text:
# Eccentric discs in binaries with intermediate mass ratios: Superhumps in the VY Sculptoris stars

## 1 Superhumps in Nova-like Variables

The superhump phenomenon was first observed in superoutbursts of dwarf novae of short orbital period ($`P_{\mathrm{orb}}\stackrel{<}{}2.8\mathrm{h}`$: see Warner 1995b). It can be explained as an effect of an eccentric disc that precesses with respect to the tidal field of the secondary star (Whitehurst 1988). In low mass ratio binaries ($`q\stackrel{<}{}1/4`$), disc eccentricity can be excited via tidal resonance (Whitehurst 1988, Hirose & Osaki 1990, Lubow 1991). In systems with larger $`q`$ however, the disc is truncated at too small a radius for the resonance to be effective.

Observationally there is evidence that discs can be tidally resonant for $`q`$ significantly greater than $`1/4`$. Superhumps appear in high mass transfer discs (those of nova-like variables and of nova remnants) in some systems with orbital periods up to 3.5 h (Skillman et al. 1998). At this period the mass of the secondary star is $`0.31\mathrm{M}_{}`$ (equation 2.100 of Warner 1995b). Unfortunately there are no reliable determinations of $`q`$ in the superhumping systems with $`P_{\mathrm{orb}}>3`$h. The mean mass of the primaries of the nova-likes is $`0.74\mathrm{M}_{}`$ (Warner 1995b) and the range is likely to be at least $`0.51.0\mathrm{M}_{}`$. If the primary mass is at the upper end of this range, it is therefore possible that a system with $`P_{\mathrm{orb}}3.5`$h would have a mass ratio approaching that needed for the eccentric resonance to lie within the accretion disc.

There can be little doubt that a mechanism is required to extend the range of mass ratios for which tidal resonance occurs, beyond the $`q\stackrel{<}{}1/4`$ established in equilibrium disc calculations. One possibility is suggested by the VY Scl stars, systems with orbital periods in the range $`3.0<P_{\mathrm{orb}}<4.0`$ h (Warner 1995b) in which mass transfer is liable to reduce significantly at irregular intervals. Such a drop in $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ would allow a tidally stable, equilibrium disc that just marginally fails to reach the eccentric resonance to expand radially and become eccentrically unstable.

In this paper we demonstrate that the discs in high $`\dot{M}`$ systems can be excited into an eccentric state when the mass transfer from the secondary drops below its equilibrium value. In the next section we discuss the observational peculiarities of the VY Scl stars. In section three we outline our model for superhumps in these systems. We present numerical results that support our case in section four, and make our conclusions in section five.

## 2 Mass Transfer in Nova-like Variables

The long-term light curves of nova-like variables show brightness variations on a range of time-scales. Quasi-periodic modulations with ranges $`0.7`$ mag and time-scales of $`12`$ months may be intrinsic to the disc and in effect suppress dwarf nova outbursts in which the thermal instability of the disc is modified by irradiation from the white dwarf primary (Warner 1995a). Larger brightness variations on time-scales from days to years are also seen, in which the star shows a “bright state” before falling from 1 to 5 magnitudes in brightness. This behaviour is named after the type star, VY Sculptoris, and is generally believed to be the result of significant and relatively rapid drops in mass transfer from the secondary.

The known VY Scl stars (Table 4.1 in Warner 1995b) have orbital periods in the range $`3.2P_{\mathrm{orb}}4.0`$ h. Two apparently discrepant systems, V794 Aql and V745 Cyg have since had their orbits redetermined. Thorstensen (private communication) found the orbital period of V745 Cyg to be $`4.05`$ h, and Honeycutt & Robertson (1998) found the period of V794 Aql to be $`3.68`$ h. Furthermore, every nova-like variable in the 3.0 to 4.0 h $`P_{\mathrm{orb}}`$ range that has a well observed long-term light curve has been found to be of VY Scl type (Warner 1995b). Unstable mass transfer in these systems may be due to irradiation of the secondary by the primary (Wu, Wickramasinghe & Warner, 1995).

As a consequence, in the range $`3.0\stackrel{<}{}P_{\mathrm{orb}}\stackrel{<}{}4.0`$ h, high $`\dot{M}`$, stable accretion discs are subject to occasional reductions of received mass at their outer edge. In the following sections we numerically investigate the disc response.

## 3 Tidal instability in systems with intermediate mass ratios

Eccentricity can be excited in a close binary accretion disc if it overlaps or very nearly overlaps the $`3:1`$ eccentric inner Lindblad resonance (Lubow 1991). With a characteristic radius almost half the interstellar separation, this resonance is only accessible to discs in low mass ratio systems. Tidal forces prevent discs in high mass ratio systems from reaching the resonance.

Paczyński (1977) approximated the streamlines in a pressureless, inviscid disc with ballistic particle trajectories. He then suggested that such a disc could not be larger than the largest ballistic orbit that doesn’t intersect orbits interior to it. Using Paczyński’s estimate, Hirose & Osaki (1990), and Lubow (1991) found that the $`3:1`$ resonance could only be reached if $`q\stackrel{<}{}1/4`$.

But the tides that truncate a close binary disc also remove angular momentum from it. Papaloizou & Pringle (1977) calculated the tidal removal of angular momentum from a disc comprised of gas in linearly perturbed circular orbits. They estimated that the disc would need to extend out to approximately $`0.850.9`$ times the mean Roche lobe radius for tidal torques to be effective (slightly beyond the Paczyński radius). However the assumption of linearity made by Papaloizou & Pringle lead to an underestimate of the dissipation in the neighbourhood of Paczyński’s orbit crossing radius and thus to a larger estimate for the tidal radius. Thus when Whitehurst & King (1991) used the Papaloizou & Pringle value for maximum disc size, they estimated that the $`3:1`$ resonance could be reached in systems with $`q`$ as high as $`1/3`$.

