text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In this talk I will show that neutrinos can be pair produced by a time-dependent matter density through standard electroweak interactions. The idea is that both ordinary matter and the nuclear matter found in neutron stars carry a net SU(2) charge. Neutrinos couple to this charge through the electroweak interactions. In a time-dependent matter background this leads to neutrino pair production . This phenomenon is analagous to electron pair production by a time-varying electromagnetic field , or fermion production by a variable scalar field as can occur during preheating . Applications include density waves in a neutron star, a neutron star in a binary system, or a supernova explosion. We expect the amount of neutrinos produced to be small though.

## 2 Formalism

The starting point in our description of neutrino production is the Dirac equation for a neutrino in the presence of a time-dependent electroweak current $`j^\mu (t)`$:

$$\left[i\gamma ^0_0+i\gamma ^k_k+j_\mu (t)\gamma ^\mu P_\mathrm{L}m\right]\psi =0.$$
(1)
Here $`P_\mathrm{L}`$ is the projection operator on left handed states. In electrically neutral matter, the isospin of protons and electrons cancel, and the net weak current is proportional to the number density of neutrons $`n_n`$. Let us consider the case of a spatially uniform matter density moving with a four-velocity $`v_\mu `$. Then $`j_\mu =\rho v_\mu `$ with $`\rho =(G_F/\sqrt{2})n_n`$. The largest values of the “reduced density” $`\rho `$ are obtained in nuclear matter. In a neutron star the reduced density ranges from $`\rho 10^3\mathrm{eV}`$ in core to $`\rho 10^3\mathrm{eV}`$ in the outer layers.

To solve the Dirac equation it proves convenient to rewrite it as a second order differential equation for scalar functions. To do so we expand the neutrino field in a complete set of eigenmodes

$$\psi =\underset{s=\pm }{}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\left[b_{𝐤,s}U_{𝐤,s}(t)+d_{𝐤,s}^{}V_{𝐤,s}(t)\right]e^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}}.$$
(2)
For the eigenspinors we make the following Ansatz

$`U_{𝐤,s}(t)e^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}}`$ $`=`$ $`N_{k,s}\left[i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +m+j_\mu (t)\gamma ^\mu P_\mathrm{L}\right]\varphi _{k,s}^{(1)}(t)R_{k,s}^{(1)}\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}ı/2_0^t\rho _\pm (\zeta )𝑑\zeta },`$
$`V_{𝐤,s}(t)e^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}}`$ $`=`$ $`N_{k,s}\left[i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +m+j_\mu (t)\gamma ^\mu P_\mathrm{L}\right]\varphi _{k,s}^{(1)}(t)R_{k,s}^{(1)}\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}ı/2_0^t\rho _\pm (\zeta )𝑑\zeta }.`$ (3)
$`N_{k,s}`$ are normalization constants. We choose the time-independent spinors $`R_{k,s}^{(\lambda )}`$, $`\lambda =\pm 1`$, such that they transform into each other under the action of $`\gamma ^0`$, and that they are eigenvectors of the spin operator:

$$\gamma ^0R_{k,s}^{(\lambda )}=R_{k,s}^{(\lambda )},\gamma ^0\stackrel{}{\gamma }\stackrel{}{k}R_{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}=\pm R_{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}.$$
(4)
This latter property means that for matter moving with some velocity, we choose $`\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{k}`$. We do not expect the orthogonal momenta to change the overall picture of particle production. Substituting this Ansatz back in the Dirac equations gives the desired equation for the mode functions $`\varphi _{k,s}^{(\lambda )}`$:

$$\ddot{\varphi }_{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}+\left[m^2+k_{\mathrm{eff},\pm }^2i\frac{\lambda }{2}\dot{\rho }_\pm \right]\varphi _{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}=0,$$
(5)
where we have aligned the neutrino momentum and the velocity of the background matter with the $`3`$rd axis, and we introduced the shorthand notation $`\rho _\pm =\rho _0(v_0\pm v_3)`$. Furthermore $`k_{\mathrm{eff},\pm }(t)=\pm k+\rho _\pm (t)/2`$ is the time-dependent effective neutrino momentum. The shift in momentum is due to the presence of the electroweak potential generated by the matter background.

The solutions corresponding to the two values of $`\lambda `$ satisfy equations that are complex conjugate of each other, i.e.,

$$\left(\varphi _{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}\right)^{}=\varphi _{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}.$$
(6)
Hence, these functions are related by charge conjugation, and thus the spinors $`U`$ and $`V`$ correspond to particle and anti-particle states. In the presence of a matter background the charge conjugation symmetry C is spontaneously broken. The time-dependent phase factor in eq. (3) is introduced to restore this symmetry for the mode functions $`\varphi _{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}`$; under charge conjugation the sign of the momentum and of the reduced density $`\rho `$ are changed similtanuously.

We choose initial conditions at $`t0`$ corresponding to a constant matter background. The mode functions are then simply plane wave solution with energies that can be read off from the mode equation (5),

$$\varphi _{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}(0)=1,\dot{\varphi }_{k,\pm }^{(\lambda )}(0)=\lambda E_{k,\pm }(0)\mathrm{with}E_{k,\pm }(0)=\sqrt{m^2+k_{\mathrm{eff},\pm }^2(0)}.$$
(7)
In the limit $`\rho 0`$, the spinors $`U`$ and $`V`$ become the usual free field positive and negative frequency solutions. We normalize the spinors $`U_{k,r}^{}(0)U_{k,s}(0)=V_{k,r}^{}(0)V_{k,s}(0)=\delta _{rs}`$. This fixes the normalization constant in eq. (3), $`N_{k,\pm }^2=(E_{k,\pm }(0)k_{\mathrm{eff},\pm }(0))^2+m^2`$. The normalization properties are preserved by the unitary time-evolution of the system.

The system — a neutrino in the presence of weakly charged matter — is solved by solving the mode equations, with given initial conditions and normalization. The next question then is: “What do the solutions mean in terms of particle production?”

## 3 Particle number

The number operator constructed from the creation and annihilation operators in the mode expansion, eq. (2) is time-independent. Clearly, this will not do to discuss particle production. Particle production is associated with the time-dependence of the Hamiltonian. One can introduce time-dependent creation and annihilation operators that diagonalize the Hamiltonian instantaneously. This defines a physically motivated, time-dependent number operator. Equivalently one can describe particle production in terms of the mode functions. The initial mode functions are positive and negative frequency solutions to the mode equation. However, due to the time-dependence of the Hamiltonian, at later times they will in general be a superposition of positive and negative frequencies, the overlap being a measure of particle production. One finds for the particle number

$$𝒩_{k,s}^P(t)=|D_{k,s}^P|^2,$$
(8)
where the so-called Bogoliubov coefficient $`D_{k,s}^P=U_{𝐤,\pm }^{}{}_{}{}^{}(0)V_{𝐤,\pm }(t)`$ is (up to a phase)

$$D_{k,\pm }^P=mN_{𝐤,\pm }^2\left[i\dot{\varphi }_{k,s}^{(1)}(t)\varphi _{k,s}^{(1)}(t)\left(E_{k,\pm }^{(1)}(0)+\frac{1}{2}(\rho _\pm (0)\rho _\pm (t))\right)\right].$$
(9)
Both $`U`$ and $`V`$ are unitary matrices, and thus the Boguliubov coefficient cannot exceed unity, in accordance with the Pauli exclusion principle. Note further that particle production goes to zero in the limit of a massless neutrino. This is as expected, since in this limit the left and right handed sector decouple, and if the Hamiltonian is diagonal at the initial time, it remains so at all times.

## 4 Results

As an explicit example we have calculated numerically the neutrino production in a matter background that is changing periodically with time: $`j^0=\rho (t)=1+0.1\mathrm{sin}(\omega t)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{j}=0`$ (all quantities in units of $`m`$). The results are shown in figure 1a and b. Figure 1a shows that neutrino production is peaked where the effective momentum $`k_{\mathrm{eff}}=k+\rho /2`$ is zero, and the instantaneous energy appearing in the mode equation (5) is minimized. The width of the excited band is set by the neutrino mass. Figure 1b shows particle number as a function of time. It oscillates, corresponding to creation and annihilation of neutrino pairs. What is left out of the picture is the diffusion of neutrinos as a result of the finite size of the matter region, i.e., neutrinos can escape the production region before they are absorbed. If diffusion is efficient, the production rate is of the order of the slope in fig 1b.

How effective is the neutrino production mechanism? To get an idea, we compare this process with another process in which fermions can be produced, namely preheating. In simple models of inflation the inflaton field $`I`$ starts oscillates in a potential well at the end of inflation. If the inflaton couples to a fermionic field, this leads to copious production of fermions. Particle production occurs in the non-adiabatic regime, when the inflaton field goes through the minimum of the potential well and $`\dot{I}I^2`$. As a result, the width of the resonance band is set by the frequency of oscillations, which can be much larger than the fermion mass. Furthermore, the dimensionless effective inflaton-fermion coupling $`\lambda I_0/\omega `$ is large because of the large amplitude of oscillation $`I_0`$. Fermion production is unsurpressed, and $`𝒩_{k,s}^P=𝒪(1)`$. Neutrino production on the other hand occurs in the adiabatic regime, since for physically realistic values of $`\omega `$ we have $`\dot{\rho }/2E_{\mathrm{ins}}^2`$ at all times (here $`E_{\mathrm{ins}}=\sqrt{m^2+k_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}`$ is the instantaneous energy of the mode functions). The width of the resonance is then set by the neutrino mass, or by the size of the matter perturbation $`\delta \rho `$ if $`m>\delta \rho `$; both are at most the order of eV. Moreover the effective dimensionless coupling $`\lambda =\delta \rho /m\stackrel{<}{}1`$, and particle number is surpressed by a factor $`𝒩_{k,s}^P\lambda ^2`$.

