text:
# Simulation in ALICE

## I Introduction

ALICE, is the experiment dedicated to the study of heavy ion collisions at the LHC. It is a multipurpose detector with excellent tracking and secondary vertex capabilities, electron and muon detection and a high resolution $`\gamma `$-spectrometer. Although smaller in size as compared to the large LHC detectors ATLAS and CMS, ALICE is of similar complexity. Instead of a complete description of the detector we mention here exemplarily that close to the vertex six layers of silicon trackers (pixel-, drift-, and strip-detectors) are used mainly for secondary vertex reconstruction. The main tracking device is a very large Time Projection Chamber (TPC) covering approximatively two units of pseudo-rapidity. Moreover, ALICE uses almost all known particle identification techniques including Cerenkov and Transition Radiation detectors whose detailed response simulation is a demanding task.

Heavy ion collisions produce a very large number of particles in the final state. Current predictions range from 1400-8000 charged particles in the central unit of rapidity. This is a challenge for the reconstruction and analysis algorithms. The development of these algorithms requires a predictive and precise simulation. Particles have to be transported in the detectors and structural elements. The latter produce secondary particles which can increase significantly the detector occupancy and their correct prediction is important. For those particles passing through sensitive detector areas a detailed detector response simulation is necessary.

Transport and detector response simulation is only one part of the simulation task. Of comparable complexity and diversity is the primary event simulation. It comprises both the heavy ion physics specific soft physics and the hard probes like heavy flavor and jet production. In addition, ALICE has to simulate all possible collision systems ranging from pp, p-A, intermediate mass A–A, to Pb–Pb as well as collision geometries ranging from central to peripheral collisions.

Before we describe the different components of the simulation framework we outline in the following section the ALICE simulation strategy as it has been developed on the basis of the above mentioned challenges and requirements.

## II ALICE simulation strategy

In order to cope with the challenges described in the introduction, the ALICE Offline Project has developed a coherent simulation framework as an integral part of the AliRoot aliroot  object oriented (C++) framework for simulation, reconstruction and analysis based on ROOT root . It comprises primary event (physics) simulation, particle transport, detailed detector response simulation and fast simulation. Its main components are the Virtual MC, the detector classes containing the user code, a set of collaborating classes for primary particle simulation, and base classes for fast simulation.

Since the complex description of the detector geometries and of the detector responses has to be accomplished by a relatively small community of physicists it is essential to provide a stable framework which does not require rewriting of the user code in the case that one of its underlying components changes. The most important of these underlying components is the transport MC. However, in traditional simulation environments the user code for geometry description, and detector response simulation (hit generation) depends entirely on the transport MC. ALICE uses currently Geant3 geant3  in production, FLUKA fluka  and Geant4 geant4  are both options for simulations in the near future. Other alternatives might come up after LHC start-up. For this reason the ALICE Offline Project has developed the concept of the Virtual MC which provides an insulation layer between the user code and the underlying MC.

As already outlined in the introduction also primary event generation is a complex task. It requires the generation of uncorrelated underlying events, correlation between particles and a multitude of so called hard probes as well as any possible mixture between these components. Generators come as external generators packages like Pythia and HIJING as well as simple user written generators based on parameterisations or so called afterburners which introduce particle correlations in existing events. The simulation framework provides a set of collaborating base classes as building blocks for this variety of generators. These will be described in section V.

The size of events produced in heavy ion collisions and the variety of physics signals and collision systems which have to be studied require enormous amounts of computing time and data storage. The framework has to help to reduce the required resources as much as possible. One such tool is known as merging or embedding and will be described in the following section.

Another tool is fast simulation, which is needed for high statistics studies of signals and backgrounds for which the detector acceptances, reconstruction efficiencies, and resolutions have been already determined and parameterised using detailed simulations. The framework provides a set of base classes providing a uniform interface and facilitating the realisation of fast simulation applications.

Last not least it should be mentioned that the ALICE simulation framework provides a rigorous approach concerning MC truth using the class AliStack developed for this purpose. The history of each particle resulting into a detector hit and all primary particles are recorded. The user has the possibility to write additional information if needed.

## III Simulation in the AliRoot framework

### III.1 Components

Fig. 1 shows a component view of the AliRoot simulation framework. The central module, STEER, provides the interface classes for the detector description and data structures. It also provides the run steering and particle stack implementations required by the Virtual MC. The run steering communicates with the event generator module via the interface class AliGenerator, with the detector specific modules via AliDetector, and with the transport MC via the Virtual MC main interface class TVirtualMC. The user code is structured according to the different sub-detectors. No dependencies between these detector modules are allowed. The detector modules contain their specific implementations of AliDetector and data structures like AliHit and AliDigit.

Generator packages like HIJING and the TVirtualMC implementations TGeant3, TGeant4 and TFluka appear as external modules. They are not needed for compilation and linking. The choice for their usage can be made by the user during runtime.

### III.2 Simulated data

The AliRoot simulation framework generates data at different stages of the simulation process. First, there are the so-called hits that represent the precise information about a particle passing a detector obtained from the transport MC, i.e. in most cases energy deposition and position. These hits are then transformed into the signal produced by the detector, summable digits that correspond to the raw data before addition of noise and threshold subtraction. The introduction of summable digits was necessary in order to realise the event merging strategy in which a underlying signal free event is combined with a signal event before completing the digitization process producing the digits which contain the information of raw data. The importance of this procedure for the simulation of heavy ion collisions lies in the fact that one underlying event can be used for several signal events thus reducing computation time and data storage space.

## IV The Virtual Monte Carlo

The VirtualMC interface has been developed by the ALICE Offline project in order to make the user code for detector simulation independent from the underlying transport MC. A detailed description can be found in Ref. vmc .

An illustration of the VirtualMC concept is shown in Fig. 2. A development that is ongoing (see Ref. tgeo ) is to separate the physics and transport part of the VirtualMC from the geometry modeler. This has the advantage that the geometry can be used independently from transport for reconstruction and visualisation. Moreover, the implementation of the geometry modeler can be optimised independently from the transport MC.

Currently ALICE uses TGeant3, the Geant3 implementation of TVirtualMC in production. TGeant4 is used for simulations related to Geant4 physics validations. The TFluka implementation is almost completed and an intensive testing phase will follow before the first release. Currently it uses FLUGG flugg  for geometry navigation. This is expected to be be replaced by the ROOT geometry modeler.

## V Event generators

### V.1 Simulation of heavy ion collisions

The simulations of physical processes are confronted with several problems:

* Existing generators give different answers on parameters such as expected multiplicities, transverse momentum dependence and rapidity dependence at LHC energies.
* Most of the physics signals, like Hyperon decays, high transverse momentum phenomena, open charm and beauty, quarkonia etc., are not properly reproduced by the existing generators.
* Simulation of small cross sections would demand prohibitively long runs to simulate a number of events that is commensurable with the expected number of detected events in the experiment.
* The existing generators do not provide for event topologies like momentum correlations, azimuthal flow etc.

To allow nevertheless efficient simulations ALICE has adopted a framework that allows for a number of options:

* The simulation framework provides an interface to external generators, like HIJING and DPMJET.
* A parameterised “signal free” underlying event with multiplicity as a parameter is provided.
* Rare signals can be generated using the interface to external generators like PYTHIA or simple parameterisations of transverse momentum and rapidity spectra defined in function libraries.
* The framework provides a tool to assemble events from different signal generators (event cocktails).
* The framework provides tools to combine underlying events and signal events on the primary particle level (cocktail) and on the digit level (merging).
* After-Burners are used to introduce particle correlations in a controlled way.

The main parts of the implementation of this strategy are described below.

### V.2 Interfaces

To facilitate the usage of different generators we have developed an abstract generator interface called AliGenerator, see Fig. 3. The objective is to provide the user with an easy and coherent way to study a variety of physics signals as well as full set of tools for testing and background studies. This interface allows the study of full events, event-by-event analysis, single processes and a mixture of both, Cocktail Events.

During creation of a AliGenerator object it registers itself to the run steering object. The latter owns and provides access to the particle stack of type AliStack, so that the method AliGenerator::Generate() can write particles to it. Alternatively a stack can be directly connected to the AliGenerator object in order to use particle production stand-alone for fast simulation tasks or in order to create several events before a combination of them is written to the main stack.

