text:
# On the equivariant reduction of structure group of a principal bundle to a Levi subgroup

## 1. Introduction

A holomorphic $`G`$–bundle over $`^1`$ admits a holomorphic reduction of structure group to a maximal torus of $`G`$, where $`G`$ is a complex reductive group \[Gr\]. In particular, any holomorphic vector bundle over $`^1`$ splits as a direct sum of line bundles. If $`V`$ is a holomorphic vector bundle over $`^1`$ equipped with a lift, as vector bundle automorphisms, of the standard action of the diagonal matrices in $`\text{SL}(2,)`$ on $`^1`$, then $`V`$ decomposes as a direct sum of holomorphic line subbundles each left invariant by the action of the torus \[Ku\]. More generally, let $`E_G`$ be a principal $`G`$–bundle over an irreducible complex projective variety $`M`$, where $`G`$ is a complex reductive group, with both $`E_G`$ and $`M`$ equipped with algebraic actions of a connected complex algebraic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$; the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ commutes with the action of $`G`$ and the projection of $`E_G`$ to $`M`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant. Assume that $`E_G`$ admits a reduction of structure group to a maximal torus $`T`$ of $`G`$. Then $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`T`$ if and only if the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the automorphism group of $`E_G`$ leaves a maximal torus invariant \[BP\].

The aim here is to investigate conditions under which a principal $`G`$–bundle over a projective variety equipped with an action of a group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup of $`G`$.

Let $`M`$ be an irreducible projective variety over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ of characteristic zero on which a group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts as algebraic automorphisms. Let $`G`$ be a connected reductive linear algebraic group over $`k`$ and $`E_G`$ a principal $`G`$–bundle over $`M`$. Let $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ denote the group of all automorphisms of $`E_G`$. Suppose we are given a lift of the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`M`$ to $`E_G`$ that commutes with the action of $`G`$. More precisely, the automorphism of $`E_G`$ defined by any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an algebraic automorphism of $`G`$–bundle over the automorphism of $`M`$ defined by $`\gamma `$. The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ induces an action on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ through group automorphisms.

A torus is a product of copies of the multiplicative group $`𝔾_m`$. By a Levi subgroup of $`G`$ we will mean the centralizer of some torus of $`G`$. Let $`E_HE_G`$ be a reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup $`H`$. We will denote by $`Z_0(H)`$ the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element. So $`Z_0(H)`$ is contained in the automorphism group of $`E_H`$ and hence contained in $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$.

We prove that $`E_H`$ is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially on the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ (Theorem 2.2).

A torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ determines a torus, unique up to inner automorphism, of $`G`$. The $`G`$–bundle $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`H`$ if and only if there is torus $`T\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ satisfying the following two conditions:

1. the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`T`$ is trivial;
2. there is a subtorus $`T^{}Z_0(H)G`$ in the conjugacy class of tori of $`G`$ defined by $`T`$ such that the centralizer of $`T^{}`$ in $`G`$ coincides with $`H`$.

(See Lemma 3.2 and Proposition 3.3.)

Let $`T_0G`$ be a torus in the conjugacy class of tori defined by a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ is the subgroup fixed pointwise by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The conjugacy class of $`T_0`$ does not depend on the choice of the maximal torus. Let $`H_0G`$ be the centralizer of $`T_0`$.

In Theorem 4.1 we prove that $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group $`E_{H_0}E_G`$ to $`H_0`$, which is unique in the following sense:

1. for any $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group $`E_{H_0}^{}E_G`$ to $`H_0`$, there is an automorphism $`\tau \text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`\tau (E_{H_0})=E_{H_0}^{}`$ as subvarieties of $`E_G`$; and
2. if $`E_H`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup $`HG`$, then there is $`gG`$ and $`\tau \text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`g^1H_0gH`$ and $`E_{H_0}g\tau (E_H)`$.

A theorem due to Atiyah says that for an isomorphism of a vector bundle over $`M`$ with any direct sum of indecomposable vector bundles, the direct summands are unique up to a permutation of the summands. Theorem 4.1 is an equivariant principal bundle analog of this result of \[At\].

Acknowledgments. We thank Vyjayanthi Chari for a very useful discussion.

## 2. Equivariant reduction to a Levi subgroup

Let $`M`$ be an irreducible projective variety over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ of characteristic zero. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a group acting on the left on $`M`$. So we have a map

(2.1)
$$\varphi :\mathrm{\Gamma }\times MM$$

such that for any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the map defined by $`x\varphi (\gamma ,x)`$ is an algebraic automorphism of $`M`$, and furthermore, $`\varphi (\gamma _1\varphi (\gamma _2,x))=\varphi (\gamma _1\gamma _2,x)`$ for all $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`xM`$, with $`\varphi (e,x)=x`$, where $`e\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the identity element.

Let $`G`$ be a connected reductive linear algebraic group over the field $`k`$ and $`E_G`$ a principal $`G`$–bundle over $`M`$. Let

(2.2)
$$f:E_GM$$

be the projection. We will denote by $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ the group of all automorphisms of the $`G`$-bundle $`E_G`$ (over the identity automorphism of $`M`$). So, $`\tau (z)g=\tau (zg)`$ and $`f(\tau (z))=f(z)`$ for all $`\tau \text{Aut}(E_G)`$ and $`zE_G`$. Note that $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ is an affine algebraic group over $`k`$. After fixing a faithful representation of $`G`$, the group $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ gets identified with a closed subgroup of the automorphism group of the associated vector bundle; the automorphism group of a vector bundle is a Zariski open dense subset in the vector space defined by the space of all global endomorphisms of the vector bundle. The group $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ is, in fact, the space of all global section of the adjoint bundle

$$\text{Ad}(E_G):=E_G\times ^GG=(E_G\times G)/G$$

(the action of any $`gG`$ sends any point $`(z,g^{})E_G\times G`$ to $`(zg,g^1g^{}g)`$). Let

$$\text{Aut}^0(E_G)\text{Aut}(E_G)$$

be the connected component containing the identity element. So $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ is a connected affine algebraic group over $`k`$.

Assume that $`E_G`$ is equipped with a lift of the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`M`$. So the map

(2.3)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }:\mathrm{\Gamma }\times E_GE_G$$

defining the action has the property that for any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the map defined by $`z\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma ,z)`$ is an algebraic automorphism of $`E_G`$ that commutes with the action of $`G`$ on $`E_G`$, and $`f\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma ,z)=\varphi (\gamma ,f(z))`$, where $`f`$ is as in (2.2). Note that the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ induces an action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ through algebraic group automorphisms. More precisely, the action of any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ sends $`F\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ to the automorphism defined by

$$z\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma ,F(\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma ^1,z))),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is as in (2.3).

The group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts on the adjoint bundle $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ as follows: the action of any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ sends $`(z,g)E_G\times G`$ to

(2.4)
$$(\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma ,z),g)E_G\times G;$$

this descends to an action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the quotient $`\text{Ad}(E_G)=(E_G\times G)/G`$. This descended action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ lifts the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`M`$, and it clearly preserves the algebraic group structure of the fibers of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$. The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ induces an action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the space of all global sections of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$, namely $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$. It is straight–forward to check that this induced action on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ coincides with the earlier defined action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$.

Let

(2.5)
$$\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{Aut}(E_G)$$

be the subgroup that is fixed pointwise by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$. Since the action of each $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an algebraic automorphism of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$, the subgroup $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is Zariski closed.

A reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to a closed subgroup $`HG`$ is a section of $`E_G/H`$ over $`M`$, or equivalently, a closed subvariety $`E_HE_G`$ closed under the action of $`H`$ such that the $`H`$ action on $`E_H`$ defines a principal $`H`$–bundle over $`M`$.

###### Definition 2.1.

A reduction of structure group $`E_HE_G`$ to $`H`$ is called $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$equivariant if the subvariety $`E_H`$ is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$.

Since the actions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`G`$ on $`E_G`$ commute, there is an induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G/H`$. It is easy to see that $`E_H`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group if and only if the section over $`M`$ of the bundle $`E_G/HM`$ defined by $`E_H`$ is fixed by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the space of all sections of $`E_G/H`$ induced by the action on $`E_G/H`$.

By a Levi subgroup of $`G`$ we will mean the centralizer in $`G`$ of some torus of $`G`$. Recall that a torus is a product of copies of $`𝔾_m`$ or the trivial group. For a Levi subgroup $`HG`$, the centralizer in $`G`$ of the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element coincides with $`H`$ (see \[SS, §3\]). If $`HG`$ is a Levi subgroup, then there is a parabolic subgroup $`HPG`$ such that $`H`$ projects isomorphically to the Levi quotient of $`P`$. Conversely, if $`H`$ is a reductive subgroup of a parabolic subgroup $`PG`$ such that $`H`$ projects isomorphically to the Levi quotient of $`P`$, then $`H`$ is a Levi subgroup of $`G`$. Note that if we take the torus to be the trivial group, then the corresponding Levi subgroup is $`G`$ itself, and hence in that case the corresponding parabolic subgroup is $`G`$.

Take a Levi subgroup $`HG`$. Let

$$Z_0(H)H$$

be the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element. Let

(2.6)
$$E_HE_G$$

be a reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to $`H`$. We have

(2.7)
$$Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G),$$

where $`\text{Aut}^0(E_H)`$ is the connected component of the group of all automorphisms of the $`H`$–bundle $`E_H`$ containing the identity automorphism; the group $`Z_0(H)`$ acts on $`E_H`$ as translations (using the action of $`H`$ on $`E_H`$), which makes $`Z_0(H)`$ a subgroup of $`\text{Aut}^0(E_H)`$.

###### Theorem 2.2.

If the reduction $`E_H`$ in (2.6) is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant, then the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ in (2.7) is contained in $`\mathrm{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (defined in (2.5)).

