text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In perturbative string theory, space-time is built out of a conformal world-sheet theory. It has therefore been a constant theme to try to identify geometrically the features of the conformal field theory, as has been done most notably with boundary conditions on the worldsheet and D-branes. Another prominent example is that of orbifolding (see for example , , ). For instance, it has been shown in  that upon orbifolding flat space by some abelian, finite group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ one can include phases in the twisted sectors of the theory, which correspond geometrically to introducing a non-trivial two-form field $`B`$, called discrete torsion. In this note we extend this study to a class of orbifolds of curved (bosonic) backgrounds.

We were motivated by the fact that the CFT describing string propagation in lens spaces $`L_n=SU(2)/_n`$, where the left $`SU(2)`$ symmetry is preserved, is an element in a family of theories corresponding to a particular choice of a parameter also called (algebraic) discrete torsion , . The question arose as to whether a different choice of algebraic discrete torsion would also have a geometrical interpretation. It is our goal here to describe the geometry of this family of CFTs.

To answer this question we will study more general orbifolds $`M=G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of compact, simple, simply connected groups $`G`$ by abelian, finite subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (whose action will be specified later). $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ lies in some maximal torus of $`G`$ and is of the form $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times _{n_r}`$ where $`r`$ is the rank of $`G`$. Depending on the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the quotient space may be smooth or have some singularities. If $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is smooth, it inherits the left translational invariant metric $`g`$ and three-form $`H`$ from the covering $`G`$. The quotienting can therefore be implemented on the WZW model describing $`G`$ at some level $`k`$. Recall however that, for integrality of the Wess-Zumino term, the field $`H`$ is quantized, $`HH^3(G,k)`$, so that it describes a (1-)gerbe over $`G`$ . In order that the integrality of the Wess-Zumino term be preserved by the quotient, all $`n_i`$ must divide $`k`$. This is not a restriction, since in comparing CFT with geometry one takes the semi-classical limit of $`k`$ large. On the other hand, the theory may depend on the choice of connection $`B`$ for the $`H`$-field .

We show that these same CFTs can be constructed using the simple current formalism 111In fact, the case of non-abelian $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can in principle be studied with tools introduced just recently in  which are beyond the scope of this paper.. This is a powerful tool which has been systematically studied for over a decade; we briefly review it in section 2, and in particular we describe the algebraic discrete torsion. In section 3 we review the construction of gerbes with connections on quotient spaces and show how they allow for inequivalent choices of $`B`$ fields. Using the Künneth formula we compare this freedom to the choice of CFT discrete torsion in the case of orbifolds of WZW models. We construct the partition functions for these quotient spaces and match them to the modular invariants derived in the section 2; we find that part of the discrete torsion corresponds to the choice of action of the subgroup, yielding different quotient spaces, and another part corresponds to the different choices of $`B`$ field.

For some values of the discrete torsion, the correspondence above associates CFTs to target spaces $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ having fixed points. We expect that these singularities are regulated by string theory in some way, but we leave the determination of the resolved geometry for later work. We conclude with some remarks on T-duality and D-branes on these spaces.

## 2 The CFT description of discrete torsion

We start by building a rational conformal field theory corresponding to the sigma-model on the quotient $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acting on the right. We shall use the simple current formalism , which we briefly review now. Given a rational CFT with chiral algebra $`𝐠_k`$, simple currents are those primary fields which have the property that they have an inverse under the fusion product, denoted $``$. A ubiquitous example is the identity field itself. Furthermore, since the theory is rational, for any simple current $`J`$ there is a positive integer $`n_J`$, called the order of $`J`$, such that $`J^{n_J}=J\mathrm{}J`$ is the identity field. The set of such primaries forms an abelian finite group for the fusion product, which is called the center of the theory. We are interested in those simple currents which have trivial monodromy around all other fields, since these encode some “bosonic” symmetry of the theory. Such simple currents form the effective center $`𝒵`$, which is equivalently defined as the subgroup of the center consisting of those simple currents $`J`$ for which $`n_J\mathrm{\Delta }_J`$ (where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_J`$ is the conformal weight of $`J`$).

The partition function of a CFT is a bilinear in the characters of the irreducible highest weight representations

$$Z=\underset{\lambda ,\lambda ^{}\mathrm{irreps}}{}Z_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}\chi _\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda ^{}$$
(2.1)
It is said to be of simple current type if $`Z_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}`$ is non-zero only for $`\lambda ^{}=J\lambda `$ for some primary $`\lambda `$ and some $`J𝒵`$. The consistent modular invariant partition functions of this type were classified in , and they constitute the vast majority of known rational CFTs.

To build a modular invariant of simple current type one begins by choosing a simple current group $`𝒢𝒵`$. Since $`𝒢`$ is a finite abelian group, it is of the form $`𝒢=_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times _{n_q}`$. Then, picking a set of generators $`J_i`$ for $`𝒢`$ defines a $`q\times q`$ symmetric matrix of relative monodromies $`R_{ij}=Q_{J_i}(J_j)=\mathrm{\Delta }(J_i)+\mathrm{\Delta }(J_j)\mathrm{\Delta }(J_iJ_j)`$. We define a $`q\times q`$ matrix $`X`$ whose entries are defined modulo integers and such that its symmetric part is fixed by $`X+X^t=R`$. Its antisymmetric part is constrained by $`X_{ij}=x_{ij}/n_{ij}`$, with $`x_{ij}`$ an integer and $`n_{ij}=gcd(n_i,n_j)`$. The antisymmetric part of $`X`$ is called (algebraic) discrete torsion, and it is parametrized by $`H^2(𝒢,U(1))`$ . Given a choice of discrete torsion, the modular invariant is given by

$$Z=\underset{\lambda }{}\underset{J^\stackrel{}{s}𝒢}{}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{q}{}}\delta _{}(Q_{J_i}(\lambda )+X_{ij}s_j)\right)\chi _\lambda \overline{\chi }_{J^\stackrel{}{s}\lambda }$$
(2.2)
where we have written the general element of $`𝒢`$ as $`J^\stackrel{}{s}=\mathrm{\Pi }_iJ_i^{s_i}`$. Here $`\delta _{}(a)=1`$ if $`a`$ and $`0`$ otherwise. So we see that the discrete torsion affects only the off diagonal ($`s_i0`$) terms in the modular invariant. The left and right kernels of $`X`$ determine the extensions of the left and right chiral algebras respectively. Therefore, when they are different the modular invariant is left-right asymmetric.

#### WZW models from Cosets:

To describe the $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ theory we start from the CFT $`𝐠_k/u(1)^ru(1)^r`$, with $`𝐠`$ the Lie algebra of $`G`$, since the chiral $`u(1)`$ symmetries are not broken by the quotient (recall that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a subgroup of a maximal torus and that the level $`k`$ must be a multiple of the $`n_i`$). To get acquainted with the procedure, we first recall how to recover the $`G_k`$ WZW (charge-conjugation) partition function as a modular invariant of the $`𝐠_k/u(1)^ru(1)^r`$ theory, following .

Denote by $`P`$ the weight lattice of the finite dimensional Lie algebra $`𝐠`$ and by $`Q`$ its root lattice. From the decomposition of representations of $`𝐠`$ in terms of those of $`u(1)^r`$, the characters of the irreducible highest weight representations of $`𝐠_k`$ decompose as

$$\chi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{𝐠_k}(\tau ,z)=\underset{\mu P/kQ}{}\chi _{\mathrm{\Lambda },\mu }(\tau )\chi _\mu ^{u(1)^r}(\tau ,z)$$
(2.3)
The generalized parafermion labels $`(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mu )`$ are subject to the selection rule $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu Q`$. Furthermore, there are field identifications generated by outer automorphisms $`\omega `$ of $`𝐠_k`$ which descend to outer automorphisms of $`u(1)_{2k}^r`$.

The $`G_k`$ WZW (charge-conjugation) partition function is a simple current modular invariant with simple current group $`𝒢Q/kQ`$. For concreteness, in the following we shall mainly consider the case $`𝐠_k=su(N+1)_k`$. In this case the rank $`r`$ is equal to $`N`$ and $`Q=^N`$. The parafermion primaries are vectors $`(\stackrel{}{ȷ},\stackrel{}{m})`$ which we write in a basis $`\{\stackrel{}{\lambda }_i\}`$ for the weight lattice, e.g. $`\stackrel{}{ȷ}=_{i=1}^Nj_i\stackrel{}{\lambda }_i`$. The parafermions are subject to the selection rules $`m_i=j_i`$ mod $`2`$ and to the field identifications given by $`(\stackrel{}{ȷ},\stackrel{}{m})(\omega \stackrel{}{ȷ},\stackrel{}{m}+k\stackrel{}{\lambda }_1)`$ with

$$\omega (\stackrel{}{ȷ})=\left(k\underset{i}{}j_i\right)\stackrel{}{\lambda }_1+j_1\stackrel{}{\lambda }_2+\mathrm{}+j_{N1}\stackrel{}{\lambda }_N$$
(2.4)
In our notations both the parafermion labels $`m_i`$ and the $`u(1)_{2k}`$ labels, denoted $`m_i^{}`$, are defined modulo $`2k`$. The simple current group in this case is $`𝒢_k^N`$, where the $`i^{th}`$ factor is generated by $`J_i`$ acting as $`m_im_i+2`$ together with $`m_i^{}m_i^{}+2`$.

Now to define the modular invariant (2.2) with simple current group $`𝒢_k^N`$ we must specify the $`N\times N`$ matrix $`X`$. For $`N>1`$ this allows for a choice of discrete torsion, i.e. the antisymmetric part of $`X`$ whose entries are constrained to be of the form $`x_{ij}/k`$, for some integers $`x_{ij}`$. To recover the $`G_k`$ theory, i.e. to get the combinations of the characters of the form (2.3) in the partition function (2.2), we set the $`x_{ij}`$’s to zero. Other choices of $`x_{ij}`$’s will yield more complicated partition functions; in this case it is not clear how to take the semi-classical limit of large $`k`$, since different scalings of the $`x_{ij}`$ with $`k`$ yield different partition functions. Therefore, it is not evident to assign a geometrical interpretation to non-zero values of these parameters. In this note we will set the $`x_{ij}`$’s to zero.

