text:
# On Tachyon kinks from the DBI action

## 1 Introduction

In addition to the stable D-branes, type II superstrings admit non-supersymmetric D-branes. The instability of these non-BPS branes is signalled by the presence of a tachyon on their worldvolume, and their decay is described by the dynamics of the tachyon. The BPS branes can be viewed as tachyon kinks on the non-BPS branes with one dimension higher. The dynamics of the decaying tachyon can be captured using the Dirac-Born-Infeld (DBI):

$$S=d^px𝑑tV(T)\sqrt{\left(1+_\mu T_\nu T\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right)}.$$
(1)
Here $`V(T)`$ is the tachyon potential which is even and vanishes at infinity where it reaches its minimum. Near the global maximum at $`T=0`$, $`V(T)=𝒯_p(1\beta ^2T^2/2)+\mathrm{}`$ where $`𝒯_p`$ is the tension of the non-BPS $`p`$-brane and the potential encodes the mass of the tachyon near the perturbative vacuum $`T=0`$. Finally $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }=(1,+1,\mathrm{},+1)`$ is the $`p+1`$ Minkowski metric.

It happens that finite energy solitons of the DBI action are singular. One would like to regularise the behaviour of such solitons. This can be achieved by compactifying one spatial dimension on a circle. The singular solitons can be then obtained in the decompactifed limit provided some restrictions on the tachyon potential are imposed. On the other hand, there seems to be an intrinsic ambiguity in the regularization process of the DBI action leading to singular solutions. In particular, adding an extra kinetic term for the tachyon and then taking the limit where this term vanishes222Equivalently one can work with the action (2) below with $`q1/2`$ and then take the limit $`q1/2^+`$ at the end of the calculation. leads to singular kinks with no restriction on the shape of the potential. Such an ambiguity can be lifted for kinks in an electric field background. In particular for a critical value $`\stackrel{~}{E}=1`$ of the electric field, one always finds regular and finite energy solutions of the DBI action.

The plan of this paper is as follows. In Section 2 we revisit Derrick’s theorem which gives necessary conditions for the existence of finite energy solitons for actions of the form (1). In Section 3, we compactify one spatial coordinate on a circle of radius $`R`$ in order to get regular kinks. In fact, we obtain regular solitons describing $`n`$ pairs of kinks and anti-kinks. Then we determine the conditions on the potential for which the decompactifying limit exists. The stability of the kink-antikink configurations is also described. Finally we consider the case of charged kinks and focus on the critical case where regular and finite energy solitons on the infinite line can be found.

## 2 Uncharged solitons and Derrick’s theorem

We are interested in kink-like solutions of (1). These kink solutions should represent the stable BPS $`p1`$ branes into which the non-BPS $`p`$-brane decays. Before doing this explicitly, it is worthwhile recalling Derrick’s theorem: in the case of the usual Klein-Gordon action for scalar fields, it tells us that finite energy static solitonic solutions on an infinite space are only possible in (1+1)-dimensions. Here will draw similar conclusions starting from (1).

Let us consider a slightly more general action:

$$S=d^px𝑑tV(T)\left(1+_\mu T_\nu T\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right)^q,$$
(2)
where the real scalar field $`T`$ is dimensionless (we set $`\alpha ^{}=1`$ throughout). For $`q=1/2`$ this is just (1). Let $`T_1(x)`$ be a static solution of the equations of motion, and hence an extremum, $`\delta E=0`$, of the finite static energy functional

$$E[T]=d^pxV(T)\left(1+_iT^iT\right)^q.$$
(3)
Now consider a family $`T_\lambda (x)=T_1(\lambda x)`$, using $`\frac{d}{d\lambda }E[T_\lambda ]|_{\lambda =1}=0`$ we find

$$d^pxV(T)\left(1+_iT^iT\right)^{q1}\left[p+(p2q)_iT^iT\right]=0.$$
(4)
When $`q=1/2`$, the case we focus on here, the square bracket in (4) is $`p+(p1)_iT^iT`$ which can never vanish for $`p1`$. Thus no finite energy static solutions seem to be permitted. However, there is formally a way around this: when $`p=1`$ Eq. (4) becomes

$$0=d^px\frac{V(T)}{\sqrt{1+T^2}}$$
(5)
which can vanish if

$$T^{}\pm \mathrm{}\mathrm{or}T\pm \mathrm{}$$

with $`E[T]`$ remaining finite.

Let us suppose that the equations of motion admit a solution with $`T^{}\pm \mathrm{}`$ describing a single kink on the infinite line (below we will find the conditions on $`V(T)`$ such that this is the case),

$$T(x)=\underset{C0}{lim}\frac{x}{C}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{}& x>0\hfill \\ 0& x=0.\hfill \\ \mathrm{}& x<0\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
This is a typical case of the solutions discussed by Sen: it describes an infinitely thin topological kink interpolating between the two vacuua. Notice that $`V=0`$ everywhere apart from when $`T=0=x`$. Substitution of (6) into the energy functional (3) (taking carefully the $`C0`$ limit) gives the the energy of this singular solution to be

$$E_{\mathrm{Sen}}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}V(x)𝑑x.$$
(7)
Sen has argued that such singular kinks are stable, as the BPS brane should be, and furthermore that their effective action is exactly the required DBI action. Hence such solutions are of great interest, and would suggest that BPS branes are infinitely thin. Note that the parameters of $`V(T)`$ should be tuned such that $`E_{\mathrm{Sen}}=𝒯_{p1}`$.

In this note, we will construct such singular solitons as limits of regularised kink solutions. Sen’s singular limit can then be approached in the decompactification limit. We are looking for static kink-like solutions in which $`T`$ has a non-trivial dependence on only one spatial coordinate; $`T=T(x)`$. Let us assume that the kink is centered at the origin, $`T(0)=0`$. The equations of motion coming from (2) with $`q=1/2`$ have a first integral,

$$\frac{V(T)}{\sqrt{1+(T^{})^2}}=V_0,$$
(8)
where $`V_00`$ is a constant. The energy of this solution is given by

$$E=𝑑xV(T)\sqrt{1+(T^{})^2}=\frac{1}{V_0}𝑑xV^2(T).$$
(9)
Since $`T^2`$ is positive, solutions of equation (8) exist in the region $`V(T)V_0`$. Furthermore, the solutions $`T(x)`$ are periodic with a $`V_0`$-dependent amplitude which, from (8), diverges as $`V_00`$. Note that within one period there must be both a kink and an anti-kink (corresponding to the two points for which $`T(x)=0`$). Also, the energy density of the kinks becomes more and more localised as $`V_00`$. Below we will study in detail the dependence of both the period and $`E`$ on $`V_0`$.

In order for $`E`$ to be finite, one must have $`|T|\mathrm{}`$ as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$. This immediately implies from (8) that $`V_0=0`$ — a topological kink.333Notice that this condition is identical to (5). Sen’s solution (6) is such a singular solution in which $`T`$ vanishes for only one value of $`x`$: in other words Sen’s solution is periodic with a divergent wavelength. Furthermore in that case $`E=2E_{\mathrm{Sen}}`$.

We would like to approach the singular ($`V_00`$) kink(s) as the limit of regular solutions with $`V_00`$. In order to get regular and finite energy solutions we shall suppose that $`x`$ is a compact direction of length $`2\pi R`$, so that $`V_0`$ can now be non-zero. Our aim is to see whether the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$ with $`E`$ being finite exists. Note that if this limit exists we expect to get twice (7) as the energy of the resulting solution. In fact, BPS branes have a RR charge and on a circle the sum of the charges must vanish so all we can get are pairs of branes and anti-branes. Sen’s solution corresponds to the brane infinitely distant from the anti-brane.

The period of the solutions of equation (8) is $`4\zeta `$ where

$$\zeta (V_0)=_0^{T_0}\frac{dT}{\sqrt{\left(\frac{V}{V_0}\right)^21}},$$
(10)
and $`T_0`$ is defined by $`V(T_0)=V_0`$. The radius is thus given by

$$2\pi R=4n\zeta ,$$
(11)
where $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. The separation between the brane and the anti-brane is $`2\zeta `$. The $`V_0`$-dependent energy of this solution can be written as

$$E(V_0)=4n_0^{T_0}𝑑T\frac{V}{\sqrt{1\left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^2}}$$
(12)
or equivalently $`4n(V_0)`$.

The behaviour of $`\zeta (V_0)`$ as $`V_00`$ depends critically on the form $`V(T)`$ for large $`T`$. Since the potential is assumed positive, let us write it in the form $`V=e^{\sigma (T)}`$, then the behavior of $`\zeta (V_0)`$ depends on $`\sigma ^{}(T)`$ at large $`T`$ : $`\zeta (V_0)[\sigma ^{}(T_0)]^1`$. Let us examine the limit where the radius goes to infinity. There are three possibilities

1. $`\zeta \mathrm{}`$ as $`V_00`$. This happens when $`\sigma ^{}0`$. The kink anti-kink separation tends to infinity, and as $`R\mathrm{}`$, equation (11) can be satisfied with $`n=1`$ (a single kink and anti-kink). The energy of this solution will, however, depend on the behaviour of $`\zeta V_0`$. Indeed, the energy goes to $`2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}V(T)𝑑T`$ if and only if $`\zeta V_00`$ . This latter case is the one which reproduces a single singular solution in the non-compact limit.
2. $`\zeta `$ const $`0`$ as $`V_00`$. Now the kink anti-kink distance tends to a constant and one can never get an isolated kink. As $`R\mathrm{}`$, equation (11) can only be satisfied if $`n\mathrm{}`$. In fact the realistic potential $`V=v/\mathrm{cosh}(\beta T)`$ falls in this category.
3. $`\zeta 0`$ as $`V_00`$. The kink and anti-kink separation tends to zero and it is clearly not possible to obtain a single kink and anti-kink in the non-compact limit. This behaviour occurs for many potentials considered in the literature; for example $`V(T)=ve^{T^2}`$.