#### V.2.1 External generators

Several event generators are available via the abstract ROOT class that implements the generic generator interface, TGenerator. Through implementations of this abstract base class we wrap FORTRAN MonteCarlo codes like PYTYIA, HERWIG and HIJING that are thus accessible from the AliRoot classes. In particular the interface to PYTHIA used with PDFLIB includes the use of nuclear structure functions.

AliGenerator derived classes like AliGenPythia or AliGenHijing combine the external particle production by delegation to TGenerator with their main task writing particles to the stack. In addition simplified configuration of the external generators is provided. Predefined simulation configurations like minimum bias or jet-production help the user to perform easily simple simulation tasks.

An interesting byproduct of this design is that in a ROOT session the external generators can be used interactively. Run time configuration, particle production and analysis can be performed from the command-line interface.

#### V.2.2 Parameterisations

In many cases, the expected transverse momentum and rapidity distributions of particles are known. In other cases the effect of variations in these distributions must be investigated. In both situations it is appropriate to use generators that produce primary particles and their decays sampling from parametrised spectra. To meet the different physics requirements in a modular way, the parameterisations are stored in independent function libraries wrapped into classes that can be plugged into the generator. This is schematically illustrated in Fig. 4 where four different generator libraries can be loaded via the abstract generator interface.

#### V.2.3 Event cocktails

It is customary in heavy ion event generation to superimpose different signals on an event to tune the reconstruction algorithms. In other cases the user needs the possibility to assemble events by combining different particle types and parameterisations.

This is possible in AliRoot via the so-called cocktail generator (Fig. 5). This creates events from user-defined particle cocktails by choosing as “ingredients” a list of generators. Through its recursive design AliGenCocktail is at the same time a generator and a container class for generators. The generation task is performed by delegating to the registered generators.

Another important application of AliGenCocktail has been found for the simulation of p-A collisions. Generators like HIJING can simulate p-A collisions but they do not simulate slow nucleons. The detection of these slow nucleons is important for the determination of the centrality of the collisions (event geometry). Simple parameterisations exist for their production we have designed base classes AliGenSlowNucleons and AliSlowNucleonModel for this purpose. They need, however, the event collision geometry as an input. An easy solution was to combine the instance of the slow nucleon generator with a generator that can provide a collision geometry using AliGenCocktail. Communication between the two is via the class AliCollisionGeometry.

#### V.2.4 Afterburner

The modularity of the event generator implementation allows at the same time easy integration with the simulation steering class AliRun and with the objects that are responsible for changing the output of event generators or for assembling new events making use of the input of several events. These processors are generally called Afterburners. They are especially needed to introduce a controlled (parameterised) particle correlation into an otherwise uncorrelated particle sample. In AliRoot this task is further simplified by the implementation of the stack class AliStack that can be connected to both AliRun and AliGenerator. Currently afterburners are used for two particle correlation simulations and analysis and for the simulation of azimuthal flow.

## VI Fast simulation

Detailed detector simulation is needed together with reconstruction to evaluate the acceptance, efficiency and resolution for specific physics probes. Owing to the high particle multiplicity per event this analysis can be based on a few thousand events. Many types of physics analysis, such as D meson reconstruction from hadronic decay channels, and trigger studies have to make use of millions of events. Computing resources are in general not available for such high statistics simulations.

To reach the required sample size, fast simulation methods based on meaningful parameterisations of the results from detailed and consequently slow simulations are applied. The systematic error introduced by the parameterisations is in general small compared to the reduction of the statistical error. This is particularly true for the studies of the invariant mass continuum below a resonance.

It is hard to find a common denominator for fast simulation methods since they are very specific to the analysis task. As a minimum abstraction, we have designed base classes that allow for a representation of the detector or detector systems as a set of parameterisations of acceptance, efficiency and resolution. The Muon Spectrometer fast simulation has been implemented using these classes.

Another interesting development concerns the fast simulation of the resolution and efficiency of tracking in the central barrel. In this approach full tracking is performed for the inner tracking system (ITS), which is needed for detailed secondary vertex reconstruction studies. After this, TPC resolution and efficiency are obtained from the track parameters at the inner radius of the TPC, using a parameterisation.

## VII Conclusions

The ALICE Offline Project has developed a coherent simulation framework for detector and physics performance studies in the AliRoot Framework based on ROOT. The main simulation components are the Virtual MC Interface and event generator interfaces tailored to the needs of the heavy ion community

The framework has proven its maturity and functionality in the large MC production that has been performed for the studies related to the ALICE Physics Performance Report. The framework is still confronted with new requirements from both physics studies and new detector elements under study, most recently the proposed electromagnetic calorimeter together with the ideas of studying jet physics with the ALICE detector. The easiness with which such new elements can be introduced are the consequence of our modular approach.


format: text

text:
# Discrete quantum modes of the Dirac field in 𝐴𝑑𝑆_{𝑑+1} backgrounds

## 1 Introduction

The interest in propagation of the quantum free fields on de Sitter or anti-de Sitter ($`AdS`$) spacetimes is due to the hope that these simple examples of matter fields minimally coupled with the gravitational field of the background could suggest new ways to further developments of the quantum field theory in curved spacetimes. Moreover, the discovery of the AdS/CFT correspondence  brings in a central position the theory of the free fields on the $`(d+1)`$-dimensional $`AdS`$ spacetimes ($`AdS_{d+1}`$) since their quantum modes can be related to the conformal field theories in the Minkowski-like boundaries of the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ manifolds .

The quantum modes of the scalar free fields in central charts of the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ backgrounds are well-studied either for $`d=3`$  or in the general case of any $`d`$ . However, for the Dirac field we know only the solutions in the central charts of the $`AdS_{3+1}`$ spacetime we have obtained few years ago . These were derived using a special Cartesian tetrad-gauge which points out the central symmetry as a manifest one  helping us to simply separate the spherical variables of the Dirac equation in terms of the angular spinors defined in special relativity . Recently, Gu, Ma and Dong have generalized the technique of separating spherical variables of the Dirac equation in Minkowski spacetime to flat (pseudo-Euclidean) spacetimes with generalized spherical coordinates of any dimensions . This offers us the opportunity to generalize our method to any $`(d+1)`$-dimensional curved spacetime with static charts having the $`SO(d)`$-symmetry, we call here (generalized) central charts. The idea is to write the Dirac equation in a suitable gauge allowing us to take over the whole procedure of the separation of generalized spherical variables worked out for the flat manifolds with central potentials . In this way we have to obtain simple radial equations that may be solved for particular cases as that of the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ spacetimes. The present article is devoted to this problem.

The main point of our approach is the mentioned Cartesian gauge which can be generalized to central backgrounds of any dimensions, where it will play a similar role in showing off the manifest $`SO(d)`$ symmetry of the generalized central backgrounds. This leads to a simple covariant form of the Dirac equation in Cartesian coordinates and produces manifest covariant $`SO(d)`$ generators of the spinor representation whose orbital and spin parts commute to each other . In these conditions the separation of the generalized spherical variables can be done in terms of the angular momentum eigenspinors defined in the $`(d+1)`$-dimensional flat backgrounds . After the separation of the angular variables there remain only two radial wave functions for which we write down the radial equations in the general case of any central chart with generalized spherical coordinates. These can be analytically solved for the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ backgrounds in the same manner as in the case of $`d=3`$ , finding only discrete quantum modes.

We start in the second section outlining a convenient version of gauge-covariant Dirac theory in any dimensions. In Sec.3 we define the Cartesian gauge in Cartesian coordinates and we bring the Dirac equation in a simpler form, called reduced equation, which has similar properties as that in flat spacetime, including the discrete symmetries. The next section is devoted to the separation of variables in generalized spherical coordinates which generates the radial equations. In Sec.5 we obtain the quantum modes of the Dirac field in the central charts with generalized spherical coordinates of the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ spacetime, deriving the normalized energy eigenspinors and the energy levels. The parity and charge-conjugation transformations we use are defined in Appendix.

## 2 The gauge-covariant Dirac theory in $`(d+1)`$ dimensions

The theory of the Dirac field in curved spacetimes of any dimensions involves three basic ingredients that can be chosen in different ways. These are the local chart (i.e., natural frame), the gauge fields defining the local frames and the Clifford algebra. In these conditions, the physical meaning of the whole theory remains independent on the choice of these elements only if we assume that this is gauge-covariant. On the other hand, the generalization to a larger number of dimensions may be physically relevant in the sense of the Kaluza-Klein theories only if the extra-dimensions are space-like. For this reason we consider here the gauge-covariant theory of the Dirac spinors in backgrounds with $`d+1`$ dimensions among them only one is time-like.