## 5 Conclusions

To summarize, neutrinos can be pair produced by a time-dependent matter background. Although neat, the phenomenon seems of little practical importance. Due to the smallness of all mass scales involved, the amount of neutrinos produced is small.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported in part by the US Department of Energy grant DE-FG03-91ER40662, Task C, as well as by a Faculty Grant from UCLA Council on Research.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Self-gravitating non-abelian solitons ( for a review) are natural generalisations of flat space solitons. From the original Bartnik-McKinnon solutions  onwards, interesting behaviour has been found in static Einstein-Yang-Mills systems. For example, non-abelian black holes can violate many no-hair and uniqueness theorems . However, not many exact self-gravitating non-abelian static solutions are known. One such solution , of $`𝒩=4`$ gauged supergravity, has been used recently to construct a supergravity dual to large $`N`$, $`𝒩=1`$ super Yang-Mills .

Recent work on manifolds with $`G_2`$ holonomy  provides an easy way to obtain supersymmetric solitons by dimensional reduction. Manifolds of $`G_2`$ holomony are seven dimensional manifolds that admit a parallel spinor. They are therefore important in supersymmetric compactifications of eleven dimensional supergravity or M-theory. Here we will trivially extend the Riemannian $`G_2`$ manifolds to eight dimensions by adding a time direction and then dimensionally reduce to obtain supersymmetric monopole solutions of a four dimensional theory.

Four families of noncompact $`G_2`$ manifolds asymptotic to cones over $`S^3\times S^3`$ are known, denoted $`𝔹_7,_7,\stackrel{~}{}_7,𝔻_7`$ in . The metrics all have an isometry group containing $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$. We will dimensionally reduce on $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ contained in the $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$. This will result in static four dimensional manifolds with an $`SU(2)/U(1)=S^2`$ factor and $`U(1)`$ isometry, corresponding to axially symmetric monopole or cosmic string solutions. There will also be $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ gauge fields and scalars. The Bogomol’nyi equations have effectively already been solved in constructing the $`G_2`$ metric and we will see that the four dimensional solutions are automatically BPS. This method allows the construction of exact supersymmetric solutions that would be hard to guess directly in four dimensions. The correspondence between special holonomy metrics in higher dimensions and BPS solutions has been used recently in the other direction in  in which $`SU(2)`$ instantons on $`S^4`$ were shown to give give rise to Spin(7) metrics on the chiral spinor bundle of $`S^4`$.

The dimensionally reduced Lagrangian density in four dimensions will be

$``$ $`=`$ $`R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^\varphi F^{a\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }^b\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}g^{\mu \nu }𝒟_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}𝒟_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{ab}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi `$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^\varphi \left[4\mathrm{\Phi }^{ii}+ϵ_{ijk}ϵ_{lmn}\mathrm{\Phi }_{il}\mathrm{\Phi }^{jm}\mathrm{\Phi }^{kn}\right],`$
where we have written $`e^{2\varphi }det\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to emphasise the dilatonic behaviour of the determinant. The Higgs fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}`$ are in the second symmetric power of the adjoint representation of the gauge group $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$, transforming as (21) below. This is somewhat uncommon in the context of monopoles but arises naturally in dimensional reduction . The Lagrangian has standard Eintein-Yang-Mills-Higgs(-dilaton) terms with a potential that is unbounded below. Here and throughout, indices $`a,b,\mathrm{}`$ run from $`1`$ to $`4`$ and indices $`i,j\mathrm{}`$ run from $`1`$ to $`3`$. The metric convention is $`(,+,+,+)`$.

The terms in the Lagrangian (1) come from dimensional reduction of the Einstein-Hilbert action in eight dimensions. The full supersymmetric theory will have fermionic fields and also more bosonic fields coming from an eight dimensional supergravity (e.g. ). These other fields are set to zero in the solutions discussed here.

Section 2 reviews the relevant results on $`G_2`$ metrics. Section 3 is the dimensional reduction from eight to four dimensions. Section 4 discusses the metric, gauge fields and scalars. It is seen that the solutions correspond to global monopoles as they are asymptotically conical. They are generically not spherically symmetric. This result is discussed in the context of previous work on non-spherically symmetric black holes  and is related to recent work on the asymptotic topology of $`G_2`$ metrics . It is shown that although defining magnetic charges by integration of field strengths over spheres at infinity is problematic, nontrivial topological charges may be associated with the scalar fields. Section 5 considers some aspects of four dimensional solutions corresponding to more general $`G_2`$ metrics than considered in the previous sections. Solutions corresponding to cosmic strings are found. Section 6 is the conclusion.

## 2 $`G_2`$ metrics asymptotic to cones over $`S^3\times S^3`$

Three families of complete nonsingular seven dimensional metrics with $`G_2`$ holonomy are known, based on generalisations of . They are asymptotic to cones over $`^3`$, $`SU(3)/T^2`$ and $`S^3\times S^3`$, and hence noncompact. These topological spaces belong to a restricted set of possibilities for cohomogeneity one $`G_2`$ metrics . The last of these cases has isometries appropriate for dimensional reduction to a self-gravitating non-abelian monopole in four dimensions.

A general ansatz for the $`G_2`$ metric with nine radial functions was introduced in .

$$ds_7^2=dr^2+a_i(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _i}+g_i(r)\sigma _i)^2+b_i(r)^2\sigma _i^2,$$
(2)
where $`\sigma _i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _i}`$ are the left invariant one forms on each copy of $`SU(2)=S^3`$. That is,

$`\sigma _1=\mathrm{cos}\psi d\theta +\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi `$ $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\psi }d\stackrel{~}{\theta }+\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\theta }d\stackrel{~}{\varphi },`$
$`\sigma _2=\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta +\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi `$ $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\psi }d\stackrel{~}{\theta }+\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\theta }d\stackrel{~}{\varphi },`$
$`\sigma _3=d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi `$ $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}=`$ $`d\stackrel{~}{\psi }+\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\theta }d\stackrel{~}{\varphi }.`$ (3)
The ranges for the coordinates are $`0\theta ,\stackrel{~}{\theta }\pi `$, $`0\varphi ,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }<2\pi `$ and $`0\psi ,\stackrel{~}{\psi }4\pi `$. The metric (2) generically has isometry group $`\stackrel{~}{SU(2)}\times SU(2)`$ corresponding to left multiplication of $`SU(2)`$ on each of the $`S^3`$s. The condition for $`G_2`$ holonomy becomes a set of nine first order equations for $`a_i,b_i,g_i`$. The general solution to these coupled nonlinear equations is not known. This is one reason to consider consistent truncations of the nine function ansatz by setting various of the radial functions to be equal. Another reason is that an extra $`U(1)`$ isometry is needed to give the M-theory solution a Kaluza-Klein interpretation in terms of type IIA string theory.

Various truncated solutions involving six radial functions, providing the desired $`U(1)`$ isometry, have been studied and a unified description has recently been given . Four families of solutions are known numerically, denoted $`𝔹_7,_7,\stackrel{~}{}_7,𝔻_7`$. A generic member of any family is aymptotically locally conical (ALC) as opposed to asymptotically conical (AC), meaning that there is an $`S^1`$ that stabilises as $`r\mathrm{}`$. This will be the orbit of the $`U(1)`$ isometry. All four families of metrics have a limiting case in which they become AC. The families have different behaviours at the origin. Thus $`𝔹_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$ have an $`S^3`$ bolt whilst $`_7`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$ have a $`T^{1,1}=(S^3\times S^3)/S^1`$ bolt. A bolt is a subspace that remains of finite size in a degenerate orbit at the origin, the principal orbits here are $`S^3\times S^3`$. For the cases with an $`S^3`$ bolt, the AC limit corresponds to the original $`G_2`$ metric of  and for this metric the $`U(1)`$ isometry is enhanced to a third $`SU(2)`$, as will be discussed below. From an M-theory perspective, the most interesting result is a unified treatment of the deformed - corresponding to $`𝔹_7`$ \- and resolved - corresponding to $`𝔻_7`$ \- conifolds in type IIA string theory .

We will concentrate on the few cases in which a closed form solution is known. Other cases will be considered in §5. This begins with an ansatz for the metric with six radial functions studied in ,

$$ds_7^2=dr^2+a_i(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _i}\sigma _i)^2+b_i(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _i}+\sigma _i)^2.$$
(4)
In  it was shown that for the case of a collapsing $`S^3`$ at the origin, i.e. the $`𝔹_7`$ family in the notation of the previous paragraph, the only regular solutions of the six-function equations are also solutions of a reduced set of four-function equations, with the metric ansatz now written as

$`ds_7^2=dr^2/c(r)^2`$ $`+`$ $`a(r)^2\left[(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}\sigma _1)^2+(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}\sigma _2)^2\right]+b(r)^2\left[(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}+\sigma _1)^2+(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}+\sigma _2)^2\right]`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`c(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}+\sigma _3)^2+d(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}\sigma _3)^2.`$
This metric has an $`\stackrel{~}{SU(2)}\times SU(2)\times U(1)\times _2`$ symmetry, corresponding to the symmetries of an M-theory lift of $`N`$ D6-branes wrapping the $`S^3`$ of the deformed conifold geometry.