Conversely, if $`Z_0(H)\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)\mathrm{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, then the reduction $`E_H`$ in (2.6) is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant.

###### Proof.

Assume that the reduction $`E_H`$ in (2.6) is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant. For any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma `$ be the automorphism of the variety $`E_H`$ defined by the action of $`\gamma `$. The automorphism $`gZ_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ preserves $`E_H`$, and on $`E_H`$ it coincides with the map $`zzg`$. Let $`S_g`$ be the automorphism of the $`H`$–bundle $`E_H`$ defined by $`zzg`$. Since the actions of $`G`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ commute, we have

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma S_g\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma ^1=S_g\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma \mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma ^1=S_g$$

on $`E_H`$. Therefore, the two automorphisms, namely $`g\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ (in (2.7)) and the image of $`g`$ by the action $`\gamma `$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$, coincide over $`E_HE_G`$. Consequently, these two automorphisms of $`E_G`$ coincide. In other words, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\mathrm{Aut}(E_G)`$ fixes the subgroup $`Z_0(H)`$ pointwise. This completes the proof of the first part.

Assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially on the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ defined in (2.7). Take a closed point $`xM`$. We will show that the evaluation map

(2.8)
$$f_x:Z_0(H)\text{Ad}(E_G)_x$$

is injective, where $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_x`$ is the fiber of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ over $`x`$; the map $`f_x`$ sends any $`sZ_0(H)`$ to the evaluation at $`x`$ of the corresponding section (as in (2.7)) of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$.

To prove that $`f_x`$ is injective, fix a finite dimensional faithful $`G`$–module $`V`$ over $`k`$. Let

$$E_V:=(E_G\times V)/G$$

be the vector bundle over $`M`$ associated to $`E_G`$ for the $`G`$–module $`V`$; the action of any $`gG`$ sends $`(z,v)E_G\times V`$ to $`(zg,g^1v)`$. Take any $`\sigma Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. So $`\sigma `$ gives an automorphism

$$\sigma ^{}H^0(M,\text{Isom}(E_V))$$

of the vector bundle; the automorphism of $`E_G\times V`$ that sends any $`(z,v)E_G\times V`$ to $`(\sigma (z),v)`$ descends to an automorphism of $`E_V`$.

Since $`M`$ is complete and irreducible, there are no nonconstant functions on it. Therefore, the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial of the endomorphism

$$\sigma ^{}(y)\text{End}((E_V)_y),$$

where $`yM`$ is a closed point, are independent of $`y`$. Also, since $`\sigma `$ is an element of a torus, namely $`Z_0(H)`$, the endomorphism $`\sigma ^{}(y)`$ is semisimple.

If $`f_x(\sigma )=\text{Id}_{(E_G)_x}`$, where $`f_x`$ is defined in (2.8), then clearly $`\sigma ^{}(x)=\text{Id}_{(E_V)_x}`$. Therefore, in that case, all the eigenvalues of $`\sigma ^{}(y)`$ are $`1`$ for all $`yM`$. Since all $`\sigma ^{}(y)`$ is semisimple with all eigenvalues $`1`$, it follows immediately that $`\sigma ^{}(y)`$ is the identity automorphism of $`(E_V)_y`$ for each $`yM`$.

Since $`V`$ is a faithful $`G`$–module and $`\sigma ^{}`$ is the identity automorphism of $`E_V`$, we conclude that $`\sigma `$ is the identity automorphism of $`E_G`$. This proves that the homomorphism $`f_x`$ defined in (2.8) is injective.

Therefore, using the evaluation map, $`M\times Z_0(H)\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ is a subgroup–scheme. Since $`Z_0(H)`$ is preserved by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$, it follows immediately that the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ leaves this subgroup–scheme invariant.

Fix an element $`g_0Z_0(H)`$ such that the Zariski closure of the group generated by $`g_0`$ coincides with $`Z_0(H)`$. Since $`H`$ is the centralizer of the subgroup $`Z_0(H)G`$, and the algebraic subgroup generated by $`g_0`$ coincides with $`Z_0(H)`$, we conclude that $`H`$ coincides with the centralizer of $`g_0G`$.

Let

(2.9)
$$F:E_G\times G\text{Ad}(E_G):=(E_G\times G)/G$$

be the quotient map. Let

(2.10)
$$\widehat{F}:=F^1(\text{image}(\widehat{g}_0))E_G\times G$$

be the subvariety, where

(2.11)
$$\widehat{g}_0:M\text{Ad}(E_G)$$

is the section defined by the above element $`g_0`$ using the inclusion $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ in (2.7). Set

(2.12)
$$\widehat{E}:=\widehat{F}(E_G\times \{g_0\})E_G\times G,$$

where $`\widehat{F}`$ is defined in (2.10), and let

(2.13)
$$E^{}E_G$$

be the image of $`\widehat{E}`$ (constructed in (2.12)) by the projection of $`E_G\times G`$ to $`E_G`$ defined by $`(z,g)z`$.

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially on the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)`$, the image of the map $`\widehat{g}_0`$ in (2.11) is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$. Since the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ is the descent, by the projection $`F`$ in (2.9), of the diagonal action on $`E_G\times G`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acting trivially on $`G`$, it follows that $`E^{}`$ in (2.13) is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$.

Since $`E^{}`$ is left invariant by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the theorem follows once we show that $`E^{}`$ coincides with the subvariety $`E_H`$ in (2.6).

To prove that $`E^{}=E_H`$, first note that

$$E_H\times \{g_0\}\widehat{F}E_G\times G$$

with $`\widehat{F}`$ defined in (2.10). Indeed, the automorphism of $`E_H`$ defined by $`g_0`$ sends any $`zE_H`$ to $`zg_0`$ (since $`g_0`$ is in the center of $`H`$, this commutes with the action of $`H`$ and hence it is an automorphism of $`E_H`$). This immediately implies that $`E_H\times \{g_0\}\widehat{F}`$. Consequently, we have $`E_HE^{}`$. On the other hand, for any $`xM`$ and $`wE^{}(E_G)_x`$ it can be shown that the fiber of $`E^{}`$ over $`x`$ is contained in the orbit of $`w`$ for the action of the centralizer of $`g_0`$ in $`G`$. Indeed, if $`F(w^{},g^{})=F(w^{}g,g^{})`$, where $`g,g^{}G`$, $`w^{}(E_G)_x`$ and $`F`$ as in (2.9), then $`gg^{}g^1=g^{}`$, this being an immediate consequence of the definition of $`F`$. Therefore, if $`w,wgE^{}`$, with $`gG`$, then $`g^1g_0g=g_0`$.

We already noted that the centralizer of $`g_0`$ in $`G`$ coincides with $`H`$. We also saw that $`E_HE^{}`$. Therefore, the above observation that any two points of $`E^{}`$ over a point $`xM`$ differ by an element of the centralizer of $`g_0`$ implies that $`E_H=E^{}`$. This completes the proof of the theorem. ∎

###### Example 2.3.

It may happen that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ preserves the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ in (2.7), but does not preserve $`Z_0(H)`$ pointwise. We give an example.

Fix a maximal torus $`TG`$. Take $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to be the normalizer $`N(T)`$ of $`T`$ in $`G`$, and equip $`M`$ with the trivial action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$; let $`G`$ be such that $`N(T)T`$. Set $`E_G`$ to be the trivial $`G`$–bundle $`M\times G`$. The group $`N(T)`$ acts on $`M\times G`$ as left translations of $`G`$. So the induced action of $`N(T)`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)=G`$ is the conjugation action. Set $`H=T`$. The reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to $`T`$ defined by the inclusion $`M\times TM\times G`$ has the property that the subgroup

$$Z_0(H)=TG=\text{Aut}(E_G)$$

(defined in (2.7)) is left invariant by the action of $`N(T)`$ (in this case it is the adjoint action of $`N(T)`$ on $`G`$). However no reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to $`T`$ is left invariant by the action $`N(T)`$.

The automorphism group of a torus is a discrete group. Therefore, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a connected algebraic group acting algebraically on $`E_G`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially on $`Z_0(H)`$ provided $`Z_0(H)`$ is preserved by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proposition 2.4.

Let $`T\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a torus such that there is an element $`g\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ satisfying the condition that $`g^1Tg=Z_0(H)`$, with $`Z_0(H)`$ constructed in (2.7) for the reduction $`E_H`$ in (2.6). Then $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`H`$.

###### Proof.

Take $`T`$ and $`g`$ as above. So, the image

$$E_H^{}:=g(E_H)E_G$$

is a reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to $`H`$, where $`E_H`$ is the reduction in (2.6). Take any automorphism $`\tau `$ of the principal $`H`$–bundle $`E_H`$. Using the reduction $`E_H`$ in (2.6), the automorphism $`\tau `$ gives an automorphism $`\tau _1`$ of the $`G`$–bundle $`E_G`$. On the other hand, using the above reduction $`E_H^{}E_G`$ together with the isomorphism of $`E_H`$ with $`E_H^{}`$ defined by $`zg(z)`$ the automorphism $`\tau `$ gives an automorphism $`\tau _2`$ of $`E_G`$. It is easy to see that $`\tau _2=g\tau _1g^1`$.

Therefore, if we substitute $`E_H`$ by $`E_H^{}`$, then the subgroup $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ in (2.7) gets replaced by $`gZ_0(H)g^1`$. Now, the second part of Theorem 2.2 says that $`E_H^{}`$ is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$. This completes the proof of the proposition. ∎

## 3. Levi reduction from tori in $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$

Let $`T\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ be a torus. From the proof of Theorem 2.2 it can be deduced that $`T`$ determines a torus, unique up to an inner automorphism, in $`G`$. This will be explained below with more details.

