text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The concept of Wigner’s little group  is of great importance in modern theoretical physics. One of the best known applications of the little group is its role in the classification of elementary particles according to their spin and helicity quantum numbers. Also, the transformation properties of state vectors in Hilbert space under Poincare transformation are obtained from their transformation properties under the action of little group, using the method of induced representation . More recently, the little group is shown to have nontrivial implications in studying the naturality of ghosts . Apart from its various roles mentioned above, Wigner’s little group is also known to be acting as generator of gauge transformations in various types of gauge theories  including the topologically massive gauge theories . It was shown by Han et al.  that the $`E(2)`$ like little group for massless particles, or more precisely the translational subgroup $`T(2)E(2)`$ generates gauge transformations for free Maxwell theory in 3+1 dimensions. It was shown in  that the same little group generates gauge transformations for Kalb-Ramond theory  while the translational group $`T(3)`$ does the job in the topologically massive $`BF`$ theory . These theories involve 2-form gauge fields whereas Maxwell theory is a vector gauge theory, i.e., involves 1-form gauge field. Now coming to lower dimensional case, it is again proved that appropriate representations of translational group $`T(1)`$ generate gauge transformations for Maxwell theory and topologically massive Maxwell-Chern-Simons(MCS) theory in 2+1 dimensions . It is interesting to note that all these representations of the little group that generate gauge transformations in topologically massive theories can be systematically obtained from that in one higher dimension by a method of dimensional descent . For instance, the representations that generate gauge transformation for MCS theories in 2+1 dimensions can be obtained by dimensional descent from the representation of $`T(2)`$ that generate the gauge transformation in 3+1 dimensional Maxwell theory which involves splitting of the representation of $`T(2)`$ in to a pair of $`T(1)`$ representations appropriate for the doublet of MCS theories. Interestingly, Proca theory in 2+1 dimensions, which is not a gauge theory, can be regarded as a doublet of MCS theories  which are $`U(1)`$ gauge theories by themselves. These $`T(1)`$ groups generate gauge transformations in each of these MCS theories and are related by complex conjugation. Also, the representation of $`T(3)`$ that generates gauge transformation $`BF`$ theory in 3+1 dimensions can be similarly obtained by the same method of dimensional descent from the little group for massless particles in 4+1 dimensions as shown in . (The $`BF`$ theory however does not form a doublet.) The 4+1 dimensional little group generates gauge transformations in various gauge theories inhabiting this higher dimensional spacetime. All the above mentioned theories in whose context the role of little group in generating gauge transformations were studied are either vector or antisymmetric 2-form gauge fields. These studies established that the various representations of the little group (or more precisely, the translational subgroup of the little group) which generate gauge transformations in the theories, massless or topologically massive, are in fact related. The connection between Wigner’s little group for massless particles and gauge transformation for 3+1 dimensional linearized Einstein gravity, which is a 2nd rank symmetric tensor gauge theory, was studied in . The tensor analogue of MCS theory is the linearized version of the 2+1 dimensional Einstein-Chern-Simons(ECS) theory obtained by coupling a CS term to pure Einstein gravity. The ECS theory is a topologically massive gauge theory possessing a single degree of freedom and is described a 2nd rank symmetric tensor field. (Unlike the Maxwell case, the bare Einstein gravity in 2+1 dimensions is devoid of any propagating degree of freedom.) Also it was suggested in  that the 2+1 dimensional Einstein-Pauli-Fierz(EPF) theory is a doublet of a pair of ECS theories just as 2+1 dimensional Proca theory is a doublet of MCS theories. At this stage one can ask whether the Wigner’s little group generate gauge transformations in the ECS theories also. If the answer is yes, are these representations the same as the ones obtained in the case of vector/2-form gauge fields and can one employ the method of dimensional descent in this case too? Analogous to Proca theory in 2+1 dimensions, does the suggested doublet structure of EPF theory enables one to construct the representations that generates gauge transformations in ECS theories? Many of these questions are yet to be answered and the purpose of this paper is to undertake a study of these problems. Here we study the little group and dimensional descent from 3+1 dimensionsional linearized Einstein gravity to linearized ECS theory in 2+1 dimensions. However, in the present work our main intention is to study the role of Wigner’s little group as a generator of gauge transformation in topologically massive ECS theory, where gauge invariance coexists with massive excitations, like the corresponding MCS theory involving vector gauge fields. Our approach to the problem consists of considering the momentum space equation of motion using which we obtain explicit form of the polarization vector/tensor of the theory under consideration. Using the expression of the polarization vector/tensor thus obtained, we study the role of the respective Wigner’s little group in generating gauge transformation in the theory. This approach, therefore, is different from the one used in . It should be noticed that, on account of the fact that unlike other field theories in whose contexts the translational group was shown to generate gauge transformations, in the linearized gravity theories the gauge transformation and spacetime diffeomorphisms are intertwined. Thus the problem is interesting in its own right.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a brief review of the role of little group as a gauge generator in the usual and topologically massive gauge theories. In the context of topologically massive gauge theories like the MCS and $`BF`$ theories, we provide a brief outline of the method of dimensional descent. In section 3, we study the role of little group as a generator of gauge transformation in linearized Einstein gravity in 3+1 dimensions and and in 2+1 dimensional ECS theory. Section 4 discusses the doublet structure of EPF theory in 2+1 dimensions and applies the method of dimensional descent from 3+1 dimensional linearized gravity to 2+1 dimensional EPF theory. We also explain in section 4, how the representations of $`T(1)`$ that generates gauge transformation in the doublet of ECS theories can be obtained by a careful study of the polarization tensors of EPF and ECS theories. We finally conclude in section 5.

## 2 Wigner’s little group and dimensional descent in vector and 2-form gauge theories

Wigner’s little group is defined as the subgroup of Lorentz group that preserves the energy-momentum vector of a particle. We begin by reviewing the role of Wigner’s little group as a generator of gauge transformation in Maxwell and Kalb-Ramond (KR) theories in 3+1 dimensions and also of the method of dimensional descent. Our notation is as follows. We use $`\mu ,\nu `$ etc to denote the spacetime indices in 3+1 dimensions and $`a,b`$ etc for 2+1 dimensions. Signature of the metric is ‘mostly negative’.

### 2.1 Wigner’s little group and gauge transformation in Maxwell and KR theories

An element of the little group that leaves the four-momentum $`k^\mu =(\omega ,0,0,\omega )^T`$ of a massless particle moving in the $`z`$-direction invariant is given by

$$W_4(p,q;\varphi )=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1+\frac{p^2+q^2}{2}& p\mathrm{cos}\varphi q\mathrm{sin}\varphi & q\mathrm{sin}\varphi +p\mathrm{cos}\varphi & \frac{p^2+q^2}{2}\\ p& \mathrm{cos}\varphi & \mathrm{sin}\varphi & p\\ q& \mathrm{sin}\varphi & \mathrm{cos}\varphi & q\\ \frac{p^2+q^2}{2}& p\mathrm{cos}\varphi q\mathrm{sin}\varphi & q\mathrm{sin}\varphi +p\mathrm{cos}\varphi & 1\frac{p^2+q^2}{2}\end{array}\right).$$
(1)
Here $`p,q`$ are any real numbers. This little group can be written as

$$W_4(p,q;\varphi )=W(p,q)R(\varphi )$$
(2)
where

$$W(p,q)=W_4(p,q;0)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1+\frac{p^2+q^2}{2}& p& q& \frac{p^2+q^2}{2}\\ p& 1& 0& p\\ q& 0& 1& q\\ \frac{p^2+q^2}{2}& p& q& 1\frac{p^2+q^2}{2}\end{array}\right)$$
(3)
is a particular representation of the translational subgroup of $`T(2)`$ of the little group. We first discuss how this representation of $`T(2)`$ generates gauge transformation in Maxwell theory. The Lagrangian for Maxwell theory is

$$=\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu },F^{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu $$
(4)
and the corresponding equation of motion is

$$_\mu F^{\mu \nu }=0$$
(5)
For a single mode, without loss of generality, the gauge field $`A^\mu (x)`$ can be written as

$$A^\mu (x)=\epsilon ^\mu (k)e^{ikx}$$
(6)
suppressing the positive frequency part for simplicity. Here $`\epsilon ^\mu `$ stands for the polarization vector of the photon333This method , henceforth referred to as “plane wave method”, was used in  to find masses of the excitations and structures of the maximally reduced form of the polarization vectors/tensors in various theories. . In terms of the polarization vector, the gauge transformation $`A_\mu (x)A_\mu ^{}=A_\mu +_\mu f`$ (where $`f(x)`$ is an arbitrary scalar function) is expressed as

$$\epsilon _\mu (k)\epsilon _\mu ^{}=\epsilon _\mu (k)+if(k)k_\mu $$
(7)
where $`f(x)`$ has been written as $`f(x)=f(k)e^{ikx}`$. The equation of motion, in terms of the polarization vector, will now be given by

$$k^2\epsilon ^\mu k^\mu k_\nu \epsilon ^\nu =0.$$
(8)
The massive excitations corresponding to $`k^20`$ leads to the solution $`\epsilon ^\mu k^\mu `$ which can therefore be gauged away. For massless excitations ($`k^2=0`$), the Lorentz condition $`k_\mu \epsilon ^\mu =0`$ follows immediately from (8). Taking $`k^\mu =(\omega ,0,0,\omega )^T`$, corresponding to a photon of energy $`\omega `$ propagating in the $`z`$ direction, one can easily show that $`\epsilon ^\mu (k)`$ takes the form

$$\epsilon ^\mu (k)=(0,\epsilon ^1,\epsilon ^2,0)^T$$
(9)
up to a gauge transformation. Note that (9) is the maximally reduced form of $`\epsilon ^\mu `$ displaying the two transverse degrees of freedom $`\epsilon ^1`$ and $`\epsilon ^2`$. Under the action (3) of the translational group $`T(2)`$ this polarization vector transforms as follows:

$$\epsilon ^\mu \epsilon ^\mu =W_{}^{\mu }{}_{\nu }{}^{}(p,q)\epsilon ^\nu =\epsilon ^\mu +\left(\frac{p\epsilon ^1+q\epsilon ^2}{\omega }\right)k^\mu .$$
(10)
Clearly, using (7), this can be identified as a gauge transformation by choosing $`f(k)`$ suitably.