We start with a such pseudo-Riemannian manifold, $`M_{d+1}`$, whose pseudo-Euclidean model has the flat metric $`\eta `$ of signature $`(1,d)`$, corresponding to the gauge group $`G(\eta )=SO(1,d)`$. Since the Dirac theory involves local orthogonal (non-holonomic) frames, we choose in $`M_{d+1}`$ a local chart with coordinates $`x^\mu `$, $`\alpha ,\mathrm{},\mu ,\nu ,\mathrm{}=0,1,2,\mathrm{},d`$, and introduce local frames using the gauge fields $`e_{\widehat{\alpha }}(x)`$ and $`\widehat{e}^{\widehat{\alpha }}(x)`$ labeled by local (hated) indices, $`\widehat{\alpha },\mathrm{},\widehat{\mu },\widehat{\nu },\mathrm{}=0,1,2,\mathrm{},d`$. Their components accomplish

$$e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu \widehat{e}_\nu ^{\widehat{\alpha }}=\delta _\mu ^\nu ,e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu \widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\beta }}=\delta _{\widehat{\alpha }}^{\widehat{\beta }},g_{\mu \nu }e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu e_{\widehat{\beta }}^\nu =\eta _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }},$$
(1)
and give the components of the metric tensor of $`M_{d+1}`$ in the natural frame, $`g_{\mu \nu }(x)=\eta _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}\widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\alpha }}(x)\widehat{e}_\nu ^{\widehat{\beta }}(x)`$.

Bearing in mind that the irreducible representations of the Clifford algebra have only an odd number of dimensions, we consider a $`(2m+1)`$-dimensional Clifford algebra with $`2md`$, acting on a spinor space with $`2^m`$ dimensions. From the basis of this algebra we choose a suitable set of $`d+1`$ $`\gamma `$-matrices and match the phase factors in order to have

$$\{\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }},\gamma ^{\widehat{\beta }}\}=2\eta ^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}.$$
(2)
Then $`(\gamma ^0)^{}=\gamma ^0`$ and $`(\gamma ^i)^{}=\gamma ^i`$ ($`i,j,k,\mathrm{}=1,2,\mathrm{},d`$) which means that the Dirac adjoint of any matrix $`A`$ can be defined in usual manner as $`\overline{A}=\gamma ^0A^{}\gamma ^0`$ so that the $`\gamma `$-matrices be self-adjoint, $`\overline{\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}}=\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}`$. Notice that the point-dependent matrices $`\gamma ^\mu (x)=e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu (x)\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}`$ are also self-adjoint with respect to the Dirac adjoint.

The group $`G(\eta )`$ admits an universal covering group $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$ that is simply connected and has the same Lie algebra. The spin operators

$$S^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}=\frac{i}{4}[\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }},\gamma ^{\widehat{\beta }}]$$
(3)
represent the basis-generators of the spinor representation of $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$ which, in general, can be reducible. The real valued parameters of $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$ are the components $`\omega _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}=\omega _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}`$ of the skew-symmetric tensors, $`\omega `$ defining the operators

$$T(\omega )=e^{iS(\omega )},S(\omega )=\frac{1}{2}\omega _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}S^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }},$$
(4)
which transform the gamma-matrices according to the rule

$$[T(\omega )]^1\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}T(\omega )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}(\omega )\gamma ^{\widehat{\beta }}$$
(5)
where

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}(\omega )=\delta _{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}+\omega _{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}+\frac{1}{2}\omega _{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}\omega _{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\lambda }}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{n!}\underset{n}{\underset{}{\omega _{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}\omega _{\widehat{\sigma }}^{\widehat{\lambda }}\mathrm{}\omega _{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\tau }}}}+\mathrm{},$$
(6)
is a transformation of $`G(\eta )`$. We specify that the operators $`T(\omega )\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$ are unitary with respect to the Dirac adjoint satisfying $`\overline{T(\omega )}=[T(\omega )]^1`$.

Let us denote by $`\psi `$ the Dirac free field of mass $`m`$, and by $`\overline{\psi }=\psi ^{}\gamma ^0`$ its Dirac adjoint. In natural units (with $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$) its gauge invariant action  is

$$𝒮[\psi ,e]=d^dx\sqrt{g}\left\{\frac{i}{2}[\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu D_\mu \psi (\overline{D_\mu \psi })\gamma ^\mu \psi ]m\overline{\psi }\psi \right\}$$
(7)
where $`g=|\mathrm{det}(g_{\mu \nu })|`$ and $`D_\mu =_\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{spin}`$ are the covariant derivatives of the spinor field formed by the usual covariant derivatives $`_\mu `$ (acting in natural indices) and the spin connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{spin}=\frac{i}{2}e_{\widehat{\nu }}^\beta (\widehat{e}_\alpha ^{\widehat{\sigma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\beta \mu }^\alpha \widehat{e}_{\beta ,\mu }^{\widehat{\sigma }})S_{\widehat{\sigma }}^{\widehat{\nu }}`$. The action of these covariant derivatives in the spinor sector is $`D_\mu \psi =(_\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{spin})\psi `$. Since the spin connection satisfies $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_\mu ^{spin}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{spin}`$, the quantity $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ can be derived as a scalar, i.e. $`_\mu (\overline{\psi }\psi )=\overline{D_\mu \psi }\psi +\overline{\psi }D_\mu \psi =_\mu (\overline{\psi }\psi )`$, while the quantities $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\alpha \gamma ^\beta \mathrm{}\psi `$ behave as tensors of different ranks. Moreover, the use of covariant derivatives assures the covariance of the whole theory under the gauge transformations

$`\widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\alpha }}(x)`$ $``$ $`\widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\alpha }}(x)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\widehat{\beta }}^{\widehat{\alpha }}[\omega (x)]\widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\beta }}(x),`$
$`e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu (x)`$ $``$ $`e_{}^{}{}_{\widehat{\alpha }}{}^{\mu }(x)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\widehat{\alpha }}^{\widehat{\beta }}[\omega (x)]e_{\widehat{\beta }}^\mu (x),`$ (8)
$`\psi (x)`$ $``$ $`\psi ^{}(x)=T[\omega (x)]\psi (x),`$
due to the point-dependent parameters $`\omega _{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}(x)`$, in the sense that $`𝒮(\psi ^{},e^{})=𝒮(\psi ,e)`$. Thus we reproduced the main features of the familiar tetrad gauge-covariant theories with spin in four dimensions from which we can take over now all the results arising from similar formulas. For example, in this way we find that

$`D_\mu (\gamma ^\nu \psi )=\gamma ^\nu D_\mu \psi ,`$ (9)
$`[D_\mu ,D_\nu ]\psi =\frac{1}{4}R_{\alpha \beta \mu \nu }\gamma ^\alpha \gamma ^\beta \psi ,`$ (10)
where $`R`$ is the Riemannian-Christoffel curvature tensor of $`M_{d+1}`$. The Dirac equation derived from the action (7), $`_D\psi =m\psi `$, involves the Dirac operator that can be written as

$$_D=i\gamma ^\mu D_\mu =i\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu _\mu +\frac{i}{2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_\mu (\sqrt{g}e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu )\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }}\frac{1}{4}e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu \{\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }},\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{spin}\}.$$
(11)
It is not difficult to verify that this is self-adjoint with respect to the Dirac adjoint.

A crucial problem is to find the generators of symmetries at the level of the relativistic quantum mechanics since these operators must commutes with the Dirac one. In the absence of other interactions these are produced only by the symmetries of the background. For explaining this mechanism it is worth reviewing some previous results we obtained in four dimensions and can be generalized to arbitrary dimensions. In  we defined the external symmetry group, $`S(M)`$, of a given manifold $`M`$ as the universal covering group of the isometry group, $`I(M)`$, pointing out that for each matter field there exists a specific representation of $`S(M)`$, induced by a linear representation of $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$, that leaves the field equation invariant. Consequently, the generators of this representation are operators which commute with that of the field equation. They can be calculated starting with the Killing vectors corresponding to the isometries of $`I(M)`$ according to a rule obtained by Carter and McLenaghan for the Dirac field  which states that for any Killing vector $`k^\mu `$ there exists an operator

$$X_k=ik^\mu D_\mu +\frac{1}{2}k_{\mu ;\nu }e_{\widehat{\alpha }}^\mu e_{\widehat{\beta }}^\nu S^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}$$
(12)
which commutes with $`_D`$. We have shown that these operators are just the generators of the representation of $`S(M)`$ in the space of the spinors $`\psi `$ that is induced by the spinor representation of $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$. Each generator $`(\text{12})`$ can be divided in an usual orbital part and a spin part, involving the spin matrices, whose forms depend on the choice of the gauge fields. When the spin parts commute with the orbital ones we say that the representation is manifest covariant. These results can be generalized for any $`M_{d+1}`$ manifold considering that the operators $`S^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}`$ are those defined by Eq.(3).