#### $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ models from Cosets:

The results in the previous paragraph suggest that the simple current group leading to the $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ theory is $`𝒢_k^N\times \mathrm{\Gamma }`$. There may be several groups isomorphic to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times _{n_N}`$ in the effective center $`𝒵`$, but without loss of generality we may assume that the generators of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ act on directions of the maximal torus normal to each other (with respect to the Killing form). That means that the $`i^{th}`$ generator of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which we denote $`W_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$, acts on the momenta as $`m_i^{}m_i^{}+2k/n_i`$. leaving all other quantum numbers invariant. Here $`n_i`$ denotes the order of the current $`W_i`$, which may be one. Let us now consider the possible discrete torsion. From  we know that the (algebraic) discrete torsion for a theory with simple current group $`𝒢`$ is parametrized by

$$𝒟(𝒢)H^2(𝒢,U(1))$$
(2.5)
We will see in section 3 that for our case222Here we use interchangeably the notations $`\times `$ and $``$ for direct products of finite groups.

$$H^2(_k^N\times \mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))=_k^{\frac{N(N1)}{2}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}_{n_i}^N\underset{i<j}{}_{gcd(n_i,n_j)}$$
(2.6)
We can see this more directly by studying the antisymmetric part of the matrix $`X`$. For this, a word on notation is in order. The matrix $`X`$ is written on a basis $`(J_i,W_j)`$, where $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$. Since we want to keep the same index labelling $`i`$ for both sets of currents $`J`$ (the $`_k^N`$ generators) and $`W`$ (the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ generators)333This is because the indices $`i`$ are associated to the $`U(1)^{(i)}`$ subgroups of the chosen maximal torus., entries mixing $`J_i`$’s will be denoted $`X_{ij}`$, entries mixing $`J`$’s and $`W`$’s are denoted $`Y_{ij}`$ and entries mixing $`W`$’s are denoted $`Z_{ij}`$. Going back to the discrete torsion group (2.6), the first factor stands for the $`x_{ij}`$ mentioned in the previous paragraph. Then, to the entries $`Y_{ij}`$ we can add the numbers $`y_{ij}/n_j`$, because all $`n_j`$ divide $`k`$. Since the entries of the matrix $`X`$ are defined modulo integers, the $`y_{ij}`$ are parametrized by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This accounts for the $`_{n_i}^N`$ factors. Finally, to the entries $`Z_{ij}`$ we may add $`z_{ij}/gcd(n_i,n_j)`$, which are parametrized by $`_{i<j}_{gcd(n_i,n_j)}`$.

So in our case the formula (2.2) yields for general discrete torsion parameters $`(y_{ij},z_{ij})`$ (recall we are setting $`x_{ij}=0`$)

$$Z(y_{ij},z_{ij})=\underset{\stackrel{}{ȷ}}{}\underset{\stackrel{}{s}}{}\left(\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\stackrel{}{m},\stackrel{}{m}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}{\stackrel{}{w},\stackrel{}{w}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}}{}\chi _{\stackrel{}{ȷ}\stackrel{}{m}(\stackrel{}{s})}\chi _{\stackrel{}{m}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}\overline{\chi }_{j,\stackrel{}{w}(\stackrel{}{s})}\overline{\chi }_{\stackrel{}{w}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}\right)$$
(2.7)
where we are writing the general simple current as $`J^\stackrel{}{s}=\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_iJ_i^{s_i}\right)\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_iW_i^{\overline{s}_i}\right)`$ together with $`\stackrel{}{s}=(s_1,\mathrm{},s_N,\overline{s}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{s}_N)`$ and

$`m_im_i^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\left(y_{ij}+\delta _{i,j}\right){\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_j}}\overline{s}_j\mathrm{mod}k`$ (2.8)
$`m_i^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(y_{ii}1)s_i{\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_i}}\overline{s}_i+{\displaystyle \underset{ji}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{z_{ij}}{n_{ij}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_i}}\overline{s}_j\mathrm{mod}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_i}}`$ (2.9)
and $`w_i=m_i+2s_i`$, $`w_i^{}=m_i^{}+2s_i+2\frac{k}{n_i}\overline{s}_i`$. Here we have used the notation $`\chi _{\stackrel{}{m}^{}(s)}=\mathrm{\Pi }_i\chi _{m_i^{}(s)}^{u(1)^{(i)}}`$ for the product of the $`u(1)`$ characters and $`n_{ij}=gcd(n_i,n_j)`$.

We will see in section 3.2 that quotient $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acting on the right is described by the choice $`x_{iI}=1`$, which preserves the left-moving $`𝐠_k`$ symmetry. It is interesting to study how properties of this family of theories depend on the discrete torsion. This program has been developed for general simple current modular invariants for what concerns boundary conditions, see for instance . In the next section we will focus on the geometrical interpretation of the discrete torsion.

## 3 The geometrical description of discrete torsion

Let us consider for the moment a general background manifold $`M`$ with metric $`g`$ and three-form $`HH^3(M,)`$. To build a sigma-model with target space $`M`$, one specifies a gauge field (or connection) $`B`$ such that $`dB=H`$. This connection $`B`$ is a collection of open sets $`𝒪_i`$ covering $`M`$, of 2-forms $`B^i`$ on $`𝒪_i`$ which locally trivialize $`H`$ and such that $`B^{(i)}B^{(j)}=dA^{(ij)}`$ are exact on $`𝒪_{ij}=𝒪_i𝒪_j`$ – this defines a Deligne cohomology class of degree three444There are further conditions on the one-forms $`A^{(ij)}`$, for more details see  and references therein.. Two connections are equivalent if and only if they differ by a connection of a line bundle, the choice of which is parametrized by the first cohomology group $`H^1(M,U(1))`$ . Furthermore, since in our case the three-form $`H`$-field is quantized, the second cohomology group $`H^2(M,U(1))`$ acts freely and transitively on the set of equivalence classes of connections. The role of $`H^2(M,U(1))`$ for general backgrounds $`M`$ has been studied by Sharpe ( and references therein), in connection to the usual discrete torsion introduced by Vafa . In general, $`H^2(M,U(1))`$ is non-zero for $`M`$ a quotient of a simply connected manifold by some discrete group, which need not act freely.

We now specialize to the case where $`M`$ is a quotient of a simple, simply-connected compact Lie group $`G`$ by some action, indexed by $`p`$, of an abelian discrete subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We denote the quotient by $`M=G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$. Our results will apply to quotients of all compact Lie groups, since they all have a simply connected Lie group as covering space. As mentioned in the introduction, $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$ inherits the translational invariant metric and $`H`$ field from $`G`$, so that it is a target space for some CFT as long as the quotienting respects the quantization condition on $`H`$. For concreteness, and following Section 2, most of the calculations will be for $`G=SU(N)`$, but the generalization to $`G`$ a general simple, simply connected, compact Lie group is straightforward.

Before entering into more detail, it is useful to compare the group $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$ parametrizing the usual discrete torsion (à la Vafa) with the algebraic discrete torsion group $`𝒟(_k^N\times \mathrm{\Gamma })`$ (2.5). First we notice that for $`G`$ simply connected, using the fact that $`\pi _2(G)=0`$, we have that

$$H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))=H^2(\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))$$

even if the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is not free (in which case the lhs stands for the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-equivariant cohomology ). This allows us to work exclusively in terms of group cohomology. Furthermore, from the short exact sequence

$$0U(1)0$$

and using the fact that $`H^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma },)=0`$, we get that

$$H^l(\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))=H^{l+1}(\mathrm{\Gamma },)$$
(3.1)
for any positive integer $`l`$, and in particular we have

$$𝒟(𝒢)=H^2(_k\times \mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))H^3(_k\times \mathrm{\Gamma },)$$

To determine $`H^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$ we use the Künneth formula () which implies that if $`X,Y`$ are two finite abelian groups then

$$H^{}(X\times Y)=\left(H^{}(X)_{}H^{}(Y)\right)\times Tor(H^{}(X),H^{+1}(Y))$$
(3.2)
We use here the standard mathematical notation that the sum of the degrees on the rhs is equal to the degree on the lhs. $`Tor`$ is a finite abelian group, which verifies $`Tor(,)=Tor(,)=0`$ and also

$`Tor(_n,_m)=_{gcd(n,m)},Tor(X,Y\times Z)=Tor(X,Y)\times Tor(X,Z)`$
These properties will allow us to determine $`H^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$. Using (3.2) recursively for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times _{n_N}`$ we get for the usual discrete torsion

$$H^2(\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))H^3(\mathrm{\Gamma },)=_{i<j}_{gcd(n_i,n_j)}$$
(3.3)
Similarly, we compute the algebraic discrete torsion group to be (omitting the factor $`_k^{\frac{N(N1)}{2}}`$)

$$𝒟(𝒢)=\underset{i}{}_{n_i}^N\underset{i<j}{}_{gcd(n_i,n_j)}$$
(3.4)
This comparison suggests that the usual discrete torsion, that is the choice of connection $`B`$, is accounted for in the second factor of the CFT discrete torsion group $`𝒟(𝒢)`$ (2.5)555That different choices of discrete torsion can be related to inequivalent choices of a connection on a bundle gerbe was also brought to my attention in discussions with Ch. Schweigert.. Since this action exhausts the transformations compatible with the given background, we should expect that the CFT parameters encoded in the first factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^N`$ will correspond to a change of background. In order to study these parameters, we now consider the simplest example of the generalized lens spaces $`L_{(n,p)}`$.

### 3.1 The example of lens spaces

A generalized lens space666I thank G. Moore for bringing these spaces to my attention. $`L_{(n,p)}`$ is a quotient of $`SU(2)`$ by the equivalence relation

$$g\omega ^{\frac{p+1}{2}}g\omega ^{\frac{p1}{2}}$$
(3.5)
where $`\omega _nSU(2)`$ is an element of order $`n`$. Notice $`p`$ is defined modulo $`n`$, since $`\omega ^{n/2}`$ is a central element of order two. Usual lens spaces correspond to the choices $`p=\pm 1`$. In terms of Euler coordinates $`g(\chi ,\theta ,\varphi )=e^{i\frac{\chi }{2}\sigma _3}e^{i\frac{\theta }{2}\sigma _1}e^{i\frac{\varphi }{2}\sigma _3}`$ this action amounts to

$$\chi \chi +2\pi \frac{p+1}{n},\varphi \varphi 2\pi \frac{p1}{n}$$
(3.6)
If $`n,p`$ are not relatively prime, the action has a fixed circle $`\chi +\varphi =\mathrm{const}`$.

The sigma-model describing the usual lens spaces $`L_{(n,1)}`$ first appeared in  as the bosonization of a two-dimensional supersymmetric CFT which appears in the near horizon limit of an extremal four dimensional black hole. There the lens space was considered topologically as the Hopf fibration of $`U(1)/_n`$ over the sphere $`S^2`$. The $`L_{(n,p)}`$ spaces with $`n,p`$ relatively prime are topologically very similar. In particular, their fundamental group is $`\pi _1(L_n)_n`$ with the fiber being the non-trivial $`S^1`$; the maps in the different connected components of $`\pi _0(Map(S^1,L_n))_n`$ differ by the winding number around the non-trivial $`S^1`$. Finally, their second cohomology group $`H^2(L_{(n,p)},U(1))`$ is trivial, so that there is only one class of connections $`B`$ for an integral $`H`$-field.

To study string theory on $`L_{(n,p)}`$, we note that the action (3.6) breaks the $`su(2)_k\times su(2)_k`$ symmetry down to a $`u(1)_{2k}\times u(1)_{2k}`$ symmetry, which means that the appropriate chiral algebra is $`su(2)_k/u(1)_{2k}\times u(1)_{2k}`$, with $`k`$ a multiple of $`n`$. Using the decomposition of (chiral) vertex operators

$$V^{su(2)_k}=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m=0}{m=j(2)}}{\overset{2k1}{}}V_{jm}^{PF}V_m^{u(1)_{2k}}$$

and accounting for the action (3.6) on the left and right moving $`u(1)`$ fields, we can write a general vertex operator of the generalized lens space CFT as777To simplify the notation we omit the superscripts. The vertex operators are recognizable by their labels.

$$V[j,m,w,\overline{s}_1]=V_{jm}V_{m(p1)\frac{k}{n}\overline{s}_1}\overline{V}_{jw}\overline{V}_{w(p+1)\frac{k}{n}\overline{s}_1}$$
(3.7)
where $`\overline{s}_1`$ is a winding number. Here the fact that $`p`$ is defined modulo $`n`$ can be related to the the field identification in the parafermion sector $`V_{jm}V_{kj,m+k}`$. Notice that the left and right movers in (3.7) are related by simple currents of the $`su(2)_k/u(1)_{2k}\times u(1)_{2k}`$ theory which form a group $`𝒢=_k\times _n`$.