By similar methods it can shown that gauge transformations are generated by $`T(2)`$ in the 3+1 dimensional Kalb-Ramond(KR) theory  described by the Lagrangian

$$=\frac{1}{12}H_{\mu \nu \lambda }H^{\mu \nu \lambda }$$
(11)
where the 3rd rank field strength tensor $`H_{\mu \nu \lambda }`$ is given by

$$H_{\mu \nu \lambda }=_\mu B_{\nu \lambda }+_\nu B_{\lambda \mu }+_\lambda B_{\mu \nu }$$
(12)
with $`B_{\mu \nu }=B_{\nu \mu }`$ being the rank-2 antisymmetric gauge field. The equation of motion for the KR theory is given by

$$_\mu H^{\mu \nu \lambda }=0.$$
(13)
Here the model is invariant under the reducible gauge transformation given by444This is reducible, since by the choice $`f_\mu =_\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }`$, of the arbitrary functions $`f_\mu `$, the gauge variation can be made to vanish.

$$B_{\mu \nu }B_{\mu \nu }^{}=B_{\mu \nu }+_\mu f_\nu _\nu f_\mu .$$
(14)
Analogous to Maxwell case, we follow the plane wave method and adopt for KR theory, the ansatz

$$B^{\mu \nu }(x)=\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }(k)e^{ikx}$$
(15)
where $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }(k)`$ is the antisymmetric polarization tensor of KR theory. In terms of the polarization tensor, the equation of motion (13) can be written as

$$k_\mu [k^\mu \epsilon ^{\nu \lambda }+k^\nu \epsilon ^{\lambda \mu }+k^\lambda \epsilon ^{\mu \nu }]=0$$
(16)
and the gauge transformation (14) as

$$\epsilon _{\mu \nu }\epsilon _{\mu \nu }^{}=\epsilon _{\mu \nu }+i(k_\mu f_\nu (k)k_\nu f_\mu (k)).$$
(17)
For the case $`k^20`$, from (16) one has

$$\epsilon ^{\nu \lambda }=\frac{1}{k^2}[k^\nu (k_\nu \epsilon ^{\mu \lambda })k^\lambda (k_\mu \epsilon ^{\mu \nu })].$$
(18)
These (massive) solutions can be gauged away by choosing $`f^\lambda (k)=\frac{i}{k^2}k_\mu \epsilon ^{\mu \lambda }`$. Similar to Maxwell case, here too the massive excitations are gauge artifacts. As for $`k^2=0`$, we have from (16) $`k_\mu \epsilon ^{\mu \nu }=0`$ which is the similar to the Lorentz condition in Maxwell theory. Using this condition and by choosing a frame where $`k^\mu =(\omega ,0,0,\omega )^T`$ just as in Maxwell theory, the polarization tensor reduces to the maximally reduced form

$$\{\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }\}=\epsilon ^{12}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(19)
after a suitable gauge transformation that does away with the spurious degrees of freedom. In the maximally reduced form of $``$ (19) one is left with the only physical degree of freedom corresponding to $`\epsilon ^{12}`$ . Since under Lorentz transformation $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }`$ transforms as $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{\mu }{}_{\rho }{}^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{\nu }{}_{\sigma }{}^{}\epsilon ^{\rho \sigma }`$ the transformation of $``$ matrix under the action of the little group $`W(p,q)`$, which in this case is subgroup of Lorentz group, is given by

$$^{}=W(p,q)W^T(p,q)=\epsilon ^{12}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& q& p& 0\\ q& 0& 1& q\\ p& 1& 0& p\\ 0& q& p& 0\end{array}\right)=+\epsilon ^{12}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& q& p& 0\\ q& 0& 0& q\\ p& 0& 0& p\\ 0& q& p& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(20)
With the choice $`f^1=\frac{iq}{\omega }\epsilon ^{12},f^2=\frac{ip}{\omega }\epsilon ^{12}`$ and $`f^3=f^0`$, one can write (20) as a gauge transformation (17). Thus, the translational group $`W(p,q)`$ generates gauge transformation in KR theory also.

By similar methods it was shown that the translational group $`T(3)`$ generates gauge transformation in the topologically massive $`BF`$ theory which has the Lagrangian

$$=\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{12}H_{\mu \nu \lambda }H^{\mu \nu \lambda }\frac{m}{6}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }H_{\mu \nu \lambda }A_\rho ,m>0$$
(21)
which is obtained by topologically coupling the $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ field of Kalb-Ramond theory(11) with the Maxwell field $`A_\mu `$ so that the last term in (21) does not contribute to the energy-momentum tensor. The B$``$F Lagrangian (21) can be regarded either as a massive Maxwell(i.e., Proca) theory or a massive KR theory . For the sake of completeness, we summarize here the essential points concerning the role of $`T(3)`$ in generating gauge transformation in $`BF`$ theory . Following the plane wave method, the polarization vector and tensor for this theory, in the maximally reduced form (analogous to (9) and (19)), are found to be

$$\epsilon ^\mu =i\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ a\\ b\\ c\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& c& b\\ 0& c& 0& a\\ 0& b& a& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(22)
where $`a,b,c`$ being three arbitrary real parameters corresponding to three degrees of freedom and we have chosen the rest frame where

$$k^\mu =(m,0,0,0)^T.$$
(23)
Note that the number of degrees of freedom for B$``$F theory can be obtained by adding the number of degrees of freedom for Maxwell and KR theories together . Clearly, unlike the Maxwell or KR theories, the 2-dimensional translational group $`T(2)`$ cannot generate gauge transformation in $`BF`$ theory having three degrees of freedom. It is the 3-dimensional translational group $`T(3)`$ represented by

$$D(p,q,r)=1+pT_1+qT_2+rT_3=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& p& q& r\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(24)
that generate gauge transformation in this case. Here $`T_1=\frac{D}{p},T_2=\frac{D}{q},T_2=\frac{D}{r}`$ are the Lie algebra generators of the abelian algebra of $`T(3)`$. One can immediately see that

$$\delta \epsilon ^\mu =D_{}^{\mu }{}_{\nu }{}^{}(p,q,r)\epsilon ^\nu \epsilon ^\mu =\frac{i}{m}(pa+qb+rc)k^\mu =(pT_1+qT_2+rT_3)\epsilon ^\mu $$
(25)
and

$$\delta =D(p,q,r)D^T(p,q,r)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& (rbqc)& (pcra)& (qapb)\\ (rbqc)& 0& 0& 0\\ (pcra)& 0& 0& 0\\ (qapb)& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(26)
so that using (7) and (17) one can cast (25) and (26) respectively in the form of gauge transformations. Further it has been shown in  that the representation (24) of $`T(3)E(3)`$ can be constructed from one higher i.e., 4+1 dimensional spacetime by a method of ‘dimensional descent’ which involves the projection operator $`𝒫`$ = diag$`(1,1,1,1,0)`$. This is expected, as $`E(3)`$ is the Wigner’s little group for massless particles in 4+1 dimensions and under this projection, the polarization vector (tensor) of free Maxwell (KR) theory and the momentum 5-vector for a massless photon moving in the 4th direction in 4+1 dimensional spacetime maps to the polarization vector $`\epsilon ^\mu `$ (tensor $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }`$) (22) and momentum 4-vector $`k^\mu `$ (23) of a massive B$``$F quanta at rest in 3+1 dimensions. The same feature of “dimensional descent” goes through from 3+1 dimensions to 2+1 dimensions so that starting from usual photon in 3+1 dimensions and using $`𝒫`$ = diag$`(1,1,1,0)`$ one obtain the polarization vector and momentum 3-vector of a Proca quanta governed by the Proca theory

$$=\frac{1}{4}F^{ab}F_{ab}+\frac{\omega ^2}{2}A^aA_a$$
(27)
in 2+1 dimensions. In order to discuss the gauge transformation properties it is essential to provide a $`3\times 3`$ representation of $`T(2)`$ (denoted by $`\overline{D}(p,q)`$) which now amounts to deleting the last row and column of $`D(p,q,r)`$ in (24),

$$\overline{D}(p,q)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& p& q\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(28)
The corresponding generators are given by,

$$\overline{T}_1=\frac{\overline{D}}{p}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right);\overline{T}_2=\frac{\overline{D}}{q}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(29)
Just as the Proca theory in 3+1 dimensions maps to the $`BF`$ theory, where gauge transformations were discussed, the Proca theory in 2+1 dimensions is actually a doublet of Maxwell-Chern-Simons theories,

$$=_+_{}$$
(30)
where

$$_\pm =\frac{1}{4}F^{ab}F_{ab}\pm \frac{\theta }{2}ϵ^{abc}A_a_bA_c$$
(31)
with each of $`_+`$ or $`_{}`$ being a topologically massive gauge theory. The mass of the MCS quanta is $`\omega =|\theta |`$, where $`\omega `$ is the parameter entering in (27). We can therefore study the gauge transformation generated in this doublet. The polarization vector for $`_\pm `$, with only one degree of freedom for each of $`_+`$ and $`_{}`$, has been found to be

$$\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\\ \pm i\end{array}\right)$$
(32)
while the 3-momentum $`k^a=(\omega ,0,0)^T`$ obviously takes the same form as in the Proca model. In analogy with (25), here also one can write,

$$\delta \overline{\epsilon }^a=(p\overline{T}_1+q\overline{T}_2)_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}\overline{\epsilon }^b$$
(33)
where $`\overline{\epsilon }^a=(0,a_1,a_2)^T`$ is the polarization vector for the Proca theory in 2+1 dimensions. Had the Proca theory been a gauge theory, (33) would have represented a gauge transformation, as it can be written as