In other respects, from the conservation of the electric charge, one can deduce that when $`e_i^0=0`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},d`$, the relativistic scalar product of two spinors ,

$$\psi _1,\psi _2=_Dd^dx\mu (x)\overline{\psi }_1(x)\gamma ^0\psi _2(x),$$
(13)
defined on the $`d`$-dimensional space domain $`D`$ of the chart we use, has the weight function

$$\mu (x)=\sqrt{g(x)}e_0^0(x).$$
(14)
The coherence of the whole theory is guaranteed by the fact that the conserved quantity associated to the Killing vector $`k^\mu `$, given by the Noether theorem, is the expectation value $`\psi ,X_k\psi `$ of the operator (12) calculated using the scalar product (13) .

## 3 The Dirac equation in central backgrounds

In what follows we shall focus only on the static central manifolds. These have static central charts with Cartesian coordinates, the time $`x^0=t`$ and space Cartesian coordinates $`x^i`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},d`$, where the metric is time-independent and spherically symmetric. The isometry groups of these manifolds, $`I(M_{d+1})`$, include as a subgroup the group of the static central symmetry, $`I_c=T(1)SO(d)`$, formed by time translations and $`d`$-dimensional orthogonal transformations of the Cartesian space coordinates seen as the components of the vector $`𝐱(x^1,x^2,\mathrm{},x^d)`$. The central symmetry requires the metric tensor, $`g(𝐱)`$, to transform manifestly covariant under the linear transformations of the space coordinates,

$$x^ix^i=R_{ij}x^j,t^{}=t,$$
(15)
produced by any $`RSO(d)`$. In these conditions the corresponding line element has the general form

$$ds^2=g_{\mu \nu }(𝐱)dx^\mu dx^\nu =A(r)dt^2[B(r)\delta _{ij}+C(r)x^ix^j]dx^idx^j$$
(16)
where $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ are arbitrary functions of the Euclidean norm of $`𝐱`$, $`r=|𝐱|=\sqrt{x^ix^i}`$, which is invariant under $`SO(d)`$ transformations. In applications it is convenient to replace these functions by new ones, $`u`$, $`v`$ and $`w`$, such that

$$A=w^2,B=\frac{w^2}{v^2},C=\frac{w^2}{r^2}\left(\frac{1}{u^2}\frac{1}{v^2}\right).$$
(17)
Then the metric appears as the conformal transformation of the simpler one with $`w=1`$.

In the case of the four-dimensional central backgrounds we proposed a Cartesian gauge in which the gauge fields are static and covariantly transform under transformations similar to (15). We adopt the same type of gauge here, in the Cartesian charts of the central manifolds $`M_{d+1}`$, requiring the 1-forms $`d\widehat{x}^{\widehat{\sigma }}=\widehat{e}_\mu ^{\widehat{\sigma }}dx^\mu `$ to transform according to the rule

$$d\widehat{x}^{\widehat{\mu }}d\widehat{x}^{\widehat{\mu }}=\widehat{e}_\alpha ^{\widehat{\mu }}(x^{})dx^\alpha =(Rd\widehat{x})^{\widehat{\mu }}.$$
(18)
Then the gauge fields must have components of the form

$`\widehat{e}_0^0`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}(r),\widehat{e}_i^0=\widehat{e}_0^i=0,\widehat{e}_j^i=\widehat{b}(r)\delta _{ij}+\widehat{c}(r)x^ix^j,`$ (19)
$`e_0^0`$ $`=`$ $`a(r),e_i^0=e_0^i=0,e_j^i=b(r)\delta _{ij}+c(r)x^ix^j,`$ (20)
where, according to Eqs.(16) and (17), we find that

$`\widehat{a}`$ $`=`$ $`w,\widehat{b}={\displaystyle \frac{w}{v}},\widehat{c}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{w}{u}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{v}}\right),`$ (21)
$`a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}},b={\displaystyle \frac{v}{w}},c={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{w}}{\displaystyle \frac{v}{w}}\right).`$ (22)
Since in this chart

$$\sqrt{g}=B^{\frac{d1}{2}}[A(B+r^2C)]^{\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{1}{ab^{d1}(b+r^2c)}=\frac{w^{d+1}}{uv^{d1}},$$
(23)
we obtain the weight function (14) in our Cartesian gauge,

$$\mu =\frac{1}{b^{d1}(b+r^2c)}=\frac{w^d}{uv^{d1}}.$$
(24)
From Eqs.(21) and (22) we observe that $`w`$ must be positively defined in order to keep the same sense of the time axes of the natural and local frames. In addition, it is convenient to consider that the function $`u`$ is positively defined and to try to define the radial coordinate $`r`$ so that $`u=1`$. However, the function $`v`$ can be of any sign. When $`v>0`$ then the space axes of the local frame at $`𝐱=0`$ are parallel with those of the natural frame, while for $`v<0`$ these are antiparallel.

Let us derive now the concrete form of the operators of the Dirac theory in this gauge. First we observe that if we replace the tetrad components in Eq.(11) then the last term of its left-hand side does not contribute. The remaining equation can be put in a simpler form introducing the reduced Dirac field, $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$, defined as

$$\psi (x)=\chi (r)\stackrel{~}{\psi }(x),$$
(25)
where

$$\chi =[\sqrt{g}(b+r^2c)]^{1/2}=v^{\frac{d1}{2}}w^{\frac{d}{2}}.$$
(26)
After this substitution we obtain the reduced Dirac equation, $`\stackrel{~}{}_D\stackrel{~}{\psi }=m\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$, in which the reduced Dirac operator,

$$\stackrel{~}{}_D=ia(r)\gamma ^0_t+ib(r)\gamma ^i_i+ic(r)(\gamma ^ix^i)\left(\frac{d1}{2}+x^i_i\right),$$
(27)
is independent on the derivatives of $`a,b`$ and $`c`$.

We observe that the reduced Dirac equation has a manifest symmetry similar to that of the Dirac equation in flat backgrounds with central potentials. This is the consequence of our version of Cartesian gauge which produces usual linear representation of the external symmetry group $`S_c(M_{d+1})`$, associated with $`I_c(M_{d+1})`$, showing off the central symmetry in a manifest covariant form. Indeed, taking into account that $`S_c(M_{d+1})=T(1)\stackrel{~}{SO}(d)`$ involves the group $`\stackrel{~}{SO}(d)\stackrel{~}{G}(\eta )`$ which is the universal covering group of $`SO(d)`$, we conclude that the spin operators $`S^{ij}`$ defined by Eq.(3) are the basis-generators of the spinor representation of $`\stackrel{~}{SO}(d)`$. Furthermore, following the method of Ref., we find that the basis-generators of the induced representation of $`S_c(M_{d+1})`$ given by Eq.(12) are the $`T(1)`$ generator, $`i_t`$, and the $`\stackrel{~}{SO}(d)`$ ones,

$$𝒥_{ij}=L_{ij}+S_{ij}=i(x^i_jx^j_i)+S_{ij},$$
(28)
which play the role of total angular momentum. They commute with the operator (27) and, obviously, have a manifest covariant form.