An exact solution of the four-function equations was found to be

$`a(r)={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(rr_0)(r+3r_0)}}{\sqrt{8r_0}}},`$ $`c(r)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2r_0(r^29r_0^2)}}{\sqrt{3(r^2r_0^2)}}},`$
$`b(r)={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(r+r_0)(r3r_0)}}{\sqrt{8r_0}}},`$ $`d(r)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{r}{\sqrt{6r_0}}},`$ (6)
where $`r_0`$ is a scale parameter, present for any Ricci-flat metric. The range of the radial coordinate here is $`3r_0r<\mathrm{}`$, so it will generally be more convenient to work with the shifted coordinate $`\overline{r}=r3r_0`$. The corresponding metric is ALC because $`c(r)`$ remains finite at infinity. It was shown  that this solution extends to a two parameter family of solutions, $`𝔹_7`$, that are not known explicitly. A limiting case of this family is the AC solution which is known exactly111The AC metric is more commonly expressed in terms of the radial variable $`\rho =\sqrt{r}`$.

$`a(r)`$ $`=d(r)`$ $`=\sqrt{r},`$
$`b(r)`$ $`=c(r)`$ $`=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{r}{3}}}\sqrt{1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{r}}\right)^{3/2}},`$ (7)
where again $`r_0`$ is a scale parameter and $`r_0r<\mathrm{}`$, so it will be convenient to use the shifted coordinate $`\overline{r}=rr_0`$. The singular conifold is obtained in the limit $`r_00`$. The AC metric has an enhanced isometry group $`SU(2)^3\times _2`$. We will see below that the fact that the third term in the isometry group for the generic ALC metric is $`U(1)`$ and not $`SU(2)`$ will mean that the global monopole in four dimensions is axially but not spherically symmetric. Finally, note that in the AC case, the $`_2`$ symmetry can be interpreted as a spontaneously broken “triality” symmetry that is important in the physics of M-theory on the $`G_2`$ manifold .

## 3 From the $`G_2`$ metric to the global monopole

First, trivially extend the $`G_2`$ metric of (5) to an eight dimensional Lorentzian manifold

$$ds_{1,7}^2=dt^2+ds_7^2$$
(8)
This will be a solution to the eight dimensional Einstein vacuum equations. We want to dimensionally reduce on an internal group manifold $`G=SU(2)\times U(1)`$ to get non-abelian gauge fields for $`G`$, scalars transforming in an adjoint representation of $`G`$, and a four dimensional Lorentzian metric. Part of the isometry group of the metric (5) is $`\stackrel{~}{SU(2)}\times SU(2)`$, by action of $`SU(2)`$ on the two sets of left invariant one forms (2). We will take the $`\stackrel{~}{SU(2)}`$ to be part of the internal group manifold. Then observe  that there are three commuting $`U(1)`$ Killing vectors of the metric (5), which can be taken to be $`\frac{}{\varphi }`$, $`\frac{}{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}`$ and $`\frac{}{\psi }+\frac{}{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}`$. The last of these cannot be simultaneously reduced with $`\stackrel{~}{SU(2)}`$ whilst the first two are related by the $`_2`$ symmetry of the metric. So we further reduce on the $`U(1)`$ generated by $`\frac{}{\varphi }`$. This leaves a remaining $`SU(2)/U(1)=S^2`$, so we expect there to be an $`S^2`$ factor in the reduced metric, at least topologically. Further, we make the indentification $`\psi \psi +2\pi `$, to half the range of $`\psi `$. This is a symmetry of the metric (5) without fixed points - the bolt $`S^3`$ is of finite size at the origin - on the manifold and so will not introduce orbifold singularities.

The eight dimensional metric had an unbroken supersymmetry, due to the special holonomy, and the reduction process commutes with the supersymmetry transformations. We can see this as follows. The isometry group acts on the parallel spinor to give another parallel spinor. By considering the supersymmetry transformations, we see that the transformed parallel spinor will be the same as the original parallel spinor if and only if the isometry transformation commutes with supersymmetry. But it is a fact that $`G_2`$ metrics admit only one parallel spinor . Therefore supersymmetry commutes with the isometry group and therefore the dimensional reduction does not ruin supersymmetry. In other words the lower dimensional solution will have unbroken supersymmetries, in fact one supercharge, and will be a BPS soliton. It should thus be stable. The Bogomol’nyi equations for gravitating systems are the first order consistency equations for the existence of parallel spinors on the background . To explicitly find the corresponding generalised BPS bound it is likely that the arguments of  will need to be modified because the spacetime in the present case is not asymptoticaly flat.

To dimensionally reduce, we want to rewrite the metric (8) in the usual form for Scherk-Schwarz reductions

$$ds_{1,7}^2=(det\mathrm{\Phi })^{1/2}ds_{1,3}^2+\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}[\lambda ^a+A^a][\lambda ^b+A^b],$$
(9)
where the left invariant forms for the internal $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ are $`\lambda ^i=\stackrel{~}{\sigma _i}`$ and $`\lambda ^4=d\varphi `$. Note that $`\mathrm{\Phi },A,ds_{1,3}^2`$ are functions of $`(t,r,\theta ,\psi )`$ whilst dependence on the internal coordinates $`(\varphi ,\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },\stackrel{~}{\psi })`$ is restricted to the $`\lambda ^a`$.

By comparing (9) with (5) one can read off the scalar fields

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a^2+b^2& 0& 0& \left(b^2a^2\right)\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta \\ 0& a^2+b^2& 0& \left(b^2a^2\right)\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta \\ 0& 0& c^2+d^2& \left(c^2d^2\right)\mathrm{cos}\theta \\ \left(b^2a^2\right)\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta & \left(b^2a^2\right)\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta & \left(c^2d^2\right)\mathrm{cos}\theta & \left(a^2+b^2\right)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +\left(c^2+d^2\right)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta \end{array}\right)_{ab},$$
(10)
with determinant

$$det\mathrm{\Phi }=4(a^2+b^2)^2c^2d^2\left[(\alpha (\overline{r})1)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +1\right],$$
(11)
and the gauge fields are

$`A^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(b^2a^2)(a^2+b^2)c^2d^2}{det\mathrm{\Phi }}}\left[\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\psi \left[\left(\alpha (\overline{r})1\right)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +1\right]\mathrm{cos}\psi d\theta \right],`$
$`A^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(b^2a^2)(a^2+b^2)c^2d^2}{det\mathrm{\Phi }}}\left[\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\psi +\left[\left(\alpha (\overline{r})1\right)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +1\right]\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta \right],`$
$`A^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(a^2+b^2)(c^2d^2)a^2b^2}{det\mathrm{\Phi }}}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ,`$
$`A^4`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(a^2+b^2)^2c^2d^2}{det\mathrm{\Phi }}}\mathrm{cos}\theta d\psi ,`$ (12)
where

$$\alpha (\overline{r})=\frac{a^2b^2(c^2+d^2)}{c^2d^2(a^2+b^2)}.$$
(13)
And the four dimensional metric - note that in (9) we have already rescaled to be in the Einstein frame - is

$$ds_{1,3}^2=det\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{r},\theta )^{1/2}\left(dt^2+\frac{d\overline{r}^2}{c^2}+R^2(\overline{r})d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{r}}^2\right),$$
(14)
where

$$R^2(\overline{r})=\frac{4a^2b^2}{(a^2+b^2)},$$
(15)
and $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{r}}^2`$ is a metric on the sphere at radius $`\overline{r}`$,

$$d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{r}}^2=d\theta ^2+\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{(\alpha (\overline{r})1)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +1}d\psi ^2.$$
(16)
It is already clear that the special AC metric (2) will result in a simpler solution because in this case $`\alpha (\overline{r})=1`$ and much of the angular dependence will vanish. For this family of solutions, $`\alpha (\overline{r})=1`$ is the condition for spherical symmetry.

## 4 Discussion of metric, scalars and gauge fields

### 4.1 Special case: the metric

Consider first the AC case (2) in which $`a(\overline{r})=d(\overline{r})`$ and $`b(\overline{r})=c(\overline{r})`$. The metric has the expected $`S^2`$ factor, with coordinates $`0\theta \pi `$ and $`0\psi <2\pi `$. Because $`\alpha (\overline{r})=1`$ in this special case, the metric on the sphere is the usual round metric. Furthermore, $`det\mathrm{\Phi }=4(a^2+b^2)^2a^2b^2`$, with no $`(\theta ,\psi )`$ dependence, and therefore the metric is spherically symmetric.