To get the spectrum, we first impose level matching on the vertex operators (3.7) (allowing for arbitrary lowering operators, which do not affect the level matching condition) and then impose modular invariance. In fact, due to the classification of simple current modular invariants  we know there is only one partition function with sectors of the form (3.7). This is

$$Z\left(L_{(n,p)}\right)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}\underset{s_1,\overline{s}_1}{}\left(\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mm^{}=(p+1)\frac{k}{n}\overline{s}_1}{m+m^{}=(p1)(\frac{k}{n}\overline{s}_1+s_1)mod2n}}{}\overline{\chi }_{jm}^{PF_k}\overline{\chi }_m^{}^{U(1)_k}\chi _{j,m+2s_1}^{PF_k}\chi _{m^{}+2s_1+2\frac{k}{n}\overline{s}_1}^{U(1)_k}\right)$$
(3.8)
which matches the partition functions (2.7) for $`p=y_{11}`$; in particular, this parameter $`p`$ is parametrized by the discrete torsion group $`_n=𝒟(_k\times _n)`$. The matching of the partition functions written explicitely in terms of characters means that the CFTs are identical, so we have found that the different choices of the discrete torsion correspond geometrically to the different target spaces obtained by taking the quotients (3.5). In particular, for $`p=1`$ we recover the usual lens space $`SU(2)/_n`$

$$Z\left(L_n\right)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}\chi _j^{SU(2)_k}\left(\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mm^{}=0mod2\frac{k}{n}}{m+m^{}=0mod2n}}{}\overline{\chi }_{jm}^{PF_k}\overline{\chi }_m^{}^{U(1)_k}\right)$$
(3.9)
### 3.2 The general case

We now consider the general case of a compact, simply connected Lie group $`G`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times _{n_N}`$ an abelian subgroup of $`G`$, where some of the $`_{n_i}`$ may be trivial. From our experience with the generalized lens spaces, we know that the discrete torsion parameters $`y_{ij}`$ of (2.8) are related to the choice of equivalence relation, call it $`p(y_{ij})`$, which defines the target space of the theory, denoted $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$. Upon inspection of the selection rules for the left movers (2.8) and for the right movers (just below that equation), the general form of the vertex operators is determined to be

$$V_{\stackrel{}{ȷ},\stackrel{}{m}(\stackrel{}{s})}V_{\stackrel{}{m}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}\overline{V}_{\stackrel{}{ȷ},\stackrel{}{w}(\stackrel{}{s})}\overline{V}_{\stackrel{}{w}^{}(\stackrel{}{s})}$$
(3.10)
with

$`m_im_i^{}={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\left(y_{ij}+\delta _{i,j}\right){\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_j}}\overline{s}_j\mathrm{mod}k`$ (3.11)
$`w_iw_i^{}={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\left(y_{ij}\delta _{i,j}\right){\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_j}}\overline{s}_j\mathrm{mod}k`$ (3.12)
We find that the equivalence relation $`p(y_{ij})`$ which determines the target space of this theory is

$$gh_i^Lgh_i^R,i=1,\mathrm{},N$$
(3.13)
where

$$h_i^L=\omega _i^{\frac{y_{ii}+1}{2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{ji}\omega _j^{y_{ij}/2},h_i^R=\omega _i^{\frac{y_{ii}1}{2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{ji}\omega _j^{y_{ij}/2}$$
(3.14)
and $`\omega _i`$ are elements of order $`n_i`$ along $`N`$ directions of the maximal torus so that they commute among themselves. Notice that for non-zero values of $`y_{ij}`$ this is an action of a subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, but not of the whole $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This relation generalizes (3.5) and accounts for the geometrical interpretation of the parameters $`y_{ij}`$. Again, if $`y_{ij}`$ and $`n_j`$ are not relatively prime there will be fixed point circles.

Now given the set of allowed vertex operators, there will in general be a finite number of possible partition functions, corresponding to different choices of connections $`B`$ for the three-form $`H`$-field. Recall that because the $`H`$-field is quantized, these are parametrized by the second cohomology $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$. Furthermore, since $`H^3(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,)`$ is without torsion, the action of $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$ on a connection $`B`$ can be formally written in a way which resembles a globally defined gauge transformation

$$BB+F$$
(3.15)
where $`F`$ is a closed two-form on $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$. The transformation (3.15) does not change the connection equivalence class if and only if $`FH^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,)`$ so we recover the action of $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$ on the set of equivalence classes of connections. These considerations are only formal because $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$ and $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,)`$ in general have torsion, and only their non-torsion elements can be related to the de Rham cohomology. In any case, if the target manifold has non-trivial second cohomology group, we may expect that the sigma-model path integral depend on the second homology of the embedding of the worldsheet $`\iota (\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ in $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$. Indeed, as described in  the group $`H^2(G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p,U(1))`$ acts by multiplying the path integrand by a phase

$$e^{iS}e^{i_CF_{ij}X^i\overline{}X^j}e^{iS}$$
(3.16)
where $`C`$ is the 2-cycle in $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$ wrapped by $`\iota (\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. Let us see how this may affect the spectrum.

Denote by $`U(1)^{(i)}`$ the subgroup of the maximal torus containing the factor $`_{n_i}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Multiplying by the phase (3.16) will shift the left and right $`u(1)`$ currents along both the $`i`$ and the $`j`$ directions, by $`j^ij^i+F_{ai}X^a`$ and $`\overline{ȷ}^i\overline{ȷ}^iF_{ai}\overline{}X^a`$ respectively (summation over $`a`$ intended). This means the corresponding left and right moving fields will shift as

$`m_i^{}m_i^{}+F_{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_i}}\overline{s}_a`$
$`w_i^{}w_i^{}F_{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{n_i}}\overline{s}_a`$ (3.17)
where $`\overline{s}_a`$ is the winding number. Recall that the phase (3.16) is a $`n_{ij}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ root of unity, where $`n_{ij}=gcd(n_i,n_j)`$, so $`F_{ij}=z_{ij}/n_{ij}`$ with $`z_{ij}`$ an integer. Thus the action of $`H^2(\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))_{i<j}_{gcd(n_i,n_j)}`$ on the spectrum indeed corresponds to the discrete torsion shift $`z_{ij}`$ in (2.9) (this is essentially as described by Vafa ). The simple current “coordinates” $`\overline{s}_i`$ are then interpreted as winding numbers.

So we have shown that where both sides are defined, discrete torsion on the CFT side and on the geometric side are equivalent. It would be interesting to find out whether this holds true even when one side is not yet well known. For instance, it is not always clear what a different choice of simple current group $`𝒢`$ corresponds to geometrically, but it should allow for the discrete torsion which is present in the CFT side. On the other hand, we may consider backgrounds whose topology is known but where the corresponding CFT is not well known, such as more general quotients by abelian groups, obtained by generalizing (3.13) to an equivalence relation with two parameters, a $`p_{\mathrm{left}}`$ and a $`p_{\mathrm{right}}`$. Other more general situations would be for instance quotients by non-abelian groups or quotients of more complicated groups such as products of groups or non-compact groups. We expect to find in the corresponding CFT a free parameter which corresponds to the geometric freedom of choice of connection.

### 3.3 Remarks

The T-dual version of these models can be easily studied in the CFT approach. For the choice of discrete torsion which preserves the chiral symmetry, i.e. for $`p_i=\pm 1`$, T-dualizing along a $`U(1)`$ direction where a $`_{n_i}`$ acts results in a theory where $`_{n_i}`$ is replaced by $`_{k/n_i}`$. This was used extensively in , to study B-type branes in lens spaces.

However, for any different choice of discrete torsion, T-duality will yield a quotient of $`G`$ which, though preserving the left and right $`u(1)`$ symmetries, is not of the form (3.13). Indeed, in general, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ changes not only by replacing $`_{n_i}`$ by $`_{k/n_i}`$ but also by changing the generator of the diagonal $`_k`$. Finding the geometrical interpretation of such simple current modular invariants would give more information on the exact T-duality transformations of a curved background.

We should note that the group $`H^1(M,U(1))`$ which parametrizes the gauge choices for the connection $`B`$ (cf. section 3) does affect the open string theory, since its action amounts to introducing Wilson lines in the background. To see this, let us first consider the symmetric boundary states in simple current CFTs . All choices of discrete torsion appear on the same footing, so we can describe easily the boundary blocks, the boundary states and their annuli amplitudes in all the models considered above. In fact, only fractional boundary blocks, which appear whenever some $`n_i`$ is even, depend on the discrete torsion. Let $`D`$ be the worldvolume of some fractional brane. Then $`H^1(M,U(1))`$ acts (projectively, via $`H^1(D,U(1))`$) by transforming the fractional branes with worldvolume $`D`$ into each other.

Acknowledgements. It is a pleasure to thank Gregory Moore for helpful discussions on generalized lens spaces and group cohomology. I would also like to thank Christoph Schweigert, Pierre Vogel and Volker Braun for discussions on group cohomology, and Giuseppe d’Appollonio and Sylvain Ribault for many helpful comments.

The author is supported by the grant SFRH/BD/799/2000 of FCT (Portugal).


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The basic theorem of interdisciplinary research states: Physicists not only know everything; they know everything better. This theorem is wrong; it is valid only for computational statistical physicists like me. (Some conference speakers still seemed to believe in the theorem; they can discuss it in their papers.) Here I present my personal view about the application of statistical physics (simulation) methods to fields outside physics like biology, economic, sociology and even psychology.

## 2  Possible criticism

Typical criticisms levelled against physicists outside physics are ”Biology is more complicated than physics, physicists neglect details.” True; but the Earth is more complicated than a point mass; nevertheless Kepler’s laws are quite accurate and were very useful. Physicists should try to find the simplest model giving the desired result, and not to make the model more realistic only for the sake of realism. Of course, Kepler knew that the Earth was not a point. He knew of the 30-year war destroying central Europe during his later life, for he was an unlucky astronomer advising general Wallenstein who was murdered. Kepler died when he tried to get his astrologer’s salary from the imperial parliament. So, Kepler could have tried to build the large size of the Earth into his description, to deal with the different countries of Europe, and to understand the religious differences which caused the war to start. But this would have been a hindrance, not a help, for the understanding of planetary motion. Only much later, thanks to Newton and others, did mankind understand that a spherically extended mass has a gravitational field equal to that caused if the whole mass would have compressed to a point in the center of the sphere. And even later, thanks to Einstein’s General Relativity Theory, did experts understand how the mass affects the metric of time and length through curved space. For the planetary motion, Einstein’s theory then explained minor deviations from Kepler’s laws like the rotation of Mercury’s perihel. Perhaps the now started century will explain how the Higgs particle produces the mass, and bring new effects. But the basic Kepler laws from around 1610 are still the starting point of modern physics. Of course, if you want to be a geographer, the assumption of a point-like Earth is dangerous for your employment: The same model may be good for some and bad for other purposes.