$$\delta \overline{\epsilon }^a=\frac{pa_1+qa_2}{\omega }k^a.$$
(34)
But since Proca theory is not a gauge theory, we can only study the gauge transformation properties of each of the doublet $`_\pm `$ (31) individually. First note that the Proca polarization vector $`\overline{\epsilon }^a`$ is just a linear combination of the two real orthonormal canonical vectors $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$ where,

$$\overline{\epsilon }^a=a_1\epsilon _1+a_2\epsilon _2;\epsilon _1=(0,1,0)^T,\epsilon _2=(0,0,1)^T.$$
(35)
Correspondingly the generators $`\overline{T}_1`$ and $`\overline{T}_2`$ (29), form an orthonormal basis as they satisfy $`tr(\overline{T}_a^{}\overline{T}_b)=\delta _{ab}`$. Furthermore,

$$\overline{T}_1\epsilon _1=\overline{T}_2\epsilon _2=(1,0,0)^T=\frac{k^a}{\omega },\overline{T}_1\epsilon _2=\overline{T}_2\epsilon _1=0$$
(36)
On the other hand, the polarization vectors $`\overline{\epsilon }_+^a`$ and $`\overline{\epsilon }_{}^a`$ (32) also provide an orthonormal basis(complex) in the plane as

$$(\overline{\epsilon }_+^a)^{}(\overline{\epsilon }_{}^a)=0;(\overline{\epsilon }_+^a)^{}(\overline{\epsilon }_+^a)=(\overline{\epsilon }_{}^a)^{}(\overline{\epsilon }_{}^a)=1.$$
(37)
Here we note that spatial part $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_\pm `$ of $`\epsilon _\pm `$ can be obtained from the space part of the above mentioned canonical ones by appropriate $`SU(2)`$ transformation. That is, $`U=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& i\\ i& 1\end{array}\right)`$ SU(2) when acts on $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)`$ yields respectively the vectors $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ i\end{array}\right)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ i\end{array}\right)`$ (up to an irrelevant factor of $`i`$)555This ambiguity of $`i`$ factor is related to the U(1) phase arbitrariness of the polarization vector .:

$$\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_+=U\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_1,\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_{}=iU\stackrel{}{\epsilon }_2.$$
(38)
This suggests that we consider the following orthonormal basis for the Lie algebra of $`T(2)`$:

$$\overline{T}_\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\overline{T}_1i\overline{T}_2)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& i\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(39)
instead of $`\overline{T}_1`$ and $`\overline{T}_2`$. Note that they also satisfy relations similar to the (1-2) basis,

$$tr(\overline{T}_+^{}\overline{T}_+)=tr(\overline{T}_{}^{}\overline{T}_{})=1;tr(\overline{T}_+^{}\overline{T}_{})=0$$
(40)
One can now easily see that

$$\overline{T}_+\epsilon _+=\overline{T}_{}\epsilon _{}=\frac{k^a}{\omega },\overline{T}_+\epsilon _{}=\overline{T}_{}\epsilon _+=0$$
(41)
analogous to (36). Furthermore,

$$\delta \overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a=\alpha _\pm \overline{T}_\pm \overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a=\frac{\alpha _\pm }{\omega }k^a.$$
(42)
This indicates that $`\overline{T}_\pm `$ \- the generators of the Lie algebra of $`T(2)`$ in the rotated (complex)basis - generate independent gauge transformations in $`_\pm `$ respectively. One therefore can understand how the appropriate representation of the generator of gauge transformation in the doublet of MCS theory can be obtained from higher 3+1 dimensional Wigner’s group through dimensional descent. A finite gauge transformation is obtained by integrating (42) i.e., exponentiating the corresponding Lie algebra element. This gives two representations of Wigner’s little group for massless particles in $`2+1`$ dimensions, which is isomorphic to $`\times 𝒵_2`$, although here we are just considering the component which is connected to the identity,

$$G_\pm (\alpha _\pm )=e^{\alpha _\pm \overline{T}_\pm }=1+\alpha _\pm \overline{T}_\pm =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& \frac{\alpha _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}& i\frac{\alpha _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(43)
Note that $`G_\pm (\alpha _\pm )`$ generates gauge transformation in the doublet $`_\pm `$,

$$G_{\pm }^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^b=\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a+\frac{\alpha _\pm }{|\mu |}k^a$$
(44)
and are related by complex conjugation. This complex conjugation is also a symmetry of the doublet .

Therefore, it is clear that suitable representations of translational groups in different dimensions act as generators of gauge transformations in ordinary as well as topologically massive gauge theories. We now turn our attention to the case of linearized gravity.

## 3 Role of little group in linearized gravity theories

Gravity (linearized) in $`d`$ spacetime dimensions is described by a symmetric second rank tensor gauge field and has $`\frac{1}{2}d(d3)`$ degrees of freedom666The degree of freedom counting can be done by following Weinberg . To start with, note that a symmetric second rank tensor in $`d`$ dimensions has $`\frac{1}{2}d(d+1)`$ independent components. Analogous to the Lorentz gauge condition ($`^\mu A_\mu =0`$) of Maxwell theory, in general relativity we have the harmonic gauge condition $`g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}=0`$ which amounts to $`d`$ constraints on the components of $`g_{\mu \nu }`$. These along with the $`d`$ independent components of the gauge parameter (which by itself is a $`d`$-vector now; see the ensuing discussion below, particularly (50)), in the linearized version of the theory, reduces the number of independent components of the tensor field to $`\frac{1}{2}d(d+1)2d=\frac{1}{2}d(d3)`$.. Therefore general relativity in 3+1 dimensions has two degrees of freedom and in 2+1 dimensions it has none. However, 2+1 dimensional gravity coupled to a Chern-Simons topological term, with gauge group being the Lorentz group itself, possesses a single propagating massive degree of freedom . Just like the MCS theory, the gauge invariance coexists with mass in the linearized version of this theory too where the gauge group reduces to abelian group $`T(1)`$. In this section we study the role of translational group in generating gauge transformations in the linearized versions of Einstein theory in 3+1 dimensions and gravity coupled to Chern-Simons term 2+1 dimensions.

Following the same conventions as of , we write the pure Einstein action in 3+1 dimensions as

$$I^E=d^4x^E,^E=\sqrt{g}R=\sqrt{g}g^{\mu \nu }R_{\mu \nu }$$
(45)
where $`^E`$ is the Einstein Lagrangian and $`R_{\mu \nu }`$ is the Ricci tensor. In the linearized approximation the metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is assumed to be close to the flat background part $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ and therefore777We have set the parameter $`\kappa `$ appearing in  equal to unity.

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }.$$
(46)
where $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ is the deviation such that $`|h_{\mu \nu }|<<1`$. When the deviation is small one considers only terms up to first order in $`h_{\mu \nu }`$. The raising and lowering of indices is done using $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$.

### 3.1 Linearized Einstein gravity in 3+1 dimensions

The linearized version of Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian is

$$_L^E=\frac{1}{2}h_{\mu \nu }\left[R_L^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{\mu \nu }R_L\right].$$
(47)
Here $`R_L^{\mu \nu }`$ is the linearized Ricci tensor given by

$$R_L^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{}h^{\mu \nu }+^\mu _\alpha h^{\alpha \nu }+^\nu _\alpha h^{\alpha \mu }^\mu ^\nu h)$$
(48)
with $`h=h_\alpha ^\alpha `$. Similarly $`R_L=R_{L}^{\alpha }{}_{\alpha }{}^{}`$. The field equations for $`h^{\mu \nu }`$ following from this Lagrangian is given by

$$\mathrm{}h^{\mu \nu }+^\mu _\alpha h^{\alpha \nu }+^\nu _\alpha h^{\alpha \mu }^\mu ^\nu h+\eta ^{\mu \nu }(\mathrm{}h_\alpha _\beta h^{\alpha \beta })=0.$$
(49)
The above equation is invariant under the following gauge transformation:

$$h_{\mu \nu }h_{\mu \nu }^{}=h_{\mu \nu }+_\mu \zeta _\nu (x)+_\nu \zeta _\mu (x)$$
(50)
which is just the symmetric counterpart of the gauge transformation (14) for KR and $`BF`$ theories. However, unlike KR and $`BF`$ theories, linearized gravity is not a reducible gauge system. Here $`\zeta _\mu (x)`$ are completely arbitrary except that they are considered to be small. Following the plane wave method, we now adopt the ansatz

$$h_{\mu \nu }=\epsilon _{\mu \nu }(k)e^{ik.x}+c.c.$$
(51)
where $`\epsilon _{\mu \nu }`$ is the symmetric polarization tensor and is the counterpart of the antisymmetric polarization tensor appearing in (15) for KR theory. With the choice

$$\zeta _\mu (x)=i\zeta _\mu (k)e^{ik.x}+c.c.$$
(52)
the gauge transformation in $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ can be written in terms of the polarization tensor as

$$\epsilon _{\mu \nu }(k)\epsilon _{\mu \nu }^{}(k)=\epsilon _{\mu \nu }(k)+k_\mu \zeta _\nu (k)+k_\nu \zeta _\mu (k).$$
(53)
Just as in the Maxwell case, hereafter we will consider only the the negative frequency part for simplicity. Substituting the ansatz in the equation of motion yields

$$k^2\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }k^\mu k_\alpha \epsilon ^{\alpha \nu }k^\nu k_\alpha \epsilon ^{\alpha \mu }+k^\mu k^\nu \epsilon +\eta ^{\mu \nu }(k^2\epsilon +k_\alpha k_\beta \epsilon ^{\alpha \beta })=0.$$
(54)
As was done in the previous cases, we separately consider the two possibilities $`k^20`$ and $`k^2=0`$. Choosing the massive ( $`k^20`$) case first, we contract the equation of motion (54) with $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ to obtain

$$k^2\epsilon k_\alpha k_\beta \epsilon ^{\alpha \beta }=0;\epsilon =\epsilon _{}^{\mu }{}_{\mu }{}^{}.$$
(55)
A general solution to this equation is given by

$$\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }=k^\mu f^\nu (k)+k^\nu f^\mu (k)$$
(56)
with $`f^\nu (k)`$ being arbitrary functions of $`k`$. Therefore, it is easily seen this solution can be ‘gauged away’ by appropriate choice of the variables $`\zeta _\mu (k)`$ in (53) as this corresponds to pure gauge. Thus, analogous to Maxwell theory, the massive excitations of linearized Einstein gravity are gauge artefacts.