We now ask which conditions $`V(T)`$ must satisfy so that as $`V_0`$ and $`R\mathrm{}`$ the energy $`E`$ in (12) with $`n=1`$ reduces to $`2E_{\mathrm{Sen}}`$ in (7). We find that $`(V_0)`$ will be finite if and only if, as $`T\mathrm{}`$,

$$\frac{|V^{}|}{V^2}\mathrm{}.$$
(13)
In this case, $`_0^{\mathrm{}}V(T)𝑑T`$. Thus from (13) we conclude that for exponential potentials

$$V(T\mathrm{})\mathrm{exp}(T^a)\mathrm{finite}a>0$$
(14)
whereas for power-law potentials

$$V(T\mathrm{})\frac{1}{T^{1/\alpha }}\mathrm{finite}\alpha <1.$$
(15)
For any $`R`$ and non-zero $`V_0`$ the kink anti-kink array is unstable. On the other hand the singular kink is always stable.

## 3  Charged Solitons

Now consider solitons in an electric field background  $`A_0(x)`$ in the gauge where $`A_1=0`$ and all the other components of the gauge field are set to zero. The DBI action depends on the tachyon and the field strength $`F_{\mu \nu }`$:

$$S=d^{p+1}xV(T)\sqrt{\gamma }$$
(16)
where $`\gamma `$ is the determinant of $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+_\mu T_\nu T+F_{\mu \nu }`$ and the only non-zero component of $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is $`F_{01}=_1A_0(x)\stackrel{~}{E}`$. The dynamics are determined by the Lagrangian density

$$=V(T)\sqrt{1+T^2\stackrel{~}{E}^2}$$
(17)
which now has two second integrals $`V_0`$ and $`e`$ where

$$V_0=\frac{V(T)}{\sqrt{1+T^2\stackrel{~}{E}^2}}$$
(18)
and from the Euler-Lagrange equations for $`A_\mu `$

$$e=\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}V(T)}{\sqrt{1+T^2\stackrel{~}{E}^2}}.$$
(19)
Since $`V_0`$ and $`e`$ are constant, the electric field

$$\stackrel{~}{E}=\frac{e}{V_0}$$
(20)
is also constant. The tachyonic dynamics can be deduced from

$$\stackrel{~}{V}_0=\frac{V(T)}{\sqrt{1+(\frac{dT}{dy})^2}}$$
(21)
where $`dy=\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{E}^2}dx`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}_0=\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{E}^2}V_0`$. Notice that there is a maximal value for the electric field $`\stackrel{~}{E}_0=1`$. As soon as $`\stackrel{~}{E}<\stackrel{~}{E}_0`$, one can use the previous analysis on the shape of the potential $`V(T)`$ with the same restrictions as in the neutral case.

More interestingly, the critical case $`\stackrel{~}{E}=1`$ leads to non-singular solitons on the real line. In that case the dynamics are governed by

$$T^2=\frac{V^2}{V_0^2}.$$
(22)
Let us define $`T_{V_0}(x)=T_1(\frac{x}{V_0})`$ then $`T_1`$ satisfies the universal profile

$$|T_1^{}|=V(T).$$
(23)
The solution

$$x=_0^T\frac{du}{V(u)}$$
(24)
defines a soliton interpolating between the $`T=\mathrm{}`$ at $`x=\mathrm{}`$ and $`T=\mathrm{}`$ at $`x=\mathrm{}`$, i.e. between two vacua of the theory. The width of the soliton is of order $`O(V_0)`$ implying that one gets an infinitely thin soliton in the $`V_00`$ limit. For any other value of $`V_0`$ the soliton is of finite width.

Finally notice that for any value of $`V_0`$, the energy of the solitons when $`\stackrel{~}{E}=1`$ is simply

$$E=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}V(T)𝑑T,$$
(25)
i.e. Sen’s value for the tension of the BPS brane. This value is independent of the width $`V_0`$ of the soliton. Therefore the zero-width limit does not modify the energy of the soliton.

We have thus found that introducing a constant electric field allows one to define regular solitons of the non-BPS DBI action on the infinite line. Moreover infinitely thin solitons can also be obtained by taking the limit where the width of the regular solitons goes to zero.

## 4 Conclusion

We have performed an analysis of the regular solitons on the circle of the non-BPS DBI action, both in the absence and in the presence of a constant electric field in the soliton direction. For an electric field below the critical value $`\stackrel{~}{E}=1`$ and with the regularisation scheme presented here, one finds that singular solitons on the infinite line can only be obtained for restricted tachyon potentials. On the other hand when $`\stackrel{~}{E}=1`$, regular solitons of finite energy exist in noncompact space.


format: text

text:
# Band gap or negative refraction effects?

## Figure Captions

Left panel: (a) Band structure; the shaded horizontal region indicates the frequency range within which the frequency band is everywhere convex; (b) the conceptual diagrams showing the conventional and negative refraction scenarios. Right panel shows the imaging fields across the slab: (c) The real part of the electric field; (d) The intensity field, i. e. the modulus of the electric field in the log scale. Hereafter, the dark circles denote the cylinders. The source is on the left hand side of the slab.

The imaging fields for a slab of photonic crystal structure, similar to Fig. 1 but with a larger sample length. (a1) and (b1) show the real part of the field, (a2) and (b2) show the intensity field. (b1) and (b2) are replots of the imaging fields for the area inside the slab from (a1) and (a2) respectively. Here we see clearly that the waves propagate in a small tunnel inside the slab; it is most evident in (b2).

The imaging fields for a transmitting source located inside a square array of cylinders. The square measures as $`14\sqrt{2}\times 14\sqrt{2}`$. All other parameters are the same as in Fig. 1.

The imaging fields for a transmitting source located inside a roughly circularly shaped array of cylinders. The total number of cylinders is 484. All other parameters are the same as in Fig. 1.


text:
# Probing the atmosphere of a solar-like star by galactic microlensing at high magnification

## 1 Introduction

In gravitational microlensing events binary lenses produce bounded regions of high magnification, known as caustics, on the magnification map projected onto the source plane (Schneider & Weiss sw (1986)). The steep magnification gradients associated with these caustic curves may be utilised to resolve the surfaces of background source stars as they move across them. Observations of this effect have been used to measure limb darkening in Galactic Bulge K giant stars (Albrow et al alb99 (1999), Albrow et al alb00 (2000), Fields et al fields (2003)), a G/K sub-giant (Albrow et al 2001a ), and an A dwarf in the Small Magellanic Cloud (reporting an angular resolution of a few nas, Afonso et al afonso00 (2000)).

In this Letter we present observations of the very high magnification microlens event MOA 2002–BLG–33. In this event, the centre-of-mass of the close binary lensing system moved into near perfect alignment with a Solar-like source star. The resulting high magnification provided ideal conditions for monitoring the source as it transited the central caustic. Our observations yielded the most precise limb darkening measurements obtained by microlensing for a non-giant star and the first such measurements for a Solar-like star other than the Sun itself.

## 2 Light Curve of MOA 2002–BLG–33

The event MOA 2002–BLG–33 was first alerted by the MOA collaboration on 2002 June 18 in its ongoing microlensing alert program (Bond et al bond01 (2001)). About 48 hours before its time of peak amplification on 2002 July 4, MOA identified this event as a high magnification event in progress and a second alert was issued. Subsequently, an intensive campaign of follow-up observations was carried out using a number of telescopes circling the globe (Fig. 1). Photometry of the event was derived using difference imaging analysis applied to the CCD images. This procedure was carried out separately on each passband of each telescope resulting in six sets of time series photometry. These are shown in Fig. 1 where they have been normalised to the microlensing light curve using the best fitting model (described below).

The M-shaped feature on the light curve results from the source star entering and exiting the central caustic curve produced by a binary lens. The detailed shape of the light curve depends on the characteristics of the lens, the trajectory of the source star, and the radius and limb darkening profile of the source star. The parameters associated with the binary lens are the lens mass ratio $`M_1/M_2`$, the separation $`a`$ of the two lenses, the Einstein radius crossing time $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, the source trajectory impact parameter, $`u_0`$, with respect to the centre-of-mass of the lens, the time $`t_0`$ when the source is closest to the centre of mass of the lens, and the angle, $`\varphi `$, between the source trajectory and the lens components.

The source star is parametrized by its radius $`r_\mathrm{s}`$ and an appropriate limb darkening model. For this we used the square-root law (Claret claret (2000))

$$\frac{I_\lambda (\theta )}{I_\lambda (0)}=1c_\lambda (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )d_\lambda (1\sqrt{\mathrm{cos}\theta })$$
(1)
where $`c_\lambda `$ and $`d_\lambda `$ are the wavelength dependent limb darkening coefficients.

Model binary microlensing light curves were generated numerically using an inverse ray tracing technique, implemented on a cluster computer (Rattenbury et al. rattenbury (2002)). The inverse ray tracing technique naturally accommodates the finite size of the source star and the limb darkening profiles across its face (Wambsganss wambs (1997)). To find the best fitting model light curve, we implemented a $`\chi ^2`$ minimisation technique using a Metropolis Hastings Markov chain Monte Carlo procedure (Ford ford (2003)). This avoids the problem of traditional minimisation techniques which can be fooled by false minima due to numerical noise in the simulated light curves.

The best fitting theoretical curve is shown in Fig. 1. A total of 11 physical parameters plus 6 flux normalisation parameters (one for each passband-telescope set) are required to describe the light curve111Blending parameters were not required because difference imaging analysis removes the effects of blending due to nearby neighbours and the lens itself.. The best fitting physical parameters are given in Table 1. The fitting procedure yielded correlated values for the limb darkening coefficients. In Table 1, we report the coefficients ($`c_\lambda ^{}`$, $`d_\lambda ^{}`$), which are related to the coefficients in Eqn. 1 through the phase space rotation $`c_\lambda ^{}=c_\lambda \mathrm{cos}33\mathrm{°}+d_\lambda \mathrm{sin}33\mathrm{°}`$ and $`d_\lambda ^{}=d_\lambda \mathrm{cos}33\mathrm{°}c_\lambda \mathrm{sin}33\mathrm{°}`$. In this representation, the $`d_\lambda ^{}`$ term contributes a small correction to $`I_\lambda (\theta )/I_\lambda (0)`$. The limb darkening parameters allow a colour map of the face of the source star to be drawn. This is depicted in Fig. 2 along with its passage through the caustic.