On the other hand, the reduced Dirac equation can be put in Hamiltonian form $`i_t\stackrel{~}{\psi }=\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ as in the case of the flat manifolds using the operators

$``$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{u(r)}{r^2}}(\gamma ^0\gamma ^ix^i)\left(\frac{d1}{2}+x^i_i\right)i{\displaystyle \frac{v(r)}{r^2}}(\gamma ^ix^i)𝒦+w(r)\gamma ^0m,`$ (29)
$`𝒦`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^0\left(S^{ij}L_{ij}+\frac{d1}{2}\right).`$ (30)
Since $`\gamma ^0`$ commutes with $`𝒥_{ij}`$ and $`𝒦`$ we have

$$[,𝒥_{ij}]=0,[,𝒦]=0.$$
(31)
Consequently, all the properties related to the conservation of the angular momentum, including the separation of variables in spherical coordinates, will be similar to those of the usual Dirac theory in the flat spacetimes with $`d+1`$ dimensions . Moreover, we note that the discrete transformations of parity and charge conjugation can be also defined. These leave Eq.(27) invariant and have the same significance as in special relativity . Thus, for example, the charge conjugation transforms each particular solution of positive frequency into the corresponding one of negative frequency (see the Appendix).

## 4 Separation of spherical coordinates

The next step is to introduce the generalized spherical coordinates, $`r`$, $`\theta _1,\theta _2,\mathrm{},\theta _{d1}`$,  associated with the space coordinates of our natural Cartesian frame,

$`x^1`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{cos}\theta _1\mathrm{sin}\theta _2\mathrm{}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{d1},`$
$`x^2`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{sin}\theta _2\mathrm{}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{d1},`$
$`\mathrm{}`$
$`x^d`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{cos}\theta _{d1}.`$
Then from Eqs.(16) and (17) one obtains the line element

$$ds^2=w^2dt^2\frac{w^2}{u^2}dr^2\frac{w^2}{v^2}r^2d\theta ^2,$$
(33)
where $`d\theta ^2`$ is the usual line element on the sphere $`S^{d1}`$ ,

$$d\theta ^2=d\theta _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _1d\theta _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _2d\theta _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\mathrm{}.$$
(34)
Consequently, in this chart we have

$$\sqrt{g_s}=\sqrt{g}r^{d1}\underset{a=1}{\overset{d1}{}}(\mathrm{sin}\theta _a)^{a1},$$
(35)
and similarly for the weight function (14). The special form of the reduced Dirac equation allows one to separate the spherical variables as in the case of the central motion in flat spacetimes, using the angular spinors $`\varphi _{\kappa ,(j)}(\widehat{𝐱})`$ defined in Ref.. These depend only on the spherical variables represented by the unit vector $`\widehat{𝐱}=𝐱/r`$, being determined by a set of weights $`(j)`$ of an irreducible representation of $`\stackrel{~}{SO}(d)`$ and the eigenvalue $`\kappa =\pm |\kappa |`$ of the operator $`𝒦`$ which concentrates all the angular operators of $``$.

The separation procedure is complicated being different for even or odd values of $`d`$ . For odd $`d`$ the particular solution of given energy, $`E`$, and positive frequency corresponding to the irreducible representation $`(j)`$ may have the form

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{E,\kappa ,(j)}(t,𝐱)=r^{\frac{d1}{2}}e^{iEt}\left(\begin{array}{c}f_{E,\kappa }^+(r)\varphi _{\kappa ,(j)}(\widehat{𝐱})\\ if_{E,\kappa }^{}(r)\varphi _{\kappa ,(j)}(\widehat{𝐱})\end{array}\right),$$
(36)
where $`\kappa `$ can take positive or negative values. However, if $`d`$ is even then there are pairs of associated irreducible representations, $`(j_1)`$ and $`(j_2)`$, giving the same eigenvalue of the first Casimir operator, among them one takes the first one for positive values of $`\kappa `$ and the second one for the negative values, $`\kappa =|\kappa |`$. Consequently, the particular solutions read

$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{E,|\kappa |,(j_1)}(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`r^{\frac{d1}{2}}e^{iEt}`$ (37)
$`\times \left[f_{E,|\kappa |}^+(r)\varphi _{|\kappa |,(j_1)}(\widehat{𝐱})+if_{E,|\kappa |}^{}(r)\varphi _{|\kappa |,(j_1)}(\widehat{𝐱})\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{E,|\kappa |,(j_2)}(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`r^{\frac{d1}{2}}e^{iEt}`$ (38)
$`\times \left[f_{E,|\kappa |}^+(r)\varphi _{|\kappa |,(j_2)}(\widehat{𝐱})+if_{E,|\kappa |}^{}(r)\varphi _{|\kappa |,(j_2)}(\widehat{𝐱})\right].`$
It is remarkable that both these types of solutions involve the same set of radial wave functions that depend on $`E`$ and

$$\kappa =\pm (\frac{d1}{2}+l),l=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(39)
where $`l`$ is an auxiliary orbital quantum number defining the representations $`(j)`$, $`(j_1)`$ and $`(j_2)`$ . The radial wave functions obey a pair of radial equations similar to those found in the case of $`d=3`$ . For a given $`\kappa `$, we embed these radial equations in the eigenvalue problem

$$H_\kappa f_{E,\kappa }=Ef_{E,\kappa }$$
(40)
of the radial Hamiltonian operator

$$H_\kappa =\left(\begin{array}{cc}mw& u\frac{d}{dr}+\kappa \frac{v}{r}\\ u\frac{d}{dr}+\kappa \frac{v}{r}& mw\end{array}\right)$$
(41)
acting in the two-dimensional space with elements $`f=(f^+,f^{})^T`$. After the separation of variables the scalar product (13) splits in angular and radial terms. Supposing that the angular spinors are normalized with respect to an angular scalar product, we remain with the radial scalar product

$$\psi _1,\psi _2=f_1,f_2=_{D_r}\frac{dr}{u}f_1^{}f_2.$$
(42)
The radial weight function $`\mu \chi ^2=1/u`$, resulted from Eqs.(24) and (26), is just that we need in order to have $`(u_r)^{}=u_r`$ such that $`H_\kappa `$ be Hermitian with respect to the scalar product (42). Thus we obtain an independent radial problem which has to be solved in each particular case separately using appropriate methods.

## 5 Quantum modes in $`AdS_{d+1}`$ spacetimes

The $`AdS_{d+1}`$ spacetime is the hyperboloid $`\eta _{AB}Z^AZ^B=R^2`$ of radius $`R=1/\omega `$ in the $`(d+2)`$-dimensional flat spacetime of coordinates $`Z^1,Z^0,Z^1,\mathrm{},Z^d`$ and metric $`\eta _{AB}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,\mathrm{},1)`$, $`A,B=1,0,1,\mathrm{}d`$. Here we consider the static chart of Cartesian coordinates $`(t,𝐱)`$ defined as

$`Z^1`$ $`=`$ $`R\mathrm{sec}\omega r\mathrm{cos}\omega t,`$
$`Z^0`$ $`=`$ $`R\mathrm{sec}\omega r\mathrm{sin}\omega t,`$ (43)
$`𝐙`$ $`=`$ $`R{\displaystyle \frac{𝐱}{r}}\mathrm{tan}\omega r,`$
and the corresponding static chart with generalized spherical coordinates (4) where the line element reads

$$ds^2=\eta _{AB}dZ^AdZ^B=\mathrm{sec}^2\omega r\left(dt^2dr^2\frac{1}{\omega ^2}\mathrm{sin}^2\omega rd\theta ^2\right).$$
(44)
In this chart $`rD_r=[0,\pi /2\omega )`$ and, therefore, the whole space domain is $`D=D_r\times S^{d1}`$. In addition, we specify that the time of $`AdS_{d+1}`$ must satisfy $`t[\pi /\omega ,\pi /\omega )`$ while $`t(\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$ defines the universal covering spacetime of $`AdS_{d+1}`$ ($`CAdS_{d+1}`$) .