For massless ($`k^2=0`$) excitations, the equation of motion (54) reduces to

$$k^\mu k_\alpha \epsilon ^{\alpha \nu }k^\nu k_\alpha \epsilon ^{\alpha \mu }+k^\mu k^\nu \epsilon +\eta ^{\mu \nu }k_\alpha k_\beta \epsilon ^{\alpha \beta }=0.$$
(57)
In a frame of reference where $`k^\mu =(\omega ,0,0,\omega )^T`$ the above equation can be written as

$$\omega [k^\mu (\epsilon ^{0\nu }\epsilon ^{3\nu })+k^\nu (\epsilon ^{0\mu }\epsilon ^{3\mu })]+k^\mu k^\nu \epsilon +\omega ^2\eta ^{\mu \nu }(\epsilon ^{00}+\epsilon ^{33}2\epsilon ^{03})=0.$$
(58)
Various components of the above equation together with the symmetricity of $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }`$ leads to the reduction in the number of independent components of $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }`$. In (58), $`\mu =\nu =0`$ leads to $`\epsilon ^{11}=\epsilon ^{22}`$; $`\mu =1,\nu =0`$ to $`\epsilon ^{01}=\epsilon ^{31}`$; $`\mu =2,\nu =0`$ to $`\epsilon ^{02}=\epsilon ^{32}`$; $`\mu =2,\nu =0`$ to $`\epsilon ^{03}=\epsilon ^{33}`$; and $`\mu =1,\nu =1`$ to $`\epsilon ^{00}=\epsilon ^{03}`$. Therefore, one can write the polarization tensor $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu }`$ in a reduced form as

$$\{\epsilon _{\mu \nu }\}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\epsilon ^{00}& \epsilon ^{01}& \epsilon ^{02}& \epsilon ^{00}\\ \epsilon ^{01}& \epsilon ^{11}& \epsilon ^{12}& \epsilon ^{01}\\ \epsilon ^{02}& \epsilon ^{12}& \epsilon ^{11}& \epsilon ^{02}\\ \epsilon ^{00}& \epsilon ^{01}& \epsilon ^{02}& \epsilon ^{00}\end{array}\right).$$
(59)
Now with the choice $`\zeta ^0=\zeta ^3=\frac{\epsilon ^{00}}{\omega },\zeta ^2=\frac{\epsilon ^{01}}{\omega },\zeta ^2=\frac{\epsilon ^{02}}{\omega }`$, the polarization tensor $`\{\epsilon _{\mu \nu }\}`$ can be written in the maximally reduced form (similar to (9) of Maxwell theory) as follows:

$$\{\epsilon _{\mu \nu }\}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& a& b& 0\\ 0& b& a& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(60)
(which is gauge equivalent to (59)) where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are arbitrary parameters representing the two degrees of freedom for the theory. (This form of the polarization tensor of linearized Einstein gravity in 3+1 dimensions is derived in  following a different approach.) In this form (60), the polarization tensor $``$ satisfies the harmonic gauge condition,

$$k_\mu \epsilon _\nu ^\mu =\frac{1}{2}k_\nu \epsilon _\mu ^\mu $$
(61)
in momentum space, automatically. Using the maximally reduced form (60) of the polarization tensor, it is now straightforward to show that the group $`W(p,q)`$ in (3) generate gauge transformations in linearized Einstein gravity also. For this purpose consider the action of $`W(p,q)`$ on $``$ in (60), just as in KR case,

$$^{}=W(p,q)W^T(p,q)$$

$$=+\left(\begin{array}{cccc}((p^2q^2)a+2pqb)& (pa+qb)& (pbqa)& ((p^2q^2)a+2pqb)\\ (pa+qb)& 0& 0& (pa+qb)\\ (pbqa)& 0& 0& (pbqa)\\ ((p^2q^2)a+2pqb)& (pa+qb)& (pbqa)& ((p^2q^2)a+2pqb)\end{array}\right).$$
(62)
The above transformation can be cast in the form of a gauge transformation (53) with the following choice for the arbitrary functions $`\zeta ^\mu (k)`$:

$$\zeta ^0=\zeta ^3=\frac{(p^2q^2)a+2pqb}{\omega },$$
(63)
$$\zeta ^1=\frac{pa+qb}{\omega },$$
(64)
$$\zeta ^2=\frac{pbqa}{\omega }.$$
(65)
We therefore conclude that the translational subgroup $`T(2)`$ of the Wigner’s little group $`E(2)`$, in its original representation $`W(p,q)`$ (3), acts as a gauge generator in linearized gravity in 3+1 dimensions.

It is important to notice that, unlike vector gauge (Maxwell) fields, the translational subgroup of Wigner’s little group acts as gauge generator for linearized gravity only when the spacetime has the dimension $`d=4`$ and not in any other dimension. This can be seen immediately from the following simple reasoning. In $`d`$ dimensions, the translational subgroup of the little group (for massless particles) has $`d2`$ generators which, incidentally, is the number of (transverse) degrees of freedom in Maxwell theory. On the other hand, the number of degrees of freedom for linearized gravity in $`d`$ dimensions is $`\frac{1}{2}d(d3)`$. Therefore, the number of generators of the translational subgroup equals the number of degrees of freedom of the theory, if and only if $`d=4`$.

### 3.2 Linearized Einstein-Chern-Simons(ECS) theory in 2+1 dimensions

The full action of the topologically massive gravity in 2+1 dimensions is

$$I^{ECS}=I^E+I^{CS}$$
(66)
where the 2+1 dimensional Einstein action here is

$$I^E=d^3x\sqrt{g}R$$
(67)
and the Chern-Simons action $`I^{CS}`$ is given by

$$I^{CS}=\frac{1}{4\mu }d^3xϵ^{def}[R_{deab}\omega _{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{ab}+\frac{2}{3}\omega _{db}^{}{}_{}{}^{c}\omega _{ec}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}\omega _{fa}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}].$$
(68)
Here the indices $`a,b,c`$ etc. stand for local Lorentz indices in 2+1 dimensions. The $`\omega _{dab}`$ are the components of the spin connection one-form and are related to the curvature two-form by the second Cartan’s equation of structure ($`R_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}=d\omega _{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}+\omega _{}^{a}{}_{c}{}^{}\omega _{}^{c}{}_{b}{}^{}`$). Note that the sign in front of the Einstein action is now opposite to the conventional one (45) and is required to make the full theory free of ghosts . The linearization, $`g_{ab}=\eta _{ab}+h_{ab}`$, of the ECS theory (66) results in the abelian theory given by

$$I_L^{ECS}=d^3x_L^{ECS}$$
(69)
where

$$_L^{ECS}=_L^E+_L^{CS}.$$
(70)
Here

$$_L^E=\frac{1}{2}h_{ab}\left[R_L^{ab}\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{ab}R_L\right]$$
(71)
now is the Lagrangian for linearized version of pure gravity in 2+1 dimensions and is the same as (47) except that it has the opposite sign and the indices, in this case, vary over $`0,1,2`$. Similarly,

$$_L^{CS}=\frac{1}{2\mu }ϵ_{abc}\left[R_L^{bd}\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{bd}R_L\right]^ah_d^c$$
(72)
is the linearized Chern-Simons term with the Chern-Simons parameter $`\mu `$. Under the gauge transformation $`h_{ab}h_{ab}^{}=h_{ab}+_a\xi _b(x)+_b\xi _a(x)`$, the Chern-Simons part $`_L^{CS}`$ changes by a total derivative:

$$\delta _L^{CS}=\frac{1}{\mu }ϵ_{abc}_d\left(R_L^{bd}^a\xi ^c\right)$$
(73)
The equation of motion corresponding to $`_L^{ECS}`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{}h^{ab}+^a_ch^{cb}+^b_ch^{ca}^a^bh+\eta ^{ab}(\mathrm{}h_c_dh^{cd})$$

$$\frac{1}{2\mu }ϵ^{acd}_c(\mathrm{}h_d^b_e^bh_d^e)\frac{1}{2\mu }ϵ^{bcd}_c(\mathrm{}h_d^a_e^ah_d^e)=0.$$
(74)
With the ansatz $`h_{ab}=\chi _{ab}(k)e^{ik.x}`$, the above equation of motion can be written in terms of the symmetric polarization tensor $`\chi _{ab}(k)`$ and the 3-momentum $`k^a`$ as follows

$$k^2\chi ^{ab}k^ak_c\chi ^{cb}k^bk_c\chi ^{ca}+k^ak^b\chi +\eta ^{ab}(k^2\chi +k_ck_d\chi ^{cd})$$

$$\frac{i}{2\mu }\left[ϵ^{acd}k_c(k^2\chi _d^b+k_ek^b\chi _d^e)+ϵ^{bcd}k_c(k^2\chi _d^a+k_ek^a\chi _d^e)\right]=0.$$
(75)
Analogous to (53), the expression for the gauge transformation for ECS theory in terms of its polarization tensors $`\chi _{ab}(k)`$ is given by

$$\chi _{ab}(k)\chi _{ab}^{}(k)=\chi _{ab}(k)+k_a\xi _b(k)+k_b\xi _a(k)$$
(76)
where $`\xi _a(k)`$ are small arbitrary functions of $`k`$. Depending on whether the excitations are massless or massive, we have two options for $`k^2`$:

(i) $`k^2=0`$ or (ii) $`k^20`$.