For near equilibrium discs subjected to a fixed rate of mass addition from the secondary, the numerical results are more in keeping with the lower mass ratio limit of $`1/4`$. Hirose & Osaki (1990) obtained eccentric discs in simulations with $`0.10q0.20`$, and Murray (1998) for mass ratios $`0.25`$. Whitehurst (1994) found eccentricity in simulations at mass ratios as high as $`1/3`$. However his discs were initialised with a rapid burst of mass transfer and so were not close to an equilibrium when they encountered the $`3:1`$ resonance.

As discussed in the previous section, the observations are not consistent with a mass ratio limit as low as $`1/4`$. We propose then that higher mass ratio systems can become resonant during periods when the disc is not in equilibrium with the mass transfer stream.

Gas passing through the inner Lagrangian point has a specific angular momentum with respect to the white dwarf equivalent to that of a circular Keplerian orbit of radius $`r_{\mathrm{circ}}`$. This circularisation radius is of the order of a tenth to one fifth the interstellar separation and is very much inside the disc’s tidal truncation limit (Lubow & Shu, 1975). Hence, mixing with the mass transfer stream reduces specific angular momentum in the outer disc and restricts the disc radially. Of course the principal confinement of the disc is provided by tidal torques, however the additional confinement due to the stream can be significant. If, as is suspected to happen in the VY Scl stars, $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ is suddenly reduced, then the radial restriction on the disc will be relaxed, and the disc will expand. The expansion can be only temporary, as the disc will subsequently adjust to the new $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ on its viscous time-scale, and return to its initial size. However, we will show in the next section that the period of readjustment can be sufficient to allow the disc to encounter the $`3:1`$ resonance and become eccentric.

## 4 Results

### 4.1 Numerical Method

In this section we present numerical results obtained using a two dimensional, fixed spatial resolution, smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH) code. Previous calculations and detailed descriptions of the code are to be found in Murray (1996, 1998). Although the code has been improved to allow for variable spatial resolution (see e.g. Murray, de Kool & Li, 1998) and for the three dimensional modelling of accretion discs (Murray & Armitage, 1998), we found that by restricting ourselves to two dimensions and fixed resolution, we could more thoroughly explore parameter space with a reasonable expenditure of computer time. Our ability to capture the essential features of the eccentric instability is not compromised, and previous results have been consistent with those of three dimensional calculations (see e.g. Simpson & Wood, 1998).

The simulations described here demonstrate that, in systems with intermediate mass ratio, a sudden reduction in mass transfer from the secondary star can allow an equilibrium disc to expand so as to come into contact with the eccentric resonance.

Two sequences of simulations were completed. In the first series we subjected near-equilibrium discs to sudden reductions in $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$, the aim being to demonstrate the viability of the proposed mechanism.

We then completed a second set of simulations in which we replaced the mass transfer stream with steady mass addition at the circularisation radius, $`r_{\mathrm{circ}}`$. By removing the additional constraining effect of the stream, and allowing the disc to reach a fully extended steady state, we made it as easy as possible for the disc to interact with the eccentric resonance. We ran such simulations for several values of $`q`$ and thus determined the range of mass ratios for which a reduction in mass transfer might result in superhumps.

As in Murray (1996) and Murray (1998), we use the interstellar separation $`d`$, the binary mass $`M`$, and the inverse of the orbital angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$, as the length, mass and time scalings for our simulations.

### 4.2 Variable $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ Calculations

In Murray (1998) we described a calculation for mass ratio $`q=0.29`$ that failed to excite the eccentric resonance (simulation 1 of that paper). In that calculation mass was introduced at a constant rate of one particle per $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=0.01`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$ at the inner Lagrangian point. An isothermal equation of state was used with $`c=0.02`$$`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}`$. The spatial resolution was fixed with the smoothing length $`h=0.01`$$`d`$. The high rate of viscous dissipation that occurs in CV discs in outburst was modelled using an artificial viscosity term (Murray 1996, 1998). The artificial viscosity parameter $`\zeta =10`$. The gave an effective Shakura-Sunyaev parameter $`\alpha 1.9`$ at the resonance radius. This was somewhat on the high side but made the calculations more manageable. At the end of the simulation ($`t=1652.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$) the non-resonant disc had an equilibrium mass of 19950 particles.

For this paper we used the final state of the above calculation as the initial state for a new simulation with $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}=0`$ (no mass addition). All other system parameters were left unchanged. The disc evolution was then followed to $`t=2000.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$, by which time there were only 5031 particles remaining in the disc. By plotting the energy viscously dissipated in the disc as a function of time we obtained a “light curve” for the simulation (figure 1). The stream-disc impact is responsible for a significant fraction of the energy dissipation in the outer disc. Hence when the accretion stream was shut off (at $`t=1652.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$) there was a sudden drop in disc luminosity. Almost immediately after mass transfer ceased the accretion disc became resonant and eccentric. The subsequent motion of the eccentric mode relative to the binary frame introduced a cyclic contribution to the energy dissipation in the outer disc (this is discussed in more depth in Murray, 1998) which we identify as a superhump signal. Figure 1 shows the superhumps reaching maximum amplitude somewhere between $`t=1800`$ and $`1900`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$. The subsequent decay of both the superhump amplitude and of the background luminosity was simply due to the decline in disc mass.

As the simulation ran we Fourier analysed the disc’s density distribution using the technique described in Lubow (1991). Each Fourier mode’s variation in azimuth and time is given by $`l\theta m\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}t`$ where $`\theta `$ is azimuth measured in the inertial frame, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}`$ is the angular velocity of the binary, and $`l`$ and $`m`$ are integers. Hence the disc’s eccentricity is measured by the $`l=1`$, $`m=0`$ mode, and the largest amplitude non-resonant tidal response has $`l=m=2`$. In some sense this latter mode (which appears in density maps as a two armed spiral pattern fixed in the binary frame) indicates the radial extent of the disc. The larger the tidal response, the more disc material there is at large radii.

The strengths of the eccentric and spiral modes are plotted in figure 2. The tidal mode strength jumped sharply once mass addition ceased, strongly indicating a redistribution of matter radially outward through the disc. We confirmed this interpretation by checking the actual particle distributions. Immediately prior to the demise of the mass transfer stream, $`18.2\%`$ of the disc mass was at radii $`r>0.4`$$`d`$. By $`t=1700.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$, this figure had increased to $`25.6`$ %. There was also an increase in absolute terms from 3636 to 4046 particles.