Our best best fitting model light curve and the associated caustic correspond to a close binary lensing system. Dominik (dominik (1999)) found that qualitatively similar caustic curves can be produced by lensing configurations that differ greatly. Caustics similar in shape to the one shown in Fig. 2 can be produced by lenses comprised of wide binary systems. Our best fitting wide binary solution for our observations of MOA 2003–BLG–33 yielded a mass ratio corresponding to that of a giant planet orbiting a stellar mass object. While this configuration qualitatively produced a short duration M-shaped amplification profile, it could not reproduce the observed light curve profile at a level demanded by the precise, densely sampled photometry we obtained. Only the above close binary model gave an acceptable fit to the data.

Unfortunately, neither the rotation period of the binary lens, nor the plane of rotation, was able to be determined from the data. We estimated the contribution of binary rotation to our measurements of limb darkening as follows. For typical values of the lens parameters, the rotation period lies in the range 100–200 days. During the caustic crossing shown in Fig. 2, the lens is thus expected to rotate through 1°–2°. Light curves were computed for rotating lenses with various periods of rotation, but with the plane of rotation held fixed and perpendicular to the lens-source axis, to maximise the effect. It was found that periods of rotation $`<`$150 days yielded light curves that were inconsistent with the data at a level greater than $`2\sigma `$. Limb darkening coefficients, and stellar profiles, were then computed, in the static approximation, for a simulated dataset with a rotation period of 150 days. It was found that the computed stellar profiles differed from the inputted profiles by approximately 2$`\times `$ the 2$`\sigma `$ statistical uncertainty of the profiles computed without rotation. The effect of rotation was therefore allowed for, in the present work, by doubling the errors in the stellar profiles calculated in the static approximation.

## 3 The surface of the source star

We used colour measurements to identify the source star type in MOA 2003–BLG–33. The baseline (i.e. unmagnified) flux of the source star was determined by from the fluxes measured by the MDM and Wise telescopes at high magnification. The instrumental magnitudes were calibrated using the catalogue of Udalski et al (udalski (2002)). The magnitudes thus determined in the V and I bands (Landolt system) were $`m_\mathrm{V}=19.94\pm 0.05`$ and $`m_\mathrm{I}=17.96\pm 0.07`$. Assuming a distance to the source star of $`7\pm 2`$ kpc, and absorption and reddening due to galactic dust with $`A_\mathrm{I}=1.18\pm 0.05`$ mag and $`\mathrm{E}(\mathrm{V}\mathrm{I})=1.24\pm 0.05`$ (Sumi et al. sumi03 (2003), Udalski udalski03 (2003)), we derive its absolute magnitude $`M_\mathrm{I}=2.6\pm 0.6`$ and colour index $`\mathrm{V}\mathrm{I}=0.74\pm 0.10`$. These values identify the source star as an F8–G2 main-sequence turn-off star with age approximately 3–10 Gy and temperature in the range 6200–5800K (Girardi et al. girardi (2002)), i.e. a solar-like star that has just commenced evolving away from the main sequence, or is just about to do so.

Limb-darkening coefficients have been calculated for the ATLAS and PHOENIX models of stellar atmospheres for a wide variety of stars (Claret claret (2000)). The limb darkening coefficients, ($`c_\lambda ^{}`$, $`d_\lambda ^{}`$), for the ATLAS model of a star with $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$=6000K, surface gravity $`\mathrm{log}g`$=4.0, and metallicity $`[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}]=0.3`$ are (0.363, 0.459) for the I-band and (0.461, 0.394) for the VE-band222For the VE-band, the average values given by Claret (claret (2000)) in the V and R bands were used, to allow for the extended red transmission of the EROS V filter, and also the pre-filtering effect of galactic dust.. These compare favourably with the measured values in in Table 1 that were derived from our observations without including the effect of rotation described above. Fig. 3 shows the theoretical intensity profiles for the range of possible star types identified for MOA 2003–BLG–33, and the intensity profiles derived from the measurements with the effect of rotation included. It is apparent that the ATLAS and PHOENIX profiles are confirmed at the 95% confidence level to within about 4%. The precision of the present measurements resulted from the fact that the magnification was high throughout the caustic crossing, and that it could therefore be monitored accurately everywhere, in particular at the end points which are most sensitive to limb darkening and reddening, as shown in Fig. 1. The effective angular resolution of our observations of MOA 2002–BLG–33 is $`<1R_{\mathrm{}}/7`$ kpc, i.e. $`<`$1$`\mu `$as.

Our results appear to be in agreement with those expected by stellar atmosphere models for the source star type identified here. Limb darkening measurements for another solar-like star, and consistent with those reported here, have been obtained by Deeg et al (deeg (2001)) using a planetary transit technique. The only other observations by gravitational microlensing of limb darkening on a main sequence star were obtained for the A dwarf source star in MACHO 1997–SMC–1 (Afonso et al afonso00 (2000)). These were only partly in agreement with stellar atmosphere theory (Claret claret (2000)). Limb darkening measurements in agreement with theoretical expectations have been reported for a G/K subgiant source in OGLE 1999–BLG–23 (Albrow et al 2001a ), and for the K giant source stars in MACHO 1997–BLG–28 (Albrow et al alb99 (1999)) and in MACHO 1997–BLG–41 (Albrow et al alb00 (2000)). On the other hand, recent results on source star in EROS 2000–BLG–5, also a K giant, appear in strong disagreement with stellar atmosphere theory (Afonso et al afonso01 (2001), Fields et al fields (2003)) whereas no such discrepancy was observed in Hα equivalent width variations obtained in spectroscopic observations of the same event (Albrow et al 2001b ).

## 4 Conclusion and outlook

We have shown how a high magnification microlensing event, with the lens being a close binary system, can be utilised to profile the atmospheres of a dwarf star. Such stars, even if nearby, cannot be resolved using conventional techniques. Thus the high magnification microlensing technique may prove useful until new, major programmes with the Very Large Telescope Interferometer and the Keck Interferometer become fully operational (Segransan et al. segransan (2003), Domiciano de Souza et al. domiciano (2003)). We note that although some previous measurements using microlensing techniques yielded possible evidence for significant departures from conventional stellar atmosphere theory, no such evidence was obtained in the present measurements. Indeed, as the star under study here was quite similar to the Sun, no such departure was expected.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank the referee, J-P. Beaulieu, for helpful suggestions in improving the presentation of this manuscript. We thank P. Dobcsanyi, B. Donovan, G. Gimel’farb, A. Gould, A. Gyekye, P. Leonne and S. Peale for assistance, the Space Telescope Science Institute for Director’s Discretionary time on the HST, the Marsden Fund of New Zealand, the Department of Education, Science and Culture of Japan, the NSF (USA), and the University of Auckland for financial support, and also the Pôle Scientifique de Modélisation Numérique (ENS-Lyon), the Norddeutscher Verbund für Höch und Höchstleistungsrechnen (HLRN), and the NERSC for computer time. This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.


text:
# An 𝑂(𝑚) Algorithm for Cores Decomposition of Networks

## 1 Introduction

“One of the major concerns of social network analysis is identification of cohesive subgroups of actors within a network. Cohesive subgroups are subsets of actors among whom there are relatively strong, direct, intense, frequent, or positive ties” (, p. 249). Several notions were introduced to formally describe cohesive groups: cliques, $`n`$–cliques, $`n`$–clans, $`n`$–clubs, $`k`$–plexes, $`k`$–cores, lambda sets, …For most of them it turns out that they are algorithmically difficult (NP hard  or at least quadratic), but for cores a very efficient algorithm exists. We describe it in details in this paper.

## 2 Cores

The notion of core was introduced by Seidman in 1983 .

Let $`G=(V,L)`$ be a graph. $`V`$ is the set of vertices and $`L`$ is the set of lines (edges or arcs). We will denote $`n=|V|`$ and $`m=|L|`$. A subgraph $`H=(W,L|W)`$ induced by the set $`W`$ is a $`k`$-*core* or a *core of order* $`k`$ iff $`vW:\mathrm{deg}_H(v)k`$ and $`H`$ is a maximum subgraph with this property. The core of maximum order is also called the *main* core. The *core number* of vertex $`v`$ is the highest order of a core that contains this vertex.

The degree $`\mathrm{deg}(v)`$ can be: in-degree, out-degree, in-degree $`+`$ out-degree, …determining different types of cores.

In figure 1 an example of cores decomposition of a given graph is presented. From this figure we can see the following properties of cores:

* The cores are nested: $`i<jH_jH_i`$
* Cores are not necessarily connected subgraphs.

## 3 Algorithm

Our algorithm for determining the cores hierarchy is based on the following property :

> If from a given graph $`G=(V,L)`$ we recursively delete all vertices, and lines incident with them, of degree less than $`k`$, the remaining graph is the $`k`$-core.

The outline of the algorithm is as follows:

|  |
| --- |
| INPUT: graph $`G=(V,L)`$ represented by lists of neighbors |
| OUTPUT: table $`core`$ with core number for each vertex |
|  |
| 1.1 | compute the degrees of vertices; |
| 1.2 | order the set of vertices $`V`$ in increasing order of their degrees; |
| 2 | for each $`vV`$ in the order do begin |
| 2.1 |  | $`core[v]:=degree[v]`$; |
| 2.2 |  | for each $`uNeighbors(v)`$ do |
| 2.2.1 |  |  | if $`degree[u]>degree[v]`$ then begin |
| 2.2.1.1 |  |  |  | $`degree[u]:=degree[u]1`$; |
| 2.2.1.2 |  |  |  | reorder $`V`$ accordingly |
|  |  |  | end |
|  | end; |

In the refinements of the algorithm we have to provide efficient implementations of steps 1.2 and 2.2.1.2.