”Computers know only 0 and 1.” Wrong; many shades of grey are possible, and integers on 32-bit computers vary between -2147483648 and +2147483647. I don’t know a human being who can distinguish anything with an accuracy of $`10^9`$. But when dealing with a new problem, why not first assume that the state variables can only be $`+1`$ and $`1`$ (1 and 0 for informatics). Monte Carlo simulations with discrete Ising models can be done for thousand times bigger systems than in molecular dynamics studies on a continuum ($`10^{13}`$ versus $`10^{10}`$). Whoever studied newspapers in the last decades came across the difficulties of defining when a person is dead, allowing the organs to be transplanted. Our hair and nails still grow long after our hearts stop beating; some readers of my papers claim my beer belly grew after my brain stopped working. Nevertheless, newspapers report the death of a person, and statistical offices prepare life tables as if life ($`+1`$) and death ($`1`$) are the only possibilities without anything in between. It is animals like Caenorhabditis elegans with its ”dauer” state (some sort of hibernation) for which intermediate states are very important, not human beings. Finally, many social problems are connected with more than one variable, but so are many models of physicists. Seven-dimensional percolation and five-dimensional Ising models show that physics is not one-dimensional, and neither is immunology where a a shape space of high dimensions was suggested already in 1979 before such models could easily be simulated. (In contrast to widespread belief, the Ising model does not only allow $`+1`$ and $`1`$ as state variables. Much work has been done on Blume-Capel-Rys-Blume-Emery-Griffiths models where also zero is allowed.)

”Humans are not numbers.” Wrong; we just don’t want to be treated as numbers, and prefer a name tag instead of a number for identification. But reality is different: US citizens have a social security number, I have a national identity card with a computer-readable number; only with a computer-readable passport can I now enter the USA; my employer, my health insurance and my bank all gave me a number. Whether I smoke, drink wódka in the morning, and eat steaks every evening influences my date of death, and neither employer nor health insurance know about it. Nevertheless, by averaging over millions of people, these personal details cancel out. Similarly, the decision to get a child is highly private, but nevertheless I am most likely right if I claim that in 2004 hundreds of thousands of children will be born in Germany. If today’s pension plans are in trouble it is because the average life expectancy increases and the average number of births per women decreased, not because of individual fluctuations. Thus humans and atoms may be described by the same method, if we look at averages. And besides the above rather recent examples we have astronomer Halley trying to establish the first human life tables three centuries ago, and Greek philosopher Empedokles claiming more than two millennia ago (according to Mimkes) that some people are like water and wine, mixing easily, while others are like water and oil, not mixing.

”Physics is different from Sociology and/or Economy.” True; but Schelling  in first issue of J. Mathematical Sociology simulated something like the dilute Ising model with Kawasaki kinetics to explain black ghettos in USA; and Nobel laureate Stigler  published market simulations in 1964 before any conference participant wrote the first simulation paper. So why cannot we follow them? Indeed, our problem is much more than we may not know such pioneering papers in non-physics journals, and thus erroneously believe that we bring new concepts to such fields with our physics experience.

## 3 Do other fields welcome physicists?

From my own experience in bio-, econo- and socio-physics my answer depends on the field; psychophysics  is too new for me.

### 3.1 Economics: yes

Economy Nobel laureate Harry Markowitz  wrote: “I believe that microscopic market simulations have an important role to play in economics and finance. If it takes people from outside economics and finance – perhaps physicists – to demonstrate this role, it won’t be for the first time that outsiders have made substantial contributions to these fields.” Economics professor Thomas Lux knows a lot about physics; one we discussed whether to do a Grassberger-Procaccia analysis of some financial data and then I realized that in this case he, the economist, would have to explain to me, the physicist, how to apply this physics method. Economics professor Haim Levy wrote papers and a book with theoretical physicist Sorin Solomon and with his son Moshe Levy, a doctoral student of physics who is now economics professor.

Kertész reported that at a recent econophysics conference the economists criticized the physicists for re-inventing the economic wheels. This I count as acceptance, not as rejection: If A claims do have done first what B reports now, then A regards this B problem as important. Somewhat similarly, when in our university magazine I reported about Ehrenstein’s simulations of the Tobin tax, a senior economics professor criticized me, perhaps correctly, for having ignored the dangers of government currency controls, as Germany had it during the Nazi dictatorship; again, the problem was taken serious by an economist.

### 3.2 Sociology: yes, if computational sociologists

A year after I started to simulate Sznajd models, I presented a review at the fifth conference on simulating society, SIMSOC V, in Poland, organized by psychologist A. Novak. I felt quite at home with some of the talks of non-physicists, with simple models giving clear results. In contrast the international Physics Computing 2001 meeting two weeks earlier was full of complicated simulations understandable to specialists only. I learned from Hegselmann’s talk (from a philosophy department) about bounded confidence and used that in several later papers of mine. Of course, for a conference on ”Simulating Society” the participating sociologists are a highly biased selection.

An important problem is how to get data, which then should be modeled by sociophysics. Election results, more precisely the distribution of votes among many candidates, have been modeled successfully for both Brazil and India. This example  also shows the limitations: The methods of statistical physics can predict the probability distribution functions for the velocity of air molecules and the election votes, but they cannot predict where a specific air molecule will be a second later or which candidate will win the election. The internet allows physicists and computer scientists to collect lots of data on who is sending e-mail to whom, which web site cites another web site, and which computers are directly connected to other computers. These evolving networks yield much better statistics than the less than 100 people at the South Pole recently investigated for social roles and leadership , ignoring the recent network literature in physics.

### 3.3 Biology: no, but changing

Traditionally, the only good biology was experimental biology, a view also held by famous interdisciplinary physicist H.E. Stanley (whom I had to replace by this talk) who analyzed empirical data from biology and economics. But with billions of base pair data available now from DNA analysis of the whole genome, the need to interpret these biological data arises. Spin glass physics taught us that knowing all the interactions between the spins and all the spin orientations does not yet solve the problem how the spin glass behaves as a whole. Similarly, bio-informatics needs to understand how to deduct from the known DNA the behaviour of the organism. Today, nobody has as yet produced a living being out of non-living matter. Thus biology should take modelling more serious than in past decades, and I see some changes in the behaviour of young biologist. After all, I became a member of the advisory board of one biological and one medical journal, never having followed a university course in these fields.

What we need in biologically motivated simulations are real successes. There are lots of papers on theoretical immunology, but vaccination works since more than a century without needing my excellent simulations. Ageing still cannot be prevented, in spite of experimental and theoretical work on it. A big effect, comparable to the atomic bomb of 1945, is still lacking in theoretical biology.

### 3.4 Econo-bio-socio-physics ?

Of course, even more difficult is to become accepted by work touching on all three of the above fields, like predicting the ”age quake” around 2030 when the 70-year old people may be the strongest age cohort in rich countries. Should they trust existing pension regulations or build up their own savings for old age? Politicians debate this hotly in several countries of the European Union. Thus far none of them asked for my advice.

## 4 Acceptance time

Let us assume that these interdisciplinary attempts of physicists are objectively good. How long do we have to wait until they will be accepted by the other field? After one decade of ageing simulations by physicists, a few biologists have started to cite them. A dozen years after the car traffic models of Nagel and Schreckenberg as well as Biham, Middleton and Levine, I don’t see yet applications in many cities and on many expressways, but serious application effort exists in Duisburg (Germany), Dallas (Texas) and Portland (Oregon). In 1976 the later Nobel laureate de Gennes was one of those who suggested that the critical exponents of three-dimensional percolation should be found in real gelation experiments. This suggestion was far from revolutionary since the later chemistry Nobel laureate Flory invented percolation theory in 1941 to explain gelation (Bethe lattice, same universality class as random graphs or other mean-field approaches). Nevertheless it took more than a decade before chemistry experimentalists widely accepted this idea. Thus, for fields much further apart, like physics and sociology, we should measure the times for possible acceptance in decades, not in months. Similarly, people planting trees for a forest work for future generations.

## 5 Summary

Exotic physics has become less exotic at this conference but it still rejected by many, both within and outside physics departments. But there is some consolation: The gap between theoretical physicists and theoretical biologists (sociologists) may be smaller than that between the latter ones and experimental biologists (sociologists).

 T.C. Schelling, J. Mathematical Sociology 1 (1971) 143.

 G.J. Stigler, Journal of Business 37 (1964) 117.

 L. da Fontoura Costa, cond-mat/0309266.

 S. Moss de Oliveira, P.M.C. de Oliveira, and D. Stauffer, Evolution, Money, War and Computers (Teubner, Stuttgart-Leipzig, 1999)

 M.C. Gonzalez, A.O. Sousa, and H.J. Herrmann, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 15, (2004) issue 1.

 J.C. Johnson, J.S. Boster and L.A. Palinhas, J. Mathematical Sociology 27 (2003) 89


text:
# Fractal Noise in Quantum Ballistic and Diffusive Lattice Systems

## I Introduction

A quantum wave packet $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$ evolving from a uniform initial superposition state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,0)`$ displays interesting quantum interference phenomena which involve self-affine fractal quantum evolution of the probability densities and quantum revivals. This was shown by Berry  in a study of quantum waves confined in boxes by Dirichlet boundary conditions. It was pointed out that the choice of hard wall boundaries introduces quantum fractal noise in the time evolution of uniform deterministic systems obeying the Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger’s equation, which is expressed via a self-affine fractal probability density $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$. Moreover, over long periods of time at integer multiples of the revival time $`T_r`$, the wave packet $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$ returns and reconstructs in its initial form . In a wide class of circumstances the quantum revivals are almost perfect with both space and time periodic $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$.

Most studies are concerned with spectra having a quadratic dependence on the quantum number, such as the simple case of the infinite potential well $`E_j=E_1j^2`$, $`j=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, where perfect and fractional revivals occur at integer and fractional multiples of the revival time $`T_r`$, respectively . For quadratic spectra with wave packets localized in energy space around a quantum number $`\overline{j}`$ the classical time $`T_{cl}=\pi \mathrm{}/(E_1\overline{j})`$ and the much longer revival time $`T_r=\pi \mathrm{}/E_1`$ are the only time scales . For more complex energy dispersions, such as the Rydberg states $`E_j=E_1/j^2`$ $`j=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ higher order time scales exist apart from the classical, e.g. 1st order, 2nd order, etc, recurrences, as shown for the “return to the origin” probability in the book by Peres . The classical revolution time for a wave packet starting around the $`\overline{j}`$th orbit is $`T_{cl}=\pi \mathrm{}\overline{j}^3/(E_1)`$, while the 1st order recurrences occur at integer multiples of the revival time $`T_r=\pi \mathrm{}\overline{j}^4/(3E_1)`$ . The classical time scale $`T_{cl}`$ defines the time up to which the system follows a classical orbit while the revival time scale $`T_r`$ resembles the Ehrenfest time where the classical Liouville density ceases to describe the system, since quantum interference makes itself obvious with gradual spreading and distortion of the wave packet. The classical and revival times are inversely proportional to the energy eigenvalue separation and its variation, respectively . The full quantum limit $`t\mathrm{}`$ is approached for much longer times.