The eccentric mode also became immediately stronger upon cessation of mass transfer, and then continued to grow as the resonance took effect. The maximum in the eccentric mode strength coincided with the largest amplitude superhumps.

We have produced a sequence of grey scale density maps of the disc (figure 3), from which it is clear that the mass transfer stream did indeed restrict the disc’s radial extent. In its original equilibrium state (top left panel), the disc immediately downstream of the stream impact region lay entirely within the Roche lobe of the primary. Compare that with the disc shortly after mass transfer had ceased (top right) which extended beyond the Roche lobe.

Having determined the mechanism to be viable, we then investigated whether disc eccentricity could be excited with a less drastic reduction in $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$. We completed a second calculation with identical initial conditions, but with the mass transfer rate reduced to half its initial value instead of being extinguished completely. Figures 4 and 5 follow the evolution of the disc to $`t=3000`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$, by which time the disc mass had stabilised at approximately 10500 particles.

As in the first simulation, the disc immediately came into contact with the resonance and became more eccentric. This time however the superhump amplitude was much reduced. The eccentricity reached a maximum at $`t2300`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$ and then declined. Note that despite the reduction in superhump amplitude, the amplitude of the $`(1,0)`$ mode was larger in the second calculation (compare figures 2 and 5). Whereas the eccentric mode strength is a measure of the eccentricity as a whole, it does not directly measure the eccentricity of individual particle orbits. The superhump signal, however, is generated by those particles on the most eccentric orbits. In the second simulation, the continued mass transfer restricted the maximum eccentricity which could be acquired by gas in the outer disc, and hence limited the superhump amplitude.

We had expected a priori that the disc would return to an axisymmetric state in equilibrium with the reduced mass flux from the secondary. However we followed this calculation to $`t=5700`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$ and were surprised to find that the eccentricity did not decline to zero as expected, but instead stabilised with $`0.05<S_{(1,0)}<0.07`$. The plot of the tidal $`(2,2)`$ mode (figure 5) and density maps (not shown) indicate that the disc returned to its original radial extent by time $`t2100`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$. There is thus the intriguing possibility that this eccentric state, once reached, was quasi-stable.

To complete this section we performed a third simulation, in which we took the previous simulation at time $`t=2400.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$ and restored the mass transfer rate to its original value. Figures 6 and 7 show that the disc was initially forced rapidly inwards and circularised by the increased mass flux from the secondary. Further adjustment then occurred on the viscous time-scale as the disc re-expanded to its equilibrium radius and mass flux, and the eccentricity decayed away. By the end of the calculation ($`t=2400.00`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$) the disc had returned to its original axisymmetric state.

### 4.3 Stable $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ Calculations

In this section we describe four simulations of discs built up to steady state from zero initial mass via steady mass addition at the circularisation radius. Although one would be hard-pressed to find such a disc in nature, it is perhaps the most favourable disc configuration for the excitation of the eccentric resonance. Whereas in the simulations of the previous section the interaction with the resonance was limited to the viscous time-scale, there is no such time limitation in these calculations. Thus if, for a given mass ratio, eccentricity cannot be excited with this artificially favourable setup, then it is hard to see how it could be excited with more realistic mass input. Hence we can obtain a limiting mass ratio for which mass transfer reductions can inspire superhumps.

As in the previous section we took an isothermal equation of state with $`c=0.02`$$`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}`$, an SPH smoothing length $`h=0.01`$$`d`$, and set the SPH artificial viscosity parameter $`\zeta =10`$. Each calculation was terminated at $`t=1000`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$.

Simulations were completed for $`q=0.29,0.30,0.31`$ and $`1/3`$. In each case, mass was added at a fixed rate of one particle per $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=0.01`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$, at a radius $`r=0.1781`$$`d`$ ($`r_{\mathrm{circ}}`$ for a system with $`q=0.18`$). By doing this we have kept the specific angular momentum of newly added material constant across the simulations. However the angular momentum is somewhat greater (14% in the case of $`q=1/3`$) than if we had used the correct circularisation radius for each mass ratio.

The strength of the eccentric mode at the conclusion of each simulation, and the disc precession periods are listed in table 1. The higher the mass ratio, the more weakly the eccentric resonance was excited. For the $`q=1/3`$ simulation some volatility could still be discerned in the eccentric mode strength but no superhumps were apparent either in the light curve or in its power spectrum.

We included in table 1 the second of the simulations completed for section 4.2 (for which $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ was reduced a factor 2). Given its length (four times that of the calculations completed for this section), this calculation provided a very reliable measurement of $`P_\mathrm{d}`$ and thus a useful check on the other results tabulated here.

A mass ratio of approximately $`1/3`$ would appear to be the upper limit beyond which the eccentric resonance cannot be excited even temporarily. Our results correspond well with those of Whitehurst (1994) who found superhumps in a simulation with $`q=1/3`$ but not in a simulation with $`q=0.34`$. He constructed his discs with a massive initial mass transfer burst, followed by a much reduced but constant $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$. The mass distribution in Whitehurst’s discs would have been therefore more akin to a disc built up via mass addition at $`r_{\mathrm{circ}}`$ than to a disc subject to steady mass addition from $`L_1`$.

## 5 Conclusions

Under conditions of steady mass transfer, a mass ratio $`\stackrel{<}{}1/4`$ is required for a close binary accretion disc to encounter the $`3:1`$ eccentric inner Lindblad resonance. However, it is possible for eccentricity to be excited in the disc of a high mass transfer system with $`q\stackrel{<}{}1/3`$ if $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ is reduced, as is thought to occur in the VY Sculptoris systems. Our simulations suggest that the disc will remain eccentric as long as $`\dot{M}_\mathrm{s}`$ remains at the lower value.

Thus, a precessing, eccentric disc remains the best explanation of superhumps, even for systems with $`3.0<P_{\mathrm{orb}}<4.0`$ h.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

One of the most interesting and still unresolved problems is the structure of a (nonperturbative) vacuum in QCD and a confinement mechanism.