Fix a point $`xM`$. We saw in the proof of Theorem 2.2 that the evaluation map

(3.1)
$$f_x:T\text{Ad}(E_G)_x$$

is injective. Since $`\text{Ad}(E_G)=(E_G\times G)/G`$, if we fix a point $`z(E_G)_x`$, then the quotient map $`F`$ (defined in (2.9)) gives an isomorphism of $`\{z\}\times G`$ with $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_x`$. This identification of $`G`$ with $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_x`$ constructed using $`z`$ is an isomorphism of algebraic groups. Furthermore, if we substitute $`z`$ by $`zg`$, $`gG`$, then the corresponding isomorphism of $`G`$ with $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_x`$ is the composition of the earlier one with the automorphism of $`G`$ defined by the conjugation action of $`g`$. Therefore, $`f_x(T)`$, with $`f_x`$ defined in (3.1), gives a torus in $`G`$ up to conjugation.

This torus of $`G`$, up to conjugation, defined by $`f_x(T)`$ actually does not depend on the choice of the point $`x`$. To prove this, take $`z_1,z_2E_G`$ with $`f(z_i)=x_i`$, $`i=1,2`$, where $`f`$ is as in (2.2). Consider the evaluation homomorphism

$$f_{x_i}:T\text{Ad}(E_G)_{x_i}$$

which is injective. Let

(3.2)
$$h_{z_i}:TG$$

be the composition of $`f_{x_i}`$ with the identification of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_{x_i}`$ with $`G`$ defined by $`z_i`$. We want to show that the two subgroups, namely $`\text{image}(h_{z_1})`$ and $`\text{image}(h_{z_2})`$, of $`G`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`G`$.

Fix a point $`t_0T`$ such that the Zariski closed subgroup of $`T`$ generated by $`t_0`$ is $`T`$ itself. For a finite dimensional $`G`$–module $`V`$ over $`k`$, let $`E_V`$ be the vector bundle associated to $`E_G`$ for $`V`$ and $`\widehat{t}_0`$ the automorphism of $`E_V`$ defined by $`t_0\text{Aut}(E_G)`$. From the definition of the map $`h_{z_i}`$ it follows that the automorphism $`\widehat{t}_0(x_i)`$ of $`(E_V)_{x_i}`$ and the automorphism of $`V`$ given by $`h_{z_i}(t_0)G`$ are intertwined by the isomorphism of $`(E_V)_{x_i}`$ with $`V`$ constructed using $`z_i`$. (Since $`E_V=(E_G\times V)/G`$, we have an isomorphism of $`(E_V)_{x_i}`$ with $`V`$ that sends any $`vV`$ to the image of $`(z_i,v)`$.) We saw in the proof of Theorem 2.2 that the characteristic polynomial of $`\widehat{t}_0(y)\text{Isom}((E_V)_y)`$ is independent of $`y`$. Therefore, the automorphisms of $`V`$ defined the two elements $`h_{z_1}(t_0)`$ and $`h_{z_2}(t_0)`$ of $`G`$ have same characteristic polynomial.

On the other hand, if $`T^{\prime \prime }G`$ is a maximal torus, then the algebra of all functions on the affine variety $`T^{\prime \prime }/W`$, where $`W:=N(T^{\prime \prime })/T^{\prime \prime }`$ is the Weyl group with $`N(T^{\prime \prime })`$ the normalizer of $`T^{\prime \prime }`$ in $`G`$, is generated by trace function of finite dimensional $`G`$–modules over $`k`$ \[St, p. 87, Theorem 2\]. Therefore, $`h_{z_1}(t_0)`$ and $`h_{z_2}(t_0)`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`G`$ (since the characteristic polynomials of $`h_{z_1}(t_0)`$ and $`h_{z_2}(t_0)`$ coincide for any $`G`$–module). Since $`\text{image}(h_{z_i})`$ is generated, as a Zariski closed subgroup, by $`h_{z_i}(t_0)`$, we conclude that the two subgroups $`\text{image}(h_{z_1})`$ and $`\text{image}(h_{z_2})`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`G`$.

###### Remark 3.1.

Let $`E_HE_G`$ be a reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup $`HG`$. Consider the torus $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ in (2.7) corresponding to the reduction $`E_H`$. By substituting a point of $`E_H`$ for the point $`z_i`$ in (3.2) we conclude that the map in (3.2) sends any $`gZ_0(H)H`$ to the point $`g\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ (in terms of (2.7)). Consequently, the torus $`Z_0(H)G`$ is in the conjugacy class of tori given by the torus $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ in (2.7).

We have the following lemma:

###### Lemma 3.2.

If the $`G`$–bundle $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup $`HG`$, then there is a torus $`T\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)\mathrm{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ that satisfies the condition that $`Z_0(H)`$ is the torus in $`G`$ defined, up to conjugation, by $`T`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`E_HE_G`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H`$. The image of $`Z_0(H)`$ in $`\text{Aut}^0(G)`$ by the inclusion map in (2.7) will be denoted by $`T`$. The first part of Theorem 2.2 says that $`T\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Fix a point $`zE_HE_G`$. It is easy to see that the torus $`h_z(T)G`$ coincides with $`Z_0(H)`$, where $`h_z`$ is defined as in (3.2) (by composing the evaluation map $`T\text{Ad}(E_G)_{f(z)}`$, where $`f`$ is defined in (2.2), with the isomorphism $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_{f(z)}G`$ defined by $`z`$). This completes the proof of the lemma. ∎

In the converse direction we have:

###### Proposition 3.3.

Let $`T^{}G`$ be a torus in the conjugacy class of tori determined by a torus $`T\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`H`$ the centralizer of $`T^{}`$ in $`G`$. Then $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`H`$.

###### Proof.

Fix any point $`zE_G`$ and consider the homomorphism

(3.3)
$$h_z:TG$$

as in (3.2), namely it is the composition of the evaluation map with the identification, constructed using $`z`$, of $`G`$ with $`\text{Ad}(E_G)_{f(z)}`$, where $`f`$ is defined in (2.2). There is an element $`gG`$ with $`gh_z(T)g^1=T^{}`$, where $`T^{}`$ is as in the statement of the proposition.

Let

(3.4)
$$H_zG$$

be the centralizer of $`h_z(T)`$, with $`h_z`$ defined in (3.3). Since $`gh_z(T)g^1=T^{}`$, and the centralizer of $`T^{}G`$ is $`H`$, we conclude that

(3.5)
$$gH_zg^1=H.$$

Fix an element $`t_0T`$ such that the Zariski closure in $`T`$ of the subgroup generated by $`t_0`$ is $`T`$ itself. As in (2.11), let

$$\widehat{t}_0:M\text{Ad}(E_G)$$

be the section defined by the automorphism $`t_0\text{Aut}(E_G)`$. As in (2.10), set

$$\widehat{F}:=F^1(\text{image}(\widehat{t}_0))E_G\times G,$$

where $`F`$ is the projection in (2.9). As in (2.12), define

$$\widehat{E}:=\widehat{F}(E_G\times \{h_z(t_0)\})E_G\times G,$$

where $`h_z`$ is defined in (3.3). Let

(3.6)
$$E^{}E_G$$

be the image of $`\widehat{E}`$ by the projection of $`E_G\times G`$ to $`E_G`$ defined by $`(y,\nu )y`$.

We will show that $`E^{}`$ constructed in (3.6) is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to the subgroup $`H_z`$ defined in (3.4).

For this, we will first show that $`E^{}`$ is closed under the action of $`H_z`$ (for the action of $`G`$ on $`E_G`$). Note that $`h_z(t_0)`$ is in the center of $`H_z`$ (as $`H_z`$ is the centralizer of $`h_z(T)`$). Therefore, for the projection $`F`$ in (2.9) we have

(3.7)
$$F(z_1,h_z(t_0))=F(z_1g_1,h_z(t_0))$$

for all $`z_1E_G`$ and and $`g_1H_z`$. Indeed, the map $`F`$ clearly has the property that for $`g,g^{}G`$ and $`w^{}E_G`$

(3.8)
$$F(w^{},g^{})=F(w^{}g,g^{})$$

if and only if $`gg^{}g^1=g^{}`$. From (3.7) it follows immediately that $`E^{}`$ is closed under the action of $`H_z`$.

It also follows from (3.8) that for any point $`yM`$, the centralizer of $`h_z(t_0)`$ (in $`G`$) acts transitively on the fiber of $`E^{}`$ over $`y`$. Note that since the Zariski closure of the group generated by $`t_0`$ is $`T`$, and $`H_z`$ is the centralizer (in $`G`$) of $`h_z(T)`$, it follows immediately that the centralizer of $`h_z(t_0)`$ is $`H_z`$.

We still need to show that the fiber of $`E^{}`$ over each point $`yM`$ is nonempty. For this note that there is a point $`z^{}f^1(y)`$, with $`f`$ defined in (2.2), such that the corresponding homomorphism

$$h_z^{}:TG$$

defined as in (3.3) by replacing $`z`$ by $`z^{}`$ has the property that $`h_z^{}(t_0)=h_z(t_0)`$. Indeed, this follows from the combination of the fact that the conjugacy class of the torus $`h_z(T)G`$ is independent of the choice of the point $`zE_G`$ and the observation that the two homomorphisms $`h_{z_1}`$ and $`h_{z_1g_1}`$ from $`T`$ to $`G`$, where $`z_1E_G`$ and $`g_1G`$, differ by the inner automorphism of $`G`$ defined by $`g_1`$. The identity $`h_z^{}(t_0)=h_z(t_0)`$ immediately implies that $`z^{}`$ is in the fiber of $`E^{}`$ over $`y`$.

Consequently, $`E^{}E_G`$ constructed in (3.6) is a reduction of structure group to $`H_z`$.

Since the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ fixes $`t_0`$, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ leaves $`E^{}`$ invariant.