As $`\overline{r}0`$, the metric is, up to an overall constant and with $`\rho =4\overline{r}^{3/4}/3`$,

$$ds_{1,3}^2\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{3\rho }{4}\right)^{2/3}dt^2+d\rho ^2+\frac{9}{16}\rho ^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ^2).$$
(17)
There is a conical singularity at the origin, hidden as a point of infinite redshift. An infinite redshift at the origin is seen in other contexts such as  pg. 683, which is the metric describing a self-similar star cluster. Interestingly, the star cluster metric is asymptotically conical, which also turns out to be the case here because as $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$, the metric is, letting $`\rho =2\overline{r}^{3/2}/3`$ and up to an overall constant,

$$ds_{1,3}^2\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{3\rho }{2}\right)^{4/3}dt^2+d\rho ^2+\frac{3}{4}\rho ^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ^2).$$
(18)
This metric is asymptotically conical (in the three dimensional sense now) with a deficit solid angle. Asymptotically conical metrics are characteristic of global monopoles . In the manifestly asymptotically conical coordinate system one must have $`T_{00}\frac{1}{\rho ^2}`$, where $`\rho `$ is the radial coordinate in (18). Thus the monopole has an infinite positive energy.

The singular conifold in seven dimensions is obtained as the limit $`r_00`$. Near the origin in this limit, the metric in four dimensions will just be (18). So the four dimensional metric will also have a conical singularity at the origin in this limit.

### 4.2 Generic case: the metric

Consider now the generic ALC case, concentrating on the closed form four-function solution (2). Again, we have the expected $`S^2`$ factor. However, the metric on the sphere is not the round metric. Thus the solution is not spherically symmetric. We have a well defined metric on $`S^2`$, because as $`\theta 0`$ then $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{r}}^2`$ goes as $`(1+𝒪(\theta ^2))d\theta ^2+(\theta ^2+𝒪(\theta ^3))d\psi ^2`$ for all $`\overline{r}`$. In (14) note that $`\alpha (\overline{r})1`$ as $`\overline{r}0`$ and $`\alpha (\overline{r})\mathrm{}`$ as $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$, this implies that the $`S^2`$ is round near the origin and becomes increasingly stretched and cylindrical in the $`z`$ direction as we move out radially.

As $`\overline{r}0`$, the metric takes the following form up to a constant with $`\rho =4\overline{r}^{3/4}/3`$

$$ds^2\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{3\rho }{4}\right)^{2/3}dt^2+d\rho ^2+\frac{9}{16}\rho ^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ^2).$$
(19)
The metric is the same as the special case (17), a fact we will see directly in §5 below. Again there is a conical singularity and point of infinite redshift at the origin. As $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$, the metric is up to constant and letting $`\rho =\overline{r}^3/3`$

$$ds^2\mathrm{sin}\theta \left((3\rho )^{4/3}dt^2+\frac{3}{2r_0}\left[d\rho ^2+\frac{9\rho ^2}{6}d\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ^2\right]\right).$$
(20)
This metric is not quite asymptotically conical as $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ^2`$ has a dependence on $`\rho `$ (16). The $`S^2`$ is increasingly cylindrical as we move out. This fact and the overall $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ term means that there is not a straightforward way of defining the energy of the solution. It is in the same family, $`𝔹_7`$, as the special solution we found before, and could be called by analogy a global monopole.

The most interesting feature of the metric is the lack of spherical symmetry. As mentioned in §2 above, this can be understood from the symmetries of the eight dimensional metric. We reduced on a $`U(1)SU(2)\times U(1)`$, where the embedding is entirely into the first term of the direct product. The isometry group of the reduced metric will be the normaliser of this $`U(1)`$ subgroup modulo the $`U(1)`$ itself. This is because the remaining symmetry must commute with the symmetry we are reducing, otherwise it would not have a well-defined action on the reduced manifold. We quotient out the $`U(1)`$, which trivially normalises itself, because it has been quotiented out of the metric in the reduction. It is immediately seen that the reduced normaliser is just the second term of the direct product, i.e. $`U(1)`$. This is the axial symmetry. In the special case above we had started with $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ in the original metric, the reduced normaliser was then $`SU(2)SO(3)`$ and we obtained spherical symmetry.

Lack of spherical symmetry has been discussed before in the context of hairy black holes with Yang-Mills-Higgs matter. It was shown in  that a magnetically charged Reissner-Nordström black hole embedded in a theory with additional massive charged vector fields is unstable under perturbations in these vector fields if the horizon radius is less than the radius of the magnetic monopole core. Physically this is the fact that production of charged vector particles is energetically favourable in a sufficiently strong magnetic field because these particles carry magentic moments that can be aligned to partially shield the magnetic field .

In , perturbative static solutions away from the Reissner-Nordström solution were found with nonzero massive vector fields. As the Reissner-Nordström metric is spherically symmetric with magnetic charge $`n`$, these vector fields can be expanded in monopole vector harmonics. The total angular momentum of these harmonics cannot be zero unless $`n=1`$, due to a contribution to the angular momentum of magnitude $`eg=n`$ directed along the line from the monopole to the charged particle. This implies that if $`n>1`$ then the solution cannot be spherically symmetric. Recently , exact solutions for these axially symmetric black holes have been found numerically and it was shown that they should be classically stable. In the present situation, the massive vector fields are due to spontaneous symmetry breaking as we will see below. We have an exact analytic solution for an axially symmetric metric with Yang-Mills and Higgs fields.

Another result closely related to the present situation is that spherically symmetric global monopoles of scalar fields have been shown to be at best marginally stable under certain axially symmetric perturbations .

To summarise, for the family of metrics considered here 222We will see in §5 below that this correspondence only holds for the metrics with an $`S^3`$ bolt, $`𝔹_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$. The metrics with a $`T^{1,1}`$ bolt do not have enhanced isometry in the AC case. we have that AC $``$ spherical symmetry and ALC $``$ axial symmetry. A result on $`G_2`$ metrics reviewed in §2 was that such metrics asymptotic to cones over $`S^3\times S^3`$ were generically ALC. A result reviewed in the preceeding paragraphs is that spherically symmetric (global) monopoles with charged massive vector fields may not be stable under certain axial pertubations. This suggests that one might be able to understand the preference for ALC metrics by lifting results about instabilities of spherically symmetric monopole configurations to the higher dimensional metrics.

### 4.3 Generic case: the scalars and gauge fields

Does the solution carry topological charges? This will depend firstly upon how much gauge symmetry is broken by the scalar fields. The scalars are in the second symmetric power of the adjoint representation of the gauge group so they transform as

$$\delta _\xi \mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}=f_{acd}\xi _c\mathrm{\Phi }_{db}+f_{bcd}\xi _c\mathrm{\Phi }_{ad},$$
(21)
where $`f_{abc}`$ are the structure constants. In our case $`G=SU(2)\times U(1)`$ so $`f_{ijk}=ϵ_{ijk}`$ and all other components are zero. Symmetries are preserved if $`\delta _\xi \mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}=0`$, which then allows costruction of a gauge invariant field strength $`\xi ^aF^a`$ .

The situation is subtle, because although scalar fields transforming in adjoint representations are usually interpreted as Higgs fields associated with symmetry breaking, here they couple to the gauge fields and metric in such a way that $`det\mathrm{\Phi }`$ behaves rather like a dilaton coupling $`e^{2\varphi }`$. So one needs to disentange ‘dilaton’ and ‘Higgs’ type behaviour of these fields. The scalar potential, in the Einstein frame Lagrangian , is

$$U(\mathrm{\Phi })=\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{(det\mathrm{\Phi })^{1/2}}\left[4\mathrm{\Phi }^{ii}+ϵ_{ijk}ϵ_{lmn}\mathrm{\Phi }_{il}\mathrm{\Phi }^{jm}\mathrm{\Phi }^{kn}\right],$$
(22)
which is unbounded below (the internal space was not Ricci-flat) and without critical points and so it is at first unclear how to define the vacua. This is characteristic of dilaton potentials. Correspondingly, the scalar fields (10) diverge at infinity. However, if we normalise the scalar fields to make them all finite at infinity by dividing by $`\frac{1}{\overline{r}^2}`$ then we can consider them to belong to a vacuum moduli space corresponding to minimising the ‘Higgs’ part of the potential.

Inserting (10) as $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$ divided by $`\frac{1}{\overline{r}^2}`$ into (21) one finds that the $`SU(2)`$ symmetry is broken at infinity to a $`U(1)`$, with symmetry generator $`\xi =(0,0,ϵ,0)`$. This depends crucially on the fact that in this normalisation $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{14}\mathrm{\Phi }_{24}0`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$ because $`a^2b^2\mathrm{}`$ slower than $`a^2,b^2`$ or $`d^2`$. Further, the remaining $`U(1)`$, generated by $`\xi ^{}=(0,0,0,ϵ)`$, is unbroken throughout all of space. Thus there are potentialy two magnetic charges.

A naive attempt to define the magnetic charge fails. As $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$ then $`F^4\frac{1}{\overline{r}^4}`$, and similarly the gauge invariant field strength of the $`U(1)SU(2)`$ goes as $`FF^a\xi ^a\frac{1}{\overline{r}^4}`$. Therefore we cannot form a magnetic charge by integrating over the sphere at spatial infinity. This is reminiscent of the situation for gravitational sphalerons  which are unstable. However, the probable stability of the present solution means that either there is a topological charge with the usual relationship between the magnetic integral at infinity and the charge not holding or the situation is similar to the Chamseddine-Volkov solution, which doesn’t have any Higgs fields and hence no topological charge 333The Chamseddine-Volkov solution  also does not, in fact, have a gauge invariant magnetic charge defined by an integral at infinity. Its stability will presumably follow along the lines of .. A good indication that the former possibility is the case here is that the usual asymptotic relationship relating the gauge and scalar fields for monopoles, $`D_\mu \xi ^a=0`$, does not hold for this solution.