At the time being we have a number of different competing scenarios of confinement. One of the most promising approaches is a quasiclassical approach promoted by Polyakov  which assumes that in the treatment of infrared problems certain classical field configurations are of paramount importance. These classical field configurations (”pseudoparticles”) are supposed to be stable, i.e. they correspond to local minima of the action and the interaction of these pseudoparticles creates a correlation length which corresponds to a new scale – confinement scale. This approach gives a clear field–theoretical prescription how to calculate analytically nonperturbative observables in the weak coupling region. In principle, this approach can be extended to the case of ”quasistable” solutions.

Another very attractive approach is a topological (or monopole) mechanism of confinement . This mechanism suggests that the QCD vacuum state behaves like a magnetic (dual) superconductor, abelian magnetic monopoles playing the role of Cooper pairs, at least, for the specially chosen (”maximally abelian”) gauge . At the time being this approach remains the most popular one in numerical studies in lattice QCD.

It is rather tempting to try to interprete lattice (abelian) monopoles as pseudoparticles (stable or quasistable). Recently the classical solutions have been found which correspond to Dirac sheet (i.e. flux tube) configurations . It is the aim of this note to study the monopolelike ($`M\overline{M}`$) abelian solutions of classical equations of motion in $`SU(2)`$ and $`U(1)`$ lattice gauge theories in $`d=3`$ and $`d=4`$ dimensions.

In what follows periodic boundary conditions are presumed. Lattice derivatives are : $`_\mu f_x=f_{x+\mu }f_x`$ ; $`\overline{}_\mu f_x=f_xf_{x\mu }`$ and $`\overline{}_\mu (U)f_x=f_xU_{x\mu ;\mu }^{}f_{x\mu }U_{x\mu ;\mu }.`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }=_\mu _\mu \overline{}_\mu `$ and the lattice spacing is chosen to be unity.

## 2 Abelian classical solutions

### 2.1 Iterative procedure

Classical equations of motion are

$$\underset{\mu }{}\text{Im}\text{Tr}\left\{\sigma ^a\overline{}_\mu U_{x\mu \nu }\right\}=0,$$
(2.1)
where $`U_{x\mu \nu }SU(2)`$. For abelian solutions $`U_{x\mu \nu }=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\sigma _3\theta _{x\mu \nu }\right)`$ eq. (2.1) becomes

$$\underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu \mathrm{sin}\theta _{x\mu \nu }=0.$$
(2.2)
Let us represent the plaquette angle $`\theta _{x\mu \nu }`$ in the form

$$\theta _{x\mu \nu }=\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{x\mu \nu }+2\pi n_{x\mu \nu };\pi <\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{x\mu \nu }\pi ,$$
(2.3)
and $`n_{x\mu \nu }=n_{x\nu \mu }`$ are integer numbers. The classical equations of motion (2.2) can be represented in the form

$$\underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu \theta _{x\mu \nu }=F_{x\mu }(\theta ),$$
(2.4)
where

$$F_{x\mu }(\theta )\underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu \left(\theta _{x\mu \nu }\mathrm{sin}\theta _{x\mu \nu }\right)$$

and $`_\mu \overline{}_\mu F_{x\mu }=0`$. For any given configuration $`\left\{n_{x\mu \nu }\right\}`$ these equations can be solved iteratively

$$\theta _{x\mu }^{(1)}\theta _{x\mu }^{(2)}\mathrm{}\theta _{x\mu }^{(k)}\mathrm{},$$
(2.5)
where

$$\underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu \theta _{x\mu \nu }^{(k+1)}=F_{x\mu }(\theta ^{(k)});k=1;2;\mathrm{},$$
(2.6)
and

$$\underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu \theta _{x\mu \nu }^{(1)}=2\pi \underset{\nu }{}\overline{}_\nu n_{x\mu \nu };$$
(2.7)
In the Lorentz gauge $`_\mu \overline{}_\mu \theta _{x\mu }=0`$ eq.’s (2.6,2.7) are equivalent to

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _{x\mu }^{(k+1)}=J_{x\mu }^{(k)};k=0;1;\mathrm{},$$
(2.8)
where $`J_{x\mu }^{(0)}=2\pi _\nu \overline{}_\nu n_{x\mu \nu }`$ and $`J_{x\mu }^{(k)}=F_{x\mu }(\theta ^{(k)})`$ at $`k1`$. Evidently,

$$\underset{\mu }{}\overline{}_\mu J_{x\mu }^{(k)}=0;\underset{x}{}J_{x\mu }^{(k)}=0.$$
(2.9)
Defining the propagator

$$G_{x;y}=\frac{1}{V}\underset{q0}{}\frac{e^{iq(xy)}}{𝒦^2};𝒦^2=\underset{\mu }{}4\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{q_\mu }{2},$$
(2.10)
one can easily find solutions of eq.’s (2.8) :

$`\theta _{x\mu }^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi {\displaystyle \underset{y\nu }{}}G_{x;y}\overline{}_\nu n_{x\mu \nu };`$ (2.11)
$`\theta _{x\mu }^{(k+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{y}{}}G_{x;y}J_{y\mu }^{(k)};{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\overline{}_\mu \theta _{x\mu }^{(k+1)}=0,`$ (2.12)
and $`_x\theta _{x\mu }^{(k+1)}=0`$.

The results of iterative solution can be summarized as follows.

1. The convergence of this iterative procedure is very fast and becomes even faster with increasing the distance between monopole and antimonopole. As an example in Figure 1a it is shown the dependence of the action on the number of iterations on the $`8^4`$ lattice where $`\stackrel{}{R}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{}{R}_2`$ are positions of the static monopole and antimonopole, respectively. In fact, the first approximation $`\theta _{x\mu }^{(1)}`$ as given in eq.(2.11) is a very good approximation to the exact solution.
2. There are no solutions when monopole and antimonopole are too close to each other. As an example, in Figure 1b one can see the dependence of the action on the number of iteration steps when $`\stackrel{}{R}_2\stackrel{}{R}_1=(0,0,2)`$.
3. In four dimensions only static (i.e. threedimensional) solutions have been found.