Finally, from (3.5) it follows immediately that $`E^{}g^1E_G`$ is a reduction of structure group to $`H`$. As $`E^{}`$ is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$, and the actions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`G`$ on $`E_G`$ commute, the subvariety $`E^{}g^1E_G`$ is also left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This completes the proof of the proposition. ∎

## 4. A canonical equivariant Levi reduction

Let $`T\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a connected maximal torus, where $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is defined in (2.5). So $`T`$ is a torus of $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. We saw in the previous section that $`T`$ determines a torus, unique up to an inner conjugation, in $`G`$. We will show that this torus in $`G`$ (up to conjugation) does not depend on the choice of the maximal torus $`T`$.

To prove this, first note that any two maximal tori of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Consider the maximal torus $`g_0Tg_0^1`$, where $`g_0\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and fix a point $`zE_G`$. The point $`z`$ defines two injective homomorphisms

$$h_z:TG$$

and

$$h_z^{}:g_0Tg_0^1G$$

defined as in (3.2) using the evaluation map and the isomorphism of groups

$$\varphi _z:\text{Ad}(E_G)_{f(z)}G$$

constructed using $`z`$, where $`f`$ is defined in (2.2). From the construction of $`h_z`$ and $`h_z^{}`$ it follows immediately that

$$\varphi _z(g_0(f(z)))h_z(T)(\varphi _z(g_0(f(z))))^1=h_z^{}(g_0Tg_0^1).$$

Therefore, $`h_z(T)`$ and $`h_z^{}(g_0Tg_0^1)`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`G`$. Consequently, the torus of $`G`$ determined by a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ does not depend on the choice of the maximal torus.

Fix a torus $`T_0G`$ in the conjugacy class of tori given by a maximal torus in $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The centralizer of $`T_0`$ in $`G`$ is a Levi subgroup. This Levi subgroup of $`G`$ will be denoted by $`H_0`$.

###### Theorem 4.1.

The $`G`$–bundle $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`H_0`$ defined above.

If $`HH_0`$ is a Levi subgroup of $`G`$ properly contained in $`H_0`$, then $`E_G`$ does not admit any $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H`$.

If $`HG`$ is a Levi subgroup such that $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H`$, but $`E_G`$ does not admit a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to any Levi subgroup properly contained in $`H`$, then $`H`$ is conjugate to the above defined subgroup $`H_0G`$.

If $`E_{H_0}E_G`$ and $`E_{H_0}^{}E_G`$ are two $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reductions of structure group to $`H_0`$, then there is an automorphism $`\tau \mathrm{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`E_G`$ such that $`\tau (E_{H_0})=E_{H_0}^{}E_G`$.

###### Proof.

That $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H_0`$ follows from the construction in Proposition 3.3. Fix a maximal torus $`T\text{Aut}^0(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and a point $`t_0T`$ such that the Zariski closure of the subgroup of $`T`$ generated by $`t_0`$ coincides with $`T`$. Let $`t_0^{}T_0`$ be the element corresponding to $`t_0`$ by an isomorphism of $`T`$ with $`T_0`$ constructed using an element of $`E_G`$. As in (2.12), consider

$$\widehat{E}:=F^1(\text{image}(\widehat{t}_0))(E_G\times \{t_0^{}\})E_G\times G,$$

where $`F`$ is defined in (2.9) and $`\widehat{t}_0`$ is the section of $`\text{Ad}(E_G)`$ defined by $`t_0`$. Finally the image of $`\widehat{E}`$ by the projection of $`E_G\times G`$ to $`E_G`$ gives a reduction of structure group of $`E_G`$ to $`H_0`$. See the proof of Proposition 3.3 for the details.

To prove the second statement, let $`HH_0`$ be a Levi subgroup of $`G`$ properly contained in $`H_0`$. So $`dimZ_0(H)>dimT_0`$, where $`Z_0(H)`$ is the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element (note that $`T_0`$ is contained in the center of the bigger Levi subgroup). The first statement in Theorem 2.2 says that if $`E_HE_G`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H`$, then $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains a torus isomorphic to $`Z_0(H)`$. This is impossible, since a smaller dimensional torus, namely $`T_0`$, is isomorphic to the maximal torus $`T`$ and any two maximal tori are isomorphic.

Let $`HG`$ be a Levi subgroup as in the third statement, and let $`E_HE_G`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H`$. The condition on $`H`$ implies that the torus $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in (2.7) for the reduction $`E_H`$ is a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Indeed, that $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ follows from Theorem 2.2. That $`Z_0(H)`$ is a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be seen as follows. If $`T^{\prime \prime }\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a torus with $`Z_0(H)T^{\prime \prime }`$, then take a torus $`T_1^{\prime \prime }`$ in the conjugacy class of tori of $`G`$ given by $`T^{\prime \prime }`$ such that $`Z_0(H)T_1^{\prime \prime }G`$. Let $`H^{\prime \prime }G`$ be the centralizer of $`T_1^{\prime \prime }`$. Since $`Z_0(H)`$ is the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element and $`Z_0(H)T_1^{\prime \prime }`$ is a proper subtorus, we conclude that $`H^{\prime \prime }H`$. Proposition 3.3 says that $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`H^{\prime \prime }`$. Since $`H^{\prime \prime }`$ is a Levi subgroup properly contained in $`H`$, this contradicts the given condition on $`H`$. Therefore, $`Z_0(H)\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a maximal torus.

Since $`T_0`$, by definition, is in the conjugacy class of tori of $`G`$ given by a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, using Remark 3.1 we conclude that the two tori $`T_0`$ and $`Z_0(H)`$ of $`G`$ are conjugate. Consequently, $`H`$ and $`H_0`$ differ by an inner automorphism of $`G`$.

Let $`E_{H_0}`$ and $`E_{H_0}^{}`$ be as in the fourth statement. Consider the inclusion in (2.7). Let $`T_1`$ (respectively, $`T_1^{}`$) be the image of $`T_0`$ in $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for the reduction $`E_{H_0}`$ (respectively, $`E_{H_0}^{}`$) by (2.7). From dimension consideration we know that both $`T_1`$ and $`T_1^{}`$ are maximal tori in $`\text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Take an element $`\tau \text{Aut}(E_G)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that

(4.1)
$$T_1^{}=\tau ^1T_1\tau .$$

Let $`E_HE_G`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to a Levi subgroup $`HG`$ and $`g_0Z_0(H)`$ an element in the connected component of the center of $`H`$ containing the identity element such that $`g_0`$ generates $`Z_0(H)`$ as a Zariski closed subgroup of $`G`$. In the proof of Theorem 2.2 we gave a reconstruction of $`E_H`$ from $`g_0`$ and its image in $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ by (2.7). (In the notation of the proof of Theorem 2.2, $`E^{}E_G`$ was constructed in (2.13) using $`g_0`$ and its image in $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, and it was shown there that $`E_H`$ coincides with $`E^{}`$.)

Fix an element $`g_0T_0`$ such that Zariski closed subgroup generated by $`g_0`$ coincides with $`T_0`$. Let $`g_1`$ be the image of $`g_0`$ in $`T_1`$ for the above isomorphism of $`T_0`$ with $`T_1`$ constructed using $`E_H`$. Set

$$g_1^{}=\tau ^1g_1\tau T_1^{},$$

where $`\tau `$ is as in (4.1). Let $`g_0^{}`$ be the image of $`g_1^{}`$ in $`T_0`$ for the above isomorphism of $`T_1^{}`$ with $`T_0`$ constructed using $`E_H^{}`$. Following the construction of $`E^{}`$ in (2.13), we can reconstruct $`E_H`$ (respectively, $`E_H^{}`$) using the pair $`(g_0,g_1)`$ (respectively, $`(g_0^{},g_1^{})`$). Using this reconstruction it is easy to see that

$$E_H^{}=\tau ^1(E_H),$$

where $`\tau `$ is as in (4.1). This completes the proof of the theorem. ∎

###### Remark 4.2.

If we set $`G=\text{GL}(n,k)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{e\}`$, then Theorem 4.1 becomes the following theorem proved in \[At\]: any vector bundle $`V`$ over $`M`$ is isomorphic to a direct sum $`_{i=1}^kU_i`$ of indecomposable vector bundles, and if

$$V\underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}W_j,$$

where each $`W_j`$ is indecomposable, then $`k=l`$ and the collection of vector bundles $`\{W_j\}`$ is a permutation of $`\{U_i\}`$.

###### Remark 4.3.

Let $`E_{}`$ be a parabolic $`G`$–bundle over an irreducible smooth projective variety $`X`$. Corresponding to $`E_{}`$, there is an irreducible smooth projective variety $`Y`$, a finite subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{Aut}(Y)`$ with $`X=Y/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and a principal $`G`$–bundle $`E_G`$ over $`Y`$ equipped with a lift of the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. More precisely, there is a bijective correspondence between parabolic $`G`$–bundles and $`G`$–bundles with a finite group action on a (ramified) covering (see \[BBN\] for the details). Therefore, Theorem 4.1 gives a natural reduction of structure group of a parabolic $`G`$–bundle to a Levi subgroup of $`G`$. This Levi reduction satisfies all the analogous conditions in Theorem 4.1.

## 5. The Levi quotient of the automorphism group

In this final section, we will assume $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to be a connected algebraic group. We will also assume the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`E_G`$ to be algebraic, that is, the map $`\varphi `$ in (2.1) is algebraic; consequently, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`M`$ is also algebraic. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is connected, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$ preserves the subgroup $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$.

Let $`U\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ be the unipotent radical of the algebraic group $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ \[Hu, p. 125\]. So the Levi quotient

(5.1)
$$L\text{Aut}^0(E_G):=\text{Aut}^0(E_G)/U\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

is a connected reductive algebraic group over $`k`$. Let

(5.2)
$$\psi :\text{Aut}^0(E_G)L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

be the quotient map.

From the uniqueness of a unipotent radical it follows immediately that the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ preserves the subgroup $`U\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. Therefore, we have an induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$.

