\pm }(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)+L\stackrel{}{\omega }_\pm e^{\frac{\omega _\pm }{2}}(dt^2+dl^2)$$
(7)
we build some simple cosmological models in a 4-dimensional spacetime with line element

$$ds_4^2=e^{\omega (t)}(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)L\dot{\omega }(t)e^{\frac{\omega (t)}{2}}dt^2$$
(8)
obtained from (7) by a section with a hypersurface at constant $`l`$ chosen, without loss of generality, as $`l=0`$.

Components of the Einstein tensor in mixed form, derived from the above metric (8), are

$$\begin{array}{cc}& G_r^r=G_\vartheta ^\vartheta =G_\phi ^\phi =\frac{e^{\frac{\omega }{2}}(\dot{\omega }^2+\ddot{\omega })}{2L\dot{\omega }}\hfill \\ & G_t^t=\frac{3e^{\frac{\omega }{2}}\dot{\omega }}{4L}\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
We wish to match the terms in (9) with the components of the usual 4D perfect fluid energy-momentum tensor $`T_{\alpha \beta }=(p+\rho )u_\alpha u_\beta +pg_{\alpha \beta }`$. In our case the pressure and density are given by $`T_r^r=p`$ and $`T_t^t=\rho `$, and therefore we can simply identify $`G_r^r`$ with $`8\pi p`$ and $`G_t^t`$ with $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}\pi \rho `$.

Of course the choice of the function $`\omega (t)`$ is to a large extent arbitrary so we suggest, to make some physically meaningful examples, the following one:

$$\omega (t)=\alpha \mathrm{ln}\left(1+\frac{t}{\alpha L}\right)$$
(10)
where $`\alpha `$ is an assignable constant.

As a consequence, the line element (8) becomes

$$ds_4^2=\left(1+\frac{t}{\alpha L}\right)^\alpha (dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)\left(1+\frac{t}{\alpha L}\right)^{\frac{\alpha }{2}1}dt^2$$
(11)
and clearly characterizes a conformally flat spacetime when $`\alpha +2=0`$.

To go further, it is useful to make in (11) the change of variable

$$\tau =\{\begin{array}{cc}& \frac{4\alpha L}{\alpha +2}\left[\left(1+\frac{t}{\alpha L}\right)^{\frac{\alpha +2}{4}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\right]\text{if }\alpha +20\hfill \\ & \\ & \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}L\mathrm{ln}(1\frac{t}{2L})\text{if }\alpha +2=0\hfill \end{array}$$
(12)
thus obtaining

$$ds_4^2=\left(1+\frac{(\alpha +2)\tau }{4\alpha L}\right)^{\frac{4\alpha }{\alpha +2}}(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)d\tau ^2\text{if }\alpha +20$$
(13)
and

$$ds_4^2=e^{\frac{\tau }{L}}(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)d\tau ^2\text{if }\alpha +2=0$$
(14)
where in both cases $`1/(2L)`$ represents the Hubble constant $`H_0`$. Accordingly, pressure and density of the perfect fluid can be rewritten respectively as

$$8\pi p=\frac{{\displaystyle \frac{2(1\alpha )H_0^2}{\alpha }}}{\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha +2)H_0\tau }{2\alpha }}\right)^2}8\pi \rho =\frac{3H_0^2}{\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha +2)H_0\tau }{2\alpha }}\right)^2}$$
(15)
and

$$8\pi p=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}H_0^28\pi \rho =3H_0^2$$
(16)
It is apparent that the case $`\alpha +2=0`$ describes a de-Sitter Universe with cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=3H_0^2`$. On the other hand, the case $`\alpha +20`$, provides the equation of state of radiation $`3p=\rho `$ when $`\alpha =2/3`$, and the equation of state of matter $`p=0`$ when $`\alpha =1`$.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The EMC measurement of the integrated helicity parton distributions  (for recent results at SLAC see ) triggered the interest in a deeper understanding of how the total angular momentum of the nucleon is shared among its constituents. It was found that the fraction of the nucleon spin carried by the quarks was rather small, at variance with the most naive quark model expectation where the proton spin is (almost) entirely built from the spin of the quarks. Among the different explanations of these discrepancies, it was proposed  that the (overlooked until then) polarization of the gluons might also contribute to the singlet axial charge through the axial anomaly. In that case, experimental data would be compatible with a rather large fraction of the spin carried by the quarks ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }=0.45\pm 0.09`$ in a recent world data analysis ), though still far away from the non-relativistic quark model predictions.