### 2.2 Stability

The question of stability of the classical solution $`U_{x\mu }^{cl}`$ is the question of the eigenvalues $`\lambda _j`$ of the matrix $`L_{xy;\mu \nu }^{ab}`$ where

$$S(e^{i\delta \theta }U^{cl})=S_{cl}+\underset{abxy\mu \nu }{}\delta \theta _{x\mu }^aL_{xy;\mu \nu }^{ab}\delta \theta _{y\nu }^b+\mathrm{},$$
(2.13)
where $`S_{cl}=S(U^{cl})`$ and $`\delta \theta _{x\mu }^a`$ are infinitesimal variations of the gauge field. A solution $`U_{x\mu }^{cl}`$ is stable if all $`\lambda _j0`$. However, a solution can be unstable but ”quasistable” if, say, only one eigenvalue is negative : $`\lambda _1<0`$, $`\lambda _j0,j1`$. A cooling history of such configuration could have demonstrated an approximate plateau. If it could have been a case, one could extend, in principle, Polyakov’s approach to the case of quasistable solutions.

It is rather easy to show that in the case of $`U(1)`$ theory $`M\overline{M}`$ solutions are stable, i.e. correspond to local minima of the action. Therefore, Polyakov’s approach based on the $`M\overline{M}`$ classical solutions is expected to describe confinement and pseudoparticles are (anti)monopoles.

Stability of $`M\overline{M}`$–classical solutions in $`SU(2)`$ theory has been studied numerically. To this purpose every classical $`M\overline{M}`$ configurations has been (slightly) heated and then a (soft) cooling procedure has been used. In Figure 2 one can see a typical cooling history of such configuration. The classical action $`S_{cl}`$ corresponding to the $`M\overline{M}`$ configuration is $`130`$. Therefore, $`M\overline{M}`$–classical solution looks absolutely unstable.

It is interesting to compare the stability of monopole classical solutions with that of Dirac sheet (flux tube) solutions. In Figure 3 one can see a typical cooling of the heated single Dirac sheet (SDS)  in $`SU(2)`$ theory. Parameters of the cooling have been chosen the same for all configurations. In fact, it is also unstable. However, a strong plateau permits to define this configuration as a quasistable.

## 3 Summary and discussions

Classical solutions corresponding to monopole–antimonopole pairs in $`3d`$ and $`4d`$ $`SU(2)`$ and (compact) $`U(1)`$ lattice gauge theories have been found.

In the case of $`3d`$ and $`4d`$ $`U(1)`$ theories these monopole–antimonopole classical solutions ($`M\overline{M}`$–pseudoparticles) are stable, i.e. correspond to local minima of the action. Therefore, the quasiclassical approach has chance to be successful.

In contrast, in $`SU(2)`$ theory ($`d=3`$ and $`d=4`$) $`M\overline{M}`$ classical solutions are completely unstable. At the moment it is not clear if Polyakov’s (quasiclassical) approach can be applied to nonabelian theories (at least, with monopoles as pseudoparticles). It is very probable that the vacuum in the (compact) $`U(1)`$ theory is a rather poor model of the vacuum in $`SU(2)`$ theory.

It is interesting to note that the Dirac sheet (i.e. flux tube) solutions are quasistable in $`SU(2)`$ theories (for $`d=3`$ and $`d=4`$). This observation could be interesting in view of the famous spaghetti vacuum picture where the color magnetic quantum liquid state is a superposition of flux–tubes states (Copenhagen vacuum) . However, the relevance of this scenario still needs a further confirmation.


text:
# Generalization of the Bloch-Messiah-Zumino theorem

\[

## Abstract

It is shown how to construct a basis in which two arbitrary complex antisymmetric matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ acquire simultaneously canonical forms. The present construction is not restricted by any conditions on properties of the $`C^+C^{}`$ matrix. Canonical bases pertaining to the generator-coordinate-method treatment of many-fermion systems are discussed.

\]

The Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) pairing theory , and its generalization by Bogolyubov , are based on fermion wave functions that have the form of fermion-pair condensates, i.e.,

$$|C=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}\underset{mn}{}C_{mn}^{}a_m^+a_n^+\right)|0,$$
(1)
where $`a_m^+`$ are the fermion creation operators, $`|0`$ is the fermion vacuum, and $`C_{mn}`$ is an antisymmetric complex matrix. Up to a unitary transformation of the single-particle basis,

$$\overline{a}_m^+=\underset{m^{}}{}U_{mm^{}}^{}a_m^{}^+,$$
(2)
state (1) is equal to the so-called BCS state

$$|C=\underset{m>0}{}\left(1+s_mc_m\overline{a}_{\stackrel{~}{m}}^+\overline{a}_m^+\right)|0,$$
(3)
better known in its normalized form,

$$\frac{|C}{C|C^{1/2}}=\underset{m>0}{}\left(u_m+s_mv_m\overline{a}_{\stackrel{~}{m}}^+\overline{a}_m^+\right)|0,$$
(4)
for

$$u_m=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+c_m^2}},v_m=\frac{c_m}{\sqrt{1+c_m^2}}.$$
(5)
The Bloch-Messiah-Zumino theorem  provides the link between the two forms of state $`|C`$, Eqs. (1) and (3), by stating that every complex antisymmetric matrix can be brought by a unitary transformation into its canonical form, i.e.,

$$(U^TCU)_{mn}=s_n^{}c_n\delta _{m\stackrel{~}{n}},$$
(6)
where index $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ denotes the so-called canonical partner of the state $`m`$, the phase factors $`s_n^{}`$=$`s_n^1`$=$`s_{\stackrel{~}{n}}^{}`$ have for the canonical partners opposite signs, and numbers $`c_n`$=$`c_{\stackrel{~}{n}}`$ are real and positive. Standard notation $`m`$$`>`$0, used in Eqs. (3) and (4), means that only one state is taken from each canonical pair. The proof of the theorem goes through a diagonalization of the hermitian matrix $`C^+C`$, that yields the unitary transformation $`U`$ and real, non-negative, pairwise degenerate eigenvalues $`c_n^2`$.