Let $`\widehat{T}_0G`$ be a torus in the conjugacy class of tori of $`G`$ given by a maximal torus in $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. Since any two maximal tori are conjugate, the conjugacy class of $`\widehat{T}_0`$ does not depend on the choice of the maximal torus. Let $`\widehat{H}_0`$ be the centralizer of $`T_0`$ in $`G`$. Setting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{e\}`$ in Proposition we conclude that $`E_G`$ admits a reduction of structure group to $`\widehat{H}_0`$.

###### Proposition 5.1.

If $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`\widehat{H}_0`$, then the induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ (defined in (5.1)) factors through an action of a torus quotient of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is reductive and the induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ factors through an action of a torus quotient of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, then $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to the Levi subgroup $`\widehat{H}_0`$.

###### Proof.

Assume that $`E_G`$ admits a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`\widehat{H}_0`$. Theorem 4.1 says that there is a maximal torus

$$T_0\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

which is left invariant by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}(E_G)`$. Consider $`\psi (T_0)`$, with $`\psi `$ defined in (5.2), which is a maximal torus in $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. Note that $`\psi (T_0)`$ is left invariant by the induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, as $`T_0`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–invariant.

Let $`ZL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ be the center and

$$PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G):=L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)/ZL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

the corresponding adjoint group. All the automorphisms of $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ connected to the identity automorphism are parametrized by $`PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, with $`PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ acting on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ as conjugations.

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is connected, we have a homomorphism of algebraic groups

$$\rho :\mathrm{\Gamma }PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

such that the action of any $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ is conjugation by $`\rho (g)`$. Since the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ preserves the maximal torus $`\psi (T_0)L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, and $`q\psi (T_0)`$ is a maximal torus in $`PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, where

$$q:L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

is the projection, we conclude that $`\rho (\mathrm{\Gamma })q\psi (T_0)`$, where $`\psi `$ is defined in (5.2). (The maximal torus $`q\psi (T_0)`$ is a finite index subgroup of its normalizer in $`PL\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$.) Therefore, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ factors through the conjugation action of the torus $`\rho (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

To prove the second statement in the proposition, assume that the induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ factors through the torus quotient $`\mathrm{\Gamma }T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We will first show that the action of $`T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ preserves a maximal torus.

Construct the semi-direct product $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ using the induced action of $`T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$. We take a maximal torus

$$\widehat{T}L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)T_\mathrm{\Gamma }$$

containing $`T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (note that $`T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is naturally a subgroup of $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). Finally, consider the intersection

$$T_1:=\widehat{T}L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)$$

(note that $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ is a normal subgroup of $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). From its construction it is immediate that $`T_1`$ is a maximal torus of $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ and $`T_1`$ is left invariant by the action of $`T_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$.

Consider

$$G^{}:=\psi ^1(T_1)\text{Aut}^0(E_G),$$

where $`\psi `$ is the projection in (5.2). Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ preserves $`T_1L\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ preserves the subgroup $`G^{}`$ defined above. Note that $`G^{}`$ fits in an exact sequence

$$eU\text{Aut}^0(E_G)G^{}T_1e,$$

where $`U\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, as before, is the unipotent radical.

A maximal torus of $`G^{}`$ is a maximal torus of $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, and since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is connected, an algebraic action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on a torus through automorphisms is trivial. Therefore, in view of Proposition 3.3, to prove the second statement in the proposition it suffices to show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ preserves some maximal torus in $`G^{}`$.

Denote by $`𝔤^{}`$ the Lie algebra of $`G^{}`$. The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`G^{}`$ induces an action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`𝔤^{}`$. Let $`𝔲`$ (respectively, $`𝔱_1`$) be the Lie algebra of $`U\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ (respectively, $`T_1`$). So the above exact sequence of groups give an exact sequence

(5.3)
$$0𝔲𝔤^{}\stackrel{\beta }{}𝔱_1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}$$

of Lie algebras.

Let

$$𝒱𝔤^{}$$

be the subspace on which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially. Note that $`𝒱`$ is a Lie subalgebra. The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`T_1`$ is trivial (as the automorphism group of $`T_1`$ is discrete and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is connected). Therefore, the induced action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`𝔱_1`$ is trivial.

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is reductive, any exact sequence of finite dimensional $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–modules over $`k`$ splits, in particular, (5.3) splits. Since $`𝔱_1`$ is the trivial $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–module, we conclude that the restriction to the subalgebra $`𝒱𝔤^{}`$ of the projection $`\beta `$ in (5.3) is surjective.

Let $`G_2G^{}`$ be the Zariski closed subgroup generated by the subalgebra $`𝒱`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts trivially on $`𝒱`$ we conclude that $`G_2`$ is fixed pointwise by the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`G^{}`$.

Since the projection of $`𝒱`$ to $`𝔱_1`$ (by $`\beta `$ in (5.3)) is surjective, the subgroup $`G_2`$ projects surjectively to $`T_1`$. Take any maximal torus $`T_2G_2`$. Since the projection of $`G_2`$ to $`T_1`$ is surjective and the kernel of the projection $`G^{}T_1`$ is a unipotent group, we conclude that $`T_2`$ is a maximal torus of $`G^{}`$.

In other words, $`T_2`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–invariant maximal torus of $`G^{}`$. Since a maximal torus in $`G^{}`$ is a maximal torus in $`\text{Aut}^0(E_G)`$, Proposition 3.3 completes the proof of the proposition. ∎

It is easy to construct examples showing that the second statement in Proposition 5.1 is not valid for arbitrary connected algebraic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Proposition 5.1 has the following corollary:

###### Corollary 5.2.

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ does not have a nontrivial torus quotient (for example, if it is unipotent or semisimple), and the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`L\mathrm{Aut}^0(E_G)`$ is nontrivial, then $`E_G`$ does not admit any $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–equivariant reduction of structure group to $`\widehat{H}_0`$, provided $`\widehat{H}_0G`$.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Mindful that it is now necessary to protect against the surreptitious importation of the nuclear materials 235U and 239Pu, various schemes are being proposed to detect them at borders. An example is that of Little et al. . They are studying the use of a beam of photons, with energy of say $`10`$ MeV, to survey incoming freight and use the delayed neutrons from photofission of these nuclei as a signature of suspicious materials.

Therefore, existing data on (i) the photon cross-sections on these nuclei, (ii) photofission products, and (iii) the delayed neutron energy spectra are all of great interest. Although there exist classical, older surveys of data  \- , it is important to collate more modern results.

## 2 Photon cross-sections on 235U and 239Pu

Modern experiments to measure the photofission cross sections for 235U and 239Pu began to produce results in 1980. The first success was by Berman’s collaboration, using 235U. The total cross section and the separate fission cross sections for 1, 2, 3 neutrons were obtain for photon energies up to 20 MeV . (See especially Figure 2 of .) Further work was also done on the photoneutron multiplicities from monoenergetic photons from 5.5 to 18 MeV .

A later effort by the same collaboration produced similar results for 239Pu . For example, in Figure 7 of  the total cross section and the separate fission cross sections for 1, 2, 3 neutrons for photon energies up to 20 MeV are given.

These and other results are compiled in the modern version of Ref. , the “Atlas of Photoneutron Cross Sections Obtained with Monoenergetic Photons” .

## 3 Photofission products

$`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐𝟑𝟓}}𝐔:`$ Starting in 1976 , a great deal of work on the photofission products of 235U was done by the Belgium group in Gent, mainly in the 12-30 MeV photon energy range. There were detailed studies on the fragment mass distributions , the charge distributions , and on the isotopic and elemental yields . As an example of the large amount of information in these papers, note that in table II of , the percentage elemental yields of Kr to Ha from 235U are given. Isotopic information is also available.

More specific studies on the isomeric yield ratios for different elements were also done .

$`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐𝟑𝟗}}\mathrm{𝐏𝐮}:`$ Kinetic energy and fragment mass distributions from photofission on 239Pu were also studied by the Gent group . But in addition, almost simultaneously a study by a Russian group also appeared . This gave element product yields from a bremsstrahlung beam of maximum energy up to 28 MeV. Both sources should be consulted.

Both $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐𝟑𝟓}}𝐔`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐𝟑𝟗}}\mathrm{𝐏𝐮}:`$ Later, there were two non-western studies on both nuclei. The first, from a Japanese group , was interested in the transmutation of high-level radioactive waste. It used 20, 30 and 60 MeV bremsstrahlung. They found results within 10% agreement with calculated values using published photonuclear cross-section data. Another study, by a Russian group from Obminsk, used photon energies up to 11 MeV. Their study found the yields for a number of odd nuclei, including both 235U and 239Pu . These two studies and their included references are a valuable resource to an audience that might not be acquainted with this literature.

## 4 Delayed neutron energy spectra

The final category of critical information deals with the delayed neutron spectra from photofissioned 235U and 239Pu. The literature is replete with many studies on this problem. See, e.g., Refs -.

In addition, very recently, a program of measurements almost made to order has been done by the French Atomic Energy Commission. They wanted to develop techniques to quantitatively assay low-level transuranics in bulk solid waste drums. This was first done by detecting on-line delayed neutron counting from incident photons with energies up to 18 MeV . Soon after they did the same type of analysis, but this time with the delayed neutrons coming from the simultaneous interrogation of both photons and neutrons . (They also interrogated Uranium encased in concrete .)

## 5 Comments

The literature presented here, and the literature contained therein, will serve as a background to programs like , which aim to study the detection of fissile materials from delayed neutrons. Data on neutron induced fission of nuclei $`{}_{}{}^{N1}A`$ - is also of interest as complementary data to the photofission of nuclei $`{}_{}{}^{N}A`$.

Finally, all the available information on photofission is an aid to the evaluation of what type of light source is needed in the near future to best advance the field .