## 4 Detailed Algorithm

We describe an implementation of the algorithm in a Pascal like language.

Structure graph is used to represent a given graph $`G=(V,L)`$. We will not describe the structure into details, because there are several possibilities, how to do this. We assume that the vertices of $`G`$ are numbered from 1 to $`n`$. The user has also to provide functions size and in Neighbors, described in the table:

Using an adequate representation of graph $`G`$ (lists of neighbors) we can implement both functions to run in constant time.

Two types of integer arrays (tableVert and tableDeg) are also introduced. Both of them must be of length at least $`n`$. The only difference is how we index their elements. We start with index 1 in tableVert and with index 0 in tableDeg.

The algorithm is implemented by procedure cores. The input is graph $`G`$, represented by variable g of type graph, the output is array deg of type tableVert containing core number for each vertex of graph $`G`$.

We need (03-06) some integer variables and three additional arrays. Array vert contains the set of vertices, sorted by their degrees. Positions of vertices in array vert are stored in array pos. Array bin contains for each possible degree the position of the first vertex of that degree in array vert. See also Figure 2 in which a Pascal implementation of our algorithm for the case of simple undirected graph $`G=(V,E)`$, $`E`$ is the set of edges, is presented.

In a real implementation of the proposed algorithm dynamically allocated arrays should be used. To simplify our description of the algorithm we replaced them by static.

At the beginning we have to initialize some local variables and arrays (08-12). First we determine n, the number of vertices of graph g. Then we compute degree for each vertex v in graph g and store it into array deg. Simultaneously we also compute the maximum degree md.

After that we sort the vertices in increasing order of their degrees using bin-sort (13-25). First we count (13-14) how many vertices will be in each bin (bin consists of vertices with the same degree). Bins are numbered from 0 to md.

From bin sizes we can determine (15-20) starting positions of bins in array vert. Bin 0 starts at position 1, while other bins start at position, equal to the sum of starting position and size of the previous bin. To avoid additional array we used the same array (bin) to store starting positions of bins. Now we can put (21-25) vertices of graph $`G`$ into array vert. For each vertex we know to which bin it belongs and what is the starting position of that bin. So we can put vertex to the proper place, remember its position in table pos, and increase the starting position of the bin we used. The vertices are now sorted by their degrees.

In the final step of initialization phase we have to recover starting positions of the bins (26-27). We increased them several times in previous step, when we put vertices into corresponding bins. It is obvious, that the changed starting position is the original starting position of the next bin. To restore the right starting positions we have to move the values in array bin for one position to the right. We also have to reset starting position of bin 0 to value 1.

The cores decomposition, implementing the for each loop from the algorithm described in section 3, is done in the main loop (28-41) that runs over all vertices v of graph g in the order, determined by table vert. The core number of current vertex v is the current degree of that vertex. This number is already stored in table deg. For each neighbor u of vertex v with higher degree we have to decrease its degree and move it for one bin to the left. Moving vertex u for one bin to the left is operation, which can be done in constant time. First we have to swap vertex u and the first vertex in the same bin. In array pos we also have to swap their positions. Finally we increase starting position of the bin (we increase previous and reduce current bin for one element).

### 4.1 Time complexity

We shall show that the described algorithm runs in time $`O(\mathrm{max}(m,n))`$.

To compute (08-12) the degrees of all vertices we need time $`O(\mathrm{max}(m,n))`$ since we have to consider each line at most twice. The bin sort (13-27) consists of five loops of size at most $`n`$ with constant time $`O(1)`$ bodies – therefore it runs in time $`O(n)`$.

The statement (29) requires a constant time and therefore contributes $`O(n)`$ to the algorithm. The conditional statement (31-39) also runs in constant time. Since it is executed for each edge of $`G`$ at most twice the contribution of (30-40) in all repetitions of (28-41) is $`O(\mathrm{max}(m,n))`$.

Summing up — the total time complexity of the algorithm is $`O(\mathrm{max}(m,n))`$. Note that in a connected network $`mn1`$ and therefore $`O(\mathrm{max}(m,n))=O(m)`$.

### 4.2 Adaption of the algorithm for directed graphs

For directed simple graphs without loops only few changes in the implementation of the algorithm are needed depending on the interpretation of the *degree*. In the case of in-degree and out-degree the function in Neighbors must return next not yet visited in-neighbor and out-neighbor respectively. If degree is defined as in-degree $`+`$ out-degree, the maximum degree can be at most $`2n2`$. In this case we must provide enough space for table bin ($`2n1`$ elements). Function in Neighbors must return next not yet visited in-neighbor or out-neighbor.

## 5 Example

We applied the described algorithm for cores decomposition on a network based on the Knuth’s English dictionary . This network has 52652 vertices (English words having 2 to 8 characters) and 89038 edges (two vertices are adjacent, if we can get one word from another by changing, removing or inserting a letter). The obtained network is sparse: density is 0.0000642. The program took on PC only 0.01 sec to compute the core numbers. In the table below the summary results are presented.

Vertices with core number 0 are isolated vertices. Vertices with core number 1 have only one neighbor in the network. The 25-core (main core) consists of 26 vertices, where each vertex has at least 25 neighbors inside the core (obviously this is a clique). The corresponding words are a’s, b’s, c’s, …, y’s, z’s.

The 16-core has additional 34 vertices (an, on, ban, bon, can, con, Dan, don, eon, fan, gon, Han, hon, Ian, ion, Jan, Jon, man, Nan, non, pan, pon, ran, Ron, San, son, tan, ton, van, von, wan, won, yon, Zan). There are no edges between vertices with core number 25 and vertices with core number 16. The adjacency matrix of the subgraph induced by these 34 vertices is presented on figure 3. In this matrix we can see two 17-cliques and some additional edges.

The 15-core has additional 16 vertices (ow, bow, cow, Dow, how, jow, low, mow, now, pow, row, sow, tow, vow, wow, yow). This is a clique again, because only the first letters of the words are different.

## 6 Conclusion

The cores, because they can be efficiently determined, are one among few concepts that provide us with meaningful decompositions of large networks. We expect that different approaches to the analysis of large networks can be built on this basis. For example, the sequence of vertices in sequential coloring can be determined by their core numbers (combined with their degrees). Cores can also be used to reveal interesting subnetworks in large networks .

The described algorithm is implemented in program for large networks analysis Pajek (Slovene word for Spider) for Windows (32 bit) . It is freely available, for noncommercial use, at its homepage:

http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/pajek/

## Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of Slovenia, Project J1-8532. It is a detailed version of the part of the talk presented at *Recent Trends in Graph Theory, Algebraic Combinatorics, and Graph Algorithms*, September 24–27, 2001, Bled, Slovenia,


text:
# hep-th/0310103 Kink-boundary collisions in a two dimensional scalar field theory

## 1 Introduction

In Ref.  we presented a five-dimensional brane-world model, closely related to five-dimensional heterotic M-theory , where M-theory five-branes are modelled as kink-solutions of a bulk scalar field theory. We were particularly interested in studying collisions of such kinks with the boundaries, a process which, in the original M-theory model, may lead to a topology-changing so-called small-instanton transition  due to absorption of the five-brane. The analysis of Ref.  was mainly performed in a moduli space approximation. We concluded that the colliding kink was absorbed by the boundary, however, its final fate could not be determined due to a break-down of the moduli space approach.

In this paper, we will focus on an even simpler, two-dimensional model which captures the essential features of its five-dimensional cousin. The model consists of a ($`1+1`$)-dimensional scalar field theory for a single real scalar and an associated potential $`V`$ with (at least) two minima to allow for kink solutions. The spatial direction is taken to be a line segment with the boundary conditions being provided by the “superpotential”  $`W`$ associated to $`V`$. To simplify the problem we have not included gravity and any other gravity-like fields which were present in the five-dimensional model .

Our main goal is to determine the final outcome of the kink-boundary collision using this simple two-dimensional model. In particular, we would like to clarify whether the kink is indeed absorbed or, rather, reflected by the boundary. While the former process would lead to a change in the boundary charge (as measured by the superpotential value) and the number of kinks present in the bulk, the latter process would conserve those numbers. We will mainly approach this problem as one posed within relatively simple two-dimensional scalar field theories whose basic properties we are investigating, although the possible relation to M-theory and topology-changing phenomena is in the back of our minds.

The plan of the paper is as follows. In the next Section, we will set up the model and derive its basic kink solution. Section 3 reviews the moduli space description of kink evolution and kink-boundary collision. The perturbation spectrum on the kink background is analysed in Section 4. In Section 5, we present a full numerical analysis of the two-dimensional model to determine the final outcome of the collision process. An analytic interpretation of the numerical results is given in Section 6. In Section 7, we present a modified moduli space picture which incorporates some, although not all, features of the collision process. We conclude in Section 8 by summarising and presenting some results about the long-time evolution of the system.

## 2 The model

In this section, we will set up the $`1+1`$-dimensional model which will be the basis of this paper. This model is designed to capture the essential features of five-dimensional heterotic M-theory  and the related defect model presented in Ref.  and, at the same time, provide the simplest setting for studying the collision of a kink with a boundary.

Time and spatial coordinate are denoted by $`t`$ and $`x`$, respectively, where the latter is taken on a circle, that is, in the range $`x[L,L]`$ (with the endpoints of the interval identified) subject to the $`Z_2`$ orbifolding generated by $`xx`$. The resulting one-dimensional orbifold $`S^1/Z_2`$ has two fixed points at $`x=x_1=0`$ and $`x=x_2=\pm L`$ and points $`x`$ and $`x`$ are identified. Instead of working with the full orbicircle, we, therefore, can (and frequently will) use the “downstairs” picture where $`x`$ is restricted to the interval $`x[0,L]`$. The fixed points at $`x_i`$, where $`i=1,2`$, can now be thought of as spatial boundaries.