case (i): $`k^2=0`$
Contracting the (75) with $`\eta _{ab}`$ gives

$$k_ak_b\chi ^{ab}=0.$$
(77)
A general solution to this equation consistent with the equation of motion (75) is

$$\chi ^{ab}=k^af^b(k)+k^bf^a(k)$$
(78)
where $`f^a(k)`$ are arbitrary functions of $`k`$. However, with $`\xi ^a=f^a`$ we can ‘gauge away’ these solutions. Therefore, massless excitations of ECS theory are pure gauge artefacts. We now proceed to the other option:
case (ii) $`k^20`$.
Let $`k^2=m^2`$. On contraction with $`\eta _{ab}`$ (75) gives

$$k_ak_b\chi ^{ab}=m^2\chi $$
(79)
where $`\chi =\chi _{}^{a}{}_{a}{}^{}`$. With $`k^\alpha =(m,0,0)^T`$, this yields

$$\chi _{11}+\chi _{22}=0.$$
(80)
By considering the spatial part of (75 ) one can show that the mass $`m`$ of the excitations can be identified with the Chern-Simons parameter $`\mu `$ as follows. The spatial part of (75 ) is

$$m^2\chi ^{ij}k^ik_a\chi ^{aj}k^jk_a\chi ^{ai}+k^ik^j\chi +\eta ^{ij}(k^2\chi +k_ak_b\chi ^{ab})$$

$$\frac{i}{2\mu }\left[ϵ^{iab}k_a(k^2\chi _b^j+k_ek^j\chi _b^e)+ϵ^{jab}k_a(k^2\chi _b^i+k_ek^i\chi _b^e)\right]=0.$$
(81)
In this equation $`i,j`$ takes values $`1`$ and $`2`$. On passing to the rest frame the above equation simplifies to

$$\chi ^{ij}\chi ^{kk}\frac{im}{2\mu }\left[ϵ^{ik}\chi _k^j+ϵ^{jk}\chi _k^i\right]=0$$
(82)
from which we obtain (for $`i=j=1`$ and $`i=j=2`$ respectively)

$$\chi ^{11}=\frac{im}{\mu }\chi ^{12};\chi ^{22}=\frac{im}{\mu }\chi ^{12}.$$
(83)
With $`i=1`$ and $`j=2`$ we have

$$\chi ^{12}=\frac{im}{\mu }\chi ^{22}.$$
(84)
This relation together with (83) implies that $`m^2=\mu ^2`$. The remaining components can be made to vanish by a suitable gauge choice. Finally, for the Chern-Simons parameter $`\mu >0`$ , the polarization tensor $`\chi _+`$ of the gravity coupled to Chern-Simons theory in 2+1 dimensions in the rest frame can be written as

$$\chi _+=\{\chi _+^{ab}\}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& i\\ 0& i& 1\end{array}\right)\tau $$
(85)
where $`\tau `$ is an arbitrary real parameter. Notice that the ECS theory has only a single degree of freedom corresponding to the parameter $`\tau `$. Similarly, the rest frame polarization tensor for an ECS theory having the Chern-Simons parameter $`\mu <0`$ is

$$\chi _{}=\{\chi _{}^{ab}\}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& i\\ 0& i& 1\end{array}\right)\tau .$$
(86)
It is important to note that these rest frame polarization tensors $`\chi _\pm `$ of ECS theories (with $`\tau =\frac{1}{2}`$) can be obtained as direct products of the rest frame polarization vectors $`\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a`$ (32) of MCS theories. i.e.,

$$\chi _\pm ^{ab}=\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^b.$$
(87)
This suggests that we adopt orthonormality conditions for $`\chi _\pm `$ which will are similar to (37) that are used for $`\overline{\epsilon }_\pm ^a`$. Hence we require

$$tr\left((\chi _+)^{}(\chi _{})\right)=0;tr\left((\chi _\pm )^{}(\chi _\pm )\right)=1.$$
(88)
Therefore, analogous to (32) of MCS theory, we have the following maximally reduced form for the polarization tensors of a pair of ECS theories with opposite helicities

$$\chi _\pm =\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& \pm i\\ 0& \pm i& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(89)
Note that these polarization matrices of ECS theories are traceless and singular. We are now equipped to study the role played by the translational group in generating the gauge transformation in this theory. The representations of $`T(1)`$ that generates gauge transformation in pair of MCS theories with opposite helicities is given by $`G_\pm (\alpha )`$ (43). On account of the relation (87) it is expected that the same representation will generate gauge transformations in ECS theories also. Indeed one can easily see that $`G_\pm (\tau _\pm )`$ are the gauge generators in ECS theories:

$$\chi _\pm \chi _\pm ^{}=G_\pm (\tau _\pm )\chi _\pm G_\pm ^T(\tau _\pm )=\chi _\pm +\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\tau _\pm ^2& \frac{\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{\pm i\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}\\ \frac{\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}& 0& 0\\ \frac{\pm i\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}}& 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(90)
This transformation can be cast in the form of the gauge transformation (76) with the following choice of $`\xi `$’s;

$$\xi _0=\frac{\tau _\pm ^2}{2|\mu |},\xi _1=\frac{\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}|\mu |},\xi _2=\frac{\pm i\tau _\pm }{\sqrt{2}|\mu |}.$$
(91)
One can obtain the moving frame expression for polarization tensors $`\chi _\pm (k)`$ from the above rest frame results by applying appropriate Lorentz boost as follows:

$$\chi _\pm (k)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^T(k)\chi _\pm (0)\mathrm{\Lambda }(k)$$

$$=\frac{1}{2\mu ^2}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}k_0^2\mu ^2& k^0k^1i\mu k^2& k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1\\ k^0k^1i\mu k^2& \frac{(k^0k^1i\mu k^2)^2}{k_0^2\mu ^2}& \frac{(k^0k^1i\mu k^2)(k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1)}{k_0^2\mu ^2}\\ k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1& \frac{(k^0k^1i\mu k^2)(k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1)}{k_0^2\mu ^2}& \frac{(k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1)^2}{(k^0k^2\pm i\mu k^1)^2}\end{array}\right)e^{\pm 2i\varphi (k)}$$
(92)
where $`\varphi (k)=\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{k^2}{k^1})`$ and the momentum space boost matrix

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(k)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma & \gamma \beta ^1& \gamma \beta ^2\\ \gamma \beta ^1& 1+\frac{(\gamma 1)(\beta ^1)^2}{(\stackrel{}{\beta })^2}& \frac{(\gamma 1)\beta ^1\beta ^2}{(\stackrel{}{\beta })^2}\\ \gamma \beta ^2& \frac{(\gamma 1)\beta ^1\beta ^2}{(\stackrel{}{\beta })^2}& 1+\frac{(\gamma 1)(\beta ^2)^2}{(\stackrel{}{\beta })^2}\end{array}\right)$$
(93)
with $`\stackrel{}{\beta }=\frac{𝐤}{k^0}`$ and $`\gamma =\frac{k^0}{|\mu |}`$. Identical results were obtained in other contexts  by different methods. Here, we have shown how these results can be obtained in a simpler and straightforward manner just by considering the momentum space expression of the equation of motion in the rest frame using the plane wave method with a subsequent boost transformation. Obviously, the relation (87) holds true in the moving frame also.

## 4 Dimensional descent and linearized gravity theories

In order to discuss dimensional descent from 3+1 dimensions to 2+1 dimensions for symmetric 2nd rank tensor fields it is essential to discuss the relevant aspects of 2+1 dimensional Einstein-Pauli-Fierz(EPF) theory whose action is given by

$$I^{EPF}=d^3x\left(\sqrt{g}R\frac{\mu ^2}{4}(h_{ab}^2h^2)\right).$$
(94)
Note that the usual sign in front of Einstein action has been restored to avoid ghosts and tachyons, as has been observed recently by Deser and Tekin . As noted in , both the relative and and overall signs of the two terms in (94) have to be of conventional Einstein and Pauli-Feirz mass terms in order to have a physically meaningful theory888On the other hand in the ECS theory, sign of the Einstein term has to be opposite to that of the conventional one for the theory to be viable. Therefore, if one attempts to couple the ECS theory with a Pauli-Fierz term, one is faced with an unavoidable conflict of signs.. Upon linearization, (94) reduces to

$$_L^{EPF}=\frac{1}{2}h_{ab}\left[R_L^{ab}\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{ab}R_L\right]\frac{\mu ^2}{2}(h_{ab}^2h^2).$$
(95)
Analogous to the doublet structure of Proca theory discussed above, the EPF theory is a doublet, as was suggested in , comprising of a pair of ECS theories having opposite helicities. And just like the Proca theory, EPF theory is a gauge noninvariant theory. The equation of motion following from the EPF Lagrangian is given by

$$\mathrm{}h^{ab}+^a_ch^{cb}+^b_ch^{ca}^a^bh+\eta ^{ab}(\mathrm{}h_c_dh^{cd})\mu ^2(h^{ab}\eta ^{ab}h)=0.$$
(96)
With the ansatz $`h^{ab}=𝒳^{ab}e^{ik.x}`$, where $`𝒳^{ab}`$ is the polarization tensor in this case, this equation can be written as

$$k^2𝒳^{ab}k^ak_c𝒳^{cb}k^bk_c𝒳^{ca}+k^ak^b𝒳+\eta ^{ab}(k^2𝒳+k_ck_d𝒳^{cd})\mu ^2(𝒳^{ab}\eta ^{ab}𝒳)=0$$
(97)
We now proceed along the same lines as was done in the previous cases to arrive at the physical polarization tensor of EPF theory. If we choose $`k^2=0`$, the equation of motion (97) leads, upon contraction with $`k_a`$, to the condition

$$k_a𝒳^{ab}=k^b𝒳.$$
(98)
On the other hand, the contraction of (97) with $`\eta _{ab}`$ leads to

$$𝒳+k_ak_b𝒳^{ab}=0.$$
(99)
A solution of the above pair of equations (98, 99) is given by $`𝒳^{ab}=k^af^b(k)+k^bf^a(k)`$ where $`f`$’s are arbitrary functions of $`k`$. This solution automatically satisfies the condition $`k.f=0`$. However, such a solution is compatible with the equation of motion (97) if and only if the $`f`$’s vanish identically. Thus the EPF theory does not have massless excitations.