Consider first the $`U(1)`$ not coming from the $`SU(2)`$. Because the symmetry is unbroken throughout space, we can consider the field near the origin $`\overline{r}0`$ and find a potential, in cartesian coordinates,

$$A^4\frac{z}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}}\frac{(xdyydx)}{x^2+y^2}.$$
(23)
This is clearly the potential corresponding to a Dirac magentic monopole with charge $`m=2`$. And this charge is topological in nature and so is the charge of this $`U(1)`$.

For the other $`U(1)`$ we need to look at the homotopy class of the map from $`S_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ to the moduli space of Higgs vacua which is $`G/H`$, where $`H`$ is the unbroken subgroup of the gauge group $`G`$. Here this is $`SU(2)/U(1)=S^2`$. This can be topologically nontrivial because for $`G`$ simply connected $`\pi _2(G/H)\pi _1(H)`$. We can find the degree of the map $`S^2S^2`$ in two ways. For the first method, decompose the matrix of scalar fields into various $`SU(2)`$ representations

$$\frac{1}{\overline{r}^2}\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝐀& 𝐯\\ 𝐯^t& s\end{array}\right),$$
(24)
where $`𝐀`$ is 3 by 3 matrix, $`𝐯`$ is a 3 component vector and $`s`$ is a scalar. The matrix can be visualised as an ellipsoid, defined by its three eigenvalues and the vector gives an oriented direction. So from (10)

$$𝐀=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}k_1& 0& 0\\ 0& k_1& 0\\ 0& 0& k_2\end{array}\right),$$
(25)
and

$$𝐯=(\frac{1}{\overline{r}}k_3\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\psi ,\frac{1}{\overline{r}}k_3\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\psi ,k_2\mathrm{cos}\theta ).$$
(26)
In these expressions, $`k_1,k_2,k_3`$ are positive constants. We see that the ellipsoid $`𝐀`$ breaks the $`SU(2)SO(3)`$ symmetry to rotations about one axis, i.e. $`U(1)SO(2)`$. Then the vector $`𝐯`$ will completely break the symmetry, unless it is pointing along the axis of symmetry of the ellipsoid. And this is precisely what happens as $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$ and the first two components vanish! This gives a geometric understanding of the partial symmetry breaking at infinity found above. The vacua are thus defined by an alligned ellipsoid and vector. And hence just by the direction of the vector (the normalisation is unimportant). Thus the map $`S^2S^2`$ is

$$(\theta ,\psi )\underset{\overline{r}\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{k_3^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\overline{r}^2}+k_2^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }}(\frac{1}{\overline{r}}k_3\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\psi ,\frac{1}{\overline{r}}k_3\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\psi ,k_2\mathrm{cos}\theta )=(0,0,\pm 1),$$
(27)
with the positive value for $`\theta >\frac{\pi }{2}`$ and negative for $`\theta <\frac{\pi }{2}`$. At $`\theta =\frac{\pi }{2}`$ the vector is zero, so the direction is determined by the ellipsoid, which is ambiguous up to a $`_2`$ flip in direction. This map has degree $`1`$. This is easiest seen by considering $`\overline{r}`$ as defining a homotopy of maps with $`\overline{r}`$ going from $`\overline{r}=k_3/k_2`$, which is just the identity map from the sphere to the sphere with degree one, to $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$ which is the map we are interested in. The degree is homotopy invariant so the map in (27) has degree one.

Alternatively, we can construct the moduli space of vacua explicitly by acting with $`G=SU(2)`$ on a particular vacuum element that we know from our solution

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0(0,0)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}k_1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& k_1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& k_2& k_2\\ 0& 0& k_2& k_2\end{array}\right),$$
(28)
where $`k_1,k_2`$ are fixed positive constants, and without loss of generality we are considering the point $`\theta =0`$. Varying $`\theta `$ must keep us within the space of vacua, after a suitable normalisation. Strictly the action is of $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ but we have already shown that the $`U(1)`$ leaves these fields invariant. The most general nontrivial finite transformation is by a group element $`g=e^{\alpha T_1}e^{\beta T_2}`$. Where $`\{T_a\}`$ are the generators of the adjoint representation of $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$. Under this transformation, (28) becomes

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0(\alpha ,\beta )=k_1\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{cos}^2\beta +\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha \mathrm{sin}^2\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta & 0\\ \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta & 0\\ \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta & \mathrm{sin}^2\beta +\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}^2\beta & 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (33)
$`+k_2\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{sin}^2\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta \\ \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{sin}^2\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta & \mathrm{sin}\alpha \\ \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta & \mathrm{cos}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}^2\beta & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \\ \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{sin}\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta & 1\end{array}\right).`$ (38)
This gives us the full moduli space of vacua, $`S^2(\alpha ,\beta )`$, with $`0\alpha \pi ,0\beta <2\pi `$. Now we need to find the degree of the map $`S_{\mathrm{}}^2S^2(\alpha ,\beta )`$ given by $`\alpha (\theta ,\psi ),\beta (\theta ,\psi )`$ such that

$$\underset{\overline{r}\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{\overline{r}^2}\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{r},\theta ,\psi )=\mathrm{\Psi }_0(\alpha (\theta ,\psi ),\beta (\theta ,\psi )).$$
(39)
Note that there is in fact no dependence on $`\psi `$ in the case under consideration. In this equation, the positive constants $`k_i`$ will in general be different in $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. The solution to (39) is given by

$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`0\text{ if }\theta <{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},`$
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\pi \text{ if }\theta >{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},`$
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (40)
Which is exactly what we found in (27) above.

So the enhanced gauge symmetry at infinity, in which the $`SU(2)`$ is not completely broken, does in fact result in a topological charge. This is clearly related to the possibility of defining a gauge invariant magnetic charge, even though this vanishes.

### 4.4 Special case: the scalars and gauge fields

The special spherically symmetric case similarly has two topological charges. Furthermore, one can also define corresponding charges by integrals at spatial infinity.

Consider first the $`U(1)`$ not in the $`SU(2)`$. The gauge field is just $`A^4=\mathrm{cos}\theta d\psi `$ which is exactly the potential for a Dirac monopole with magnetic moment $`m=2`$. Because this is now true as $`\overline{r}\mathrm{}`$, the topological charge arises in the usual fashion and coincides with the integral of $`F^4=dA^4\frac{1}{\overline{r}^2}`$ over the sphere at spatial infinity.

Consider now the $`U(1)SU(2)`$. With the notation of (24), one has for the scalar fields,

$`𝐀`$ $`=`$ $`(a^2+b^2)𝐈_3,`$
$`𝐯^t`$ $`=`$ $`(b^2a^2)(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\theta ).`$ (41)
In the geometrical language of the previous subsection, the ellipsoid is in fact a sphere and therefore the spontanteous symmetry breaking is due solely to the vector v. The generator of the unbroken $`U(1)`$ is clearly $`\xi =ϵ(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\theta ,0)`$. Because the ellipsoid does not contribute to the symmetry beaking, the gauge symmetry is everywhere broken to $`U(1)`$. The corresponding gauge invariant field strength is

$$F\xi ^aF^a=\xi ^a(dAAA)^a=3\frac{4r^3r_0^3}{(4r^{3/2}r_0^{3/2})^2}d\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta d\psi .$$
(42)
This can be integrated to give a finite magnetic charge

$$Q_B=_{S_{\mathrm{}}^2}F=3\pi .$$
(43)
The existence of a corresponding topological charge is seen as the unit winding number of the indentity map $`S^2S^2`$, exactly as for the usual Yang-Mills-Higgs monopole.

## 5 Monopoles and cosmic strings from other $`G_2`$ metrics

So far we have only considered reductions of the $`𝔹_7`$ family of $`G_2`$ manifolds, and only the two cases which have a known closed form solution for the radial functions. However, Taylor series expansions about the origin are known for all the families of metrics discussed in §2  and these can be used to examine the behaviour of the reduced four dimensional metrics near the origin. Further, the asymptotic behaviour of the radial functions can be found from their first order equations and this allows us to study the asymptotics of the four dimensional metrics. All of these seven dimensional metrics have a $`U(1)`$ isometry in the generic ALC case and therefore will have axial symmetry. If they did not have the $`U(1)`$ isometry, the reduced metric would not even be axially symmetric. We will see now that the cases with an $`S^3`$ bolt (collapsing $`S^3`$) are global monopoles and the cases with a $`T^{1,1}`$ bolt (collapsing $`S^1`$) are cosmic strings. These are all solutions of the same four dimensional theory (1).

### 5.1 $`𝔹_7`$ and $`_7`$

The metrics for the $`𝔹_7`$ and $`_7`$ families with a $`U(1)`$ symmetry both have the form

$`ds_7^2`$ $`=`$ $`dr^2+a_1(r)^2\left[(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}\sigma _1)^2+(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}\sigma _2)^2\right]`$ (44)
$`+`$ $`b_1(r)^2\left[(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}+\sigma _1)^2+(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}+\sigma _2)^2\right]+a_3(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}\sigma _3)^2+b_3(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}+\sigma _3)^2.`$
The Taylor expansions of the radial functions about the origin, to the order that we need them, are for $`𝔹_7`$ :

$`a_1(r)a_3(r)1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}r^2,`$
$`b_1(r)b_3(r){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}r,`$ (45)
where a trivial scale factor has been fixed to one. We see that an $`S^3`$ collapses at the origin. For $`_7`$ the Taylor expansions are :

$`a_1(r)1{\displaystyle \frac{q}{8}}r+{\displaystyle \frac{(163q^2)r^2}{128}},`$ $`a_3(r)r,`$
$`b_1(r)1+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{8}}r+{\displaystyle \frac{(163q^2)r^2}{128}},`$ $`b_3(r)q+{\displaystyle \frac{q^3r^2}{16}},`$ (46)
where a trivial scale factor has again been fixed to one and $`q`$ is a constant. Regularity requires $`qq_0=0.91\mathrm{}`$ with $`q=q_0`$ corresponding to the AC solution. We see that now an $`S^1`$ collapses at the origin.