The field content of our model consists of a single real scalar field $`\varphi `$ with a potential $`V=V(\varphi )`$. Gravity and gravity-like fields will not be considered here since they are not essential to analyse the kink-boundary collision. We require the potential to have at least two different minima (with vanishing potential values) in order for kink solutions to exist. We also define the “superpotential” $`W`$ by

$$W^{}=\sqrt{2V(\varphi )}.$$
(2.1)
where here and in the following the prime denotes the derivative with respect to $`\varphi `$. We will be interested in actions of the type

$$S=\mathrm{dt}_L^L\mathrm{dx}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\varphi }{t}\right)^2\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\varphi }{x}\right)^2V(\varphi )2\delta (x0)W(\varphi )+2\delta (xL)W(\varphi )\right\}$$
(2.2)
The equations of motion and boundary conditions in the boundary picture are then given by

$$\frac{^2\varphi }{t^2}=\frac{^2\varphi }{x^2}V^{}(\varphi ),\frac{\varphi }{x}|_{x_i}=W^{}(\varphi )|_{x_i}.$$
(2.3)
For the numerical simulations and for concreteness we will often use the quartic potential

$$V(\varphi )=\frac{1}{8}g^2(\varphi ^2v^2)^2$$
(2.4)
with associated superpotential

$$W=\frac{1}{2}g\left(\frac{1}{3}\varphi ^3\varphi v^2\right).$$
(2.5)
The form of the boundary terms in the action (2.2) has been chosen to facilitate the existence of BPS solutions. This can be understood by focusing on static configurations $`\varphi =\varphi (x)`$. For such configurations, the action can be written as

$$S_0^L𝑑x\left(\frac{d\varphi }{dx}W^{}\right)^2.$$
(2.6)
Note that the boundaries terms which arise from partial integration when converting the action (2.2) into the above form are precisely cancelled by the original boundary terms in (2.2). Hence, we find static solutions $`\varphi =\varphi (x)`$ of our action satisfy the first order equation

$$\frac{d\varphi }{dx}=W^{}.$$
(2.7)
Conversely, solutions to this first order equation clearly satisfy the boundary conditions as well as the second-order equation of motion in (2.3), the latter by virtue of the relation between $`V`$ and $`W`$.

From eq. (2.7), the solution $`\varphi _\mathrm{K}`$ of a kink can in general be written as

$$\varphi _K(x)=f(xZ),f^1(\varphi )=_{\varphi _0}^\varphi \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}{W^{}(\stackrel{~}{\varphi })}.$$
(2.8)
Here we take $`\varphi _0`$ to be the $`\varphi `$ value at the core of the kink, corresponding to the maximum of the potential. Then, the constant $`Z`$ can be interpreted as the position of the kink’s core as long as $`Z[0,L]`$. For $`Z`$ outside this range, the core of the kink is no longer within the physical part of space and $`Z`$ merely indicates the “virtual” position of the core.

For the quartic potential (2.4) the kink solution is given by

$$\varphi _\mathrm{K}(x)=v\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{xZ}{2L_\mathrm{K}}\right)$$
(2.9)
where the width $`L_\mathrm{K}`$ of the kink is given by

$$L_\mathrm{K}=\frac{1}{gv}.$$
(2.10)
As long as kinks are sufficiently away from the boundaries, the field $`\varphi `$ will be close to minima of its potential $`V`$ on the boundaries. Then, the boundary superpotential takes values from a discrete set consisting of the values $`W`$ assumes at the minima of the potential $`V`$. These discrete values can be interpreted as boundary charges. They are analogous to the topological boundary charges which appear in the related M-theory model . In order to consistently maintain this interpretation, the superpotential must be monotonically increasing, and so Eq. (2.5) is only valid for $`v<\varphi <v`$.

We note that our boundary conditions are related to the family considered in . These papers studied integrable ($`1+1`$)-dimensional field theories on the half line, including the sine-Gordon theory, with a two-parameter set of boundary conditions $`\varphi ^{}=MW^{}(\varphi \varphi _0)`$ at the origin. The fact that these boundary conditions do not spoil the integrability generated considerable interest.

## 3 Moduli space evolution

In the previous section, we have presented a one-parameter family of static BPS kink solutions for our theory (2.2) which is labelled by the parameter $`Z`$. Solutions exist for all values $`Z[\mathrm{},\mathrm{}]`$ but only for $`Z[0,L]`$ does $`Z`$ correspond to the position of the kink’s core. Otherwise, the kink’s core is located “outside” and only its tail remains within the physical part of space. Values $`Z=0`$ or $`Z=L`$ correspond to a kink with its core being exactly located at one of the boundaries.

We would now like to consider physical motion in this moduli space of kinks by promoting $`Z`$ to a slowly-varying function of time, $`Z=Z(t)`$. A time evolution $`Z0_+`$ ($`ZL_{}`$) then describes the collision of the kink with the boundary at $`x=x_1=0`$ ($`x=x_2=L`$) which is the process we would like to study in this paper. For definiteness, we will focus on collisions with the boundary at $`x=0`$ in the following but the conclusions, of course, apply to collisions with the other boundary at $`x=L`$ as well.

The one-dimensional effective theory $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ for the modulus $`Z=Z(t)`$ can be obtained by inserting the kink-solution (2.8) into the action (2.2) and integrating over the spatial coordinate. This results in

$$S_{\mathrm{eff}}=𝑑tF(Z)\dot{Z}^2,$$
(3.1)
where the function $`F=F(Z)`$ is given by

$$F(Z)=W(f(LZ))W(f(Z)).$$
(3.2)
The last equation means that $`F`$ is the difference of the boundary superpotentials evaluated on the kink solution. From this interpretation the qualitative behaviour of $`F`$ can be easily inferred. For $`Z[0,L]`$ and well away from the boundaries (that is, away by more than the width of the kink) the field $`\varphi _\mathrm{K}`$ is very close to neighbouring minima of the potential on the two boundaries. More precisely, $`\varphi _\mathrm{K}(x=0)`$ is very close to the minimum with the smaller superpotential value and $`\varphi _\mathrm{K}(x=L)`$ is very close to the neighbouring minimum with the larger superpotential value. This means, for such values of $`Z`$ the function $`F(Z)`$ is finite positive and approximately constant. On the other hand, for $`Z<0`$ or $`Z>L`$ and away from the boundary, $`\varphi `$ is very close to the same minimum for both boundaries which means that $`F(Z)`$ is approximately zero (although still positive).

The function $`F`$ can be computed for any given potential $`V`$ and associated superpotential $`W`$ to confirm this expectation. For the quartic potential (2.4), the associated superpotential (2.5) and kink solution (2.9) one finds

$$F(Z)=gv^3\left[\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{g}{2}v(xZ))\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{tanh}^3(\frac{g}{2}v(xZ))\right]|_0^L.$$
(3.3)
This function has been plotted in Fig. 1 and it shows indeed the general properties discussed above. The constant value of $`F`$ for $`Z`$ inside the interval is given by

$$F(Z)4gv^3/3\mathrm{for}ZL_\mathrm{K}\mathrm{and}LZL_\mathrm{K}.$$
(3.4)
For later purposes, it is also useful to note the asymptotic behaviour of $`F`$ for $`ZL_\mathrm{K}`$ which will be relevant after a collision of the kink with the boundary at $`x=0`$. It is given by

$$F(Z)4gv^3\left(1e^{2gvL}\right)e^{2gvZ}\mathrm{for}ZL_\mathrm{K}.$$
(3.5)
If the width of the kink $`L_\mathrm{K}`$ is much smaller than the size $`L`$ of the interval, $`L_\mathrm{K}L`$, this reduces to

$$F(Z)4gv^3e^{2gvZ}\mathrm{for}ZL_\mathrm{K}\mathrm{and}L_\mathrm{K}L.$$
(3.6)
The equations of motion derived from the effective action (3.1) are simply

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(F\dot{Z}^2\right)=0,$$
(3.7)
where the dot denotes the derivative with respect to time. This leads to the first integral

$$F\dot{Z}^2=u^2=\mathrm{const},$$
(3.8)
where $`u`$ is a constant. This relation, of course, represents energy conservation. Together with the properties of $`F`$ stated above it implies that $`Z`$ evolves with constant velocity in the interval $`Z[0,L]`$ and, once it has collided with the boundary at $`x=0`$, accelerates and evolves towards $`Z\mathrm{}`$ while $`\dot{Z}`$ diverges. Moreover, from the explicit form of $`F`$ one can show that $`Z`$ reaches $`\mathrm{}`$ in a finite time. Of course, the validity of the effective theory (3.1) when $`Z`$ and $`\dot{Z}`$ diverge after a collision is at best doubtful. Although the effective theory provides a good description of slow kink motion for finite values of $`Z`$, it seems difficult, therefore, to draw any reliable conclusion about the outcome of the collision based on this effective theory. Three possibilities are conceivable. The kink could be absorbed by the boundary with its kinetic energy being completely converted into radiation (that is, fluctuations of $`\varphi `$ around one of its vacuum states). In this case the charge on the absorbing boundary would have changed by one unit between the initial and final state. It could be inelastically reflected with part of its kinetic energy being transferred to radiation or it could be elastically reflected. Then the boundary charge remains unchanged. We will now analyse the full two-dimensional theory (2.2) to determine which of these three possibilities is actually realised.