Now for $`k^20`$, in the rest frame $`k^\mu =(m,0,0)^T`$ and so the $`(00)`$ component of the equation of motion yields $`\mu ^2(𝒳^{00}𝒳)=0`$ which in turn gives

$$𝒳^{11}+𝒳^{22}=0.$$
(100)
Therefore, one is free to arbitrarily choose either $`𝒳^{11}`$ or $`𝒳^{22}`$. Similarly, the $`(0i)`$ component in the rest frame becomes $`\mu ^2𝒳^{0i}=0`$ implying

$$𝒳^{0i}=0.$$
(101)
The space part ($`(ij)`$-components) of the equation of motion with $`i=j=1`$ and $`i=j=2`$, respectively yields in the rest frame,

$$\mu ^2(𝒳_{}^{0}{}_{0}{}^{}+𝒳_{}^{2}{}_{2}{}^{})+m^2𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{1}{}^{}=0$$
(102)
$$\mu ^2(𝒳_{}^{0}{}_{0}{}^{}+𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{1}{}^{})+m^2𝒳_{}^{2}{}_{2}{}^{}=0.$$
(103)
Adding the above to equation gives,

$$𝒳^{00}=0.$$
(104)
Finally, the $`(ij)`$ compnent of (97) for $`ij`$ in the rest frame becomes

$$(m^2\mu ^2)𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{2}{}^{}=0.$$
(105)
which can be satisfied if either $`(m^2\mu ^2)=0`$ (in which case $`𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{2}{}^{}`$ may remain arbitrary) or $`𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{2}{}^{}=0.`$ The latter case implies that we will have only one degree of freedom in the theory corresponding to $`𝒳_{}^{1}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ (or $`𝒳_{}^{2}{}_{2}{}^{}`$). However, as is well known, the EPF theory has two degrees of freedom . Therefore, we must have

$$m^2=\mu ^2$$
(106)
thus establishing that the mass of the EPF excitation to be $`|\mu |`$ and leaving the $`\chi ^{12}`$ component arbitrary. The two massive degrees of freedom of EPF model correspond to $`𝒳_{11}=𝒳_{22}=a`$ and $`𝒳^{12}=𝒳^{21}=b`$ where $`a,b`$ are arbitrary parameters. Therefore,from (101 ,104 , 106) it is obvious that we can write the polarization tensor of EPF model in the rest frame as

$$𝒳=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& a& b\\ 0& b& a\end{array}\right).$$
(107)
With the aid of the expressions (107) for $`𝒳`$ of EPF theory and (89) for $`\chi _\pm `$ of a pair of ECS theories, we now embark on a discussion of dimensional descent for the case of 2nd rank symmetric tensor gauge fields emphasising the near exact parallel with case of vector gauge fields. One can obtain the momentum 3-vector $`k^a`$ and polarization tensor $`𝒳`$ (107) of EPF model in 2+1 dimensions from those of linearized gravity in 3+1 dimensions as follows. By applying the projection operator $`𝒫=`$diag$`(1,1,1,0)`$ on momentum 4-vector $`k^\mu =(\omega ,0,0,\omega )^T`$ of a massless graviton moving in the $`z`$-direction of 3+1 dimensional linearized Einstein gravity and subsequently deleting the last row of the resulting vector, one get momentum 3-vector $`k^a`$ of 2+1 dimensional EPF quanta at rest. By a similar application of $`𝒫`$ on $``$ (60) and deleting the last row and column, one gets the polarization tensor $`𝒳`$ (107) in the rest frame of the EPF quanta. Next we notice that, just like the way Proca polarization vector $`\overline{\epsilon }^a`$ is written as a linear combination of two orthonormal canonical vectors (35), one can write the EPF polarization tensor $`𝒳`$ as

$$𝒳=a𝒳_1+b𝒳_2=a\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)+b\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(108)
We may consider the above equation to be the EPF analogue of (35) in the case Proca theory. Notice that the space parts of the matrices appearing in the above linear combination are nothing but the Pauli matrices

$$\sigma _1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\sigma _3=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(109)
Clearly, the space part $`\{\chi _{\pm }^{}{}_{}{}^{ij}\}`$ of the ECS polarization tensors $`\chi _\pm `$ (89) can be expressed in terms of $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _3`$ as follows:

$$\{\chi _{\pm }^{}{}_{}{}^{ij}\}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sigma _3\pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\sigma _1).$$
(110)
This amounts to an SU(2) transformation in the 2-dimensional subspace (of the SU(2) Lie algebra in an orthonormal basis) spanned by $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sigma _1`$ and $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sigma _3`$999Note that the $`\{\chi _{}^{ij}\}`$ obtained in (110) differs from the one obtained by SU(2) rotation by an irrelevant $`i`$ factor just as in the vector case.. It should be noticed that (110) is the analogue of (38) in the case of Proca and MCS theories. In the case of vector (Proca and MCS) field theories, the basis vectors $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$ (35) of the Proca polarization vector, when transformed by a suitable SU(2) transformation yield the polarization vectors $`\epsilon _\pm `$ of a pair of MCS theories. Similarly, in the case of tensor (EPF and ECS) field theories, the same SU(2) transformation when acted on the $`𝒳_1`$ and $`𝒳_2`$ provides the polarization tensors $`\chi _\pm `$ of a doublet of ECS theories with opposite helicities just as Proca theory is a doublet of MCS theories having opposite spins. This corroborates the proposition that EPF theory is consisted of a doublet of ECS theories with opposite spins at least at the level of polarization tensor. Moreover, as we have discussed earlier, the polarization tensor and momentum vector of (2+1 dimensional) EPF theory can be obtained from those of linearized Einstein gravity (in 3+1 dimensions) by applying suitable projection operator. This relationship between EPF and ECS theories resemble the one between Proca and MCS theories. Therefore we expect that the procedure of dimensional descent to be valid here as well. As described in section 2, the generator of the representations of $`T(1)`$, obtained by dimensional descent, that generate gauge transformation in a pair of MCS theories with opposite helicities are given by $`\overline{T}_\pm `$ (39). Also, the ECS polarization tensors $`\chi _\pm `$ can be made to satisfy the orthonormality relations (88) similar to (37) for MCS case owing to the fact that the former is a tensor product of MCS polarization vectors. Hence it is natural to expect that the $`T(1)`$ group representation $`G_\pm (\tau )`$ (43) obtained by exponentiation of $`\overline{T}_\pm `$ generates gauge transformation in ECS doublet, which in fact it does, as we have shown in (90). Therefore, it is evident that by a dimensional descent from 3+1 dimensional linearized gravity one could obtain the representations of $`T(1)`$ that generate gauge transformations in the doublet of topologically massive ECS theories in 2+1 dimensions. This is similar to the dimensional descent from 3+1 dimensional Maxwell theory to 2+1 dimensional MCS theory discussed in section 2.

## 5 Conclusion

In this paper we have studied the role of translational subgroup of Wigner’s little group for massless particles, as a generator of gauge transformations in 3+1 dimensional linearized (pure) Einstein gravity and 2+1 dimensional ECS theory which are 2nd rank symmetric tensor field theories. This property of translational group was earlier shown to hold for vector gauge theories and 2-form gauge fields in different dimensions. In those cases the theories considered included ordinary gauge fields as well as topologically massive gauge fields. In section 2, a review of the role of translational group in generating gauge transformations in the vector gauge ( Maxwell and MCS) theories and in 2nd rank antisymmetric tensor gauge (KR and $`BF`$) theories is provided. Taking the example of 3+1 dimensional Maxwell and 2+1 dimensional Proca theory (which is a doublet of MCS theories with opposite helicities), we have illustrated the method of dimensional descent by which one obtains the representation of the little group that generates gauge transformation in a topologically massive theory. In section 3, we studied the linearized Einstein gravity in 3+1 dimensions and by a straightforward analysis of its the equation of motion, using the plane wave method in momentum space, we obtatined the maximally reduced form of the polarization tensor of the theory and the result agrees with the expression of the polarization tensor obtained by other methods . Using this maximally reduced polarization tensor, we have shown explicitly that $`T(2)`$, the translational subgroup of the the Wigner’s little group $`E(2)`$, generates gauge transformations in 3+1 dimensional linearized gravity just as it happens in the cases of vector or Kalb-Ramond theory involving antisymmetric tensor gauge fields. In the next section we consider the topologically massive ECS theory, obtained by coupling a Chern-Simons mass term to the linearized gravity in 2+1 dimensions and show that the polarization tensor of ECS theory is actually a tensor product of the polarization vectors of a pair of MCS theories with the same Chern-Simons parameter. We have further shown that the same representation of $`T(1)`$ that generate gauge transformation in MCS theories acts as generator of gauge transformation in ECS theory also. Finally, in section 4 we obtain the polarization tensor of EPF theory (obtained by coupling the linearized gravity to a Pauli-Fierz mass term) in 2+1 dimensions and show that it splits into ECS polarization tensors with opposite helicitites thus suggesting a doublet stucture for EPF theory at the level of polarization tensors. This is very similar to Proca theory which is a doublet of MCS theories. Drawing this analogy further, we have been able to extend the method of dimensional descent to the case of second rank symmetric tensor field theories and show that one can obtain the EPF polarization tensor from that of linearized Einstein gravity in 3+1 dimensions. Further more, one obtains the representation of $`T(1)`$ that generate gauge transformation in ECS theory by following exactly the same procedure as that in the case of MCS theory.

However, it should be mentioned that the the analogy between EPF and Proca theories with their respective doublet structures breaks down if one considers the fact that sign of the Einstein term flips from EPF to ECS theories in contrast to Proca theory where the sign of the Maxwell term remains unchanged irrespective of whether it is coupled to a Chern-Simons term or a usual mass term. Therefore, further investigations are necessary in order to rigorously establish the doublet structure, if any, of EPF theory beyond the level of polarization tensors.