The quantum evolution of wave packets which consist of a large number of simultaneously excited eigenstates is related via the uncertainty principle to ultrashort laser pulses of femtosecond duration. In this way one can study the evolution of a coherent superposition of many quantum states. The quantum evolution of such superpositions can be realised in the physics of Rydberg atoms , molecules , semiconductor quantum wells , mode propagation of Bose-Einstein condensates in magnetic wave guides , laser prepared states in ionic traps , etc. On the other hand, from studying squeezed wave packets with reduced spatial uncertainty, in order to behave like particles as much as possible, one gains a deep insight into the semi-classical limit where quantum and classical physics meet according to the correspondence principle. The quantum evolution is qualitatively milder than the classical one and it remembers the initial state, due to the reversible and unitary nature of the quantum evolution transformation $`\mathrm{exp}(iHt/\mathrm{})`$. For classical evolution the initial state always converges to a stationary distribution. We show that quantum memory effects exist and a self-affine fractal space and time distribution of the probability density $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$. Quantum revivals also appear in the “return to the origin” probability. They might be interesting for fundamental issues, such as the use of quantum mechanics in computation . It was shown that space-time interference which repeats itself at discrete time intervals can create a subatomic quantum counter  and can help towards implementation of factorization for an integer number into primes exploring fractional revivals  (see also the $`N`$-slit interferometer in ).

Our study may also be relevant to another aspect of quantum information theory, which is the newborn subject of quantum random walks (e.g. the Hadamard walk) . A quantum walk is iterated by combining the usual translation with a rotation in “coin”-space, where a quantum coin-flip replaces the classical coin-flip. Of course one should avoid any measurement at intermediate times . The quantum walk has an improved behavior over the classical random walk since it is characterized by ballistic (quadratic dependence of the mean square displacement in time), instead of the usual diffusive (mean square displacement linear in time) of the classical evolution. It is a general feature of one-particle quantum algorithms to speed up quadratically when compared to classical dynamics .

The quantum evolution is analogous to the classical phenomenon of geometrical optics known as the Talbot effect . Talbot inspected a coarsely ruled diffraction grating illuminated with white light through a magnifying lens. When the lens held close to the grating, the rulings appeared in sharp focus, as expected. However, moving the lens away, the rulings of the grating first appeared blurred, as expected, but then reappeared in sharp focus at multiples of a particular distance, known as the Talbot distance. In the Talbot effect the pattern of intensity is doubly periodic, both across the grating and as a function of distance from the grating. More discussion on the Talbot effect and its analogies with the quantum problem can be found in . Although the quantum revivals are semiclassical in nature quantum interference exists since these semiclassical phenomena appear only close to the quantum limit $`t\mathrm{}`$.

In this paper, as an alternative to continuous media we aim to study quantum evolution of wave packets moving in tight-binding lattices. A discrete and finite space is important for simulations on a finite computer with the possibility of mapping it to a quantum computer. This study is a general scheme for discetizing space when one deals with linear equations (such as the quantum Schrodinger’s equation), which turns out to be particularly useful when the geometry plays an important role. It complies with the necessity to exploit possibilities for the information space, which is also discrete, opposite to the continuous classical phase space. This convenient computational tool for implementing space is favored by the presence of an underlying lattice in solid state applications. We discuss two cases: (i) the ballistic motion in the case of zero site potential where quantum interference from wave scattering at the hard walls creates a sort of quantum “randomness” similarly to that of the “particle in a box”, and (ii) a diffusive case via a special quasi-periodic potential of critical strength . It must be stressed that quantum diffusive evolution is very different from classical diffusion although the space fractal dimension of the quantum probability is the same. The spectrum is of the $`\mathrm{cos}`$ type and the stationary eigenstates are simple $`\mathrm{sin}`$ elementary trigonometric functions so that the evolution can be characterized by an infinity of other time scales apart from $`T_{cl}`$, $`T_r`$. In the ballistic case the motion remains ballistic for all $`t`$ since the tight binding lattice has no small $`t`$ semiclassical limit.

Our results confirm the presence of fractal fluctuations of the probability distribution during the ballistic and diffusive quantum evolution, in agreement with Berry . Moreover, for all kinds of quantum noise the fractal noise is described by the predicted universal fractal dimensions $`D_x`$, $`D_t`$ and $`D_{x=t}`$ of the self-affine curves. For the ballistic motion the mean square distance increases proportionally to the square of the elapsed time while for quantum diffusion the mean square distance increases proportionally to time. The self-affinity seen in the noisy quantum evolution is familiar in non-linear systems. Therefore, techniques from non-linear physics can be used to understand some of the mysteries of quantum mechanics, particularly quantum evolution in open systems in the presence of time-dependent potentials.

## II Ballistic quantum evolution

### A Space-time structures

We have created space-time structures on the discrete orthonormal finite lattice space basis $`\{|x,x=1,2,\mathrm{},N\}`$ for various continuous times $`t`$. For the ballistic quantum evolution in a line the mean-square displacement grows quadratically $`x^2=2t^2`$. It can be expressed via the stationary eigensolutions of the Hamiltonian $`H`$ through the evolution operator $`\mathrm{exp}(iHt/\mathrm{})`$, since $`H`$ is time-independent. The static Schrodinger’s equation $`H|j=E_j|j`$, $`j=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$ corresponding to the matrix $`H`$, which is tridiagonal for a one-dimensional lattice with zero diagonal entries and constant off-diagonal elements, has stationary eigenvalues, eigenvectors $`E_j=2\mathrm{cos}\frac{j\pi }{N+1}`$, $`|j=\sqrt{\frac{2}{N+1}}_{x=1}^N\mathrm{sin}\frac{j\pi x}{N+1}\frac{}{}|x`$. The quantum evolution of the initial ket $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ can be expressed as

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iHt/\mathrm{}}|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}|jj|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ (2)
so that the space-time wave function reads

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`x|\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}c_x^{(j)}j|\mathrm{\Psi }(0),`$ (4)
with the the amplitude on site $`x`$ denoted by the elementary trigonometric function $`c_x^{(j)}=x|j=\sqrt{\frac{2}{N+1}}\mathrm{sin}\frac{j\pi x}{N+1}`$.

Fig. 1. The space-time ($`x`$-$`t`$) representation of various initial wave packets moving ballistically in a chain. The classical time is $`T_{cl}\mathrm{}(N+1)`$ and quantum memory effects are seen to develop with different initial wave packets giving different pictures. (a) For a local initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t=0)=\delta _{x,1}`$ in position $`1`$ with $`N=1000`$ we see almost classical motion with recurrence at $`t=1001`$. (b) For a spatially uniform initial superposition $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t=0)=1/\sqrt{N}`$ in a chain with $`N=100`$ we observe interesting interference effects. (c) For an initial uniform superposition of all stationary eigenstates with $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{j=1}^Na_j|j`$, with $`a_j=1/\sqrt{N}`$ for any $`j`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t=0)=\sqrt{2/N(N+1)}_{j=1}^N\mathrm{sin}\frac{j\pi x}{N+1}`$ amplitude at site $`x`$ for a chain with $`N=1000`$. The result resembles that of (a) where a wave is released at one end of the chain since in the spatial basis this initial state has higher amplitude near the end of the chain with diminishing oscillations. (d) For a Gaussian in space initial superposition $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t=0)=a_x`$ for $`N=100`$ interesting interference patterns are also seen.

The ballistic evolution is considered for various initial superpositions $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,0)=x|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$, chosen from expansions either in the spatial basis with $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{x=1}^Na_x|x`$, $`_{x=1}^N|a_x|^2=1`$ or in the eigenstate basis with $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{j=1}^Na_j|j`$, $`_{j=1}^N|a_j|^2=1`$. The amplitude $`c_x^{(j)}`$ is real and the transformation from the spatial $`|x`$ to the eigenstate $`|j`$ basis or its inverse from $`|j`$ to $`|x`$ are the same. In this case the computations of the space-time wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$ at various times are particularly simple by replacing the eigenvalues $`E_j`$, eigenvector amplitudes $`c_x^j`$ in Eq. (2). For initial superposition in the spatial basis the normalized space-time probability becomes

$`P(x,t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}({\displaystyle \underset{x^{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}c_x^{}^{(j)}a_x^{})c_x^{(j)}\right|^2`$ (5)
and for superposition in the eigenbasis the normalized space-time probability is

$`P(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2=\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}c_x^{(j)}a_j\right|^2.`$ (6)
Firstly, the initial wave was released on a $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑙}`$ state at one end of the chain with $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=|1\mathrm{\Psi }(x,0)=x|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=\delta _{x,1}`$ which from Eq. (3) at later times gives the probability

$$P(x,t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2=\left|\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}c_1^{(j)}c_x^{(j)}\right|^2,$$
(7)
in terms of the eigenvalues $`E_j`$, eigenvectors $`|j=_{x=1}^Nc_x^{(j)}|x`$. This gives an almost classical evolution of a point particle seen in Fig. 1(a) where the particle at time $`T_{cl}=\mathrm{}(N+1)`$ returns to its initial position. The quantum revival resembles a classical particle moving with constant velocity which reflects at the boundaries at $`t=T_{cl}`$ and returns to its original position $`1`$. Our second initial choice was the spatial superposition in space $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{x=1}^Na_x|x`$ with $`\mathrm{𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚}`$ $`a_x=1/\sqrt{N}`$ for all $`x`$, which gives from Eq. (3) the normalized space-time probability

$`P(x,t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \underset{x^{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}c_x^{}^{(j)}c_x^{(j)}\right|^2.`$ (8)
The corresponding space-time structure which arises from the initial condition of Eq. (6) is shown in Fig. 1(b) where we can observe interesting quantum interference features. The third choice we have made was not spatial but a $`\mathrm{𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚}`$ $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛}`$ $`\mathrm{𝑜𝑛}`$ $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑙𝑙}`$ $`\mathrm{𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑟𝑦}`$ $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑖𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠}`$ $`|j`$ choosing the initial superposition $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{j=1}^Na_j|j`$, with $`a_j=1/\sqrt{N}`$ for all $`j`$. If transformed to the spatial basis this choice has a maximum at one end of the chain with decaying oscillations. At later times the normalized space-time probability is

$`P(x,t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}c_x^{(j)}\right|^2.`$ (9)
Finally, a $`\mathrm{𝐺𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑎𝑛}`$ spatial initial superposition was chosen of the type $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{x=1}^Na_x|x`$, centered in the middle of the chain $`N/2`$. In this case after normalization the probability amplitude can be obtained from Eq. (3) with $`|a_x|^2e^{(xN/2)^2/(2\sigma ^2)}`$, $`_{x=1}^N|a_x|^2=1`$, drawn from a Gaussian with $`\sigma ^2=1`$.