Furthermore, from Eq.(44) we identify

$$u(r)=1,w(r)=\mathrm{sec}\omega r,v(r)=\omega r\mathrm{csc}\omega r,$$
(45)
and, introducing the notation $`k=m/\omega `$ (i.e. $`mc^2/\mathrm{}\omega `$ in usual units), we find the Hamiltonian of the radial problem

$$H_\kappa =\left(\begin{array}{cc}\omega k\mathrm{sec}\omega r& \frac{d}{dr}+\omega \kappa \mathrm{csc}\omega r\\ \frac{d}{dr}+\omega \kappa \mathrm{csc}\omega r& \omega k\mathrm{sec}\omega r\end{array}\right).$$
(46)
Its form suggests us to perform the local rotation $`f\widehat{f}=U(r)f=(\widehat{f}^+,\widehat{f}^{})^T`$ where

$$U(r)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\frac{\omega r}{2}& \mathrm{sin}\frac{\omega r}{2}\\ \mathrm{sin}\frac{\omega r}{2}& \mathrm{cos}\frac{\omega r}{2}\end{array}\right).$$
(47)
The transformed Hamiltonian,

$$\widehat{H}_\kappa =U(r)H_\kappa U^{}(r)\frac{\omega }{2}1_{2\times 2}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\nu & \frac{d}{dr}+W_\kappa \\ \frac{d}{dr}+W_\kappa & \nu \end{array}\right)$$
(48)
giving the new eigenvalue problem

$$\widehat{H}_\kappa \widehat{f}=\left(E\frac{\omega }{2}\right)\widehat{f},$$
(49)
has supersymmetry since it has the requested specific form with $`\nu =\omega (k+\kappa )`$ and the superpotential

$$W_\kappa (r)=\omega (\kappa \mathrm{cot}\omega rk\mathrm{tan}\omega r).$$
(50)
Consequently, the transformed radial wave functions, $`\widehat{f}^\pm `$, satisfy the second order equations

$$\left(\frac{1}{\omega ^2}\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{k(k1)}{\mathrm{cos}^2\omega r}+\frac{\kappa (\kappa 1)}{\mathrm{sin}^2\omega r}\right)\widehat{f}^{(\pm )}(r)=ϵ^2\widehat{f}^{(\pm )}(r),$$
(51)
where $`ϵ=E/\omega 1/2`$. The general solutions can be written in terms of Gauss hypergeometric functions ,

$`\widehat{f}^\pm (r)`$ $`=`$ $`N_\pm \mathrm{sin}^{2s_\pm }\omega r\mathrm{cos}^{2p_\pm }\omega r`$
$`\times F(s_\pm +p_\pm {\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}},s_\pm +p_\pm +{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}},2s_\pm +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},\mathrm{sin}^2\omega r),`$
depending on parameters that must satisfy

$`2s_\pm (2s_\pm 1)`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa (\kappa 1),`$ (53)
$`2p_\pm (2p_\pm 1)`$ $`=`$ $`k(k1),`$ (54)
and on the normalization factors $`N_\pm `$. The next step is to select the suitable values of these parameters and to calculate $`N_+/N_{}`$ such that the functions $`\widehat{f}^\pm `$ should be solutions of the transformed radial problem (49) with a good physical meaning. This can be achieved only when $`F`$ is a polynomial selected by a suitable quantization condition since otherwise $`F`$ is strongly divergent for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\omega r1`$. Then the functions $`\widehat{f}^\pm `$ will be square integrable with normalization factors calculated according to the condition

$$f,f=\widehat{f},\widehat{f}=_{D_r}𝑑r\left(|\widehat{f}^+(r)|^2+|\widehat{f}^{}(r)|^2\right)=1,$$
(55)
resulted from the fact that the matrix (47) is orthogonal.

The discrete energy spectrum is given by the particle-like $`CAdS`$ quantization conditions

$$ϵ=2(n_\pm +s_\pm +p_\pm ),ϵ>0,$$
(56)
that must be compatible with each other, i.e.

$$n_++s_++p_+=n_{}+s_{}+p_{}.$$
(57)
Hereby we see that there is only one independent radial quantum number, $`n_r=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. In other respects, if we express the solutions (5) in terms of Jacobi polynomials, we observe that these functions remain square integrable for $`2s_\pm >1/2`$ and $`2p_\pm >1/2`$. Since from Eq.(39) we have $`|\kappa |\frac{d1}{2}`$, we are forced to consider only the positive solutions of Eqs.(53). However, the Eqs.(54) admit either the solutions $`2p_+=k`$ and $`2p_{}=k+1`$ defining the boundary conditions of regular modes or other possible values, $`2p_+=k+1`$ and $`2p_{}=k`$, giving the irregular modes for which $`k<1/2`$ . Here we restrict ourselves to write down only the energy eigenspinors of the regular modes on $`CAdS`$.

Let us consider first $`\kappa =|\kappa |`$ and choose $`2s_+=\kappa `$ and $`2s_{}=\kappa +1`$ for which Eq.(57) is accomplished provided $`n_+=n_r`$ and $`n_{}=n_r1`$. Then the functions $`\widehat{f}^\pm `$ given by Eqs.(5) represent a solution of the transformed radial problem (49) only if

$$\frac{N_{}}{N_+}=\frac{2n_r}{2|\kappa |+1}.$$
(58)
These can be expressed in terms of Jacobi polynomials as

$`\widehat{f}_{n_r,|\kappa |}^+(r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\mathrm{sin}^{|\kappa |}\omega r\mathrm{cos}^k\omega rP_{n_r}^{(|\kappa |\frac{1}{2},k\frac{1}{2})}(\mathrm{cos}2\omega r),`$ (59)
$`\widehat{f}_{n_r,|\kappa |}^{}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\mathrm{sin}^{|\kappa |+1}\omega r\mathrm{cos}^{k+1}\omega rP_{n_r1}^{(|\kappa |+\frac{1}{2},k+\frac{1}{2})}(\mathrm{cos}2\omega r),`$
We specify that from Eq.(58) we understand that the second equation of (59) gives $`\widehat{f}^{}=0`$ when $`n_r=0`$. For $`\kappa =|\kappa |`$ we use the same procedure finding that $`2s_+=|\kappa |+1`$, $`2s_{}=|\kappa |`$, $`n_+=n_{}=n_r`$ and

$$\frac{N_{}}{N_+}=\frac{2|\kappa |+1}{2n_r+2k+1}.$$
(60)
The corresponding normalized radial wave functions are

$`\widehat{f}_{n_r,|\kappa |}^+(r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\left[{\displaystyle \frac{n_r+k+\frac{1}{2}}{n_r+|\kappa |+\frac{1}{2}}}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ (61)
$`\times \mathrm{sin}^{|\kappa |+1}\omega r\mathrm{cos}^k\omega rP_{n_r}^{(|\kappa |+\frac{1}{2},k\frac{1}{2})}(\mathrm{cos}2\omega r),`$
$`\widehat{f}_{n_r,|\kappa |}^{}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\left[{\displaystyle \frac{n_r+|\kappa |+\frac{1}{2}}{n_r+k+\frac{1}{2}}}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{sin}^{|\kappa |}\omega r\mathrm{cos}^{k+1}\omega rP_{n_r}^{(|\kappa |\frac{1}{2},k+\frac{1}{2})}(\mathrm{cos}2\omega r).`$
In both cases, the general normalization factor calculated from Eq.(55) is

$$N=\sqrt{2\omega }\left[\frac{n_r!\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_r+k+|\kappa |+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_r+|\kappa |+\frac{1}{2})\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_r+k+\frac{1}{2})}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(62)
Finally, using the inverse transformation of (47) we obtain the radial wave functions

$$f_{n_r,\kappa }^\pm (r)=\widehat{f}_{n_r,\kappa }^\pm (r)\mathrm{cos}\frac{\omega r}{2}\widehat{f}_{n_r,\kappa }^{}(r)\mathrm{sin}\frac{\omega r}{2}$$
(63)
of the particular solutions of positive frequency (36), (37) and (38) of the reduced Dirac equation. The last step is to restore the form of the field $`\psi `$, according to Eqs.(25), (26) and (45), writing down the particular solutions of positive frequency of the original Dirac equation,

$$\psi _{n_r,\kappa ,(j)}^{pa}(t,𝐱)=\left(\frac{\omega r}{\mathrm{sin}\omega r}\right)^{\frac{d1}{2}}\mathrm{cos}^{\frac{d}{2}}\omega r\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{n_r,\kappa ,(j)}(t,𝐱).$$
(64)
If these are interpreted as particle-like solutions then the antiparticle-like ones can be derived directly through the charge conjugation as

$$\psi _{n_r,\kappa ,(j)}^{ap}=\left(\psi _{n_r,\kappa ,(j)}^{pa}\right)^c=C\left(\overline{\psi }_{n_r,\kappa ,(j)}^{pa}\right)^T,$$
(65)
where the matrix $`C`$ is defined by Eq.(70).