I thank Barry Berman, Mark Chadwick, Dominic Chan, Jim Friar, Danas Ridikas, and Bill Wilson for many helpful comments. In addition, Fanny Jallu kindly provided references. This work was supported by the United States Department of Energy.


text:
# The quasars are neutron stars embedded in clouds of hydrogen.

## 1 Introduction

There are many reasons to question the current explanations for the spectra of quasars. According to theory, to produce the Lyman lines in the redshift of quasars, atomic hydrogen is concentrated into bands or islands at many different redshifts; or conversely relativistic jets flow from the faces of quasars. Both hypothesis are flawed because they require clouds of hot atomic hydrogen, whose stability and/or velocity cannot be explained using conventional physical models.

To understand propagation of light in low pressure gases, one must take into account the “Coherent Raman Effect on time-Incoherent Light”(CREIL), which transfers energy by frequency shifts from shorter wavelengths to longer wavelengths without blurring or distorting the images or the spectra. The relative frequency shifts $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu /\nu `$ due to CREIL are nearly constant.

In a previous paper (Moret-Bailly ), we explained that the spectra can be obtained by assuming that a nearly homogeneous cloud of Lyman pumped atomic hydrogen is perturbed by a variable magnetic field: Where the field is low, there is virtually no redshift and the absorption (or emission) lines are written visibly into the spectrum. If the field is high, the redshift is simultaneous with the absorption (or emission), blurring the lines and making them invisible. The spectrum results not from a modulation of the absorption, but from the redshifting function of the gas. We also showed that the existence of a non-linearity is able to increase the contrast of the lines.

However our previous explanation requires an important variation of the magnetic field for each line, which in turn requires the existence of a large number of magnetised satellites. Another weakness in this argument is that the spectra show a pseudo-stochastic repartition of the redshifts of the lines, the difference of two redshifts being the product of a constant $`z_b=0.062`$ multiplied by an integer (Burbidge , Tifft , Burbidge & Hewitt , Bell , Bell & Comeau ). It seems very difficult to explain such a spectroscopic regularity of the “intrinsic redshift”by the presence of objects in the line of sight. The non-linearity we introduce in this letter provides a very simple solution.

Section 2 recounts the key spectroscopic properties which provide the “Coherent Raman Effect on time-Incoherent Light”(CREIL) able to explain the intrinsic redshifts.

Section 3 applies CREIL to a halo of atomic hydrogen; to obtain the required resonances, H must have a non- zero orbital quantum number. Lyman pumping is demonstrated to provide the necessary quantum state and non- linearity.

Section 4 explains the appearance of the periodic redshifts.

Section 5 explains the building of the spectrum of a quasar during the propagation of the light in the cloud of hydrogen which surrounds it.

## 2 The “Coherent Raman Effect on time-Incoherent Light”(CREIL)

The CREIL is very similar to the “Impulsive Stimulated Raman Scattering”(ISRS) discovered in 1968 (Giordmaine ) and commonly used to study radiation mechanics (Yan et al. , Weiner et al. , Dougherty et al. , Dhar et al. ).

Both effects are space-coherent, they do not blur the images. They are parametric, using matter as a ’catalyst’, leaving the molecules unchanged. They may be considered as a combination of two nearly simultaneous coherent Raman scatterings yielding virtually opposite transitions. The relaxation times of the matter used as a catalyst must be longer that the length of the light pulses; these relaxation times are the period of (at least) a quadrupole-allowed transition, and, in a gas, the collisional time.

The difference results from the use of ordinary time-incoherent light in the CREIL while the ISRS uses strong ultrashort laser pulses. In the ISRS, the strong laser flux has a qualitative effect: the Raman scattered amplitude which produces the frequency shifts (by interference with the exciting light beam), increases as a nearly quadratic function of the exciting flux amplitude. In the CREIL, at low power, all scatterings are linear: under the described conditions the coherently scattered amplitude is proportional to the exciting amplitude. This behavior, makes the frequency shift independant of the intensity.

The ISRS and the CREIL may be computed from the tensors of polarisability of the molecules. This is only slightly dependent on the exciting frequencies, so that, in a first approximation, the relative frequency shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu /\nu `$ does not depend on the exciting frequency; as the the redshifts produced by the CREIL do not depend on the intensities, the spectra are slightly distorted, but not blurred.

The length of the pulses of ordinary (thermal) incoherent light is of the order of 5 nanoseconds. To avoid an incoherent scattering, the mean molecular collision rate must be greater than 5 ns. This is only possible when the pressure is less than a few pascals. To produce a CREIL effect, the Raman resonance period must also be longer than 5 ns, that is a Raman resonance frequency in the MHz range (Moret-Bailly \[1998, 1998a, 2001\]). Both of these conditions increase the path length necessary for a measurable frequency shift. Because of these extremes, CREIL has never been measured in a laboratory. In space the pressure is generally low, and the light paths are long. The 2.7K background thermal radiation, provides a uniform low temperature exciting energy that is blueshifted (heated) during a CREIL event.

The other essential component in a CREIL event is a molecular catalyst with a low frequency quadrupolar resonance. Hydrogen is the most common element and exists in several allotropic states, mono-, di- and tri-atomic. Some polyatomic allotropes (H$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{2}{}^{}`$, H2D+, …) exhibit Raman hyperfine resonances close to 30 Mhz; although these molecules are not readily observed, they undoubtedly occur due to ultraviolet radiation and collisions. The reason they are not observed is very simple: these molecules are destroyed by the collisions with H2 so that their half-life is long only where the pressure is low enough to allow CREIL. A simultaneous absorption and CREIL makes absorption lines as wide as the redshift; therefore the lines of these molecules are so wide and weak that they cannot be seen. Atomic hydrogen also provides convenient transitions if it has been pumped by a Lyman transition so that hyperfine structures appear in non-zero quantum shells.

## 3 Propagation of light in atomic hydrogen.

Consider the propagation of light having a continuous spectrum (constant intensity, in particular in the Lyman region), in an homogeneous atmosphere of low pressure atomic hydrogen. In the fundamental state (principal quantum number n=1), the distance between the hyperfine levels (1420 MHz) is too large. In the other states, hyperfine transitions have convenient frequencies for the Raman allowed selection rule $`\mathrm{\Delta }F=1`$, for instance : 178 MHz in $`2s_{1/2}`$, 59 MHz in $`2p_{1/2}`$ and 24 MHz in $`2p_{3/2}`$.

Set $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$ the length of path for which the redshift is equal to the linewidth $`\delta \nu `$ of the Lyman $`\alpha `$ line, and assume that the atoms which are active in CREIL are mostly pumped by the Lyman $`\alpha `$ transition.

Set $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu `$ the redshift along the path $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$, which would result from a complete Lyman $`\alpha `$ absorption of the intensity $`I`$ , and suppose that, in a first approximation, the whole redshift results from the Lyman $`\alpha `$ absorption.

\- case a: If $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu `$ is larger than the Lyman $`\alpha `$ linewidth $`\delta \nu `$ , that is if $`I`$ is large enough, $`I`$ is not fully absorbed, only the constant intensity $`\mathrm{\Delta }I`$ which produces the redshift $`\delta \nu `$ is subtracted from $`I`$, that is from the spectrum while, by redshifting, the Lyman line crosses it. Thus, the contrast of lines which have been written into the spectrum is increased.

\- case b: If, on the contrary, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu `$ is lower than $`\delta \nu `$, the first approximation fails, a part of the redshift must result from other Lyman absorptions or other active atoms. Assuming a low redshifting power for these effects, a long path $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$ is necessary to get the redshift $`\delta \nu `$, so that the absorption of all lines is strong.

If the intensity $`I`$ is constant and high, except for a single absorption line, the redshift and the absorption are constant (case a), except at a coincidence of the line with a Lyman line; at this coincidence, the redshifting power decreases (strongly if case b is reached), so that the absorption of all lines of the gas is increased; similarly, a written emission line increases the redshifting power, so that the decrease of absorption appears as an emission; the coincidence by redshift of a line already written in the spectrum with a Lyman line writes the whole spectral pattern of the gas into the spectrum.

## 4 Building the periodic redshifts.

Suppose that a single Lyman pattern is written in the spectrum. The coincidence of the written, redshifted Lyman $`\beta `$ (resp. Lyman $`\gamma `$) line with the Lyman $`\alpha `$ line of the gas writes the Lyman pattern into the gas. Both patterns differ by the shift of frequencies $`\nu _{(\beta \mathrm{resp}.\gamma )}\nu _\alpha `$ of the $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ (resp. $`\gamma `$) lines. As in the standard computations the lines are considered as Lyman $`\alpha `$, the frequency shift is relative to the Lyman $`\alpha `$ frequency:

$$\begin{array}{c}z_{(\beta \mathrm{resp}.\gamma ),\alpha }=\frac{\nu _{(\beta \mathrm{resp}.\gamma )}\nu _\alpha }{\nu _\alpha }\hfill \\ \frac{11/(3^2\mathrm{resp}\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}4}^2)(11/2^2)}{11/2^2}\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
$$\begin{array}{c}z_{(\beta ,\alpha )}5/270.185230.0617;\hfill \\ z_{(\gamma ,\alpha )}=1/4=0.25=40.0625.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
Similarly $`z_{(\gamma ,\beta )}7/1080.065.`$ The redshifts appear, with a good approximation as the products of $`z_b=0.062`$ by an integer $`q`$.

The intensities of the Lyman lines are decreasing functions of the final principal quantum number $`n`$, so that the inscription of a pattern is better for $`q=3`$ than for $`q=4`$ and a fortiori for $`q=1`$.

Iterating, the coincidences of the shifted line frequencies with the Lyman $`\beta `$ or $`\alpha `$ frequencies build a tree, final values of $`q`$ being sums of the basic values 4, 3 and 1. Each step being characterised by the value of q, a generation of successive lines is characterised by successive values of $`q:q_1,q_2\mathrm{}`$ As the final redshift is $`q_Fz_b=(q_1+q_2+\mathrm{})z_b`$, the addition $`q_F=q_1+q_2+\mathrm{}`$ is both a symbolic representation of the successive elementary processes, and the result of these processes.