## 4 Perturbation spectrum

It is instructive to examine how the eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of small perturbations around the kink change with the modulus $`Z`$. To find the eigenvalues we must expand the field around the kink configuration $`\varphi (x)=\varphi _\mathrm{K}(xZ)+\phi (x)`$ and solve the eigenvalue problem

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+V^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _\mathrm{K})+2W^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _\mathrm{K})\delta (x)\right]\phi =\omega ^2\phi $$
(4.1)
Here, we have neglected the contribution from the boundary at $`x=L`$ which is justified as long as the kink is sufficiently far away from this boundary. This can always be achieved by making $`L`$ large. We would then expect that at large positive $`Z`$, the spectrum would be asymptotically close to that of an isolated kink . For the quartic potential (2.4) one expects one zero mode with no nodes, a bound state with one node and eigenvalue $`\omega _1^2=3\mu ^2/2`$, and a continuum starting at $`\omega _2^2=2\mu ^2`$, where $`\mu =gv/\sqrt{2}`$. At large negative $`Z`$, the spectrum should be asymptotically close to that of the vacuum, which also possesses a nodeless zero mode and a continuum starting at $`\omega ^2=2\mu ^2`$, but no bound state.

Although the free kink eigenfunctions and eigenvalues are known exactly , the non-trivial boundary condition, or equivalently the extra $`\delta `$-function contribution to the potential, change the problem. As we have not been able to find a solution to the eigenvalue problem in closed form, we resorted to a simple numerical method.

Eq. (4.1) was discretised on an $`2N+1`$-point interval $`L<x<L`$, using the lowest order discrete Laplacian

$$\frac{d^2}{dx^2}(y)\frac{\phi _{i+1}2\phi _i+\phi _{i1}}{\mathrm{\Delta }x^2},$$
(4.2)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=L/N`$. At the left (right) boundary the double forward (backward) derivative was taken, which improves the accuracy at the expense of generating two spurious eigenfunctions with large negative eigenvalues. The $`\delta `$-function was defined as $`\delta (x)\delta _{i0}/\mathrm{\Delta }x`$. One should note that in defining the problem for both positive and negative values of $`x`$, we will find eigenfunctions which are both symmetric and antisymmetric under reflections around $`x=0`$. We are clearly interested only in the symmetric ones.

The eigenfunctions and eigenvalues are easily found using matlab. We took $`N=100`$ and $`L=10`$, in units where $`\mu =1`$. The lowest three (0, 1 and 2 nodes) are shown for $`2<Z<2`$ in Fig. (2). The closeness of the lowest eigenvalue to 0 is a measure of the accuracy of the procedure. The shapes of the eigenfunctions for $`Z=2`$, $`Z=0`$ and $`Z=2`$ are shown in Fig. (3).

As we will see later, the existence of a zero mode for all values of the kink position $`Z`$ is crucial for an understanding of the kink-boundary collision. We will also find that it has important implications for the creation of kinks due to spontaneous emission from the boundary.

## 5 Numerical Simulation

As we have seen in the previous sections, a straightforward moduli calculation suggests that, as the kink collides with the boundary, it should cross it and accelerate towards infinity. As a result, the field configuration inside the bulk will approach one of the true vaccua of the theory. We could then expect the kinetic energy of the kink to be converted into radiative excitations of the vacuum that would propagate away from the boundary. This reasoning suggests, the kink should be absorbed by the boundary as a result of the collision. In this section we will test this expectation by performing numerical simulations of the kink/boundary collision. As we will see, a more complex picture will emerge, showing how the moduli description fails to capture the essential features of the collision process.

We model the bulk equation of motion Eq. (2.3) with the quartic potential (2.4) on a $`1D`$ lattice using a second order discretization of the Laplacian operator, and propagate it in time according to a standard leapfrog algorithm. The implementation of the boundary condition is less straightforward, since it relates a function of the field to its spatial derivative. Taking as an example the boundary condition at $`x=0`$, we discretise it as

$$\frac{\varphi _1\varphi _0}{\delta x}=W^{}(\varphi _m),$$
(5.1)
where $`\varphi _m`$ is the value of the field evaluated at some point in the interval $`(0,\delta x)`$. We allowed for different choices of the discretization scheme by writing $`\varphi _m=(1G)\varphi _0+G\varphi _1`$, with $`G`$ a parameter lying between $`0`$ and $`1`$. Since the discretised spatial derivative is effectively evaluated in the mid-point between lattice sites $`i=0`$ and $`i=1`$, the most natural option is to set $`G=.5`$ We confirmed that this choice is the most accurate one, by evolving in time a stationary kink configuration, with its core placed near the boundary. For $`G>.5`$ the kink is slightly repelled by the boundary, whereas for $`G<.5`$ the boundary has an attractive effect. The disadvantage of setting $`G=.5`$ is that it turns Eq. (5.1) into a non-linear implicit equation for $`\varphi _0`$, which has to be solved numerically for each time-step. This is clearly the case for any choice of $`G`$ other than $`G=1`$. On the other hand, for the lattice action obtained by a straightforward discretization of Eq. (2.2), the only energy conserving algorithm corresponds to $`G=0`$. For $`G>0`$ we cannot rely on energy conservation as test of the adequacy of the choice of time-step. Of course all schemes conserve energy in the $`\delta x0`$ limit. Since we are dealing with a one-dimensional system, we had no serious computational restrictions and we chose to work with $`G=.5`$. We have checked that, in the limit of small lattice spacing the three values $`G=0,.5`$ and $`1`$ lead to the same results. The boundary condition equation Eq. (5.1) was solved using an implementation of the Newton-Raphson method (see ).

The initial conditions for the numerical evolution should model, as closely as possible, a kink in the bulk with a given velocity $`\dot{Z}_i`$ moving towards one of the boundaries. We set up the initial field configuration as $`\varphi _K(xZ_i)`$ using the kink profile in Eq. (2.9), with $`Z_i`$ the initial core position far from both boundaries. The initial field momentum is defined as $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\dot{Z}_i_x\varphi _K`$, where $`\dot{Z}_i`$ is the chosen initial kink velocity. The simulations were run for a theory with $`g=2\sqrt{2}`$ and $`v=1`$, which implies a kink width of $`L_\mathrm{K}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}`$. We chose a box of physical length $`L=16`$, comfortably larger than the kink width. For high and mid-range kink velocities, the lattice parameters were set to $`\delta x=.0125`$ and $`\delta t=.005`$. Low collision velocities lead to a large total simulation time and a smaller time-step is needed to avoid error accumulation. For the lowest velocities we used $`\delta x=.00125`$ and $`\delta t=.001`$.

We explored a wide range of collision velocities, letting $`\dot{Z}_i`$ vary between $`.01`$ and $`.75`$ in steps of $`.01`$ In Fig. 4 we can see a series of snapshots of $`\varphi `$ for several evolution times in a typical run (in this case $`\dot{Z}_i=.3`$). During the first part of the evolution the kink moves towards the boundary with constant velocity. As its core starts moving into the boundary there is, as expected from the moduli picture, an increase in $`\dot{Z}`$. At some point the kink leaves the bulk completely and the field is left in the true vacuum, oscillating rapidly in the vicinity of the boundary. The kink then “returns” into the simulation box, moving away from the boundary with decreasing velocity at first. When its core is well inside the bulk the kink velocity oscillates around an average value $`\dot{Z}_f`$. This final value is always smaller than the initial velocity $`\dot{Z}_i`$, as some energy is lost into radiation during the collision. In the late time profiles in Fig. 4 we can see these radiative perturbations moving away from the boundary.

In Fig. 5 we have a plot of the kink velocity versus time. $`\dot{Z}(t)`$ was evaluated by numerical differentiation of the position of the core of the kink $`Z(t)`$. This in turn was defined as the position of the zero of the field, obtained by interpolating $`\varphi `$ as its sign changes. The same features of the evolution can be seen, with $`\dot{Z}(t)`$ increasing as the kink approaches the boundary, and being reflected later on with a lower final velocity. Note that in both the beginning and end periods of the evolution, the velocity is not strictly constant, oscillating around an average value. This indicates that in both cases, apart from the translational mode, other modes of the kink are excited. As far as the initial condition is concerned this was expected since we are not using a Lorentz boosted kink, which would clearly not obey the boundary conditions. This effect is particularly visible for high kink velocities, both before and after the collision.

Surprisingly, the overall qualitative pattern of the evolution did not change within the whole range of velocities observed. Even for very low velocities, where we expected the reasoning based on the moduli calculation to be applicable, the incoming kink was always reflected by the boundary after the collision. In the next few sections we will try to explain this behaviour and gain a deeper quantitative understanding of the collision process.

## 6 Collision as a vacuum perturbation

As we have seen in Section 3, the motion of the kink should be well described by the moduli equations of motion, up to the point when the velocity of its core becomes too large. For low values of the initial velocity $`\dot{Z}_i`$, we expect this to happen when the kink core is outside the bulk and far from away from the boundary. That this is the case can be easily shown using the moduli energy conservation equation (3.8). Assuming that the moduli approximation breaks down for velocities above a certain $`\dot{Z}_{max}`$. Then Eq. (3.8) implies that the corresponding core position $`Z_{max}`$ should satisfy

$$F(Z_{max})=\frac{4}{3}gv^3\left(\frac{\dot{Z}_i}{\dot{Z}_{max}}\right)^2.$$
(6.1)
Here we assumed the kink to be initially inside the bulk and far from its boundaries so that (3.4) applies. Clearly, the form of $`F(Z)`$ implies that for $`\dot{Z}_i`$ small enough, $`Z_{max}`$ can be made arbitrarily large.

If, when the maximal velocity is reached, we have $`Z_{max}L_\mathrm{K}`$, the field configuration in the bulk will be everywhere very close to the vacuum $`v`$. This suggests that for low $`\dot{Z}_i`$, we could use the linearised equations of motion around $`v`$ to describe the evolution, after the moduli approximation breaks down. In this section we will use this approach to show that the kink bounces back inelastically after the collision, confirming the previous simulation results.