The obtained space-time structures for the various initial from the second to the fourth conditions are shown in Fig. 1. The white denotes high amplitude and the amplitude is lower in the darker. The spectacular patterns shown are known as quantum carpets  and arise from scattering at the hard walls at the ends. The quantum intereference is more prominent for the uniform initial condition (Fig. 1(b)) where the picture resembles more closely the quantum carpets of Berry . We can also see quantum recurrences more clearly in Fig. 1(a), (c) where the initial wavepacket has maximum amplitude close to the end site $`1`$. The quantum carpets shown in Fig. 1. repeat indefinitely at time $`T_{cl}`$, but less and less less accurately each time.

### B Fractal dimensions for the probability density

We observe the quantum evolution for a uniform initial wave function along the chain as a function of space freezing the time, as a function of time at a single site or varying space positions equal to time. The corresponding pictures are shown in Figure 2 where interesting self-affine fractal oscillations are seen. For the spatial distribution our simple computations for the fractal dimension coincide with the value $`D_x=1.5`$ predicted by Berry. This value coincides with the displacement curve of classical random walks which gives Brownian noise. Quantum “randomness” described by the fractal dimension $`D_x`$ arises from the linear Schrodinger’s equation, only due to quantum interference from scattering at the boundaries. It must be noted these curves are not self-similar but self-affine fractals. The computed time fractal dimension also gives the predicted value $`D_t=1.75`$. The $`D_t`$ is higher than $`D_x`$ as it can be seen form the more noisy oscillating of the probability density as a function of time t. We also display a space-time function along the diagonal $`x=t`$ where the self-affine fluctuations are much smaller with $`D_{x=t}=1.25`$.

Fig. 2. Fractal noise of an initially uniformly distributed in space wave packet for a chain of length $`N=10000`$. (a) The absolute of the probability amplitude squared $`|P(x,t)|^2`$ as function of space $`x`$ at fixed time $`t_0=100000`$. (b) A function of time $`t`$ at the fixed site $`x_0=5000`$. (c) A function of both space and time with $`x=t`$. The obtained fractal dimensions are denoted in the log-log insets on the plot.

The capacity (box) dimension of the self-affine $`y=y(x)`$ curves is computed by counting boxes of linear size $`b.\tau `$ along the x-axis axis and of size $`b.a`$ along the y-axis. It must be noted that a similarity dimension cannot be defined since for a self-affine curve scaling is different along the two axes. We have used integer time units so the minimum box width along the x-axis is taken $`\tau =1`$ and use a high-resolution grid for the amplitude along the y-axis. This is required in order to obtain the “local” non-integer fractal dimension $`D`$ of the self-affine curves, while larger values of $`a`$ finally give the well known “global” fractal dimension $`D=1`$ . The selected values of $`a`$ were of order of $`10^{10}`$ for both the space $`D_x`$ and time $`D_t`$ dimensions. For the space-time fractal $`a`$ is of the order of $`7\times 10^8`$. The box dimension is defined by the scaling equation $`N(b,a)b^D`$, where $`N`$ is the number of boxes needed to cover the curve . A linear fit of the scaling equation is displayed in the log-log plots of the corresponding insets of Fig.2 which gives $`D`$ from the slope. As pointed out above the obtained results for $`D_x,D_t,D_{x=t}`$ are in agreement with the values for the fractal dimensions predicted by Berry . For the other initial conditions considered we find similar fractal dimensions although with errors arising from the small sizes (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Time fractals for other initial conditions in a chain of length $`N=1000`$. (a). A Gaussian spatial superposition at a fixed site $`x_0=500`$ where we compute $`D_t1.80`$. (b) A uniform initial superposition in the eigenbasis where we find $`D_t1.46`$.

### C “Return to the origin” probability

The “survival” or “return to the origin” probability is defined from the squared absolute amplitude overlap

$`P_0(t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)|\mathrm{\Psi }(t)|^2`$ (10)
which can be computed from Eq. (1). For an initial superposition in the spatial basis $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{x=1}^Na_x|x`$ one obtains

$`P_0(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{x=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{x^{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}a_x^{}a_x^{}c_x^{}^{(j)}c_x^{(j)}\right|^2.`$ (11)
For an initial superposition in the eigenstate basis $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=_{j=1}^Na_j|j`$ we have the simpler expression independent of eigenvectors

$`P_0(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|a_j|^2e^{iE_jt/\mathrm{}}\right|^2`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j^{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|a_j|^2|a_j^{}|^2e^{i(E_jE_j^{})t/\mathrm{}}.`$ (13)
Fig. 4. The “return to the origin” probability $`P_0(t)`$. (a) For an initially uniform superposition in space and a chain of length $`N=100`$. The quantum revivals occur at an estimated period $`T_r\mathrm{}(N+1)^20.08(N+1)^2`$. (b) For an initially uniform superposition of stationary eigenstates in a chain of length $`N=1000`$. In the inset a presentation of the probability density $`P(x,t)`$. The quantum revivals which appear with period $`T_{cl}\mathrm{}(N+1)`$.

The quantum revivals can be seen in Fig.4 where $`P_0(t)`$ is shown versus $`t`$ in a log-log plot. $`P_0(t)`$ is periodic in the early stages of evolution which becomes less clear later. The long-time overall asymptotic algebraic decay $`P_0(t)\frac{1}{t}`$ of ballistic systems can be seen predicted from properties of Bessel functions. Fractional revivals with smaller strength are also seen. In the eigenbasis the expansion of the states $`j`$ around the center of the wave packet $`\overline{j}`$ $`E_j=E_{\overline{j}}+(j\overline{j})\frac{E_{\overline{j}}}{\overline{j}}+\frac{1}{2!}(j\overline{j})^2\frac{^2E_{\overline{j}}}{^2\overline{j}}+\mathrm{}=E_{\overline{j}}+2\pi \mathrm{}[\frac{(j\overline{j})}{T_{cl}}+\frac{(j\overline{j})^2}{2!T_r}\mathrm{}]`$ allows to find the time scales $`T_{cl}=\mathrm{}(N+1)/\mathrm{sin}(\overline{j}\pi /(N+1))`$, $`T_r=\mathrm{}(N+1)^2/(\pi \mathrm{cos}(\overline{j}\pi /(N+1)))`$, etc. Of course, if $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ consists of only one eigenstate with $`j=\overline{j}`$ the system shows no evolution. When the wave packets consists of many states $`j`$ near the band center $`E0`$ then the dominant time scale is $`T_{cl}\mathrm{}(N+1)`$ with $`T_r=\mathrm{}`$. When it consists of states $`j`$ near the edges $`E\pm 2`$ then $`T_{cl}=\mathrm{}`$ so the dominant time scale is $`T_r\mathrm{}(N+1)^2`$. In Fig. 4(a) for a uniform expansion in the spatial basis we observe period proportional to $`T_r`$ since it correspond to eigenstates close to $`E\pm 2`$. In Fig. 4(b) the uniform distribution in the eigenbasis emphasises states from the band center $`E0`$ which is the mean energy for this initial superposition, so that we observe a period proportional to $`T_{cl}`$.

## III Diffusive quantum evolution

We have also considered a chain with non-zero site potential taking the quasi-periodic value $`ϵ_x=2cos(2\pi xM/N)`$, $`x=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$ for $`M`$, $`N`$ successive Fibonacci numbers so that the rational $`M/N`$ approaches the inverse golden mean ratio. In this critical case one obtains diffusive time evolution with the mean-square-displacement growing linearly with time $`x^2t`$ which can be compared with the ballistic case $`x^2t^2`$ studied in Chapter II. It must be stressed again that although diffusive this is quantum evolution and not classical.

### A Space-time structures

Fig. 5.  The space-time ($`xt`$) representations for quantum diffusive evolution in a quasiperiodic chain of length $`N=987`$. (a) For an initially uniform distributed wavepacket in space as a function of space $`x`$ and time $`t`$. (b) For an initially Gaussian wave packet in space.

The obtained space-time structures for the diffusive case and two spatial initial conditions are shown in Fig. 5. Again, the white colour denotes high amplitude and the darker lower amplitude. The figures show spectacular patterns due to quantum intereference from scattering at the hard walls at the ends of the chains but no quantum revivals. We show the space-time evolution for a uniform (Fig. 5(a)) and Gaussian spatial wave packet (Fig. 5(b)). The quantum interference gives very different results in this case since the obtained quantum carpets display self-similarity superimposed on the self-affinity found for ballistic evolution. For the Gaussian in space initial state Fig. 5(b) we see slow quantum evolution with the system not reaching the boundary within $`T_{cl}`$.

### B Fractal dimensions for the probability density

Fig. 6.  Fractal noise for diffusion in a chain of length $`N=987`$. (a) An initially uniform wave packet at time $`t=10`$ as a function of space. (b) As function of time at site $`x_0=500`$.

We obtain similar to ballistic case self-affine fractal dimensions displayed in Fig. (6). Apart from self-affine the curves are also self-similar fractals with dimensions defined in . From the normalized probability measure $`P(x,t)`$ with $`_{x=1}^NP(x,t)=1`$ we compute $`_{x=1}^NP(x,t)\mathrm{ln}P(x,t)`$, $`\mathrm{ln}_{x=1}^NP(x,t)^2`$ and from the linear fits vs. $`\mathrm{ln}N`$ obtain the space fractal dimensions $`D_1^x`$, $`D_2^x`$, respectively. Our results gave give the entropy fractal dimension $`D_1^x0.85`$ for the uniform and $`0.43`$ for the Gauss while for the correlation dimension we obtain $`D_2^x0.77`$ for the uniform and $`0.37`$ for the Gauss. It must be pointed out that the fractal dimensions $`D_1,D_2`$ depend strongly on initial conditions (see Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.  Entropy vs. $`logN`$ for the diffusive model for an initially (a) uniform and (b) gauss distribution, both in space. The information dimension $`D_1^x0.85`$ for the uniform and $`D_1^x0.43`$ for the Gauss is obtained form the slopes of the linear fits. Similar results exist for the correlation dimension $`D_2`$.

### C “Return to the origin” probability

The “return to the origin” probability now shows many fluctuations and if we define the time integrated correlation function $`C(t)=(1/t)_0^tP_0(t^{})𝑑t^{}`$ vs. $`t`$. We also observe the long-time asymptotically algebraic overall decay $`P_0(t)\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}`$ known for diffusive systems.

Fig. 8 . The “return to the origin probability” for an initially uniform distributed wavepacket in a chain of length $`N=987`$. The inset shows the log-log scale of the correlation function $`C(t)`$ vs. $`t`$ with diffusive correlation behavior.

## IV Discussion-Conclusions

We studied the milder when compared to classical quantum ballistic and diffusive evolution of wave packets. It is different from that of classical point particles, nevertheless, shows fractal noise in the form of self-affine curves. Our calculations are done by discretizing the space into a tight-binding chain lattice. For the ballistic case semiclassical diffusive evolution does not exist for small $`t`$, to cross over to ballictic for longer times , since the ballistic law is satisfied for all $`t`$. In this case we display quantum memory effects by observing different evolutions for various initial superposition wave packets $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$. However, in agreement with Berry’s findings for a “particle in box” a self-affine fractal space-time $`P(x,t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)|^2`$ is found. For diffusive systems the evolution apart from self-affine is also self-similar with no recurrences.