The name “tree” is not very good because ’branches’ of the tree may be ’stacked’ by coincidences of frequencies. A remarkable coincidence happens for $`q=10`$, this number being obtained by the effective coincidences deduced from:

$$10=3+3+4=3+4+3=4+3+3=3+3+3+1=\mathrm{}$$
(3)
$`q=10`$ is so remarkable that $`z_f=10z_b=0.62`$ may seem experimentally a value of $`z`$ more fundamental than $`z_b`$.

In these computations, the levels for a value of the principal quantum number $`n`$ larger than 4 are neglected by assuming that the corresponding transitions are too weak.

## 5 The model of quasar.

The accretion of hydrogen produces a high energy, thus a high temperature at, and close to the surface of the quasar. As this region is not a black body, the intensities of the emission lines is larger than the background intensities.

Close to the quasar, the atomic hydrogen if fully ionised, it does not produce redshifts, metal lines may be relatively sharp.

The broad lines:

If the star emits a strong electromagnetic field (radio-loud quasars) the ions are accelerated, so that the temperature remains high over a large distance, the hydrogen remains ionised until a pressure of an order of magnitude of a Pascal increases the collisional time enough to break the heating and ionising process.

If the star is radio-quiet, some neutral hydrogen remains at pressures larger than a Pascal: Lyman emission, then absorption lines appear. These lines are saturated, thus broad; their intensity corresponds, in a large part of their width, to an equilibrium of the temperatures of the gas and of the light. The existence of excited neutral atoms induces the redshift process described previously.

The “proximity effect”:

Between the emission and absorption regions, the gas has approximately the temperature of the light, so that no lines are written; however some atoms are excited, so that there is a region without visible lines over a redshift of the order of z=0.5: it is the proximity effect (Rauch ).

The Lyman forest and the “dust”:

The Lyman forest corresponds to the process described in section 4. If the redshift of the emission lines is large, a lot of energy is transferred to the thermal radiation; it seems that this thermal radiation is produced by hot dust.

The high redshifts:

The “intrinsic redshift”produced by the cloud which surrounds the quasar is much larger than the remaining redshift for which Hubble’s law is valuable; thus the quasar is not very far, it may be simply a neutron star.

## 6 Conclusion.

The present computation is a quantitative explanation of the frequencies observed in the spectra of the quasars. It requires only elementary physics, no unknown matter. The computation should be improved by an evaluation of the intensities.

The CREIL appears as a key in the study of the quasars. It should probably be helpful for other studies: for instance, some astrophysicists think that the dark matter needed to get the gravitational stability could be simply molecular hydrogen; with this hypothesis, it exists, by UV ionisation, some H$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{2}{}^{}`$ which, by collisions with H2, generates H3 and H$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{3}{}^{}`$; the hyperfine structures of H$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{2}{}^{}`$, H$`{}_{2}{}^{}D_{}^{+}`$ and H$`{}_{2}{}^{}D`$, the Rydberg levels of H3 provide quadrupolar resonances in the megahertz range, therefore a contribution of the CREIL not only to the “intrinsic”redshifts, but to the “cosmological”redshifts. A convenient, constant density of excited hydrogen in the intergalactic space gives Hubble’s law, without expansion of the Universe.

## 7 acknowledgements.

I thank very much Jerry Jensen who improved and corrected the manuscript, and Iain. R. McNab for a discussion on the allotropes of hydrogen.


text:
# The Casimir Energy Paradox of the QCD String

## 1 Puzzle in the QCD String Spectrum

A new analysis of the fine structure in the QCD string spectrum was presented at Lattice 2002 . Shortly afterwards, two papers were submitted for publication with focus on complementary aspects of the same problem .

Ref.  reported a comprehensive study of the QCD string spectrum as the quark–antiquark separation $`\mathrm{R}`$ was varied in the range $`0.2\mathrm{fm}<\mathrm{R}<3.0\mathrm{fm}`$ (Fig. 1). On the shortest length scale, the excitations were consistent with short distance physics without string imprint in the spectrum. A crossover region below 2 fm was identified with a dramatic rearrangement of the level orderings. On the largest length scale of 3 fm, the spectrum exhibited string-like excitations with asymptotic $`\pi /\mathrm{R}`$ string gaps split by a fine structure. It is quite remarkable that the torelon spectrum, which is free of end effects, exhibits a similar fine structure, as reported for the first time at this conference .

In a complementary study , the Casimir energy and the related effective conformal charge, $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{R})=12\mathrm{R}^3\mathrm{F}^{}(\mathrm{R})/(\pi (\mathrm{D}2))`$, were isolated where $`\mathrm{F}(\mathrm{R})`$ is the force between the static color sources and D is the space-time dimension of the gauge theory. With unparalleled accuracy, $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{R})`$ was determined for the gauge group SU(3) in three and four dimensions in the range $`0.2\mathrm{fm}<\mathrm{R}<1.0\mathrm{fm}`$ below the crossover region of the string spectrum. It was suggested that the rapid change of the effective conformal charge from what is expected in the running Coulomb law to $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{R})1`$ well below 1 fm is a signal for early bosonic string formation. The results are surprising because the scale $`\mathrm{R}`$ is not large compared with the expected width of the confining flux, and, perhaps more quantitatively, the string imprint in the Casimir energy is observed in the $`\mathrm{R}`$ range where the spectrum exhibits complex non-string behavior, as shown in Fig. 1.

After a long series of comprehensive studies, we report here new results in the three dimensional Z(2) gauge model and a simple resonance model for a better understanding of the seemingly paradoxical situation.

## 2 String Formation and $`𝐂_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐟𝐟}}`$ in Z(2) Model

References to earlier work on the three-dimensional Z(2) gauge model can be found in a recent paper on the finite temperature properties of the Z(2) string . The well-known dual transformation of the model to Ising variables facilitates very efficient simulations and analytic studies of the Casimir energy and the string spectrum in the $`\mathrm{\Phi }^4`$ field theory setting. This is illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3.

We applied the simple definition $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{R})=24\mathrm{R}^2(\mathrm{E}^{}(\mathrm{R})\sigma )/(\pi (\mathrm{D}2))`$ with the string tension $`\sigma `$ determined in high precision separate runs from the ground state of long torelons. The simulations in Fig. 2 are compared with the predictions of the Nambu-Goto (NG) string model and the analytic first term in the $`\mathrm{}`$ expansion of the equivalent $`\mathrm{\Phi }^4`$ field theory setting. The NG spectrum with fixed end boundary conditions in $`D`$ dimensions was first calculated in Ref.  with the result $`\mathrm{E}_\mathrm{N}=\sigma \mathrm{R}(1\frac{\mathrm{D}2}{12\sigma \mathrm{R}^2}\pi +\frac{2\pi \mathrm{N}}{\sigma \mathrm{R}^2})^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ where N=0 is the string ground state. Although there exists an inconsistency in the quantization of angular momentum rotations around the $`q\overline{q}`$ axis at finite $`\mathrm{R}`$ values unless $`\mathrm{D}=26`$, the problem asymptotically disappears in the $`\mathrm{R}\mathrm{}`$ limit . It has been expected that predictions for strings emerging from field theory and their effective bosonic string description at large $`\mathrm{R}`$ will be similar to that of the NG model with corrections which are increasingly important at smaller $`\mathrm{R}`$.

The field theory calculation of $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ includes the classical energy of the string-like soliton being formed and the sum of zero-point energies which are dominated by glueball scattering states in the bulk! The few stable and displaced “string-like” modes are also contributing. How scattering states might conspire to produce $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}1`$ is further illustrated below in a simple resonance model of massless scalar field theory. Our results are closer to the leading order field theory calculation and deviate substantially from the predictions of the NG string model, particularly at smaller $`\mathrm{R}`$ values. This differs from the tantalizing findings of Ref.  where simulations of the finite temperature Z(2) string were presented to be in agreement with the 1–loop NG string model. For further illustration, the first string excitation in Fig. 3 is compared with the NG model and its loop expansion which completely breaks down below 1 fm. The leading order field theory calculation, which does not assume string formation, accounts for the shape of the spectrum quite well.

## 3 Simple Resonance Model

Consider a massive scalar field in one space and one time dimension interacting with an external source J(x) according to the Lagrangian $`\mathrm{L}=\frac{1}{2}_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{M}^2\mathrm{\Phi }^2\mathrm{J}(\mathrm{x})\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$. The field is confined between two opaque barriers represented by repulsive delta-function potentials $`\mathrm{J}(\mathrm{x})=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{M}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{x})\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{x}\mathrm{L}))+`$ $`\lambda (\delta (\mathrm{x})+\delta (\mathrm{x}\mathrm{L}))`$ where $`\lambda `$ is tunable and the field is rendered massless inside a square well. The field eigenmodes $`\mathrm{E}_\mathrm{n}(\mathrm{L})`$ and $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{L})`$ can be calculated as shown in Fig. 4. There are only four bound ”string modes” for the two choices of $`\lambda `$. On the left side $`\lambda =10`$, $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}=0.99`$ and the sharp resonance spectrum is located at the expected string positions. On the right, $`\lambda =0`$ and the sharp resonances disappear from the bulk scattering state spectrum. Nevertheless, $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{eff}}=0.85`$ is only 15 percent off from the $`\mathrm{L}=\mathrm{}`$ limit. A hidden mechanism on phase shifts might keep the conformal charge close to what it would be for a perfect massless string spectrum trapped inside.