Acknowledgment: Authors wish to thank Dr. R. Banerjee for many illuminating and useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Crossover between Equilibrium and Shear-controlled Dynamics in Sheared Liquids

## Abstract

We present a numerical simulation study of a simple monatomic Lennard-Jones liquid under shear flow, as a function of both temperature $`T`$ and shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }`$. By investigating different observables we find that i) It exists a line, $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, in the ($`T`$-$`\dot{\gamma }`$) plane that sharply marks the boarder between an “equilibrium” and a “shear-controlled” region for both the dynamic and the thermodynamic quantities; and ii) Along this line the structural relaxation time, $`\tau _\alpha (T_{\dot{\gamma }})`$, is proportional to $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$, i. e. to the typical time-scale introduced by the shear flow. Above $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ the liquid dynamics is unaffected by the shear flow, while below $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ both $`T`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }`$ control the particle motion.

The effects of the shear flow on the properties of simple liquids has recently been the object of extensive investigations . Beside its intrinsic theoretical interest (the study of out-of-equilibrium stationary states), it has been hypothesized  that the shear flow acts as an aging-stopping mechanism, thus suggesting an interesting experimental method to study dynamics in supercooled liquids and glasses. Indeed, under shear flow, the system is in an out-of-equilibrium situation but reaches a stationary regime: similarly to equilibrium the correlation functions depend only on the time-difference. This takes place also at those temperatures for which the non-sheared system would be in an $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔}`$ regime (i. e. the correlation functions depend explicitly on two times). In the common phrasing, the application of a shear flow has the effect to rejuvenate the glassy system and the aging phenomenon characteristic of glasses is stopped. The fact that some relevant properties of aging systems, like the existence of a generalized fluctuation-dissipation relation  and of an effective temperature, still hold in systems under shear flow , makes the study of sheared systems an important topic. This is particularly true in view of possible experiments aiming to probe the out-of-equilibrium dynamics of glassy systems: in aging the waiting-time dependence of correlation functions prevents the acquisition of the data with the desired statistics, while under shear correlation functions become time translation invariant.

In this work we use numerical simulations to study the effects of the shear flow on the properties of a simple Lennard-Jones model liquid. In particular we compare the temperature dependence of some physical quantities of the driven system (with different shear rates $`\dot{\gamma }`$) with those of the equilibrium system ($`\dot{\gamma }=0`$). We find that i) it exists a well-defined crossover temperature $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, whose value depends on the shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }`$, below which the properties of the sheared system exhibit a marked difference from those of the equilibrium system. On the contrary, for $`T>T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ the driven system is not influenced by the presence of a shear flow, and both the energy and the structural relaxation time coincide with their equilibrium values. ii) The same $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ can be derived from the $`T`$-dependence of both potential energy and structural relaxation times, thus indicating the robustness of the ”cross-over” temperature concept; iii) At $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, the structural relaxation time $`\tau _\alpha (T_{\dot{\gamma }})`$ is proportional to $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$, i. e. to the typical time-scale introduced by the shear, the proportionality coefficient being an observable dependent quantity. The previous observations lead to a microscopic interpretation of the shear thinning effect, and suggest a quantitative experimental test on the temperature dependence of the non-linear viscosity in simple liquids.

The investigated system is made of $`N`$=256 particles interacting via a simple Lennard-Jones potential, plus a small many-body term  introduced to prevent the crystallization unavoidably occurring in undercooled monatomic systems. The particles are confined in a cubic box, at density $`\rho =1`$ (hereafter all the quantities are expressed in reduced LJ unit), with periodic boundary condition adapted to the presence of a shear flow. The latter is applied to the system along the $`x`$ direction with a gradient velocity field along the $`y`$ axis. The molecular dynamics simulation is performed using SLLOD algorithm , with a Nose-Hoover thermostat for the thermal velocities. Different shear rates $`\dot{\gamma }`$ were studied in the range $`\dot{\gamma }=10^1÷\dot{\gamma }=10^3`$. A preliminary simulation performed at $`\dot{\gamma }=0`$ was used to determine the reference behavior of the equilibrium system. For all the shear rates considered, different physical quantities are analyzed as a function of temperature: energy, incoherent scattering functions, relaxation times.

In Fig. 1 we report the potential energy per particle $`e`$ as a function of temperature for selected values of the shear rate. The full line indicates the temperature dependence of $`e`$ at equilibrium ($`\dot{\gamma }=0`$), which, as shown in previous work , can be described quite accurately by the Rosenfeld-Tarazona $`T^{3/5}`$ power-law . The open symbols indicates the caloric data for three selected shear rates: $`\dot{\gamma }`$=1$``$10-1, 4$``$10-2, 6$``$10-3. At high temperature, one can observe a good agreement between $`e(T,\dot{\gamma })`$ and $`e(T,\dot{\gamma }=0)=e_{eq.}(T)`$. On lowering the temperature, the agreement breaks down at a $`\dot{\gamma }`$-dependent temperature ($`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$), below which the caloric curve of the sheared system deviate from the $`T^{3/5}`$ power-law. In particular, at low-$`T`$, $`e(T,\dot{\gamma })`$ is well described by a linear temperature dependence (indicated, as an example, by the dashed line for $`\dot{\gamma }`$=4$``$10-2). The deviation of the energy of the driven system from the equilibrium energy is evidenced in the inset of Fig. 1, where the energy difference $`ee_{eq.}`$ is reported as a function of temperature for the system with $`\dot{\gamma }=410^2`$. The existence of a linear behavior of $`e(T,\dot{\gamma })`$ at low $`T`$ and of an analytic expression for this quantity at high $`T`$ allows for a straightforward identification of a crossover temperature $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ (indicated in the inset of Fig. 1 with dashed arrow).

In Fig. 2 we report the $`\dot{\gamma }`$-dependence of the parameters describing the caloric curves of the sheared systems: the crossover temperature $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ and the potential energy value at $`T`$=0 $`e_0`$. As shown in Fig. 2a, $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ is an increasing function of the shear rate. For small shear rate values it approaches a plateau whose value is very close to the estimated mode-coupling critical temperature $`T_{MCT}`$ ($`T_{MCT}`$=0.475 for this potential model ) indicated by the dashed line in Fig. 2a. A similar plateau is observed in the $`\dot{\gamma }`$ dependence of $`e_0`$ (see Fig. 2b). Here, for small shear rate values, $`e_0`$ reaches the value $`e_0^{pl.}6.90`$. We note that the value $`e_0^{pl.}`$ is higher than the lowest inherent structure energy value obtained in equilibrium simulation $`e_0^{IS}=7.0`$ . Similarly to the case of analytic mean field spin glass models , the plateau value can be interpreted as a threshold in the potential energy surface, above which the system is forced by the shear. However, as we are dealing with a non-mean field system, we expect that for values of $`\dot{\gamma }`$ small enough -well below the ones that we are able to study- the system cross the threshold. Similarly, also in Fig. 2a the existence of a plateau is only apparent and mirrors the (apparent) power-law divergence of the relaxation times predicted by the MCT. The evaluation of the crossover temperature for even smaller $`\dot{\gamma }`$, i. e. in a region not accessible to the simulation for CPU time reason, would have resulted in a $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ smaller than $`T_{MCT}`$ as a consequence of the presence of activated processes in the investigated non-mean field system.

Further information on the effect of the shear flow can be obtained analyzing the temperature dependence of correlation functions in driven systems. For the different shear rates considered, we have calculated the incoherent scattering functions $`F_𝐪(t)`$:

$$F_𝐪(t)=\frac{1}{N}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}e^{i𝐪[𝐫_j(t)𝐫_j(0)]},$$
(1)
where $`𝐫_j(t)`$ is the position of particle $`j`$ at time $`t`$. The wave vector $`𝐪`$ is that of the first peak of the static structure factor $`S_𝐪`$ ($`q_{max}=7.1`$) along the “shear-free” direction ($`𝐪=(0,0,q_{max})`$). In Fig. 3 we report the $`F_𝐪`$ for the equilibrium system (full lines) and, as an example, for the system with $`\dot{\gamma }`$=4$``$10-2 (dashed lines), for three different temperatures. At the higher reported temperature ($`T=1.6`$), the $`F_𝐪`$ of the sheared system is undistinguished from the equilibrium one. At the intermediate temperature ($`T=0.80`$) the full and dashed lines start to deviate one from the other, an effect that become more and more clear on lowering the temperature ($`T=0.56`$). It is worth to note that -at the reported value of $`\dot{\gamma }`$\- the crossover temperature derived from Fig. 1 is $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$=0.97, i. e. intermediate between the the first two reported $`F_𝐪`$. From the inspection of Fig. 3, one can conclude that for $`T`$ smaller than $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ (derived from $`e`$) there are no effects of the shear flow on the dynamics.

To put the previous observation on a quantitative ground, we analyze the temperature dependence of relaxation time $`\tau _\alpha `$, defined as the time at which $`F_𝐪`$ reach $`1/e`$-th of its non-ergodicity factor (the apparent plateau value). In Fig. 4 the power law fit to the equilibrium ($`\dot{\gamma }=0`$) relaxation times is reported as full line, together with the relaxation times for three selected shear rates: $`\dot{\gamma }_1`$=1$``$10-1 (full diamonds), $`\dot{\gamma }_2`$=4$``$10-2 (full circles) and $`\dot{\gamma }_3`$=6$``$10-3 (open circles). In the same figure are also indicated by dashed lines the crossover temperatures derived from Fig. 1 for the three selected shear rates. Similarly to the thermodynamic quantities, also the dynamics follow a simple behavior: at a fixed $`\dot{\gamma }`$ value, for $`T`$ larger than a certain threshold the dynamics of the sheared system is undistinguished from the equilibrium one. Below the threshold the relaxation time flattens and no longer follows the steep increase associate to the slowing down of the dynamics which precedes the glass transition. It is important to emphasize that the crossover temperature, defined from the dynamics is found to be the same as that derived from thermodynamic data.