The energy levels result from Eq.(56) where we must take into account that $`\omega k=m`$ and $`\omega ϵ=E\omega /2`$. Thus we obtain

$$E_{n_r,\kappa }=\{\begin{array}{ccc}m+\omega (2n_r+\kappa +\frac{1}{2})\hfill & \mathrm{for}& \kappa =|\kappa |\hfill \\ m+\omega (2n_r+|\kappa |+\frac{3}{2})\hfill & \mathrm{for}& \kappa =|\kappa |\hfill \end{array}$$
(66)
which suggests us to introduce the principal quantum number

$$n=\{\begin{array}{ccc}2n_r+|\kappa |\frac{d1}{2}=2n_r+l\hfill & \mathrm{for}& \kappa =|\kappa |\hfill \\ 2n_r+|\kappa |\frac{d1}{2}+1=2n_r+l+1\hfill & \mathrm{for}& \kappa =|\kappa |\hfill \end{array}$$
(67)
taking the values $`0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ since $`l`$ ranges as in Eq.(39) and $`n_r=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. With its help we can write the compact formula of the energy levels

$$E_n=m+\omega \left(n+\frac{d}{2}\right),n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(68)
which is similar to that of the $`d`$-dimensional homogeneous harmonic oscillator but having a relativistic rest energy. These energy levels are deeply degenerated and the problem of determining the degree of degeneracy seems to be complicated requiring a special study.

## 6 Conclusions

We demonstrated that our Cartesian gauge in central charts leads to simple reduced Dirac equations in Cartesian coordinates and similar radial problems in spherical coordinates for any central background $`M_{d+1}`$. These reduce to a pair of radial equations that depend on $`d`$ only through the quantum number $`\kappa `$. This property may allow one to solve the radial problem for large sets of spacetimes of the same type and to study how depend the quantum modes on $`d`$.

In the case of the $`CAdS_{d+1}`$ spacetimes we found that the energy spectrum of the Dirac field minimally coupled with gravity is discrete and equidistant like that of the scalar field but the ground state energy is quite different. We remind the reader that the energy levels of the scalar free field are

$$E_n^{sc}=\sqrt{m^2+\frac{d^2}{4}\omega ^2}+\omega \left(n+\frac{d}{2}\right),n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(69)
The difference is due to the fact that in curved spacetimes the free Dirac equation is no more the square root of the Klein-Gordon equation with the same mass. This gives rise to new problems concerning the physical interpretation of the mass terms in theories where the matter fields are minimally coupled with gravity. In other respects, our result has consequences even in holography  since this indicates that the conformal dimensions of the boundary Klein-Gordon and Dirac (or Majorana) fields of the ADS/CFT conjecture may be different.

### Acknowledgments

I would like to thank E. Papp for useful discussions and drawing me attention on Ref..

## Appendix A Parity and charge conjugation

In the theory of the Dirac field in curved spacetimes $`M_{d+1}`$ the discrete transformations can be defined in a similar way as in special relativity. Thus the parity changes $`𝐱𝐱`$ and $`\psi (𝐱,t)\gamma ^0\psi (𝐱,t)`$ leaving the reduced Dirac equation invariant. The form of the charge conjugation depends on the representation of the Dirac matrices. These satisfy Eqs.(2) and, consequently, they must be either symmetric or skew-symmetric. Let us assume that there are $`s+1`$ symmetric $`\gamma `$-matrices, namely $`\gamma ^0`$ and $`s`$ matrices with space-like indices, $`\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_1},\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_2},\mathrm{},\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_s}`$. Then the matrix

$$C=(1)^{\frac{s}{2}}\gamma ^0\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_1}\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_2},\mathrm{},\gamma ^{\widehat{\alpha }_s}$$
(70)
has the properties $`C^1=C^T=(1)^s\overline{C}`$ and $`C\gamma ^{\widehat{\mu }}C^1=(1)^s(\gamma ^{\widehat{\mu }})^T`$. With its help one can define the charge conjugated spinor $`\psi ^c=C\overline{\psi }^T`$ of the spinor $`\psi `$ and verify that the reduced Dirac equation given by the operator (27) remains invariant under the charge conjugation $`\psi \psi ^c`$. Note that this transformation is point-independent which suggests that the vacuum state could be stable (or invariant ) in quantum field theories based on field equations invariant under this type of charge-conjugation. Particularly, it is known that the Euclidean vacuum of the $`AdS`$ spacetime is invariant .


text:
# A Possible New Population of Sources with Extreme X-Ray / Optical Ratios1,2

## 1 Introduction

A key question in astrophysics concerns the evolution of active galactic nuclei (AGN) during the “quasar epoch” ($`z23`$) and at higher redshifts, where their space density declines (Fan et al. 2001, 2003; Barger et al. 2003). Their evolution appears to track the star formation rate (e.g., Steidel et al. 1999), thereby suggesting an empirical link between galaxy growth and AGN fuelling. A connection between galaxies and AGN is also suggested by the black hole / bulge mass relationship (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000).

A powerful tool to investigate the physical nature of such relationships is AGN X-ray emission, which above a few keV can penetrate obscuration around AGN. Ultra-deep X-ray surveys with Chandra on the Hubble Deep Field North (HDF-N; Brandt et al. 2001), and Chandra Deep Field South (CDF-S; Giacconi et al. 2002) are sufficiently sensitive to reveal AGN beyond the tentative reionization epoch ($`z67`$, Fan et al. 2001, 2003), where optical information is no longer available. These surveys also probe more numerous, lower-luminosity AGN at $`z36`$, where ultra-deep optical and near-IR imaging can constrain their properties.

In this paper we describe a sample of sources with extreme X-ray / Optical flux ratios (or “EXO”s), that are robustly detected ($`2589`$ counts) in the 2 Msec HDF-N and reprocessed 1 Msec CDF-S main catalogs (Alexander et al. 2003). They are also detected in near-IR $`JHK`$ imaging, but completely undetected in our deep GOODS HST/ACS survey, which to date is the most sensitive and detailed optical imaging of these fields (Giavalisco et al. 2003). We discuss various possible interpretations for these objects. Throughout this paper we adopt $`H_0=70`$ km s-1 Mpc-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{M}=0.3`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$.

## 2 Observations and Sample Description

We began by matching the X-ray catalogs (Alexander et al. 2003) to our ACS $`z_{850}`$ catalogs (Giavalisco et al. 2003); details are in Koekemoer et al. (2003, in preparation) and Bauer et al. (2003, in preparation). The matched sources are mostly moderate-luminosity AGN at $`z0.54`$, or star-forming galaxies at $`z0.51`$ (e.g., Hornschemeier et al. 2001; Schreier et al. 2001; Alexander et al. 2001; Koekemoer et al. 2002).

The remaining sources were inspected in detail by overlaying X-ray contours on the $`z_{850}`$ and the combined $`B_{435}`$+$`V_{606}`$+$`i_{775}`$+$`z_{850}`$ images. Most of these had faint optical counterparts, below the formal 10-$`\sigma `$ $`z_{850}`$ catalog threshold or undetected in $`z_{850}`$ but detected in another band (perhaps high equivalent width Lyman-$`\alpha `$ emitters). Detection in $`z_{850}`$ or bluer bands suggests these sources are at $`z6`$ (Barger et al. 2003; Cristiani et al. 2003).

Finally, there remained sources with no ACS counterparts within $`2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$ ($`10`$ times the positional uncertainty) in $`z_{850}`$ and the combined $`B_{435}`$+$`V_{606}`$+$`i_{775}`$+$`z_{850}`$ images, despite robust detections in the X-ray main catalogs ($`2589`$ counts). We focus on CDF-S where we have complete ACS and near-IR coverage; HDF-N sources will be discussed separately (Koekemoer et al. 2003, in preparation). Five of these 7 CDF-S sources have fairly well behaved X-ray exposure maps; the other two are still detected in $`JHK`$ thus are likely also real. The sources are also at a wide range of off-axis angles in the Chandra image. We computed $`z_{850}`$ upper limits from the pixel r.m.s. ($`0.00170.0024`$ counts s-1 pixel-1), integrated over a $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$$`\times `$$`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$ aperture (4$`\times `$4 ACS-pixel box), to yield 3-$`\sigma `$ upper limits111Using the same zeropoints as Giavalisco et al. (2003). of $`z_{850}27.928.4`$ (AB magnitudes).