This work was supported by the U.S. DOE, Grant No. DE-FG03-97ER40546, the U.S. National Science Foundation under Award PHY-0099450 and the European Community’s Human Potential Programme, HPRN-CT-2000-00145.


text:
# Electromagnetic radiation produced by avalanches in the magnetization reversal of Mn12-Acetate

## Abstract

Electromagnetic radiation produced by avalanches in the magnetization reversal of Mn12-Acetate has been measured. Short bursts of radiation have been detected, with intensity significantly exceeding the intensity of the black-body radiation from the sample. The model based upon superradiance from inversely populated spin levels has been suggested.

Populations of spin levels in molecular nanomagnets can be easily manipulated by the magnetic field. For systems studied to date the distances between the levels may go up to $`0.5`$THz. Sources and detectors in this frequency range are scarce. Meantime the electromagnetic radiation in the range $`0.10.5`$THz is considered to be best for detecting small tumors and for security screening at the airports Mittleman . In this Letter we report experimental studies of the electromagnetic radiation from Mn12-Acetate, performed with the help of an InSb bolometer inside a SQUID magnetometer. Magnetic clusters Mn12-Ac have spin $`S=10`$ and high magnetic anisotropy that corresponds to a $`66`$K energy barrier between spin-up and spin-down states in zero field. The clusters form a centered tetragonal crystal lattice inside which they weakly interact through magnetic dipolar forces. At low temperature, due to the high anisotropy, a crystal of Mn12-Ac, can be prepared in a metastable spin state Sessoli . The crystals exhibit extraordinary staircase magnetic hysteresis Friedman  explained by resonant quantum spin tunneling. It also has been known for some time Paulsen  that at low temperature and high field-sweep rate, sufficiently large crystals exhibit an abrupt reversal of the magnetic moment. This effect has been attributed to a thermal avalanche in which the initial relaxation of the magnetization towards the direction of the field results in the release of heat that further accelerates relaxation. Direct measurements of the heat emission by Mn12-Ac crystals Fominaya , as well measurements of the magnetic relaxation in pulse fields Barco , supported this conjecture. The avalanches have long been considered as undesirable events that prevent experimentalists from studying spin tunneling in large crystals. Our interest to avalanches was motivated by the fact that they create a large inverse population of spin energy levels.

The experimental setup is schematically presented in Figure 1. The sample was prepared by assembling together 20 single crystals of Mn12-Ac of total volume $`V22`$mm3. The conventional composition, lattice structure, and magnetic properties of the crystals have been confirmed by chemical, infrared, X-ray diffraction methods, and by SQUID magnetometry. The crystals were glued together with their c-axes parallel to each other within a maximum five-degree misalignment. The assembly was placed inside a cylindrical waveguide, $`5`$mm in diameter, with the c-axis approximately parallel to the axis of the guide. The InSb bolometer was positioned inside the waveguide, $`13`$cm above the sample located at the center of the measuring area of the SQUID magnetometer. The cooling agent was helium gas maintained at $`1.8`$K at the locations of the sample and the bolometer. Before conducting measurements of the sample, we placed the bolometer inside the measuring area of the magnetometer and obtained the dependence of the resistance of the bolometer on temperature and the magnetic field. The voltage drop on the bolometer measured at a constant current goes down when it absorbs radiation. The spectral bandwidth of the commercial InSb bolometer is $`60`$GHz - $`3`$THz, and the response time when illuminated is less than $`1\mu `$s in the kelvin temperature range. To calibrate the bolometer response to the radiation, we used a heater that delivered measured heat pulses to the sample. The temperature of the sample was monitored by a thermometer in a thermal contact with the sample.

Figure 2A shows the magnetization curve obtained by sweeping the magnetic field between $`2`$T and $`2`$T at $`1.8`$K. For the sweep rate between $`5`$mT/s and $`27`$mT/s the avalanches reproducibly occur at $`B\pm 1.4`$T. At the time of the avalanche, the temperature of the crystals jumped by about $`2`$K, from $`1.8`$K to $`3.8`$K. Figure 2B shows two bursts of the radiation measured by the InSb bolometer during the total magnetization cycle at the field-sweep rate of $`27`$mT/s. These bursts have been observed in hundreds of hysteresis cycles and are completely reproducible in terms of their position and height. They coincide precisely with the occurrence of the avalanches. The time dependence of the burst is blown in Fig. 2C. Each burst is characterized by a steep decrease of the voltage drop on the bolometer within a time of the order of $`0.03`$s. It is followed by the slow increase of the voltage towards the noise level, which we interpreted as a thermal equilibration of the system. A similar equilibration has been observed after supplying a heat pulse to the sample. However, the short radiation burst preceding the equilibration appears to be a unique signature of the magnetization avalanche. The total magnetic energy released in the avalanche was $`B\mathrm{\Delta }M\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$mJ. Experimenting with heat pulses, we found that four times this energy (resulting in the $`12`$K temperature of the sample) was required to produce the bolometer signal of the level of the radiation burst from the avalanche.

The spin Hamiltonian of Mn12-Ac molecular cluster in the magnetic field applied along the c-axis, is

$$=DS_z^2FS_z^4bS_z+^{},$$
(1)
where $`𝐒`$ is the spin of the cluster, $`D=0.55`$K and $`F=1.1\times 10^3`$K are uniaxial anisotropy constants, $`b=g\mu _BB`$ is the reduced magnetic field (with $`B`$ being the actual field, $`g=1.94`$ being the gyromagnetic factor, and $`\mu _B`$ being the Bohr magneton), and $`^{}`$ contains smaller terms that do not commute with $`S_z`$ (see for details Ref. Hill-Kent ). The energy levels of (1) are given by

$$E_m=Dm^2Fm^4bm,$$
(2)
with $`m`$ being the magnetic quantum number for the spin of the molecule $`𝐒`$. At $`b=kD`$, with $`k=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$, the levels $`m`$ and $`m^{}`$ satisfying $`m+m^{}=k`$ are nearly degenerate, as is illustrated in Figure 3 for $`k=3`$. This resonance approximately corresponds to the field at which the avalanches have been observed.

For an individual molecule the rate of the spontaneous decay from the level $`m`$ to the level $`m+1`$ with the emission of light is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=\frac{2g^2\mu _B^2}{3\mathrm{}^4c^3}(S+m)(Sm+1)(E_mE_{m+1})^3.$$
(3)
With the help of Eq. (1) one finds that at $`k=3`$ the frequencies of the corresponding radiation are between $`f80`$GHz for the $`m=1m=2`$ transition and $`f350`$GHz for the $`m=9m=10`$ transition, that is, in the range of the InSb bolometer. The corresponding wavelengths are between $`3.8`$mm for the $`m=1m=2`$ transition and $`0.85`$mm for the $`m=9m=10`$ transition. At $`k=3`$ and $`m=1`$ the rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ of Eq. (3) is of the order of $`10^7`$s-1, that is, the lifetime of the corresponding excited state with respect to the photon emission is of the order of one year. Other individual magnetic dipole transitions in Mn12-Ac have similarly low rates. However, as first noticed by Dicke Dicke , $`N_m`$ dipoles confined within a volume of size $`d`$ which is small compared to the wavelength of the radiation $`\lambda `$, cannot radiate independently. At $`d<\lambda `$ a spontaneous phase locking of the atomic dipoles occurs that results in the coherent radiation burst with the power $`P_{SR}N_m^2`$ emitted within a time of the order of $`\tau _{SR}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/N_m\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$. This phenomenon, known as the superradiance or superfluorescence, has been widely observed in gases on increasing the concentration of the gas confined within a volume of dimensions $`d<\lambda `$ (see reviews Haroche-Men'shikov ). In our case the condition $`d<\lambda `$ is fulfilled at least for the first few transitions starting from $`m=1`$. For $`m=1`$ the superradiance rate would then be $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SR}=1/\tau _{SR}=N_1\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$, where $`N_1N\mathrm{exp}(U_{eff}/T)`$ is the population of the $`m=1`$ level, $`N`$ is the total number of Mn12-Ac molecules available for the relaxation and $`U_{eff}`$ is the effective energy barrier between the two wells shown in Fig. 3. For our sample, $`N\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}6}\times 10^{18}`$ and $`U_{eff}47`$K. The latter corresponds to the distance from $`m=10`$ to the $`m=4,1`$ resonance that dominates the magnetic relaxation at $`k3`$ and $`T=3.8`$K. Correspondingly, $`\mathrm{exp}(U_{eff}/T)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}\times 10^6`$ and $`N_1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\times 10^{13}`$. The rate of the electromagnetic decay of the $`m=1`$ state then increases from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^7`$s-1 to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SR}=N_1\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\times 10^6`$s-1. The total duration of the relaxation due to the continuous supply of the population of the $`m=1`$ level is given by $`\tau =\tau _{SR}\mathrm{exp}(U_{eff}/T)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.1}`$s, which is in a remarkable agreement with experiment.

In our model the relaxation from the upper levels in the right well in Fig. 3 is dominated by the emission of photons, while at the lower levels it must switch to the emission of phonons due to the violation of the condition $`d<\lambda `$ at the bottom of the well. This condition is one of the two basic requirements for the superrradiance to occur. The other condition is that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SR}`$ exceeds the rate of decoherence of the phases of the magnetic dipoles. In our case this decoherence is provided by spin-phonon transitions at a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{phon}<\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^6`$s-1 GC . Remarkably, the superradiance rate computed above, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SR}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\times 10^6`$s-1, indeed, exceeds the phonon rate. Given the fact that our model also provides the correct duration of the avalanche, this is hardly a coincidence. It is, therefore, conceivable that the magnetization avalanche is an electromagnetic phenomenon to the same degree as it is a phonon runaway. This conjecture is supported by the experimental fact that avalanches only occur when the total number of molecules in a crystal assembly exceeds a critical value, $`N\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^{18}`$, needed to ignite superradiance.

The work at the University of Barcelona has been supported by the European Commission through Contract No. IST-2001-33186 and by the Spanish Government through Contract No. MAT-2002-03144. The work of E.M.C. has been supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation through Grant No. EIA-0310517.