text:
# Vortex Stability Near the Surface of a Bose-Einstein Condensate

## I Introduction

Since the experimental achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in confined dilute gases and the observation of vortex lattices mad ; mad2 ; haj ; ram ; abo ; abo2 ; hod , much interest has been devoted to the formation, stabilization, and dynamics of vortices mad ; mad2 ; butt ; castin ; dalfovo ; feder ; fetter ; fetter2 ; matt ; mad3 ; anatoly ; james1 ; james2 . Vortices have been created in Bose-Einstein condensates using two different techniques. The first is a phase imprinting technique matt  and the second is a rotating harmonic trap technique mad ; haj ; abo ; hod . In the latter technique, a rotating laser beam superposed on the magnetic trap creates an anisotropic confining potential that stirs the condensate. Energetically stable vortices are generated if the rotation frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the harmonic trap is greater than a certain critical frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ baym ; dalfovo2 ; anatoly ; feder2 .

As a mechanism for vortex nucleation, it was suggested that vortices are created from the excitation of low-energy surface modes of the Bose-Einstein condensate dalfovo3 ; isos ; james1 ; mur ; tsu . For rotational frequencies $`\mathrm{\Omega }<\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$, moving vortices are created in the ultra-dilute region of the condensate. Their effect is observed at the surface of the condensate only as a surface wave gardiner ; james1 ; james2 ; usama . Upon increasing the rotation frequency, the vortices approach the surface of the condensate. At the critical frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$, the vortices enter the condensate, i.e., nucleate. This was supported by Penckwitt et. al gardiner  with a simulation to the growth of the condensate from a rotating thermal cloud. It was also supported by Anglin james1 ; james2  who showed, using a boundary layer approach, that the energy barrier to vortex penetration disappears at the Landau critical velocity for surface modes.

This picture for vortex nucleation will be the main focus of the present paper. Using a (rather simple) variational approach to the problem, we investigate the energetic stability of a vortex moving near the surface of the condensate. We verify the above picture by calculating the energy in terms of the distance of the vortex core from the surface $`x_0`$, the rotation frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and the center-of-mass speed of the core of the vortex $`v_0`$. We also calculate the critical frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ at which the vortex enters the condensate.

In terms of variables local to the surface of large condensates, the surface can be approximated by a plane and the harmonic trapping potential can be approximated by a linear potential emil ; usama . We start by writing the Gross-Pitaevskii energy functional of a rotating condensate in this planar geometry. Using this energy functional with an appropriate trial wavefunction we calculate the energy of a vortex moving in a direction parallel to the surface of the condensate. Then we minimize the energy with respect to the position of the core of the vortex. The resulting equilibrium position of the vortex core is a function of the rotation frequency, the speed of the vortex, and the distance between the vortices in the case when more than a single vortex exists. This allows for a detailed investigation of the stability of the vortex in terms of these parameters.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we introduce the energy functional of a rotating condensate in the planar geometry. In Sec. III we use this energy functional to calculate the energy of a moving vortex as described above. In Sec. IV we investigate the stability of the vortex in terms of the parameters involved. We end in Sec. V by a summary and discussion of our results.

## II Energy Functional of the Surface of a rotating condensate

In this section we write the Gross-Pitaevskii equation of a rotating condensate in terms of parameters local to the surface of the condensate. Then we construct an energy functional that corresponds to this equation.

The time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation, that describes the behavior of the order parameter $`\psi (𝐫,t)`$, is given by

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}^2+V(𝐫,t)+g|\psi (𝐫,t)|^2\mu \right]\psi (𝐫,t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\psi (𝐫,t).$$
(1)
Here $`V(𝐫,t)`$ is a time-dependent harmonic trapping potential with time-dependence corresponding to rotating the axes of the trapping potential. The effective two-particle interaction $`g`$ is proportional to the $`s`$-wave scattering length $`a`$ according to $`g=4\pi a\mathrm{}^2/m`$, where $`m`$ is the mass of an atom, and $`\mu `$ is the equilibrium chemical potential.