The dimensional reduction is now done as in §3. We are interested here in the behaviour of the spatial metric near the origin, so we will not consider the time component. For the $`𝔹_7`$ case one obtains up to a constant, after putting $`\rho =2r^{3/2}/3`$,

$$ds_3^2d\rho ^2+\frac{9\rho ^2}{16}(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ^2).$$
(47)
This is just the metric at the origin that we found in §4. Note that the $`r`$ here is a different radial coordinate to that used above. For $`_7`$ one obtains up to a constant

$$ds_3^2\mathrm{sin}\theta (dr^2+2d\theta ^2+4r^2d\psi ^2).$$
(48)
The metric has become cylindrical, with axial not spherical symmetry at the origin. Further, there is a surfeit plane angle suggesting that the solution corresponds to a cosmic string. This can be understood as the fact that in the $`G_2`$ metric only an $`S^1`$ collapses at the origin. Note that this solution remains axially not spherically symmetric for all allowed values of $`q`$. In particular the AC limit does not restore spherical symmetry.

The asymptotic behaviour as $`r\mathrm{}`$ of the radial functions can be found from the first order equations they satisfy. From the equations in  one has for both $`𝔹_7`$ and $`_7`$ that in the ALC case

$`a_1(r)^2{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{12}},`$ $`a_3(r)^2{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{9}},`$
$`b_1(r)^2{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{12}},`$ $`b_3(r)^2k^2,`$ (49)
where $`k`$ is a constant. Doing the dimensional reduction and setting $`\rho =r^3/3`$ the metric up to a constant is

$$ds_3^2\mathrm{sin}\theta (d\rho ^2+\frac{9\rho ^2}{6}d\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ^2).$$
(50)
This is in agreement with what we found before in (20). It is interesting that the monopole and the string have the same asympotic behaviour in the ALC case. This is possible because the sphere becomes increasing cylindrical asymptotically, as was commented in the previous section. The asymptotic behaviour for the AC case may be found similarly.

### 5.2 $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$

The metrics for the $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$ families with a $`U(1)`$ symmetry both have the form

$$ds_7^2=dr^2+a(r)^2\left[(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _1}+g(r)\sigma _1)^2+(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _2}+g(r)\sigma _2)^2\right]+b(r)^2(\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2)+c(r)^2(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _3}+g_3(r)\sigma _3)^2+f(r)^2\sigma _3^2.$$
(51)
The Taylor expansions about the origin are, for $`𝔻_7`$

$`a(r){\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}},`$ $`b(r)1{\displaystyle \frac{(q^22)r^2}{16}},`$
$`c(r){\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}},`$ $`f(r)q+{\displaystyle \frac{q^3r^2}{16}},`$
$`g(r){\displaystyle \frac{a(r)f(r)}{2b(r)c(r)}},`$ $`g_3(r)1+2g(r)^2,`$ (52)
where a trivial parameter has been fixed to one and $`q`$ is a free parameter. The AC solution is recovered when $`q=1`$. There is an $`S^3`$ collapsing at the origin.

For $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$, the Taylor expansions about the origin are

$`a(r)1+{\displaystyle \frac{(4c_0^2)r^2}{16}},`$ $`b(r)b_0+{\displaystyle \frac{(43b_0^2c_0^2)r^2}{16b_0}},`$
$`c(r)c_0+{\displaystyle \frac{(2+c_0^4)r^2}{4}},`$ $`f(r)(1+b_0^2)r,`$
$`g(r){\displaystyle \frac{b_0c_0r}{2}},`$ $`g_3(r)b_0^2{\displaystyle \frac{(1+b_0^2)r^2}{c_0^2}},`$ (53)
setting a trivial parameter to one and with $`b_0`$ and $`c_0`$ as free parameters. There is an $`S^1`$ collapsing at the origin.

Now compute the metrics near the origin as previously. There is a subtlety which is that these families of metrics do not have a $`_2`$ symmetry interchanging $`\sigma _i\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$. Therefore we will get different metrics depending on which of the $`SU(2)`$s we reduce on. To get a sensible metric in four dimensions we should reduce on the copy that does not (partially) collapse at the origin, which corresponds to the $`\sigma _i`$. The result for $`𝔻_7`$ up to a constant, after putting $`\rho =2r^{3/2}/3`$,

$$ds_3^2d\rho ^2+\frac{9\rho ^2}{16}(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\psi ^2).$$
(54)
This is exactly as for $`𝔹_7`$ in (47). Thus this family also give global monopoles. The result for $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$ up to a constant is

$$ds_3^2\mathrm{sin}\theta \left[dr^2+d\theta ^2+\left(\frac{1}{b_0^2}+1\right)^2r^2d\psi ^2\right].$$
(55)
This metric is very similar to that for $`_7`$ in (48). It is cylindrical with a surfeit plane angle that depends on $`b_0`$. There is therefore a natural interpretation as a cosmic string. Also as for $`_7`$, spherical symmetry cannot be restored for any value of $`(b_0,c_0)`$ and in particular it will not be restored in the AC limit.

As in the previous subsection, we can also calculate the asymptotic behaviour of the metric. We will do this for $`𝔻_7`$ in the ALC case. From the first order equations for the radial functions  one has that as $`r\mathrm{}`$

$`a(r)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}1}{2}}r^2,`$ $`b(r)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}1}{2}}r^2,`$
$`c(r)^2(1\sqrt{3})^2r^2,`$ $`f(r)^2k^2,`$
$`g(r){\displaystyle \frac{a(r)f(r)}{2b(r)c(r)}},`$ $`g_3(r)1+2g(r)^2,`$ (56)
where $`k`$ is a constant. Doing the dimensional reduction one obtains the asymptotic metric up to a constant with $`\rho =2r^{7/2}/7`$

$$ds_3^2\mathrm{sin}\theta (d\rho ^2+\alpha \rho ^2d\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\rho ^2),$$
(57)
with $`\alpha =4.48\mathrm{}`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\rho ^2`$ is a metric on the $`S^2`$ similar to (16), increasingly cylindrical at infinity.

## 6 Conclusion

We have shown how one can obtain BPS monopoles in four dimensions by dimensional reduction of special holonomy metrics of higher dimension. In particular, we have considered seven dimensional Riemannian metrics of $`G_2`$ holonomy extended trivially to eight dimensions by adding a time direction.

The $`G_2`$ metrics we considered all had $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ isometry group in the generic case. Four families of such metrics are known, denoted $`𝔹_7,_7,\stackrel{~}{}_7,𝔻_7`$. We concentrated on the $`𝔹_7`$ case for which a couple of closed form solutions are known. We reduced on $`SU(2)\times U(1)SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ to get static four dimensional metrics with an $`S^2`$ factor and a $`U(1)`$ isometry group corresponding to axial symmetry.

The $`G_2`$ metrics considered are generically asymptotically locally conical (ALC), with the $`U(1)`$ isometry corresponding to a stabilised $`S^1`$. There is a special limiting case in each family of metrics in which the metric becomes asymptotically conical (AC) with the $`S^1`$ blowing up at infinity. For $`𝔹_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$ the AC case has an enhancement of isometry to $`SU(2)^3`$. This is seen in the four dimensional solution as an enhancement from axial to spherical symmetry. It was suggested that the preference for ALC $`G_2`$ metrics could be understood from instabilities of certain spherically symmetric four dimensional solutions with charged massive gauge fields under axially symmetric perturbations.

The families $`𝔹_7`$ and $`𝔻_7`$ have an $`S^3`$ that collapses at the origin and the four dimensional solution is spherically symmetric at the origin, with a conical singularity at the origin hidden as a point of infinite redshift. These are monopoles. The metric becomes increasingly cylindrical asymptotically. For $`_7`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}_7`$, only an $`S^1`$ collapses at the origin and this results in the four dimensional metric having axial symmetry at the origin. These are cosmic strings.

The $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ gauge and scalar fields were also examined. It was shown that in the generic case the $`SU(2)`$ gauge symmetry is completely broken except at infinity where it is broken to $`U(1)`$. This allows a topological charge to be associated with the solution by constructing a map $`S_{\mathrm{}}^2S^2`$. This is not the usual map because the Higgs fields are not in the usual adjoint representation. There is a second topological charge from the $`U(1)`$ gauge symmetry.