When using states (1) in applications beyond the mean-field approximation, and in particular in the generator coordinate method (GCM) , the matrix elements and overlaps depend on the product matrix $`C^+C^{}`$. For example, the overlap of two states (1) reads

$$C^{}|C=\stackrel{1/2}{det}\left(1+C^+C^{}\right),$$
(7)
and the transition density matrix is given by

$$\rho _{mn}=\frac{C^{}|a_n^+a_m|C}{C^{}|C}=\left[\left(1+C^+C^{}\right)^1C^+C^{}\right]_{mn}.$$
(8)
It has been realized long time ago  that the matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ is also pairwise degenerate, which facilitates calculation of the phase of the overlap, otherwise ambiguous because of the square root appearing in Eq. (7). Moreover, under certain conditions it has been proved in Ref.  that it is enough to give up the unitarity of matrix $`U`$ to bring both matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ simultaneously into the canonical forms analogous to (6). The same fact has later been rediscovered in Ref. , although the necessary restrictions on matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ have not been recognized there.

In the present paper, I generalize results of Ref.  by deriving canonical forms of two arbitrary complex matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ in a common canonical basis. These results are not restricted by any conditions on matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$.

Let us begin by recalling the notion of the Jordan form (see e.g. ) of an arbitrary complex matrix. Focussing our attention on the matrix $`C^+C^{}`$, the vectors defining its Jordan basis can be arranged in columns of matrix $`W`$, and one has

$$\underset{n}{}\left(C^+C^{}\right)_{mn}W_{ni}=\underset{j}{}W_{mj}D_{ji},$$
(9)
where matrix $`D`$ is block diagonal (composed of the Jordan blocks). One can attribute the number of the block $`I_i`$, the length of the block $`L_i`$, and the number within the block $`k_i`$, to every index $`i`$ that numbers the Jordan basis vectors. In this notation, $`D`$ has the form:

$$D_{ji}=\delta _{I_jI_i}D_{k_jk_i}^{I_i},$$
(10)
where in every block matrix $`D_{kk^{}}^I`$ reads

$$D_{kk^{}}^I=D_I\delta _{kk^{}}+\delta _{kk^{}1},$$
(11)
i.e., it has a common complex number $`D_I`$ on the main diagonal and the ones just above the main diagonal.

Basis vectors belonging to a given block $`I`$ form the so-called Jordan series of length $`L`$. The series starts with the basis vector called the series head, and ends with an eigenvector of $`C^+C^{}`$. The whole series is uniquely determined by the series head, because the remaining basis vectors in the series can be obtained by a repeated action of $`C^+C^{}`$ on the series head. The basis vectors in a given series are not unique, because a linear combination of these vectors may give another valid series head, and leads to the same Jordan canonical form. Explicitly, this transformation reads

$$W_{mk^{}}^{}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{L}{}}W_{mk}\alpha _{kk^{}}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{k^{}}{}}W_{mk}\alpha _{Lk+1},$$
(12)
where the transformation matrix $`\alpha _{kk^{}}`$ depends on $`L`$ arbitrary complex numbers $`\alpha _k`$ (only $`\alpha _1`$ must not vanish), and has the following explicit structure:

$$\alpha _{kk^{}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}\alpha _1\hfill & \alpha _2\hfill & \alpha _3\mathrm{}\hfill & \alpha _{L1}\hfill & \alpha _L\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \alpha _1\hfill & \alpha _2\mathrm{}\hfill & \alpha _{L2}\hfill & \alpha _{L1}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & \alpha _1\mathrm{}\hfill & \alpha _{L3}\hfill & \alpha _{L2}\hfill \\ \multicolumn{5}{c}{}\\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\mathrm{}\hfill & \alpha _1\hfill & \alpha _2\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\mathrm{}\hfill & 0\hfill & \alpha _1\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(13)
It is easy to check that matrices having this structure form a group. It is also easy to check that vectors $`W_{mk}^{}`$ form the Jordan series, similarly as vectors $`W_{mk}`$ do, and that they can replace vectors $`W_{mk}`$ in the Jordan basis, giving the same matrix $`D`$ in Eq. (9).

According to the Jordan construction, the whole space in which acts matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ splits into subspaces spanned by the Jordan series. The number of eigenvectors of $`C^+C^{}`$ equals to the number of different series, or to the number of Jordan blocks, and is in general smaller than the dimension of the matrix $`C^+C^{}`$. Some matrices (hermitian or not) can be fully diagonalized, i.e., they have numbers of eigenvectors equal to their dimensions. This corresponds to the case when all the Jordan series have the length equal 1.

One calls two blocks degenerate, or two series degenerate, if they have the same diagonal number $`D_I`$, and they have the same length $`L`$. The latter condition is very important, because only degenerate series defined in such a way can be mixed; this is an analogue of the possibility to mix degenerate eigenvectors of a matrix which can be fully diagonalized. If two series have different lengths then vectors of a longer series cannot be admixed to those of the shorter series, even if the series have the same diagonal number $`D_I`$. If the matrix can be fully diagonalized, then all the series have length 1, the number of eigenvectors equals to the dimension of $`C^+C^{}`$, and transformation (12) reduces to the possibility of arbitrarily normalizing every eigenvector.

After these necessary preliminaries, let us proceed with presenting the main results of the present paper. Multiplying from the left-hand and right-hand sides the eigen-equation (9) by $`W^1`$, and then transposing, we obtain that

$$C^{}\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)=W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}D^T,$$
(14)
which multiplied by $`C^+`$ from the left-hand side gives

$$\left(C^+C^{}\right)\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)=\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)D^T.$$
(15)
One can see now that matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ has another equivalent set of Jordan series, i.e.,

$$\underset{n}{}\left(C^+C^{}\right)_{mn}V_{ni}=\underset{j}{}V_{mj}D_{ji},$$
(16)
where the new matrix of basis vectors $`V`$ is given by

$$V=C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}J.$$
(17)
In every Jordan block, matrix $`J`$ has the ones on the skew diagonal and zeros otherwise, i.e., $`J_{kk^{}}`$=$`\delta _{k,Lk^{}+1}`$. Hence, when an arbitrary matrix is multiplied by $`J`$ from the right-hand (left-hand) side, the order of its columns (rows) is flipped. In particular, one obtains that $`D^T`$=$`JDJ`$.