## 3 “EXO”s: Extreme X-ray / Optical Ratio Sources

The 7 sources with no ACS counterparts are shown in Figure 1. We carried out photometry at the X-ray positions, and present the ACS upper limits and near-IR detections in Table 1. To further investigate the nature of these sources, we examine the relationship between their X-ray and optical fluxes (e.g., Maccacaro et al. 1988; Stocke et al. 1991). In Figure 2 we plot $`F_{0.58\mathrm{keV}}`$ versus $`z_{850}`$ for all the X-ray sources, including the ACS non-detections, also showing lines of constant $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ (derived from $`z_{850}`$). At soft X-ray energies this ratio is complicated by absorption and thermal gas emission (e.g., Beuermann et al. 1999) but these no longer dominate above a few keV, which is redshifted into the soft band for $`z12`$. Sources with $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}0.110`$ are generally identified with AGN; these deep X-ray data also reveal normal galaxies and starbursts (e.g., Hornschemeier et al. 2003) with $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ extending a few orders of magnitude below AGN, but at $`z_{850}24`$ these are lost from the X-ray sample and the AGN dominate.

Figure 2 also reveals that our $`z_{850}`$-undetected objects occupy the high end of the $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ plane, above most of the detected optically faint sources. This is interesting since it is not expected a priori that optically undetected objects should have strong X-ray flux. We also plot our measured ACS magnitudes for CDF-S sources reported as undetected in ground-based data by Yan et al. (2003), and show Extremely Red Objects (EROs) from previous studies (Alexander et al. 2002; Stevens et al. 2003).

In Figure 3 we plot $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ against $`z_{850}K`$; the normal galaxies and starbursts with $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}0.11`$ are blue, while the only objects with $`z_{850}K>4`$ are those with high $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ (see also Brusa et al. 2002; Cagnoni et al. 2002). Not all the high $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ objects are red; some are blue, with $`z_{850}K02`$, and are likely unobscured AGN. However, at high $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ we also find the reddest objects, with most of our undetected $`z_{850}`$ sources at the extreme end with $`z_{850}K4.26.2`$.

## 4 Possible Constituents of the “EXO” Population

We now examine various possibilities for these sources in order to explain: (1) deep optical non-detection; (2) robust X-ray detection; and (3) extremely red colors. We rule out main-sequence stars as these typically have $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}10^50.1`$ (e.g., Stocke et al. 1991). More exotic galactic sources include low-mass X-ray binaries, cataclysmic variables, or neutron stars, which generally have $`L_X10^{30}10^{35}`$ erg s-1 (e.g., Verbunt & Johnston 1996 and references therein). At distances $`10100`$ kpc they would have X-ray fluxes $`10^{14}`$ erg s-1 cm-2, consistent with what is observed. However, the number of sources in our small survey area would imply total counts $`10^410^5`$ times above what is known for our galaxy (e.g. Howell & Szkody 1990; Alexander et al. 2001). Thus we turn to an extragalactic origin for the EXOs.

Low-luminosity galaxies can host relatively luminous X-ray sources, for example the local dwarf NGC 4395 ($`M_B16.5`$) with a central X-ray source $`L_{210\mathrm{k}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}3\times 10^{38}`$ erg s-1 (Ho et al. 2001). However, such objects do not have the extremely red colors of our sources. Moreover, our $`z_{850}`$ limits would imply a distance modulus $`45.3`$ mag, hence $`L_X3\times 10^{42}8\times 10^{43}`$ erg s-1, at least $`10^4`$ times above those for such dwarfs locally. It would be highly interesting if the EXOs were low-luminosity dwarfs with such extreme AGN, but since we know of no local analogs, we explore other alternatives.

### 4.1 Evolved Galaxies

A possible alternative is that the EXOs may be at moderate redshifts and extremely evolved. At $`z1,2,3,4,5,6`$, the oldest possible populations (5.7, 3.2, 2.1, 1.5, 1.2, 0.9 Gyr) would have observed colors $`z_{850}K1,4,4.5,3.5,3.2,3`$ respectively, for a single-burst model with 0.3 solar metallicity (Charlot & Bruzual 2003, in preparation). At least $``$$`12`$ magnitudes of extinction would be required since we observe no UV excess. These properties are comparable to those derived for other X-ray ERO’s (e.g., Alexander et al. 2002; Brusa et al. 2002; Stevens et al. 2003). However, it is interesting to note that the $`K`$-band magnitudes are $`100`$ times too low compared to what is needed to place these objects on the $`M_{BH}\sigma `$ relation (see Woo & Urry 2002).

### 4.2 Dusty Galaxies

We next explore the amount of dust needed to achieve the high $`z_{850}K`$ colors. If these sources were local ($`z0.1`$), then $`z_{850}K4.5`$ would imply $`A_V1014`$ (Rieke & Lubofsky 1985; Calzetti 1997), depending on the stellar populations. This would require a column $`N_H25\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2 ratio, which is too high for the observed soft X-ray fluxes unless we invoke a highly interesting scenario where the AGN is unobscured while the rest of the galaxy is completely obscured.

At higher redshifts, the $`A_V`$ limits decrease since $`z_{850}`$ and $`K`$ sample bluer rest-frame wavelengths. Between $`z12.5`$ we infer $`A_V52`$ respectively, comparable to similar objects discussed by Alexander et al. (2002); Smail et al. (2002); Stevens et al. (2003), and Yan et al. (2003). Again it is interesting that the EXO host luminosities at these redshifts, from their $`K`$ magnitudes, would place them at least 2 orders of magnitude away from the $`M_{BH}\sigma `$ relation implied by their X-ray fluxes, suggesting atypical accretion rates (Woo & Urry 2002).

### 4.3 High-Redshift Lyman Break Galaxies

Finally we investigate the possibility that these sources are at high enough redshifts to move the Lyman break out of the $`z_{850}`$ filter. Yan et al. (2003) investigated similar possibilities for their CDF-S sources undetected in ground-based $`R`$ imaging but detected with ISAAC. We have in fact detected their sources in our ACS $`z_{850}`$ data (Figure 2) and agree with them that those sources are unlikely to be at $`z5`$. However, their sources are the only ones with $`F_\mathrm{X}/F_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ comparable to our EXOs. Thus, if the EXOs belong to the same population as the Yan et al. (2003) sources, then their distance modulus is $`1.52`$ magnitudes higher. If the Yan et al. (2003) sources are luminous E/S0 galaxies with $`z12.5`$, this would translate to $`z2.56`$ for the EXO population. The other possibility considered by Yan et al. (2003) is that their sources may be higher redshift AGN up to $`z35`$, depending on extinction details. If EXO’s are the high redshift extension of this population, this would place them at $`z610`$. In this case, their host galaxy absolute magnitudes (from our $`K`$-band data) would be $``$20 to $``$21, comparable to $`L_{}`$ luminosities, while their X-ray luminosities would be $`26\times 10^{44}`$ erg s-1. These are not unusually high luminosities for AGN, and may be consistent with a high-redshift extension of moderate-luminosity AGN at $`z35`$ (eg Cristiani et al. 2003).

## 5 Conclusions

We have examined various possible explanations for a population of obejcts that have extreme X-ray / Optical ratios (“EXO”s), being robustly detected in the Chandra data in CDF-S and HDF-N, yet completely undetected in our deep multi-band $`B_{435}`$+$`V_{606}`$+$`i_{775}`$+$`z_{850}`$ ACS images, which represent the most sensitive optical imaging obtained to date on these fields. In particular, the lack of detections even in the $`z_{850}`$ band suggests one of two possible scenarios: (1) if these sources lie at $`z67`$, then their hosts are unusually underluminous, or more reddened, compared with other known AGN hosts (even other ERO’s); (2) if these sources lie above $`z67`$, such that even their Lyman-$`\alpha `$ emission is redshifted out of the ACS $`z_{850}`$ bandpass, then their optical and X-ray fluxes can be accounted for in terms of $`L_{}`$ hosts and moderate-luminosity AGN. Deep near-IR spectroscopic observations will help further elucidate their nature.

Partial support for this work was provided by NASA through grant number HST-GO-09583.01-96A from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, under NASA contract NAS 5-26555. Support for this work, part of the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) Legacy Science program, was also provided by NASA through Contract Number 1224666 issued by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology under NASA contract 1407. We thank the referee for a speedy review and for valuable suggestions that helped to improve this paper. AMK wishes to thank Mark Dickinson for insightful discussions, and Harry Ferguson for thorough comments on the manuscript. DMA acknowledges the generous support provided by a Royal Society University Research Fellowship. DMA, FEB and WNB also wish to thank NSF CAREER award AST-9983783.