Many thanks to Gary Gibbons for help and suggestions. The author is funded by the Sims scholarship.


text:
# Photometry of the 1991 Superoutburst of EF Pegasi: Super-Quasi-Periodic Oscillations with Rapidly Decaying Periods

## 1 Introduction

### 1.1 Quasi-periodic oscillations

Quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) are short-period, quasi-periodic oscillations widely observed in accreting binary systems, such as cataclysmic variables (CVs) and X-ray binaries (XBs; see van der Klis (1989); more recent reviews particularly stressing on “kilohertz QPOs” include van der Klis (1999, 2000). There are two major types of “quasi-periodic” oscillations in CVs: dwarf nova oscillations (DNOs) and (in a narrower sense) QPOs (for a review, see Warner 1995a).

DNOs are oscillations observed only in dwarf nova outbursts, having periods 19–29 s, and have long (several tens to $``$100 wave numbers) coherence times (Robinson (1973); Szkody (1976); Patterson (1981); Hildebrand et al. (1980)). The amplitudes of DNOs in optical wavelengths are generally small (usually $`<`$0.01 mag). Several models have been proposed to account for DNOs (and QPOs in general), including vertical or radial oscillations of the accretion disk (Kato, 1978), reprocessing of the light by the orbiting blobs (Patterson, 1979), non-radial pulsations of the accretion disk (Papaloizou, Pringle (1978); van Horn, Wesemael (1980)), radial oscillation of the accretion disk (Cox (1981); Blumenthal et al. (1984); Okuda, Mineshige (1991); Okuda et al. (1992)), excitation of trapped oscillations around the discontinuity of physical parameters (Yamasaki et al., 1995), and oscillation of the boundary layer of the accretion disk (Collins et al. 1998, 2000aa,b).

QPOs (other than DNOs111We use the term “QPOs” in this sense in the rest of this paper.) are more widely seen in CVs, having periods 40 s to several hundred seconds, have much shorter (usually less than $``$10 wave numbers) coherence lengths. These less coherent QPOs have phenomenological similarities with QPOs in XBs, both in their coherence lengths and in the characteristic periods scaled by the Keplerian timescales at the inner edge of the accretion disk.

A potentially new class of QPOs (super-QPOs) were discovered during the 1992 superoutburst of SW UMa (Kato et al., 1992). These QPOs were only observed during the particular stages (usually the initial stage) of superoutbursts (for a review of SU UMa-type dwarf novae and superoutbursts, see Warner 1995b), and have periods of several hundred seconds, comparable to those of QPOs other than DNOs. The most striking features of super-QPOs were the large amplitudes (up to 0.2 mag) and the long coherence, lasting at least several tens of wave numbers (Kato et al., 1992). The super-QPOs observed by Kato et al. (1992) consisted of sinusoidal components and short, deep dips. Kato et al. (1992) also suggested that the QPOs reported by Robinson et al. (1987) showed only the sinusoidal components, but sharing all the other characteristics with super-QPOs observed during the 1992 superoutburst. Kato et al. (1992) proposed that an orbiting blob, which incidentally eclipsed the central part of the accretion disk, was responsible for the large-amplitude super-QPOs. Kato et al. (1992) suggested that the reason why super-QPOs are only observed during the particular stage of superoutburst may be that such a blob can be formed under the enhanced dissipation (i.e. turbulent condition) caused by the tidal instability, which is responsible for superhumps (Whitehurst (1988); Hirose, Osaki (1990)). Studies of super-QPOs have been, however, hindered by the paucity of examples. EF Peg is the only other example, which showed the remarkable time evolution of super-QPOs during the 1991 superoutburst.

### 1.2 EF Peg

EF Peg was originally discovered as a variable star (Hoffmeister, 1935), who suggested the Mira-type classification. Esch (1937) recorded two additional (bright and faint ones) maxima, and derived a period period of 157 d in combination with the maxima recorded by Hoffmeister (1935). However, Sandig (1950) only recorded an apparently nonvariable star of 13.5–14.0 photographic magnitude on 157 plates. Tsesevich et al. (1979) finally revealed that the true EF Peg is a normally fainter companion to a nonvariable star (labeled as $`w`$ in Tsesevich et al. (1979) and Howell et al. (1993)). Tsesevich et al. (1979) suggested that EF Peg is a dwarf nova with a large outburst amplitude. Their observations showed the existence of two types of — short and long — outbursts, which strongly suggested an SU UMa-type dwarf nova (for a recent review of SU UMa-type stars and their observational properties, see Warner (1995b)). Upon this information, the Variable Star Observers League in Japan (VSOLJ) called for a monitoring campaign for an outburst since 1985. Gessner (1988) searched Sonneberg plates, and found nine outbursts between 1928 and 1986, confirming the classification by Tsesevich et al. (1979). No firm outbursts above a magnitude of 12 had been recorded until the discovery of an outburst by Patrick Schmeer on 1991 October 15.779 UT at visual magnitude 10.9 (Schmeer, Poyner, 1991). Since then, only two secure outbursts have been observed in 1995 January and 1997 October, according to the reports to the VSNET Collaboration222 $``$http://www.kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp/vsnet/$``$ , and no further outburst has been observed up to 2001 July. These observations indicate the intrinsically low outburst frequency of this object. Politano et al. (1998) even suggested that EF Peg is past the period minimum of the CV evolution. The first detection of superhumps was made by Kato, Takata (1991) on 1991 October 18. More information of this superoutburst is given in Howell et al. (1993).

## 2 Observations

The observations were performed with the CCD camera (Thomson TH7882 chip, 576 $`\times `$ 384 pixels) attached to the 0.6-m reflector at Ouda Station, Kyoto University (Ohtani et al., 1992) for seven nights between 1991 October 18 and 25. An on-chip summation of 3$`\times `$3 pixels was adopted to minimize the readout time and noise. A Johnson $`V`$-band filter was adopted. The exposure time was generally 10 s, except on October 25, when the exposure time of 20 s was used. The readout time between exposures was 7–9 s. The total number of useful frames was 4789.

A summary of observation is listed in table 1. The CCD frames were, after standard de-biasing and flat-fielding, analyzed using automatic microcomputer-based aperture photometry package developed by the author. The diameter of the aperture was 18”. The magnitudes of the object were determined relatively using a local standard star BD +144648 = GSC 1117.2097 (star $`a`$ in Howell et al. (1993): $`V`$=10.21 and $`BV`$=+0.74), whose constancy during the run was confirmed using a check star GSC 1117.2131 (star $`d`$ in Howell et al. (1993)). Since EF Peg is a close double (separation 5.3”) with a star (star $`w`$ in Howell et al. (1993)), the resultant aperture photometry is a combined magnitude with this companion. The $`V`$-magnitude of the companion was measured as $`V`$=12.71 on a CCD from taken on 1992 May 5, when EF Peg was back in quiescence. As reported in Howell et al. (1993), EF Peg was brighter than this companion during the time of our observation. No variability has been yet reported for this companion star. Barycentric corrections to observed times were applied before the following analysis.

## 3 Results

### 3.1 Outburst light curve

The overall light curve of the superoutburst, drawn from the present observation, is presented in 1. The contribution from the nearby companion has been subtracted. The figure corresponds to the early part of Fig. 2 in Howell et al. (1993). The fading was slower (0.08 mag d-1) for the first three nights, but became more rapid (0.14 mag d-1) after October 20 ($``$5 d after the detection of the outburst). The decline rate of 0.11 mag d-1 in Howell et al. (1993) apparently corresponds to an average of these values. The light curve of the outburst is a quite typical one for an SU UMa-type superoutburst.

### 3.2 Superhump period and profile

As later shown in 6 and also presented by Howell et al. (1993), EF Peg showed strong superhumps during the 1991 October superoutburst. In order to determine the superhump period, we applied the Phase Dispersion Minimization (PDM) method (Stellingwerf, 1978) to all the data, after removing the linear trends of decline, and after prewhitening for slow variations with frequencies smaller than 2 d-1. The resultant theta diagram is shown in figure 2. The signal at the frequency 11.488 d-1 corresponds to the mean superhump period ($`P_{\mathrm{SH}}`$) of 0.08705(1) d. Figure 3 shows the averaged profile of superhumps. The phase zero is taken as BJD (Barycentric Julian Date) 2448547.953 (1991 October 18.453 UT). The averaged profile of superhumps is a typical one for an SU UMa-type dwarf nova: a steeper rise and a slower decline (Kato et al., 1998).

Figure 4 shows nightly averaged profiles of superhumps. The amplitude of superhumps reached a maximum on October 20 ($``$5 d after the detection of the outburst), and slowly decayed after that. The phase zero is defined as BJD 2448547.953. The shifts of superhump maxima from the zero phases represent the $`OC`$ variation described in Section 3.3.

### 3.3 Superhump period change

In order to determine the superhump period change, we extracted by eye superhump maxima times from our data and from the published light curves by Howell et al. (1993). The averaged times of a few to several points close to the maximum were used as representatives of the maxima times. The errors of maxima times are usually less than $``$0.003 d. The maxima times from the light curves in Howell et al. (1993) have been corrected to the common BJD system. The resultant superhump maxima are given in table 2. The values are given to 0.0001 d for the Ouda data in order to avoid the loss of significant digits in the later analysis. The cycle count ($`E`$) is defined as the cycle number since BJD 2448547.952 (1991 October 18.452 UT). A linear regression to the observed superhump times, gives the following ephemeris.

$$\mathrm{BJD}_{\mathrm{max}}=2448547.9636+0.086868E.$$
(1)
Figure 5 shows the $`OC`$’s against the linear regression, equation 1. The diagram clearly shows the decrease of the superhump period, which was not apparent in the analysis by Howell et al. (1993), who used nightly determined superhump periods, rather than the $`OC`$ analysis. After rejecting maxima times ($`E`$=9, 64, 122) having $`|OC|>0.01`$d from a quadratic fit using all observed times, we obtained the following final quadratic equation.