### 6.1 Expansion basis for linearised equations of motion

As discussed above we perturb around the vacuum $`v`$ and write $`\varphi =\phi +v`$. For small $`\phi `$ the field equation of motion reduces to

$$\ddot{\phi }=\phi ^{\prime \prime }m^2\phi $$
(6.2)
where $`m=gv`$ in the case of the quartic potential. The non-trivial contribution to the evolution will come from the boundary condition, which is given by

$$\phi ^{}(x_i,t)=(g/2)|\varphi ^2(x_i,t)v^2|=m|\phi (x_i,t)|$$
(6.3)
In this section we will focus on a collision taking place at the left boundary, $`x=0`$, and effectively assume the bulk to be half-infinite. This should be a reasonable approximation as long as the size of the bulk is larger than the collision time, so that effects from the radiation produced during collision reaching the opposite boundary can be neglected. Note that, as a consequence of the norm in (6.3), the boundary condition for $`\phi `$ is non-linear. Nevertheless, for periods of the evolution during which $`\phi `$ does not change sign at the origin, (6.3) reduces to a linear equation. In particular we have

$`\phi ^{}(0,t)=m\phi (0,t),`$ $`\mathrm{if}`$ $`\phi (0,t)>0,`$ (6.4)
$`\phi ^{}(0,t)=m\phi (0,t),`$ $`\mathrm{if}`$ $`\phi (0,t)<0.`$ (6.5)
This implies that we can still expand arbitrary solutions of (6.2) and (6.3) in terms of given mode functions, as long as we use a different basis for different periods of the evolution. We start with the case $`\phi (0,t)>0`$. A complete basis of solutions of (6.2) satisfying (6.4) is given by

$$\phi _k(x,t)=N_ke^{\pm i\omega t}\left[\mathrm{cos}(kx)+\frac{m}{k}\mathrm{sin}(kx)\right],w^2=k^2+m^2,k>0.$$
(6.6)
To obtain the normalisation coefficient we define the mode functions in a finite box of size $`L`$, leading to $`N_k^2=2k^2/(L\omega ^2)`$. In the end of the calculation we will take $`L\mathrm{}`$. As for $`k`$, it will have a discrete spectrum depending on the boundary conditions on the right end of the box. For simplicity we chose periodic boundary conditions, implying $`\mathrm{cos}(kL)+(m/k)\mathrm{sin}(kL)=1`$. As the box size is taken to infinity this should not be relevant for the final result.

In the case of negative field values $`\phi (0,t)`$ the basis is given by

$$\phi _k(x,t)=N_ke^{\pm i\omega t}\left[\mathrm{cos}(kx)\frac{m}{k}\mathrm{sin}(kx)\right],w^2=k^2+m^2,k>0$$
(6.7)
with $`\mathrm{cos}(kL)(m/k)\mathrm{sin}(kL)=1`$. Here $`N_k^2`$ is a normalisation which will be unimportant for the subsequent calculation. In addition, for the case of negative field values $`\phi (0,t)`$ and only for this case, there is also a zero-mass solution of the general form

$$\phi _0(x,t)=(a+bt)e^{mx}$$
(6.8)
This zero mode corresponds to the tail of the kink when its core is far outside the bulk. It can be seen as the linearised version of the translational zero mode of the kink. As we will see, this is the essential feature that distinguishes the evolution in the two regimes, $`\phi >0`$ and $`\phi <0`$.

### 6.2 Linear solution

We now apply the above results to the kink/boundary collision situation. For simplicity, we define $`t=0`$ as the time when the moduli approximation breaks down. For this time, we must find the corresponding field configuration inside the bulk which can then be taken as initial condition for the equations of motion linearised around the vacuum. When the kink core is very far from the boundary, the bulk field and its time derivative can be approximated by

$`\varphi (x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`v2ve^{mZ(t)}e^{mx}`$ (6.9)
$`_t\varphi (x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`2mv\dot{Z}(t)e^{mZ(t)}e^{mx}`$ (6.10)
We will assume that we can neglect the small perturbation around the vacuum and that effectively $`\varphi =v`$ in the bulk at $`t=0`$. The derivative term on the other hand, remains finite even as $`\dot{Z}(t)`$ diverges. Using energy conservation (3.8) and (3.6) we obtain

$$4mv^2e^{2mZ}\dot{Z}^2=F(Z_i)\dot{Z_i}^2$$
(6.11)
which implies, using the asymptotic expansion for $`F(Z)`$, that

$$e^{mZ}\dot{Z}=\frac{\dot{Z}_i}{\sqrt{3}}.$$
(6.12)
This allows us to express the finite amplitude of the velocity profile at collision time in terms of the initial velocity of the kink. The perturbation field at $`t=0`$ is then defined as

$`\phi (x,0)`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (6.13)
$`\dot{\phi }(x,0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}}mv\dot{Z}_ie^{mx}`$ (6.14)
These are now to be taken as initial conditions of the linearised equations of motion. Since $`\dot{\phi }>0`$ we will be entering a phase of the evolution for which $`\phi (0,t)>0`$ and we should expand (6.14) in terms of the corresponding basis (6.6). The expansion coefficients are easily obtained (the result depends only on integrals of products of exponentials and trigonometric functions) leading to

$$\phi (x,t)=\frac{4A}{L}m\left(1e^{mL}\right)\underset{k}{}\frac{k^2}{\omega ^5}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t)\left[\mathrm{cos}(kx)+\frac{m}{k}\mathrm{sin}(kx)\right]$$
(6.15)
where $`A=(2/\sqrt{3})mv\dot{Z}_i`$ is the amplitude of the exponential tail in the initial velocity profile for the field.

Equation (6.15) is only valid as long as $`\phi (0,t)>0`$. When the field becomes negative at the origin, the boundary condition changes sign and the solution should then be expanded in terms of the second basis (6.7). Let us define a “reflection time” $`t_R`$, for which the solution becomes negative at the boundary, that is $`\phi (0,t_R)=0`$. We can use (6.15) to calculate explicitly the mode amplitudes of $`\phi (x,t_R)=0`$ in terms of the $`\phi <0`$ basis. The new ingredient now is the presence of the zero mode. All other modes are oscillatory, corresponding to the radiation that will propagate away from the boundary after the collision. The zero mode $`\phi _0`$ on the other hand, will grow linearly in time, becoming the tail of the incoming kink. The situation will now mirror what happened before the collision, with the amplitude of the massless mode being related to the final velocity of the reflected kink $`Z_f`$. We define the zero mode amplitude as

$$a_0=𝑑x_t\phi (x,t_R)N_0e^{mx}$$
(6.16)
where $`N_0^2=2m/(1e^{2mL})`$ is the corresponding normalisation factor. The time derivative of the field at $`t_R`$ will be given by:

$$\dot{\phi }(x,t_R)=a_0N_0e^{mx}+\mathrm{oscillatory}\mathrm{terms}$$
(6.17)
Since we are mainly interested in determining the final velocity of the reflected kink, we will not calculate explicitly the positive $`k`$ component of the field. We define the amplitude of the exponential term in $`\dot{\phi }(x,t_R)`$ as $`B=a_0N_0`$, and in analogy with the calculation for the kink before the collision, (6.14) leads to

$$\dot{Z}_f=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2mv}B.$$
(6.18)
A reflection coefficient can be defined as $`R=\dot{Z}_f/\dot{Z}_i=B/A`$, quantifying the elasticity of the collision. The amplitude $`B`$ can be easily obtained by performing the integral in Eq. (6.16), leading to the expression

$$R=\frac{B}{A}=N_0^2\frac{2}{L}\left(1e^{mL}\right)^2\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}m^2\underset{k}{}\frac{k^2}{\omega ^6}\mathrm{cos}(\omega t_R)$$
(6.19)
for the reflection coefficient where $`\omega `$ is given in Eq. (6.6). Note that this solves the problem. We have obtained a formula for the reflection coefficient in terms of the reflection time $`t_R`$, which, in turn, is implicitly determined by Eq. (6.15) as the time satisfying $`\phi (0,t_R)=0`$.

### 6.3 Comparison with numerical data

To evaluate exact numerical values it is convenient to approximate the series obtained in the previous section by integrals. There is a slight subtlety involved, related to the fact that we must add over all values of $`k`$ that solve the periodic boundary condition $`\mathrm{cos}(kL)+(m/k)\mathrm{sin}(kL)=1`$. This equation is solved by $`k=2n\pi /L`$, and by an extra non-trivial solution in every interval $`(2n\pi /L,2(n+1)\pi /L)`$. This second solution approaches $`k=2n\pi /L`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. In replacing sums over $`k`$ by integrals we must take into consideration the fact that there are two $`k`$’s in each interval of length $`2\pi /L`$ and use $`(\pi /L)_k𝑑k`$ (rather than $`(2\pi /L)_k𝑑k`$). Using the continuum version of (6.19) we obtain for the reflection coefficient

$$R=\frac{16m^3}{\pi }_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑k\frac{k^2}{\omega ^6}\mathrm{cos}(\omega t_R)$$
(6.20)
The reflection time $`t_R`$ is given implicitly by

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑k\frac{k^2}{\omega ^5}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t_R)=0$$
(6.21)
Both integrals can easily be re-scaled and evaluated numerically, leading to the final results:

$$t_R=\frac{2.06}{m},R=0.63$$
(6.22)
These compare very well with the simulation results in the limit of low collision velocities, as illustrated in Figs. 6 and 7. As the initial kink velocity increases deviations from the analytical result can be observed. This is to be expected, since for higher velocities the moduli approximation should break down earlier, making equation (6.14) a worse guess for the form of the initial conditions for the linear regime. Also, we should expect corrections to the linear approximation as the field starts probing the non-linearities of the potential during the collision, for high $`\dot{Z}_i`$. Still, in the particular system simulated, the numerical results remain within 10% of the analytical prediction for velocities up to $`\dot{Z}_i=0.3`$.

It is interesting to note that the equation (6.22) depends only on the mass of the perturbed theory around the vacuum. In fact, it is easy to see that the derivation leading to this result could be reproduced for a general potential with non-vanishing second order derivative at the true vacuum. In particular, for this class of potentials, the reflection coefficient should be model independent. We confirmed this remarkable result by simulating a few collision velocities for a sine-Gordon model. As expected, we observed $`R=0.63`$.