The existence of a well defined crossover temperature $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, as evidenced by the above results, suggests the following scenario: for $`T>T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ the sheared system is not affected by the shear flow because the structural relaxation process of the equilibrium system acts on a time-scale ($`\tau _\alpha `$) that is faster than the one introduced by the shear flow; on lowering the temperature $`\tau _\alpha `$ increases and -for temperatures close to $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$\- becomes comparable to the time scale introduced by the shear (proportional to the inverse of shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$). For $`T<T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ the shear starts to modify both the static and the dynamic properties of the system. In the following, we refer to the high temperature regime ($`T>T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$) as $`\alpha `$-dominated” (equilibrium region) and the low temperature regime ($`T<T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$) as “shear-dominated”. Below $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, in the “shear-dominated” region, the system, still remaining in a stationary state, “freezes” (in the sense that relevant processes governing the relaxations become those induced by the shear and then only weakly temperature dependent). Dynamic behavior are much less affected by further decreases of temperature and the relaxation time reaches a finite value for $`T`$0. The previous scenario implies the existence of a strong relation between the equilibrium relaxation time at the crossover temperature and $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$. In Fig. 5 we compare $`\tau _\alpha (T)`$ plotted as a function of the temperature and the inverse shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$ plotted as a function of $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$. The inverse shear data have been multiplied by a constant factor $`0.07`$ in order to align them with the $`\tau _\alpha (T)`$ data. The temperature dependence of the two quantities are in quite good agreement, suggesting a direct proportionality between them

$$\tau _\alpha (T_{\dot{\gamma }})\dot{\gamma }^1.$$
(2)
There is obviously a shear-independent prefactor that depends on the chosen definition of $`\tau _\alpha `$ and on the specific investigated correlation function (for example, the self relaxation time scale approximately as $`q^2`$). It is interesting to note the existence of a simple linear relationship between $`\tau _\alpha `$ and $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$ along the line $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ in the ($`T`$-$`\dot{\gamma }`$) plane, as compared, for example, to the $`\dot{\gamma }^{2/3}`$ dependence observed along the $`T`$-constant line .

Recent important work on the fluctuation-dissipation relation (FDR) in sheared system  has provided evidence that two different temperatures control the dynamics. Dynamics at short times is controlled by the bath temperature, while dynamics at longer times is controlled by an effective temperature, larger than the bath one. Our analysis predicts that only for $`T<T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ a two-temperature scenario in the FDR should be observed.

Furthermore, our analysis confirms  that an interesting and promising (from a numerical and experimental point of view) implication of the above scenario could be the possibility to reproduce the aging properties of the non-driven system from the investigation of the shear effects on the driven system. The underling main hypothesis is the similarity between the properties of the non-driven system at a given waiting time and those of the driven system at a given shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }`$.

In conclusion we have numerically studied the shear flow effects on the thermal and dynamical properties of a simple model liquid, focusing on the differences between driven and equilibrium system, both in the dynamics and thermodynamics. The potential energy and the incoherent scattering function (and the associated structural relaxation time) have been studied as a function of temperature for different shear rates. It emerges the existence, for a given shear rate, of a crossover line $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$, separating two regimes: an high temperature (low shear rate) regime in which the driven system behaves very similar to the equilibrium one, and a low temperature (high shear rate) regime in which the driven system strongly deviate from the equilibrium one. From the temperature dependence of relaxation times we found further evidences that $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ marks the temperature at which the shear relaxation times start to deviate from the equilibrium times, passing from an $`\alpha `$-dominated” to a “shear-dominated” region and approaching a finite value at low temperature. Along the line defined by $`T_{\dot{\gamma }}`$ in the ($`T`$-$`\dot{\gamma }`$) plane we observe a direct proportionality between $`\tau _\alpha `$ and $`\dot{\gamma }^1`$, allowing a more clear interpretation of the relationship between shear and relaxation times.

We acknowledge support from INFM Initiative Parallel Computing, and MURST COFIN2000.


text:
# Probing the Initial Conditions of Clustered Star Formation – Large Scale On-the-Fly Mapping of Orion B at FCRAO

## 1. Introduction

CS is an often used tracer of dense gas in molecular clouds (e.g. Lada et al. 1991 (LEF); Lada et al. 1997). These and similar studies have shown that the CS emission is not uniformly distributed, but confined to dense cores which constitute just a small fraction of the total cloud volume and mass. LEF were able to identify all previously known dense regions of star-formation in their CS study of L1630, as well as finding many previously unknown condensations due to their CS emission. It has now become customary to search for star-forming cores using CS.

However, recent chemical models (summarized by Bergin 2000) have shown that CS is likely to be depleted due to freezing onto dust grains in the densest regions of pre-star-forming cores and therefore may not be the best tracer of dense star-forming gas. An alternative molecule to use as a tracer for dense gas is N2H+. N2H+ traces similar excitation conditions to CS, but chemically responds differently to variations in density. As a result, CS is more likely to trace post-star-forming gas while N2H+ traces the pre-star-forming cores.

We have therefore begun an unbiased study of two clustered star forming regions, L1630 and L1641 in both CS and N2H+. By mapping the regions in both lines (which can be observed simultaneously at FCRAO) we hope to be able to identify both the youngest cores, which have undergone collapse but not yet formed stars (traced by the N2H+) and post-star-forming cores (traced by the CS), and look for evidence of the freezing out of CS. The combination of the optically thick CS and optically thin N2H+ will also enable us to search for evidence for infall in the clusters. This essential kinematical information complements existing (sub)-millimetre dust continuum observations of these cluster-forming regions. Here we present initial maps of the region surrounding LBS 23 and NGC 2068.

## 2. Observations

The observations were made with the FCRAO 14m telescope during the commisioning period of an On-the-Fly (OTF) mapping scheme in 2002 January. OTF mapping with the 16-element SEQUOIA111SEQUOIA was successfully upgraded to a 32-element dual-polarisation system in March 2002, providing even faster mapping capabilities. array receiver provides fast, high quality and high-sensitivity imaging. Using the newly commissioned Dual-IF correlator with 25MHz total bandwidth and 1024 channels (providing an effective velocity resolution of 0.08 kms-1), the two lines were observed simultaneously. Maps were obtained by scanning in the RA direction, and an “off” source reference scan was obtained after every two rows. Each $`10^{}\times 10^{}`$ submap required 3 repeats to build up the required sensitivity. The area shown here therefore represents a total of 18 hours of on-source observing. System temperatures during the observations were around 200 K.

Maps obtained by this method are not evenly sampled due to the rotation of the sky with respect to the array, and a convolution and regridding algorithm has to be applied to the data in order to obtain spectra on a regularly sampled grid.

## 3. Initial Results

Figure 1a shows an overlay of N2H+ 1–0 integrated intensity on a map of the CS 2–1 integrated intensity, in the region of LBS 23 and NGC 2068. These maps cover $`600`$ square arcminutes and represent a pilot study of a much larger project. The emission maps shown here contain $`4000`$ spectra at 25′′ spacing (Nyquist sampling), each with an rms sensitivity of $`<`$0.1 K per 25 kHz channel.

Our pilot study has already shown some intriguing results. The N2H+ emission is less extended than the CS and a clear offset is seen between the peaks of the N2H+ and CS emission. This offset is not due to pointing error, as the data were obtained simultaneously with the dual-IF system. Figure 1b shows the area around LBS 23 in more detail. Triangles indicate the positions of sub-mm continuum sources found by Lis, Menten & Zylka (1999) and the stars show the positions of the sub-mm sources with IRAS detections. The sub-mm sources form a chain along the bright CS ridge, but their positions seem to correspond more closely to the N2H+ peaks, indicating that N2H+ is a better tracer of the youngest star-forming cores than CS.

The left panel of Figure 2 shows the CS map overlaid on a 2MASS K-band image. The NGC 2068 cluster is located to the north-east of the CS core, in a region cleared of molecular gas as traced by CS. Bright stars are seen in several regions of high CS column density. The CS channel maps in the right panel of Figure 2 show structure not visible in the integrated intensity. Four arched filaments stretch out from the NGC 2068 region, while the LBS 23 region appears more diffuse. The northern region (around the NGC 2068 cluster) is present in more of the channels, indicating a higher CS line-width than the more quiescent southern region.

## 4. Project Goals

We are currently in the process of extending our survey to north to include the NGC 2071 region, and also to the Orion Nebula Cluster region, L1641-South cluster, the NGC 2023/4 region and the L1641 streamer. This ambitious project, includes a range of star-forming environments, from relatively quiescent to huge cluster-forming regions. In total our survey will cover approximately 9 sq. degrees.

The results from our pilot study already demonstrate the utility of chemistry as a tool for star formation studies. Using only CS as a tracer will bias a core sample to warmer or less dense regions (where depletion is less evident). The combination of CS and N2H+ maps probes a wider range of conditions. L1630 and L1641 are known to contain varied star-forming activity (Allen 1996), and therefore these data will allow for a more complete comparison of the distribution of molecular gas to known star-forming sites.

These two tracers are also routinely used for infall studies and CS is a common tracer of outflows. The huge area of our survey will enable us to look for these phenomena on scales previously beyond the capability of millimetre observatories.

Our project goals are:

* To compare and contrast core properties (mass, dynamics, densities) in the differing environments of L1630 and L1641.
* With the use of 2MASS and existing (sub-)millimetre continuum data, to investigate how core morphological and kinematical properties are related to the YSO population, and look for spectral and chemical signatures which trace different modes (clustered vs. distributed) of star formation.
* To investigate the effects of CS depletion, and look for an evolutionary trend in depletion between the cores, by combining the CS and N2H+ data.

### Acknowledgments.

FCRAO is supported by NSF grant AST 01–00793. The Two Micron All Sky Survey is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation

## References

Allen, L.E. 1996, PhD Thesis, University of Massachusetts

Bergin, E.A. 2000, in “Astrochemistry: From Molecular Clouds to Planetary Systems, Proceedings of IAU Symposium 197. Edited by Y. C. Minh & E. F. van Dishoeck, p.51

Lada, Bally & Stark 1991, ApJ, 368, 432

Lada, Evans, Falgarone 1997, ApJ, 488, 286; LEF

Lis, Menten & Zylka 1999, ApJ, 527, 856