One of the most important issues raised by the ’spin crisis’ was the need for considering all the possible sources of angular momentum in the nucleon. Therefore, the spin sum rule should read :

$$\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(Q^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }g(Q^2)+L_q(Q^2)+L_g(Q^2)=\frac{1}{2},$$
(1)
where $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(Q^2)`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }g(Q^2)`$) is the spin carried by the quarks and antiquarks (gluons) and $`L_q(Q^2)`$ ($`L_g(Q^2)`$) is the orbital angular momentum (OAM) contribution of the quarks (gluons) .

The significant role of OAM was pointed out several years ago , but the problem was rigorously formulated only recently, when a gauge invariant definition of the quark and gluon (twist-two) operators was proposed . Besides, there has been a big effort to derive evolution equations (at one-loop level) for OAM observables . At the present there is only one gauge invariant definition of quark OAM  with known $`Q^2`$ evolution and experimentally accessible (for a discussion cfr. Ref. ). Such a definition holds for reference frames with definite nucleon polarization and the OAM distribution could be measured through the forward limit of skewed parton distributions.

One peculiar feature, already expected by general arguments , is explicitly realized in the evolution equations, namely that the OAM distribution is coupled to the helicity parton distributions. As a consequence, OAM contributions can be generated, through evolution at higher scales, even in the case of vanishing OAM components at low initial hadronic scale. This is indeed the case for most hadronic models where the quarks are arranged, in the ground state, in a $`l=0`$ S-wave configuration, stressing the crucial role of $`Q^2`$ evolution for the evaluation of spin observables or, in other words, the roughness of the identification of constituent quarks with partons at all energy scales.

From a quantitative point of view, some studies are currently available . In particular, in ref. , the OAM distributions have been calculated for a number of hadronic models. As a first step these quantities are evaluated at the hadronic (low energy) scale and then evolved to the experimental $`Q^2>>\mu _0^2`$ scale by using the Leading Order (LO) evolution procedure recently established . One central conclusion of that work is that a sizeable initial OAM distributions can deeply influence the final high-energy results. As a consequence, a clear difference arises between non-relativistic and relativistic models: while the former usually give a tiny OAM contribution at $`\mu _0^2`$, the latter may give rise to sizeable effects at high $`x`$ that persist after evolution. To this respect, OAM distributions are useful quantities to assess the relevance of relativistic effects in the hadronic models of the nucleon.

In a recent study we investigated the consequences of a light-front treatment of relativistic spin effects on the helicity distributions  and in the present paper we want to enlarge our analysis to OAM investigating in detail the predictions of a light-front covariant quark model. As a matter of fact, the spin dynamics can be discussed within the light-front approach in a way which respects covariance requirements and particularly suitable to discuss deep inelastic polarized processes, both at the hadronic  and high-energy (partonic) scale . We will show that light-front covariant quark models (LFCQM) predict a non-vanishing OAM distribution whose main features survive after evolution. We will also see that these predictions hold for a variety of mass operators indicating that the relevant ingredient is the relativistic treatment of the spin wave functions, absent in many traditional formulations of the quark model. The comparison with other relativistic models (MIT bag model) and the analysis of the moments that enter the spin sum rule will allow us to assess the reliability of LFCQM.

## 2 OAM at the hadronic scale

In the recent years a quark model-based approach has been developed for computing the non-perturbative inputs in the evolution equations  and describing polarized and unpolarized parton distributions. Schematically, the central assumption is that at some low-energy scale ($`\mu _0^2`$) the nucleon is made up of valence quarks that can be identified with the constituents of the quark model (or the bag model in alternative treatments). Therefore, the non-perturbative boundary conditions can be evaluated by using low-energy models of the nucleon. Subsequent refinements led to the inclusion of non-perturbative gluons and sea at the hadronic scale $`\mu _0^2`$ , as well as the explicit partonic content of the constituent quarks .

By following such a procedure we will assume that at the hadronic scale only valence quarks are resolved so that the quark helicity distribution $`g_1^a(x,\mu _0^2)`$ for a given flavour $`a`$ is given in terms of the momentum density of the valence quarks:

$$g_1^a(x,\mu _0^2)=\frac{1}{(1x)^2}𝑑\stackrel{}{k}(n_a^{}(\stackrel{}{k})n_a^{}(\stackrel{}{k}))\delta \left(\frac{x}{1x}\frac{k^+}{M_N}\right),$$
(2)
where $`x`$ is the Bjorken variable, $`M_N`$ the mass of the nucleon and $`k^+`$ is defined as a function of the parton momentum as $`k^+=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{k}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}2}}+m^2}+k_z`$. The polarized momentum densities are defined as:

$$n_a^{}(\stackrel{}{k})=N,J_z=1/2|\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}𝒫_a\frac{1\pm \sigma _z^{(i)}}{2}\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_i\stackrel{}{k})|N,J_z=1/2,$$
(3)
where $`𝒫_a`$ is the flavour projector.