We can now analyze cases of different degeneracies of the Jordan blocks. The arguments given below closely follow proofs presented in Ref. , only with the degeneracies of eigenvalues replaced by the degeneracies of the Jordan blocks.

Let us first suppose that $`C^+C^{}`$ has a non-degenerate Jordan block. Then, in this block the basis vectors $`V`$ must be connected with the basis vectors $`W`$ by transformation (12), i.e.,

$$\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}J\right)_{mk^{}}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{L}{}}W_{mk}\alpha _{kk^{}}.$$
(18)
Multiplying Eq. (18) by $`W^1`$ from the left-hand side, and by $`J`$ from the right-hand side, one obtains

$$\left(W^1C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)_{kk^{}}=\left(\alpha J\right)_{kk^{}}.$$
(19)
However, the matrix on the left-hand side of this equation is antisymmetric, while that on the right-hand side is symmetric; therefore, matrix $`\alpha _{kk^{}}`$ must vanish. This requires that, in a non-degenerate Jordan block, all vectors $`V`$ vanish, which contradicts Eq. (14), unless the block has length $`L`$=1 and $`D_I`$=0. Therefore, matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ cannot have non-degenerate Jordan blocks apart from the subspace of $`L`$=1 eigenvectors with all eigenvalues equal zero.

One can set this subspace aside, and assume from now on that $`C^+C^{}`$ is non-singular and has an even dimension. In this case, matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ cannot have any non-degenerate Jordan block, and hence Jordan blocks must appear in degenerate pairs. (In odd dimensions, $`C^+C^{}`$ must have at least one null eigenvalue, which can be separated, and the remaining matrix can be treated in the even dimension).

In the present considerations, it is enough to consider only pairs of degenerate blocks; had the higher degeneracies of the Jordan blocks occurred, one could have considered one pair after another, and at each step one could reduce the dimension of the problem. This is possible here, and has not been possible when considering degenerate eigenvalues in Ref. , because the whole space can be separated into the subspaces corresponding to the Jordan blocks, while it cannot be separated into subpaces corresponding to the eigenvalues.

Let us now consider a pair of degenerate Jordan blocks, each block having length $`L`$ and the common diagonal element $`D_I`$=$`D_{\stackrel{~}{I}}`$. One can adopt here the standard notation that originally pertains to the canonical pairs, namely, we denote the indices of the two degenerate blocks by $`I`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$. Similarly, indices inside these two blocks are denoted by $`k`$=1, 2,…,$`L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{k}`$=1, 2,…,$`L`$, respectively. Note that vectors in these two blocks form series, i.e., they are arranged in a specific order; therefore a vector at a given position must be associated with the vector at the same position in the second block.

Since for matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ two equivalent Jordan bases exist, $`W`$ and $`V`$, vectors in series $`V`$ must be linear combinations of those in series $`W`$. In the pair of degenerate Jordan blocks, this leads to the following relations between the two series:

$`\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}J\right)_{mk^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{L}{}}}W_{mk}\alpha _{kk^{}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{~}{k}=1}{\overset{L}{}}}W_{m\stackrel{~}{k}}\beta _{kk^{}},`$ (21)
$`\left(C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}J\right)_{m\stackrel{~}{k}^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{L}{}}}W_{mk}\gamma _{kk^{}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{~}{k}=1}{\overset{L}{}}}W_{m\stackrel{~}{k}}ϵ_{kk^{}},`$ (22)
All the four matrices $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, and $`ϵ`$ have the same structure (13). One may now proceed with multiplying Eqs. (21) and (22) from the left-hand side either by $`W_{km}^1`$ or by $`W_{\stackrel{~}{k}m}^1`$, and from the right-hand side by $`J`$. Since all matrices $`\alpha J`$, $`\beta J`$, $`\gamma J`$, and $`ϵJ`$ are symmetric, one then obtains that $`\alpha `$=$`ϵ`$=0 and $`\gamma `$=$`\beta `$.

Therefore, the canonical form of the $`C^+`$ matrix reads

$$\left(W^1C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)_{ji}=s_{I_j}C_{k_jk_i}^{I_j+}\delta _{I_j\stackrel{~}{I}_i},$$
(23)
where the symmetric matrix $`C^I`$=$`C^{\stackrel{~}{I}}`$ occupies the off-diagonal part in every pair of the degenerate Jordan blocks, and

$$C^I=s_I\beta ^{}J,$$
(24)
for $`\beta `$ having form (13). Following the standard notation, we have defined the phase factors $`s_I`$=$`s_{\stackrel{~}{I}}`$ in such a way that the skew-diagonal matrix elements of $`C^I`$ (that are all equal one to another) are real and positive, i.e., $`C_{k,Lk+1}^I`$$`>`$0.

Since the canonical basis of $`C^+`$ is the same as the Jordan basis of $`C^+C^{}`$, matrix $`C^{}`$ must in the very same basis assume an analogous canonical form:

$$\left(W^TC^{}W\right)_{ji}=s_{I_i}^{}C_{k_jk_i}^{I_i}\delta _{I_j\stackrel{~}{I}_i},$$
(25)
where the symmetric matrix $`C^I`$=$`C^{\stackrel{~}{I}}`$ reads

$$C^I=s_I^{}J\beta ^{}$$
(26)
and $`\beta ^{}`$ has also form (13). Finally, in order to satisfy Eq. (9) matrices $`\beta `$ and $`\beta ^{}`$ must obey the following condition:

$$\beta \beta ^{}=D.$$
(27)
This leaves us still some freedom in the choice of the canonical basis, because any solution of Eq. (27) gives one valid canonical form. Two obvious choices are, for example, $`\beta `$=$`D`$ and $`\beta ^{}`$=$`I`$ or $`\beta `$=$`\sqrt{D}`$ and $`\beta ^{}`$=$`\sqrt{D}`$, where any one of the possible branches of the matrix square root can be taken.