## 7 Moduli space interpretation of the kink-boundary collision

Can we find an interpretation for our results in terms of a suitable modification of the one-dimensional moduli-space approximation described in Section 3? As before, we focus on a collision with the boundary at $`x=0`$. In view of the effective action (3.1), it seems natural to introduce a new field $`\zeta `$ with a canonically normalised kinetic term by setting

$$\frac{d\zeta }{dZ}=\pm \sqrt{F},\zeta (Z)=\pm _{\mathrm{}}^Z𝑑\stackrel{~}{Z}\sqrt{F(\stackrel{~}{Z})}.$$
(7.1)
Note that the integral in this definition is indeed finite which corresponds to the fact that $`Z`$ reaches $`\mathrm{}`$ in a finite time. For a positive (negative) sign in the above definition the full range of $`Z`$ values is mapped into positive (negative) $`\zeta `$ values while the point $`Z=\mathrm{}`$ is mapped to $`\zeta =0`$ for both signs. The effective action (3.1) now takes the canonical form

$$S_{\mathrm{eff}}=𝑑t\dot{\zeta }^2$$
(7.2)
and leads to the first integral

$$\dot{\zeta }=V=\mathrm{const}.$$
(7.3)
Let us discuss the collision process in terms of the new field $`\zeta `$. We start off at some finite, positive value $`\zeta `$, corresponding to the kink being located between the boundaries, and move with a constant, negative velocity towards $`\zeta =0`$. When $`\zeta `$ reaches some smaller, positive value, corresponding to the position of the boundary at $`x=0`$, the collision takes place. From there $`\zeta `$ continues to evolve to zero and, finally, into negative values. Nothing special happens at $`\zeta =0`$ which corresponds to the formerly problematic point $`Z=\mathrm{}`$. We would now like to re-interpret this evolution of $`\zeta `$ in terms of our original field $`Z`$. Note that, from Eq. (7.1) we have

$$\dot{Z}=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill +\frac{V}{\sqrt{F}}& \hfill \mathrm{for}& \hfill \zeta >0\\ \hfill \frac{V}{\sqrt{F}}& \hfill \mathrm{for}& \hfill \zeta <0\end{array}.$$
(7.4)
This means crossing of $`\zeta =0`$ after a collision implies a sign change in the velocity of $`Z`$ and, hence, a reflection of the kink. This is precisely what we have found in the full two-dimensional theory. An alternative way of stating this is to note that $`\zeta `$ is really defined on $`R/Z_2`$. Here the $`Z_2`$ identifies $`\zeta `$ and $`\zeta `$ which correspond to the same field value $`Z`$. In fact, upon including the other boundary the $`\zeta `$ moduli space is, perhaps not surprisingly, given by $`S^1/Z_2`$. Note, however, the fix points of this moduli space orbifold do not quite correspond to the fix points of the space-time orbifold (which are at $`x=0,L`$) but rather to the points “at infinity”, that is, $`Z=\pm \mathrm{}`$.

There are two obvious conclusions about the collision process which we can deduce from our simple picture. First, the absolute values of the kink velocity, $`|V|`$, before and after the collision are the same, that is, the reflection is elastic and the reflection coefficient is $`R=1`$. This is in obvious disagreement with our two-dimensional results which showed the reflection is inelastic even at low velocities with a reflection coefficient $`R0.63`$. This disagreement arises because the modified moduli space picture still does not correctly describe the system for a short time period, corresponding to the reflection time $`t_R`$, when the modulus $`\zeta `$ is not defined. During this short period, the additional radiation is created, a process which clearly cannot be described by our effective moduli space theory with a single degree of freedom.

Secondly, the total time $`t_{\mathrm{refl}}`$ between the two crossings of the core of the kink with the boundary is given by

$$t_{\mathrm{refl}}=\frac{2}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^0\sqrt{F(Z)}𝑑Z.$$
(7.5)
Note, this time is different from the reflection time $`t_R`$ defined earlier and, for low velocities, we have $`t_{\mathrm{refl}}t_R`$. While $`t_{\mathrm{refl}}`$ is the total time the kink vanishes “behind” the boundary, $`t_R`$ is the time the moduli space approximation breaks down when the kink is far outside at $`Z\mathrm{}`$ or $`\zeta 0`$. Comparison with the numerical simulations shows that the above formula approximates $`t_{\mathrm{refl}}`$ well for low velocities with the typical discrepancy being of order $`t_R`$. This is understandable since the main contribution to the integral in Eq. (7.5) comes from the region $`Z0`$ around the boundary where the moduli space approximation is still valid.

Another conclusion from Eq. (7.5) is that the kink can disappear behind the boundary for an arbitrarily long time for sufficiently low initial velocity. However, as we have seen, it eventually always reemerges and is reflected back into the bulk.

## 8 Conclusions

Combining the numerical and analytical results discussed above, a consistent picture of the kink/boundary collision process begins to emerge. We found that for most of the evolution the system is well described by an effective theory for the kink position modulus. As the kink leaves the bulk and the modulus diverges, there is a short period of time (the reflection time $`t_R`$, in the notation of Section 6) for which this approximation breaks down. During this stage, the field in the bulk takes values outside the interval $`(v,v)`$ between the two minima of the potential and, as a consequence, the moduli approximation is not defined. Solving the full field theory for this period of the evolution, we showed that the kink is always inelastically reflected back into to the bulk. After the collision the kink moves in the bulk following once again the moduli equations of motion. We presented an analytical approach which describes the kink reflection as a fluctuation of the scalar field around its vacuum state. This picture led to analytic expressions for the reflection coefficient $`R`$ (the ratio of initial and final kink velocity) and the reflection time $`t_R`$. These analytical results turned out to be in good agreement with the numerical simulations for low kink velocities, thereby supporting our analytical approach. Remarkably, the reflection coefficient and, hence, the fraction of energy lost into radiation during a collision, turned out to be model-independently given by $`R0.63`$.

Although we have shown that the reflection of the kink can be modelled by a formal continuation of the moduli space, some aspects of the collision, such as its inelasticity, and an extra time delay $`t_R`$, are not correctly reproduced within this moduli space approach. So far we have not been able to find an alternative description of the collision that does not require taking into account the full set of degrees of freedom of the two-dimensional field theory. It is possible that a more adequate moduli space description can be achieved by a different continuation of the moduli space but clearly more work is needed to settle this question.

These results may be disappointing at first as they seem to imply that the number of kinks in the bulk and the charges on the boundaries are always conserved during collisions. Initially we had expected to find examples of collisions for which the kink would be absorbed by the boundary, leading to a change of the boundary charge . In the related M-theory model  such a change in the boundary charge indicates a change in the topology of the M-theory background and is, therefore, of particular interest.

However, on closer examination, the mechanism behind the reflection of the kink reveals a much richer potential for processes changing the boundary charges. As shown in Section 6, after the collision the kink grows back into the bulk as the exponential zero mode around the vacuum becomes excited. If we now consider a general arbitrary perturbation of the vacuum, it is very likely that it will have a non-vanishing component in the direction of the zero mode. This will lead to a kink forming and moving into the core, changing by $`1`$ the charge of the boundary. The somewhat unexpected conclusion seems to be that it is reasonably easy to extract a kink from the boundaries. In fact it is easy to show that this process is not inhibited by a lower energy threshold. When a kink forms, the change in the bulk energy corresponding to its core is compensated for by an equal change in the boundary energy terms. The energy of the initial perturbation is then converted exclusively into kinetic energy of the incoming kink. This implies that kinks with arbitrarily low velocities can always be obtained from field configurations arbitrarily near the vacuum. In this sense emission of kinks from the boundaries which change the boundary charges becomes unavoidable, in practise.

Let us illustrate these ideas by looking at the very long time limit of the kink/boundary collision process. Here we will follow  and consider a theory with a periodic potential $`V(\varphi )`$. In the situations considered so far the field values were always near the two vaccua $`v`$ and $`v`$, and the large $`\varphi `$ structure of the potential was never relevant. This is not the case, as we will see, for considerably long times after the collision. As we have discussed, when the kink collides with the left boundary some radiation is produced which propagates away in the direction of the opposite right boundary (and vice versa). As the vacuum in the right boundary becomes perturbed, we can expect as before, that the corresponding zero mode becomes excited. From our arguments above this zero mode should with time grow into an additional, left-moving kink. Something similar could be expected to happen in the left boundary, after the reflected kink moves away into the bulk. Since we expect some small perturbation around the vacuum there, another (probably very slow) right-moving kink should start forming. For a periodic potential and very long times this process would repeat itself several times, with increasing numbers of kinks being extracted from both boundaries. That this seems to be indeed the case has been confirmed in Fig. 8. For a sine-Gordon model with potential

$$V(\varphi )=\frac{m^4}{\lambda }\left[\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{m}\varphi \right)1\right]$$
(8.1)
and parameters $`m=1`$, $`\lambda =1`$ we observed the formation of five kinks from an initial single-kink collision. As expected, the kinetic energy of the initial kink is distributed amongst the final kinks that move with much lower velocities.

As an extra test we evolved a number of near vacuum configurations with zero bulk charge and observed the formation of a number of kinks at both boundaries, as expected. The natural question at this point is which mechanism would cause the kink formation process to stop eventually. One possibility is that, as their velocities become increasingly small, a kink gas would form, its density being limited by the repulsive kink-kink interaction. We can conjecture that for a very large family of initial conditions a gas of stacked branes should form, with density closely related to the energy of the initial field configuration. If this happens to be the case, the final charge configuration, in particular the final boundary charges of the system, would be selected by its total energy. Clearly a deeper understanding, both in numerical and analytical terms, of the system is needed in order to clarify these intriguing possibilities.

Acknowledgements
A. L. is supported by a PPARC Advanced Fellowship. N. D. A. is supported by a PPARC Post-Doctoral Fellowship.