An analogous definition can be worked out for the OAM distributions :

$$L_z(x,\mu _0^2)=\frac{1}{(1x)^2}𝑑\stackrel{}{k}L_z(\stackrel{}{k})\delta \left(\frac{x}{1x}\frac{k^+}{M_N}\right),$$
(4)
where the density of the angular momentum is defined in the usual way:

$$L_z(\stackrel{}{k})=N,J_z=1/2|\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}i(\stackrel{}{k}_i\times \stackrel{}{}_{\stackrel{}{k}_i})_z\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_i\stackrel{}{k})|N,J_z=1/2.$$
(5)
From the previous definitions one can recover the result $`L_z(x,\mu _0^2)=0`$ obtained assuming S-wave quarks only, and non-relativistic approximation (i.e. $`L_z(\stackrel{}{k})=0`$). A more complicated example within non-relativistic dynamics, is given by models whose nucleon wave function is a superposition of various $`SU(6)`$ components, such as the Isgur-Karl model  . The non-vanishing contribution to $`L_z(\stackrel{}{k})`$ in these cases is due to the D-state (or higher waves) admixture. For example, in the Isgur-Karl model, the OAM distribution of Eq. (4) results to be proportional to the D-State probability $`a_D^2`$  and its contribution is very small ($`a_D=0.067`$).

This situation is radically changed in a light-front covariant quark model. In light-front dynamics (LFD) , the specific partition of the Poincaré algebra into kinetic and Hamiltonian generators leads to several simplifications of the relativistic many-body problem such as, for example, the clean separation of the center of mass motion. The prize to pay is that the description of angular momentum is rather complicated. Not all the generators of rotations, in fact, belong to the kinetic subgroup, and hence the angular momentum operator is, in general, interaction dependent.
For this reason, in the phenomenological applications of LFD to the quark model, it is customary to work in the Bakamjian-Thomas construction , that is adding a phenomenological interaction to the free mass operator, only. However, the resulting total angular momentum operator, although interaction free, does not satisfy ordinary composition rules. In order to restore them, a unitary transformation of the Hilbert space, known as Melosh Rotation (MR), has to be performed. In particular, if the nucleon is in a S-wave state, such rotation acts only on the spin part of the wave function.

The $`D^{1/2}`$ representation of the MR is given by:

$$D^{1/2}[R_M(\stackrel{}{k})]=\frac{(m+\omega +k_z)i\stackrel{}{\sigma }(\widehat{z}\times \stackrel{}{k}_{})}{((m+\omega +k_z)^2+\stackrel{}{k}_{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})^{1/2}}.$$
(6)
As a result, motion and spin are now intimately correlated as it is required by a relativistic theory. The MR can be interpreted as the boost transformations required to move from the rest frame of each subsystem (quark) to the rest frame of the total system (nucleon).

In the present study we will not investigate $`SU(6)`$ breaking effects in spin-isospin space: the nucleon wave function will correspond to a S-wave. This simplifying assumption ensures that the non-vanishing OAM contribution originates from pure relativistic effects due to the treatment of the spin in light-front dynamics. Indeed the MR gives rise to a non-vanishing angular momentum density even if the spatial wave function corresponds to a S-wave and the angular momentum density can be written, for a $`SU(6)`$ symmetric spin-isospin wave function, as

$$L_z(\stackrel{}{k})=\frac{1}{3}\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}{(m+\omega +k_z)^2+\stackrel{}{k}_{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}n(\stackrel{}{k}),$$
(7)
where $`n(\stackrel{}{k})`$ is the total momentum density, defined in the usual way :

$$n(\stackrel{}{k})=\mathrm{\Psi }_N|\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_i\stackrel{}{k})|\mathrm{\Psi }_N,$$
(8)
and normalized to the number of particles ($`n(\stackrel{}{k})𝑑\stackrel{}{k}=3`$). Recalling the expressions for the polarized densities that enter the helicity distributions :