The quantum evolution could be efficiently implemented by a quantum computer so that one can use the simulation to solve certain computational tasks by creating more efficient algorithms. In fact, $`P_0(t)`$ can reveal the prime factors of an encoded number . On the other hand, fractals known from non-linear physics also appear in quantum physics, despite the fact that quantum mechanics is linear. The space fractal dimension $`D_x=1.5`$ obtained for the spatial distribution corresponds to Brownian $`1/f^2`$ noise familiar from random walks. Therefore, techniques can be transferred from non-linear physics to quantum mechanics and vice versa. Finally, quantum intereference can make itself obvious in scattering from nanostructures, such as carbon nanotubes. It can possibly influence the temperature independent white noise known as “shot noise” for measurements of current in nanostructures .

In summary, classical systems are diffusive due to either non-linear effects, which may lead to deterministic chaos, or introduced randomness from outside (flipping a coin) as for the random walk. In these cases irreversibility naturally arises with convergence to a Gaussian steady state distribution for any initial state. In quantum systems the evolution is smoother, wave-like, reversible, with no convergence to a steady state, since quantum memory develops. However, we show for simple lattice systems fractal noise due to quantum intereference from scattering at the boundaries. The noisy quantum evolution seems not only independent of chaos but is present for all kinds of evolution.


text:
# Phase Diagrams of the Spin-1 Blume-Capel Film With an Alternating Crystal Field

## 1 Introduction

The Blume-Capel model is a spin-1 Ising model with single-ion anisotropy. It has been originally introduced to study first-order magnetic phase transitions  and then applied to multicomponent fluids . Later, it was generalized to the Blume-Emery-Griffiths model  to study the He3-He3 mixtures and a variety of other physical systems.

The BC model has been investigated in detail using many approximate methods, namely mean field approximation , high temperature series expansion , constant-coupling approximation , Monte-Carlo  and renormalization-group  techniques. All of these approximate schemes suggest the existence of a tricritical point at which the system changes from the second-order phase transition to the first-order one, when the transition temperature is plotted as a function of the parameter of anisotropy.

On the other hand the BC model has been investigated on semi-infinite lattices with modified surface coupling. Several approximate methods have been used  (and references therein). All of them show the possibility to have a phase with ordered surface and disordered bulk, and show the existence of the so-called ’extraordinary’, ’surface’ and ’ordinary’ transitions, and of multicritical points called special points . More recently, with the development of the molecular beam epitaxy technique and its application to the growth of thin metallic films, renewed interest in thin film magnetism has been stimulated, and much experimental and theoretical efforts have been devoted to the subject . The BC model with a rationally decreasing crystal field has recently been extended to a layered structure and analyzed in the mean field approximation . The model exhibits a constant tricritical point and a reentrant phenomenon for a certain number of layers.

Our aim in this work is to study, using mean field theory, the phase diagrams of a ferromagnetic spin-1 Blume-Capel film with an alternating crystal field: $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ on the odd layers and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ on the even ones. The number of topologies of the phase diagrams is finite and depends only on the parity of the number of layers of the film. The phase diagrams present many multicritical points and may have transition lines exhibiting the reentrant and double-reentrant behaviors; this kind of behavior has been previously found in the Paramagnetic-Ferromagnetic transition line of the ordinary Blume-Capel model with a random crystal field  or with random nearest-neighbor interactions.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we present the model and give the mean field equations of the different order parameters. In section 3 we present the results, then we end in section 4 by a conclusion.

## 2 Model and method

The system we consider is the spin-1 Blume-Capel model of a film of N ferromagnetically coupled layers with an alternating crystal field. The Hamiltonian of this system is given by

$$=J\underset{i,j}{}S_iS_j+\underset{i}{}\mathrm{\Delta }_iS_i^2$$
(1)
where $`S_i=\pm 1,0`$; the first sum runs over all pairs of nearest-neighbors and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ is the crystal field which takes the value $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ on the odd layers and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ on the even ones. The mean field equations of state are straightforwardly obtained and are given by

$$m_k=S_k=\frac{2\mathrm{sinh}\beta h_k}{e^{\beta \mathrm{\Delta }_k}+2\mathrm{cosh}\beta h_k}$$
(2)
$$q_k=S_k^2=\frac{2\mathrm{cosh}\beta h_k}{e^{\beta \mathrm{\Delta }_k}+2\mathrm{cosh}\beta h_k}$$
(3)
with

$$\begin{array}{c}h_1=J(zm_1+m_2)\hfill \\ h_k=J(m_{k1}+zm_k+m_{k+1})\text{, for }2kN1\hfill \\ h_N=J(m_{N1}+zm_N)\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
In these equations, $`m_k`$ ($`q_k`$) is the reduced magnetization (quadrupolar moment) of the layer; and $`z=4`$ is the interlayer coordination number. The reduced total magnetization is $`m=\frac{1}{N}_{k=1}^Nm_k`$. The reduced free energy of the film is given by

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[1+2e^{\beta \mathrm{\Delta }_k}\mathrm{cosh}\beta h_k\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{N1}{}}}(m_{k1}+zm_k+m_{k+1})m_k`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_1(4m_1+m_2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_N(m_{N1}+4m_N)`$ (5)
## 3 Results and discussions

The study of the phase diagrams in the (t,$`d_2`$) plane exhibits the existence of different topologies depending on the range of variation of $`d_1`$ ($`d_1=\mathrm{\Delta }_1/J`$, $`d_2=\mathrm{\Delta }_2/J`$ and $`t=T/J`$ are the values of the reduced crystal fields and temperature respectively). We note from the beginning that these topologies are limited in number and don’t depend on the number of layers itself but only on its parity. In the following we will discuss in detail the case of an even number of layers and comment at the end on the odd number case. To understand the origin of the different topologies, we first determine analytically the ground state phase diagram in the ($`d_1,d_2`$) plane by looking for the lowest energy configurations. For an arbitrary even number of layers $`N=2L`$, we distinguish six regions of this plane (Fig.1(a)) (but only five for an odd number of layers (Fig.1(b))):

* $`d_1<3`$, $`d_2<3`$ and $`d_1+d_2<61/L`$; the stable configuration111We use obvious notations for the model where the natural basic entity of the different states and phases is a bilayer is $`(11)^L`$, where the spins of the sites of all the layers are all equal to 1.
* $`3<d_1<4`$, $`d_2<d_1`$ and $`(L1)d_1+Ld_2<6L4`$; the stable configuration is $`01(11)^{L1}`$, where the spins of the first layer are all equal to 0 while those of the other layers are all equal to 1.
* $`d_1>4`$ and $`d_2<2`$; the stable configuration is $`(01)^L`$ where the spins of the odd layers are all equal to 0 while those of the even ones are all equal to 1.
* $`3<d_2<4`$, $`d_1<d_2`$ and $`Ld_1+(L1)d_2<6L4`$; the stable configuration is $`(11)^{L1}10`$ .
* $`d_1<2`$ and $`d_2>4`$; the stable configuration is $`(10)^L`$.
* $`d_1>2`$, $`d_2>2`$, $`d_1+d_2>61/L`$, $`(L1)d_1+Ld_2>6L4`$ and $`Ld_1+(L1)d_2>6L4`$; the stable configuration is the non magnetic state $`(00)^L`$.

From Fig.1(a) it is clear that for fixed values of $`d_1`$, the system exhibits various transitions by varying $`d_2`$. For the following ranges of variation of $`d_1`$: i) $`0<d_1<2`$, ii) $`2<d_1<31/L`$, iii) $`31/L<d_1<3`$, iv) $`3<d_1<4`$ and v) $`d_1>4`$, the system presents the following phase transitions respectively:

* from the state $`(11)^L`$ to the state $`(11)^{L1}10`$ at $`d_2=3`$ and then to the state $`(00)^L`$ at $`d_2=4`$.
* from the state $`(11)^L`$ to the state $`(11)^{L1}10`$ at $`d_2=3`$ and then to the state $`(00)^L`$ at $`Ld_2=(6L4)(L1)d_1`$.
* from the state $`(11)^L`$ to the state $`(00)^L`$ at $`d_2=(61/L)d_1`$.
* from the state $`01(11)^{L1}`$ to the state $`(00)^L`$ at $`(L1)d_2=(6L4)Ld_1`$.
* from the state $`(01)^L`$ to the state $`(00)^L`$ at $`d_2=2`$.

It is worth to note here that, contrary to the two or three dimensional Blume-Capel cases (or the case of a film with a homogenous crystal field), the ground state of certain layers may be magnetic even for relatively large values of the crystal field in these layers. For example, for $`d_1<2`$, the even layers (except the final one) are in the magnetic states $`m_{2k}=1`$ even with a crystal field, in these layers, reaching the value $`d_2=4`$ (which is larger than the critical crystal field for a square ($`d_c^{(2)}`$=2) or three dimensional cubic ($`d_c^{(3)}`$=3) lattices).

For finite temperatures the transition lines are determined by solving numerically the equations 2 which may have more than one solution; the one which minimizes the free energy 5 corresponds to the stable phase. Transitions of the second order are characterized by a continuous vanishing of the magnetizations while those of the first order exhibit discontinuities at the transition points.

In order to describe the different entities in the phase diagrams, the Griffiths notations  will be adopted: the critical end-point $`B^mA^n`$ denotes the intersection of $`m`$ lines of second order and $`n`$ of first order; the multicritical point $`C`$ denotes the intersection of m lines of second order; the tricritical point, which is the intersection of a line of second order and a line of first order, is denoted in particular by $`C`$. In addition, the following notations of the different phases will be adopted: $`(FF)^L`$ is, for example, a state where all the layers are in the ferromagnetic state, i.e. the magnetization and the quadrupolar moment of each layer are both different from zero. $`(FF)^{L1}F0`$ is a phase where all the layers are in the ferromagnetic state except the last one which is in the non magnetic state (noted by 0) and is characterized by vanishing magnetization and quadrupolar moment. $`(PP)^L`$ is a phase where all the layers are in the paramagnetic state i.e. the magnetization of each layer is equal to zero but not the quadrupolar moment

For an even number of layers ($`N=2L`$), fifteen types of topology of the phase diagram in the (t,$`d_2`$) plane are found. They may be gathered into six groups, each one is characterized by a certain range of variation of $`d_1`$.

1) For $`0<d_1<d_{trc}^{(2)}`$ (e.g. Fig.2(a)), there is a critical line separating the paramagnetic phase $`(PP)^L`$ from the ferromagnetic ones $`(FF)^L`$, $`(FF)^{L1}F0`$ and $`(F0)^L`$. These ferromagnetic phases are separated by two transition lines of first-order at low temperatures which meet two critical lines at two tricritical points (totally inside the ordered phases) $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ respectively. The first-order lines reach the $`d_2`$ axis at the fixed values (independent of L) $`d_2=3`$ and $`d_2=4`$ respectively. The critical lines present both a reentrant behavior near the paramagnetic-ferromagnetic (P-F) transition line and meet this last at two multicritical points $`(B^3)_1`$ and $`(B^3)_2`$ respectively. The topology described here is characterized, contrary to the ordinary Blume-Capel model, by the absence of a tricritical point in the (P-F) transition line . The value of $`d_1`$ over which this point appears is found to be $`d_{trc}^{(2)}1.848\frac{8\mathrm{ln}2}{3}`$ which is but the mean field tricritical crystal field of the spin-1 Blume-Capel model on a square lattice.