Equations (23) and (25) complete the proof of the canonical forms of two arbitrary complex antisymmetric matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$. Both these matrices can be simultaneously transformed by matrix $`W`$ (in general non-unitary) into the block-diagonal forms with non-zero elements only between pairs of degenerate Jordan blocks.

Needless to say, whenever matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ can be fully diagonalized, which was the case in Ref. , both matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ acquire in the canonical basis the standard canonical forms analogous to Eq. (6), i.e.,

$$\left(W^1C^+W_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{T}\right)_{ji}=s_jc_j^{}\delta _{j\stackrel{~}{ı}},$$
(28)
and

$$\left(W^TC^{}W\right)_{ji}=s_i^{}c_i^{}\delta _{j\stackrel{~}{ı}},$$
(29)
where $`c_i^{}c_i^{}`$=$`D_i`$.

In Ref.  it was noticed that an incorrect conjecture was formulated in Ref. , namely, the conjecture that the simple forms of Eqs. (28) and (29) can always be achieved. In the present study we have seen that these simple forms occur only when matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ can be fully diagonalized. In fact, this is the case which occurs most often in applications. Therefore, let us now discuss conditions for the full diagonalization of $`C^+C^{}`$.

In the applications given in Ref. , the full diagonalization of matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ was secured by using a model in which matrices $`C`$ were time-even,

$$C^+=U_TC^TU_T^T,$$
(30)
and the Hermitian and time-even matrices $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{C}=U_TC$$
(31)
were positive definite. In these equations, $`U_T`$ is a unitary and antisymmetric matrix, $`U_T^+`$=$`U_T^1`$=$`U_T^{}`$. The positive definiteness of matrices $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ was in  guaranteed by a special form of matrices $`C`$. In that study, the GCM states were constructed within the SCEM model , and therefore matrices $`C`$ had the form shown in Eq. (2.13) of . Therefore, the corresponding $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ matrices were all equal to exponents of hermitian matrices, and hence trivially positive definite.

In the general presentation of the present paper, conditions (30) and (31) can be formulated as follows: If there exist a unitary antisymmetric matrix $`U_T`$ such that Eq. (30) holds for $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$, and at the same time at least $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ is positive-definite, then matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ can be fully diagonalized, and the simple canonical forms (28) and (29) exist. The proof of this statement has been given in Ref.  (Appendix C), and will not be repeated here.

The positive definiteness of $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is a required condition, because the hermitian square-root of $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ must exist. Unfortunately, this condition cannot be released, i.e., if both $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ are not positive definite, it may happen that matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ cannot be fully diagonalized. An example of such a situation is provided by the following two 4$`\times `$4 matrices:

$$C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& A\\ A^T& 0\end{array}\right)\text{ and }C^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& A^{}\\ A^T& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(32)
where the two-dimensional matrices $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ read

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& a\\ a^{}& 0\end{array}\right)\text{ and }A^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(33)
For the standard time-reversal matrix $`U_T`$ given by

$$U_T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& I\\ I& 0\end{array}\right)\text{ one has }\stackrel{~}{C}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^T& 0\\ 0& A\end{array}\right),$$
(34)
and $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ has the same form. Neither $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ (for $`a`$$``$0) nor $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ is positive definite, and the $`C^+C^{}`$=$`\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ matrix,

$$C^+C^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}(AA^{})^{}& 0\\ 0& AA^{}\end{array}\right)\text{ for }AA^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& 1\\ 0& a^{}\end{array}\right),$$
(35)
cannot be fully diagonalized, unless $`a`$$``$$`a^{}`$.

However, for any small but non-zero imaginary part of $`a`$, matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ can be fully diagonalized. Therefore, this example also shows that the positive definiteness of (time-even) matrices $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ is only a sufficient condition for the full diagonalization of $`C^+C^{}`$=$`\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$, but it is not necessary. Moreover, it is clear that matrix $`C^+C^{}`$ cannot be diagonalized for $`a`$=$`a^{}`$, because in the limit of $`\mathrm{}a`$$``$0 two eigenvectors of $`C^+C^{}`$ become parallel. This illustrates the difficulty of diagonalizing $`C^+C^{}`$ numerically for small values of $`\mathrm{}a`$; the task is then bound to become ill-conditioned.

In the GCM, matrices $`C`$ are most often obtained from solutions of the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov (HFB) or Hartree-Fock+BCS  equations for time-even states. In these cases, matrices $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ are diagonal in the HFB or BCS canonical bases  (composed of pairs of time-reversed states), and their eigenvalues are equal to $`v_m/u_m`$=$`c_m`$, where $`v_m`$ and $`u_m`$ are the standard quasiparticle amplitudes of Eq. (5). Here, the canonical pairs are defined by the time reversal, and therefore the eigenvalues $`c_m`$, can have, in principle, arbitrary signs.

However, in the BCS method (with a constant gap parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) all these quasiparticle amplitudes are positive, and hence all the resulting $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ matrices are positive definite, thus fulfilling the sufficient condition for the full diagonalization of $`C^+C^{}`$=$`\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$. In fact, quasiparticle amplitudes of different signs rarely occur in nuclear physics applications, cf. Ref. . This is so, because typical pairing forces couple the time-reversed states, and, in general, are always attractive. This shows that the Jordan structures discussed here cannot be expected to be frequently encountered, and most often one will deal with the standard canonical forms of Eqs. (28) and (29), in which the only non-zero matrix elements are adjacent to the main diagonal.

In summary, I have shown how to extend the results of Ref.  in order to construct canonical basis in which two arbitrary complex antisymmetric matrices $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ acquire simultaneously canonical forms. This construction completes the generalization of the classic Bloch-Messiah-Zumino theorem to the case of non-diagonal matrix elements calculated between fermion-pair condensates.

The critical reading of the manuscript by S.G. Rohoziński is gratefully appreciated. This research was supported by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research, Contract No. 2 P03B 040 14.