$`n_u^{}(\stackrel{}{k})n_u^{}(\stackrel{}{k})`$ $`=`$ $`4\left(n_d^{}(\stackrel{}{k})n_d^{}(\stackrel{}{k})\right)`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{9}}{\displaystyle \frac{(m+\omega +k_z)^2\stackrel{}{k}_{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}{(m+\omega +k_z)^2+\stackrel{}{k}_{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}}n(\stackrel{}{k}),`$
one can check that the total angular momentum sum rule is automatically fulfilled at the hadronic scale:

$$\frac{1}{2}(g_1^u(x,\mu _0^2)+g_1^d(x,\mu _0^2))𝑑x+𝑑xL_z(x,\mu _0^2)=\frac{1}{2}.$$
(10)
Another interesting relationship connects $`L_z`$ to the longitudinal ($`g_1`$) and transversity ($`h_1`$) parton distributions, namely :

$$g_1^a(x,\mu _0^2)+L_z^a(x,\mu _0^2)=h_1^a(x,\mu _0^2),$$
(11)
and is naturally fulfilled in our approach. This relationship also holds for other relativistic models of the nucleon, such as the bag model. Let us stress that Eq. (11) is valid at the hadronic scale $`\mu _0^2`$ only and one should be careful when using it to extract information about $`L_z^a`$ because it is broken by evolution, even at small values of $`Q^2`$. This can be easily demonstrated by considering the singlet combination corresponding to Eq. (11), i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(x,\mu _0^2)+L_z(x,\mu _0^2)H(x,\mu _0^2)=0$$
(12)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(x,\mu _0^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_a(g_1^a(x,\mu _0^2)+g_1^{\overline{a}}(x,\mu _0^2))`$ and $`H(x,\mu _0^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_a(h_1^a(x,\mu _0^2)h_1^{\overline{a}}(x,\mu _0^2))`$111The minus sign in front of $`h_1^{\overline{a}}`$ comes from the properties of the operator that defines the transversity under charge conjugation, and therefore the analogous of Eq. (11) for antiquarks should read $`g_1^{\overline{a}}(x,\mu _0^2)+L_z^{\overline{a}}(x,\mu _0^2)=h_1^{\overline{a}}(x,\mu _0^2)`$. Though our model does not contain antiquarks at the scale $`\mu _0^2`$, this relationship can be easily checked in the bag model.. In order to check the validity of Eq. (11) at $`Q^2>\mu _0^2`$ let us evolve (at LO) the first moments of the left-hand side of Eq. (12):

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }(x,Q^2)_1+L_z(x,Q^2)_1H(x,Q^2)_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1b^{50/81})\mathrm{\Sigma }(x,\mu _0^2)_1`$ (13)
$`+`$ $`(b^{50/81}b^{4/27})H(x,\mu _0^2)_1`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{50}}(1b^{50/81})`$
where $`b=\frac{\mathrm{ln}(Q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)}{\mathrm{ln}(\mu _0^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)}`$. Clearly, the right-hand side of the equation above vanishes only if $`Q^2=\mu _0^2`$. Furthermore, due to the form of the $`b`$-dependent coefficients, it quickly deviates from 0 at the initial stages of evolution pointing out the limits of the attempt, carried out in , of extracting information on $`L_z`$ from Eq. (11).

Coming back to our evaluation of OAM, Eqs. (7) - (9) show that the exact ratio between the amount of OAM and spin will depend on the specific form of $`n(\stackrel{}{k})`$, or equivalently, on the spatial nucleon wave function. Let us note however that the momentum density averages many details of the spatial wave function and to this respect, the sensitivity of the final results to the fine details of the spatial wave function is reduced.

In the following we will discuss predictions obtained solving explicitly the mass equation:

$$\widehat{M}\mathrm{\Psi }=(\underset{i_1}{\overset{3}{}}\sqrt{\stackrel{}{k}_i^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}+m^2}+V)\mathrm{\Psi }=E\mathrm{\Psi }$$
(14)
with an hypercentral phenomenological potential:

$$V=\frac{\tau }{\xi }+\kappa _l\xi +\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(15)
where $`\xi `$ is the hyperradius defined in the usual way and $`\tau `$, $`\kappa _l`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are free parameters that are fixed by spectroscopy requirements . It is worthwhile mentioning that MR has no effects on the energy levels of the confining mass operator (14) - (15) explaining to some extent the success of non-relativistic (or relativized) approaches in reproducing the baryonic spectrum. On the other hand, another remarkable effect of the relativistic mass equation is the enhancement of the high momentum components in the nucleon wave function. Since the MR factor involves momentum dependent terms, the final results will be biased by the presence of these high-momentum components. In order to test the sensitivity to the details of the momentum density we will consider an additional scenario where the MR factors are combined with a wave function obtained from the non-relativistic Schrödinger reduction of the Eq. (14) with the same form of potential (15). This new spatial wave function, hereafter indicated by $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$, will contain far less high momentum components. In fact one of the risks of guessing the wave function instead of solving the mass equation (14) explicitly, is to underestimate the contribution coming from the high-momentum components of the correct solution, mostly carried over by the relativistic kinetic energy operator in the mass equation. Although the use of MR is not fully consistent when $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ is considered, since it was derived from a non-relativistic mass equation, we will discuss it as a ’pedagogical’ example that represents an extreme scenario where high-momentum components have been strongly suppressed. The comparison of results obtained with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ will serve to establish bounds on the effects of MR.

## 3 Results and discussion

The obtained OAM distribution at the hadronic scale $`\mu _0^2`$, Eq. (4), for the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, the solution of Eq. (14), is shown in Fig. 1.a. The outcome for the modified scenario (corresponding to the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$) is shown in Fig. 1.b to appreciate the effect of the lack of high momentum components. Furthermore, the comparison with the bag model results  is also provided (Fig. 1.c). It is clear that the LFCQM, regardless of the details of the spatial wave function, provides OAM distributions which are comparable (even bigger by a factor 2) to the bag model. From the comparison between Figs. 1.a and 1.b one can see that the MR (and not the specific shape of the spatial wave function) is responsible for this sizeable OAM. In non-covariant quark models such as the Isgur-Karl model, where MR is omitted, the OAM distributions is almost flat . Even when considering a D-model  where the probability of the D-wave component is raised up to a 20 %, the resulting OAM, though comparable in size to those obtained here, are peaked at lower $`x`$. Nonetheless the large deformation of the nucleon in the D-model should not be taken as realistic.

In order to bring the OAM distributions to the high-energy experimental scale, we use the recently obtained evolution equations at LO . In the process the OAM distributions for the gluons will be generated. The initial scale $`\mu _0^2`$ is determined following the criteria exposed in , and at LO turns out to be $`\mu _0^2=0.079`$ GeV2. In fig. 1.a and 1.b we also present the evolved OAM distributions up to $`Q^2=10`$ GeV2 (short-dashed line) and $`Q^2=1000`$ GeV2 (long-dashed line).

By comparing again the LFCQM with the bag model (Fig. 1.c) it is clear that a non-vanishing OAM persists in the large $`x`$ region and this is a distinctive feature of relativistic treatments of the nucleon. Indeed, in I-K models, the OAM is entirely concentrated at low $`x`$. This may constitute a clear signature of relativity in the low-energy models of the nucleon if $`L_z(x,Q^2)`$ is measured.

In our approach all the gluon OAM is generated through evolution. In Fig. 2 we present the resulting $`L_g(x,Q^2=10\text{GeV}^2)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ and the bag model. There is an inverse correlation between the amount of high momentum components in the wave function and the value of $`L_g`$ at small $`x`$. The OAM gluon distribution for the bag model falls between those obtained with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$.

Concerning the first moments of the distributions, our model gives a value for $`L_q(\mu _0^2)=L_z(x,\mu _0^2)𝑑x`$ that ranges from 0.272 to 0.126 ($`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ model respectively). It should be stressed that the corresponding values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (0.456 and 0.748 respectively) are per se a clearcut signature in favor of light-front quark models, when compared to recent analysis of data ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }=0.45\pm 0.09`$) . Furthermore, these numbers are quite close to the angular momentum share-out given by the bag model.