2) For $`d_{trc}^{(2)}<d_1<2`$, four types of topology are found with increasing $`d_1`$, all of them present a tricritical point in the P-F transition line and present the same features of the type-1 topology with some differences. For $`d_1`$ in the vicinity of $`d_{trc}^{(2)}`$ the lines of transition (F-F lines) separating the ferromagnetic phases $`(FF)^L`$, $`(FF)^{L1}F0`$ and $`(F0)^L`$ still exhibit the reentrant phenomenon near the P-F transition line and meet this one at the multicritical points $`(B^3)_1`$ and $`(B^3)_2`$ (e.g. Fig2(b)). With increasing $`d_1`$, the F-F lines meet the P-F line at the multicritical point $`B^3`$ and at the critical end-point $`BA^2`$ respectively, and still present the reentrant behavior (e.g. Fig.2(c)); for higher values of $`d_1`$, the former lines lose the reentrant behavior and meet the P-F line at two distinct critical end points $`(BA^2)_1`$ and $`(BA^2)_2`$ as is depicted in Fig.2(d). Finally, for $`d_1`$ close to 2 the P-F first-order line develops a reentrant topology (e.g. Fig.2(e)).

Note that for $`d_1<2`$ the ferromagnetic phase $`(F0)^L`$ is stable for an infinitely large value of $`d_2`$ at temperatures lower than a temperature $`t_c^{(2)}(d_1)`$ which is independent of the number of layers $`2L`$. $`t_c^{(2)}(d_1)`$ is but the critical temperature of the ordinary two-dimensional spin-1 Blume-Capel model corresponding to $`d_1`$. This may easily be understood even beyond the mean field approximation. In fact at low temperatures and for large values of $`d_2`$, the odd layers are all non magnetic ($`m_{2k+1}=0`$) and the system of equations of the magnetizations $`m_{2k}`$ of the even layers is decoupled to L equivalent two-dimensional equations with a crystal field $`d_1`$; the magnetizations $`m_{2k}`$ (and then the total magnetization) vanish at the same temperature which is $`t_c^{(2)}(d_1)`$. For $`d_1>2`$ the ferromagnetic phase is unstable for large values of $`d_2`$, as will be seen, in accordance with the ground-state phase diagram.

3) For $`2<d_1<31/L`$, three types of topology exist. For these topologies the ferromagnetic state $`(F0)^L`$ disappears from the ordered phases. The ferromagnetic phases $`(FF)^L`$ and $`(FF)^{L1}F0`$ are, as above, separated by a transition line of first-order, at low temperatures, which reaches the $`d_2`$ axis at $`d_2=3`$ and meets the second order line at a tricritical point $`C_1`$. This last line meets the P-F line at a critical end-point $`BA^2`$. For $`d_1`$ in the close vicinity of 2, the P-F line of transition exhibits a reentrant and double-reentrant behaviors (e.g. Fig.2(f)); with increasing $`d_1`$, only the double reentrant still exist (e.g. Fig.2(g)) and then it disappears for higher values of $`d_1`$ (e.g. Fig.2(h)). Note that the P-F transition line reaches, for $`2<d_1<31/L`$, the $`d_2`$ axis at $`d_2`$ given by $`(L1)d_2=(6L4)Ld_1`$; the surface of the $`(FF)^{L1}F0`$ phase then decreases with increasing $`d_1`$ and it collapses at $`d_1=31/L`$.

4) For $`31/L<d_1<3`$, the phase diagram is of the same type as that of the ordinary spin-1 Blume-Capel model (e.g. Fig.2(i)); the first-order line reaches the $`d_2`$ axis at $`d_2`$ given by $`d_2=(61/L)d_1`$.

5) For $`3<d_1<4`$, three types of topology are found. These are characterized by the appearance of the ferromagnetic phase $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$ at low temperatures. The ferromagnetic phases $`(FF)^L`$ and $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$ are separated by a critical line of approximately constant temperature which meets the P-F transition line at a critical end-point $`BA^2`$. The P-F line reaches the $`d_2`$ axis at $`d_2`$ given by $`Ld_2=(6L4)(L1)d_1`$. For $`d_1`$ far from 4, a typical phase diagram is given in Fig.2(j). With increasing $`d_1`$, the P-F transition line develops a double-reentrant behavior (e.g. Fig.2(k)), and when $`d_1`$ approaches 4 this line presents a reentrant and double-reentrant behaviors (e.g. Fig2(l)).

6) For $`d_1>4`$, three types of topology are fond; these are characterized by the appearance, in addition to the state $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$, of the state $`(0F)^L`$ at low temperatures. The ferromagnetic phases $`(FF)^L`$, $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$ and $`(0F)^L`$ are separated by two critical lines of approximately constant temperatures which meet the P-F transition line at two critical end points $`(BA^2)_1`$ and $`(BA^2)_2`$ respectively. The P-F line reaches the $`d_2`$ axis at $`d_2=2`$. For values of $`d_1`$ very close to 4 the P-F line presents a reentrance and a double reentrance (e.g. Fig.2(m)); the reentrance disappears with increasing $`d_1`$ (e.g. Fig.2(n)) and then the double reentrance disappears for high values of $`d_1`$ (e.g. Fig.2(o)).

For an odd number, $`N=2L+1`$, of layers, the ground-state (Fig.1(b)) has only five different phases (instead of six for N even); in fact, for small values of $`d_1`$ ($`d_1<2`$) only two phases now exist: $`(11)^L1`$ (for $`d_2<4`$) and $`(10)^L1`$ (for $`d_2>4`$).

For finite temperatures, fourteen types of topology exist in this case:

* For $`0<d_1<d_{trc}^{(2)}`$ the topology is like the type-1 above (in the case of an even number of layers) but with only two ferromagnetic phases $`(FF)^LF`$ and $`(F0)^LF`$ separated by a unique line having a tricritical point $`C_1`$ at low temperatures.
* For $`d_{trc}^{(2)}<d_1<2`$ there are four types of topology which are like those of the group 2 above, but with the modification mentioned in i).
* For $`2<d_1<3`$, there are no topologies like those of the group 3 above. The topologies, in the number of three, are all of the ordinary Blume-Capel type, but for the two first ones ($`d_1`$ close to 2) the P-F transition line develops a reentrance for $`d_1`$ very close to 2, and a reentrance and double-reentrance for higher values of $`d_1`$ (Fig.3).
* For $`3<d_1<4`$, there are three types of topology which are like those of the group 5 above, but with the ferromagnetic phase $`0F(FF)^{L1}0`$ at low temperatures (instead of $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$ for N even).
* For $`d_1>4`$, there are three topologies which are like those of the group 6 above, but with the ferromagnetic phases $`(0F)^L0`$ and $`0F(FF)^{L1}0`$ at low temperatures (instead of $`(0F)^L`$ and $`0F(FF)^{L1}`$ for N even).

## 4 Conclusion

We have studied, using mean field theory, the phase diagrams of a ferromagnetic spin-1 Blume-Capel film with an alternating crystal field: $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ on the odd layers and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ on the even ones. The ground state phase diagrams in the $`(d_1,d_2)`$ plane ($`d_1=\mathrm{\Delta }_1/J`$ and $`d_2=\mathrm{\Delta }_2/J`$) are determined analytically; the number of their phases depends on the parity of the number of layers of the film. At finite temperatures, fifteen types of topology, depending on the range of variation of $`d_1`$ , are found in the (t,$`d_2`$) plane for an even number of layers, but only fourteen for an odd number of layers. The phase diagrams exhibit many multicritical points. In particular, a tricritical point $`C`$ appears in the paramagnetic-ferromagnetic line of transition, but only for values of $`d_1`$ larger than a threshold value $`d_{trc}^{(2)}=\frac{8\mathrm{ln}2}{3}`$ which is but the mean field tricritical crystal field of the spin-1 Blume-Capel model on a square lattice. Moreover, lines of transition presenting the reentrant and double-reentrant behaviors also appear in the phase diagrams.

## References

 M. Blume, Phys. Rev. 141, 517 (1966)

 H.W. Capel, Physica 32, 966 (1966)

 D.M. Saul and M. Wortis, Amer. Inst. Phys. Conf. Proc. 5, 349 (1972)
P.F. Fox and D.S. Gaunt, J. Phys. C 5, 3085 (1972)
D.M. Saul, M. Wortis and D. Stauffer, Phys. Rev. B 9, 4964 (1974)

 M. Tanaka and K. Takahashi, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) 93, K85 (1979)

 B.L. Arora and D.P. Landau, Amer. Inst. Phys. Conf. Proc. 5, 352 (1972)
A.K. Jain and D.P. Landau, Phys. Rev. B 22, 445 (1980)
W. Selk and J. Yeomans, J. Phys. A 16, 2789 (1983)
C.M. Care, J. Phys. A 26, 1481 (1993)
M. Deserno, Phys. Rev. E 56, 5204 (1997)

 A.N. Berker and M. Wortis, Phys. Rev. B 14, 4946 (1676)
T.W. Bukhard, Phys. Rev. B 14, 1196 (1976)
H. Dickinson and J. Yeomas, J. Phys. C, L345 (1983)

 C. Buzano and A. Pelizzola, cond-mat / 9502017 (1996)

 A. Benyoussef, N. Boccara and M. Saber, J. Phys. C 19, 1983 (1986)

 A. Benyoussef and H. Ez-Zahraouy, Phys. Script. 57, 603 (1998)

 L. Bahmad, A. Benyoussef and H. Ez-Zahraouy, J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 251, 115 (2002)

 A. Maritan, M. Cieplak, M.R. Swift, F. Toigo and J.R. Banavar, Phys. Rev. Let. 69 (1992) 221
A. Benyoussef, T. Biaz, M. Saber and M. Touzani, J.Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 20 (1987) 5349
T. Kaneyoshi and J. Mielnicki, J.Phys. C: Condens.Matter 2 (1990) 8773

 T. Kaneyoshi, J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 92 (1990) 59

 R.B. Griffiths, Phys. Rev. B 12, 345 (1975)

## Figure captions

The ground state phase diagrams in the $`(d_1,d_2)`$ plane for an arbitrary number N of layers, (a) $`N=2L`$, (b) $`N=2L+1`$.

The phase diagrams in the (t,$`d_2`$) plane for a generic even value of N ($`N=6`$) and generic values of $`d_1`$. (a) $`d_1=1`$., (b)$`d_1=1.85`$, (c) $`d_1=1.855`$, (d) $`d_1=1.9`$, (e) $`d_1=1.99`$, (f) $`d_1=2.01`$, (g) $`d_1=2.1`$, (h) $`d_1=2.25`$, (i) $`d_1=2.75`$, (j) $`d_1=3.5`$, (k) $`d_1=3.8`$, (l) $`d_1=3.9`$, (m) $`d_1=4.01`$, (n) $`d_1=4.1`$, (o) $`d_1=5`$. The solid lines are of second-order, the doted ones are of first-order.

The phase diagram in the (t,$`d_2`$) plane for a generic odd value of N ($`N=7`$) and generic values of $`d_1`$ in the range $`2<d_1<3`$. The number accompanying each curve is the value of $`d_1`$. The solid lines are of second-order, the doted ones are of first-order.