$`\mathrm{BJD}_{\mathrm{max}}`$ $`=2448547.9512(20)+0.087240(52)E`$ (2)
$`2.21(31)\times 10^6E^2.`$
The quadratic term corresponds to $`\dot{P}`$ = $``$4.4$`\pm `$0.6 $`\times `$ 10-6 d cycle-1, or $`\dot{P}/P`$ = $``$5.1(0.7) $`\times `$ 10-5.

## 4 Super-quasi-periodic oscillations

The most prominent feature detected during this outburst is large-amplitude super-quasi-periodic oscillations (super-QPOs: cf. Kato et al. (1992)), seen on 1991 October 18, $``$2 d before the full growth of superhumps. These QPOs had disappeared on October 20. Figure 6 shows the light curve on 1991 October 18. Two superhump maxima separated by 0.087 d are clearly seen. The errors of individual measurements are $``$0.01 mag. The detailed structure in the light curve therefore reflects the real variation of EF Peg. Rapid fluctuations superimposed on superhumps represent super-QPOs.

In order to more clearly show the structure of super-QPOs, we have subtracted superhumps from this light curve, by using a Fourier decomposition of the superhump profile up to the fourth harmonics. The resultant residual light curve is shown in figure 7.

Figure 8 shows the overall power spectrum of the prewhitened data (figure 7) on October 18. The strongest signal (210 d-1) corresponds to the dominant frequency of super-QPOs. The presence of considerable power at lower frequencies indicates the quasi-periodic nature of the signal. Figure 9 shows the variation of the dominant QPO frequency within the October 18 run. The upper and lower panels show the power spectra of the first and second half of the October 18 run, respectively. The dominant frequencies are 81 d-1 (P=18 m) and 213 d-1 (P=6.8 m), respectively.

We determined the maxima times of super-QPOs by fitting a parabola to each super-QPOs (after removing the superhump signal) around their maxima. The error of the estimates is typically 0.0002 d. The resultant times of maxima are listed in table 3. Although the observation was almost completely continuous, the maxima of $`E`$=6, 8 fell in short gaps of the observation.

A linear regression to the observed maxima gives the following equation.

$$\mathrm{BJD}_{\mathrm{max}}=2448547.9245+0.006454E.$$
(3)
The variation of $`OC`$’s (figure 10 and equation 3 indicates a large contribution of the quadratic (or higher) term. The following quadratic equation globally represents the overall $`OC`$ variation, although there still exists small residual $`OC`$’s to the quadratic equation.

$`\mathrm{BJD}_{\mathrm{max}}`$ $`=2448547.9141(11)+0.009988(25)E`$ (4)
$`1.79(12)\times 10^4E^2.`$
The quadratic term corresponds to $`\dot{P}`$ = $``$2.6$`\pm `$0.2 $`\times `$ 10-4 d cycle-1. By adopting the mean period (0.00645 d) of super-QPOs from equation 3, the period change corresponds to a decay time-scale of $`P/\dot{P}`$$``$25 cycles, or 0.16 d.

Figure 11 shows the averaged profile of super-QPOs. The phase zero was determined using maxima epochs in table 3. The resultant averaged profile has a full amplitude of 0.05 mag.

## 5 Discussion

### 5.1 Superhump period change

As described in Section 3.3, EF Peg showed a decrease of the superhump period at a rate of $`\dot{P}`$ = -4.4$`\pm `$0.6 $`\times `$ 10-6 d cycle-1, or $`\dot{P}/P`$= -5.1(0.7) $`\times `$ 10-5. This negative period derivative has a typical value for long-period SU UMa-type dwarf novae (cf. Kato et al. (2001); Patterson et al. (1993); Kato et al. (1998)). However, the same EF Peg showed virtually zero period change during the 1997 superoutburst (Matsumoto et al., in preparation). While only a few SU UMa-type systems have been observed during different superoutbursts, all known systems showed relatively constant $`\dot{P}`$ even in different superoutbursts (Kato et al., 2001). If such a large variation of $`\dot{P}`$ in EF Peg is confirmed by future observations, EF Peg would be a unique system with regards to the stability of $`\dot{P}`$. Kato et al. (1998) proposed that positive $`\dot{P}`$ in some short-period SU UMa-type systems may be a result of outward propagation of the eccentricity wave (cf. Lubow (1992); Baba et al. (2000)). The large variation of $`\dot{P}`$, proposed by the present observation of EF Peg, may reflect the different locations where tidal instability ignites.

### 5.2 Super-QPOs

As described in Section 4, EF Peg showed remarkable quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) during the earliest stage of the superoutburst, i.e. the growing stage of superhumps (October 18). These QPOs had disappeared when the amplitude of superhumps reached the maximum (October 20). As seen in 10, the maximum jump in the QPO phase was less than 0.002 d, indicating that the oscillations were essentially coherent during the entire observing run covering 20 QPO cycles, although a strong global variation of the period was present. Such a long coherence of oscillations is a signature of super-QPOs (Kato et al., 1992). Although the amplitudes of the present QPOs were smaller than that recorded in SW UMa during the 1992 superoutburst (Kato et al., 1992), they were larger than those of QPOs observed by Robinson et al. (1987) for the same star. The observed QPO profile and amplitude (figure 11) resemble those of the sinusoidal component of (Kato et al., 1992). From the transient appearance in the early stage of a superoutburst and the large amplitudes, we consider the present QPOs as a variety of super-QPOs. The same explanation in Kato et al. (1992) could apply to the present large-amplitude QPOs, except that the present QPOs incidentally lack the dip component.

The rapid decrease of the QPO period (figure 9, 10) is the unique characteristic of the present QPOs. Such a large variation of the QPO frequency within a short time (less than 3.2 hr) has never been observed in other QPOs of CVs. Furthermore, the period decrease occurred continuously (Section 4), rather than a sudden mode switch between different periods. The phenomenon is hard to explain, if these QPOs arise from oscillations of the accretion disk, or from the beat between the rotation of the magnetic white dwarf and the slowly rotating part of the accretion disk. Such a rapid decrease of the QPO period can be more naturally understood if the rotating blob (cf. Kato et al. (1992)), which rapidly lost its angular momentum via the viscosity in a turbulent disk. If we assume a 1 M primary and nearly Keplerian orbits, a decrease of the period from 18 m to 6.8 m corresponds to a decrease of the radius of the orbit from 1.6 1010 to 8.3 109 cm. This decrease in 3.2 hr corresponds to a radial velocity of 6.7 105 cm s-1 (1/140 – 1/200 of the orbiting velocity), which seems to be a reasonable value for accretion during outburst.

### 5.3 Comparison with QPOs in XBs

Although such a rapid decrease of the QPO period is unique among CVs, there are a few known similar examples in oscillations (or large-amplitude QPOs) in some XBs. The best-known example is seen in the Rapid Burster (MXB 1730-335). The first indication of such oscillations during its type II bursts from the Rapid Burster was found with the GINGA satellite (Tawara et al., 1982). Dotani et al. (1990) systematically studied these oscillations, and found the evidence of strong period changes. The best example of the “naked-eye” visibility of large-amplitude oscillations and the rapid decrease of their periods can be found in Lubin et al. (1992b) \[see also Lubin et al. 1991,1992a; for a recent observational review, see also Guerriero et al. (1999)).

The second example of similar oscillations was found in the bursting X-ray pulsar GRO J1744-28 (Zhang et al. (1996); Lewin et al. (1996)). The characteristics of the oscillations in GRO J1744-28 was studied in detail by Kommers et al. (1997). Although the nature of such oscillations are still poorly understood, several attempts have been made to understand these two unique objects. In the case of GRO J1744-28, Cannizzo (1996) considered an interplay between radial and vertical energy transport in the accretion disk, causing oscillations in the fraction of the gas pressure to the total pressure. Cannizzo (1996) showed that these oscillations eventually lead to a Lightman-Eardley instability (Lightman, Eardley, 1974), which Cannizzo (1996) considered to be the cause of Type II bursts. Cannizzo (1997) further showed that the characteristic QPO frequency can be reproduced by a selection of parameters. Abramowicz et al. (1995) suggested that low-frequency QPOs in some XBs (including those of the Rapid Burster) and black-hole candidates can be produced via dissipation of energy in the coronal region above the accretion disk. While these models were able to reproduce some parts of characteristics of QPOs (and bursts) observed in these systems, they have not yet succeeded in explaining a rapid decrease of QPO periods; the cause of this phenomenon is thus still an open question. These models for the Rapid Burster and GRO J1744-28 assume the strong radiation pressure near the inner edge of the accretion disk. Since such a condition is hard to achieve in a CV disk, the mechanisms proposed for QPOs in XBs would not be directly applicable to the present QPOs in EF Peg. However, the existence of phenomenologically similar QPOs both in CVs and XBs may provide future insight for the fundamental understanding the underlying mechanisms.

## Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to Dr. T. Takata and Mr. Y. Tomita for helping the observation. The author is also grateful to the VSOLJ and VSNET observers for supplying vital observations, and especially to Patrick Schmeer for promptly notifying us of the 1991 outburst detection.