The first moments that make up the spin sum rule also evolve with $`Q^2`$ according to :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mu _0^2)`$ (16)
$`L_q(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`(b^{\frac{50}{81}}1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mu _0^2)+b^{\frac{50}{81}}L_q(\mu _0^2){\displaystyle \frac{9}{50}}(b^{\frac{50}{81}}1)`$ (17)
$`J_g(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`b^{\frac{50}{81}}J_g(\mu _0^2){\displaystyle \frac{8}{25}}(b^{\frac{50}{81}}1)`$ (18)
In Fig. 3 we show the evolution of these quantities with $`Q^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (Fig. 3.a) and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ (Fig. 3.b). It is worthwhile mentioning that, even if we do not have gluons at the hadronic scale, they quite rapidly develop a sizeable angular momentum content. Furthermore the gluon angular momentum evolves decoupled from the quark sector and if we start with a vanishing $`J_g(\mu _0^2)`$ then $`J_g(Q^2)`$ is completely determined by the QCD anomalous dimensions. The values for $`J_g(Q^2)`$ in the region between 1 and 10 GeV2 that we find ($`J_g0.200.25`$) are compatible with those found by using QCD sum rules  ($`J_g0.25`$) and in a recent lattice calculation  ($`J_g=0.20\pm 0.07`$). They also agree with another model calculation based on the one-gluon exchange interaction between quarks  ($`J_g0.24`$). The consideration of a non-vanishing $`J_g(\mu _0^2)`$ would not change much our results since it would also raise the scale $`\mu _0^2`$ (due to the fact that at that scale the gluons would carry some momentum) and hence $`b`$ would be larger for a given $`Q^2`$.

Though the large error bars in the first direct measurement of the ratio $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }g}{g}`$ , $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }g}{g}=0.41\pm 0.18(stat)\pm 0.03(syst)`$, and the values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }g`$ obtained in recent data analysis , $`\mathrm{\Delta }g(Q^2=1\text{ GeV}^2)=1.6\pm 0.9`$, do not allow to discriminate between models, our results fall within the range of the latter. As a matter of fact the rather moderate values for $`J_g`$ result from a strong cancellation between $`L_q(Q^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }g(Q^2)`$ and, in particular we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }g(Q^2=1\text{ GeV}^2)=`$ 1.36 and 2.22 for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ respectively.

In a non-relativistic quark model one would expect $`L_q(Q^2)J_g(Q^2)0.25`$ in the range $`Q^2110`$ GeV2 since $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a constant with $`Q^2`$. When relativistic spin effects are taken into account, as Fig. 3 shows, one expects $`L_q(Q^2)`$ to be much smaller ($`L_q(Q^2)0.12`$ at most) or close to zero.

## 4 Concluding remarks

In summary we have shown that covariant light-front based quark models give rise to non-trivial predictions for the OAM distributions at both low and high momentum scales. This departure from traditional treatments of the angular momentum structure of the nucleon is more manifest in the high-$`x`$ region of the quark sector. We have seen that the performance of LFCQM is quite similar to other relativistic models of the nucleon such as the bag model. This comparison holds for a quite flexible choice of the mass operator. We have studied the predictions for other potentials that interpolate between the two somehow extreme situations presented here and conclusions are not changed. In fact, there is a clear correlation between the amount of high-momentum components in the momentum density $`n(\stackrel{}{k})`$ and the size of the OAM distribution. A more realistic interaction would give results closer to those of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ than to those obtained with $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ because a relativistic treatment of the kinetic energy operator inevitably emphasizes the high-momentum tail.

One should keep in mind however that the origin of the relativistic aspects is not the same in the bag and in the LFCQM presented here. While in the former the non-vanishing OAM comes from the small Dirac components, in the latter these ones are absent and relativity enters through the momentum dependence of the Pauli spinors. Certainly other more sophisticated spin-flavour basis can be constructed, such as the Dirac-Melosh bases , where covariance is manifest. Despite the fact that the used basis contains only kinematic and not dynamical (higher Fock states) effects, it represents a minimal framework that combines in an elegant way simplicity and a proper treatment of boost. Results obtained with this basis and with the bag model are of similar quality pointing out that it allows an easy implementation of relativistic effects in the spin structure of the nucleon.

We gratefully acknowledge Vicente Vento for useful comments and a careful reading of the manuscript.

Figure captions

Figure 1 Quark orbital angular momentum distributions calculated in light-front dynamics with the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (a), with the modified wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ (see text) (b) and in the bag model (c). Solid lines correspond to the initial hadronic scale $`\mu _0^2`$, short-dashed lines to $`Q^2=10`$ GeV2 and long-dashed ones to $`Q^2=1000`$ GeV2.

Figure 2. Gluon orbital angular momentum distributions calculated at $`Q^2=10`$ GeV2 with the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (solid line), $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ (long-dashed line) and the bag model (short-dashed line).

Figure 3. The contributions to the proton spin sum rule according to the model with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (a) and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ (b). The dashed curve shows $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }(Q^2)`$, the long-dashed one is $`L_q(Q^2)`$ and the dot-dashed curve represents $`J_g(Q^2)`$.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3