We consider the trap axes in the $`x`$\- and $`y`$-directions to be rotated counter clockwise around the $`z`$-axis with angular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The time-dependence of the trapping potential can be removed by writing the Gross-Pitaevskii equation in the rotating frame

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}^2+V(𝐫)+g|\psi (𝐫,t)|^2𝛀𝐋\mu \right]\psi (𝐫,t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\psi (𝐫,t),$$
(2)
where $`𝐋`$ is the angular momentum operator. The trapping potential, which for simplicity is taken to be isotropic, is given by

$$V(𝐫)=\frac{1}{2}m\omega _0^2r^2,$$
(3)
where $`\omega _0`$ is the characteristic frequency of the trap. Noting that $`𝛀𝐋=i\mathrm{}𝛀(𝐫\times \mathbf{})=i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times 𝐫)\mathbf{}`$, the Gross-Pitaevskii equation takes the form

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}^2+V(𝐫)+g|\psi (𝐫,t)|^2+i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times 𝐫)\mathbf{}\mu \right]\psi (𝐫,t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\psi (𝐫,t).$$
(4)
Next, we express the Gross-Pitaevskii equation in terms of the surface local coordinate $`𝐫^{}`$ and surface local velocity $`𝐯^{}`$ via a position transformation

$$𝐫=R\widehat{𝐫}+𝐫^{},$$
(5)
where $`R=\sqrt{2\mu /m\omega _0^2}`$ is the Thomas-Fermi radius of the condensate. The Gross-Pitaevskii equation takes the form

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}^2+V(R\widehat{𝐫}+𝐫^{})+g|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2+i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times 𝐫^{})\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}+i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times R\widehat{𝐫})\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}\mu \right]\psi (𝐫^{},t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\psi (𝐫^{},t).$$
(6)
The term $`i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times R\widehat{𝐫})\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}`$ can be eliminated by a Galilean transformation to a frame of reference that is moving with a speed $`𝛀\times R\widehat{𝐑}`$ fetter5 . Thus, the Gross-Pitaevskii equation becomes

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}^2+V(R\widehat{𝐫}+𝐫^{})+g|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2+i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times 𝐫^{})\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}\mu \right]\psi (𝐫^{},t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\psi (𝐫^{},t).$$
(7)
For distances close to the surface of the condensate, such that $`r^{}R`$, the trapping potential can be approximated by a linear function as emil

$`V(R\widehat{𝐫}+𝐫^{})`$ $``$ $`V(R)+\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}V(R\widehat{𝐫}+𝐫^{})|_{𝐫^{}=\mathrm{𝟎}}𝐫^{}`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`V(R)+m\omega _0^2R\widehat{𝐫}𝐫^{}`$
$`=`$ $`V(R)+Fx,`$
where we have defined the force constant $`F=m\omega _0^2R`$ and the surface local coordinate $`x=\widehat{𝐫}𝐫^{}`$, which is normal to the surface of the condensate. The coordinates of the $`y`$ and $`z`$-components of $`𝐫^{}`$ are therefore parallel to the surface. In this plane geometry the Gross-Pitaevskii equation takes the form

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}^2+Fx+g|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2+i\mathrm{}(𝛀\times 𝐫^{})\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}\right]\psi (𝐫^{},t)=i\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\psi (𝐫^{},t).`$ (9)
The first and the last terms on the left hand side of this equation can be combined as a complete square, which results in the following form for the Gross-Pitaevskii equation

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left(\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}{\displaystyle \frac{im}{\mathrm{}}}𝛀\times 𝐫^{}\right)^2+Fx+g|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m(𝛀\times 𝐫^{})^2\right]\psi (𝐫^{},t)=i\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\psi (𝐫^{},t).`$ (10)
This equation can be derived by differentiating the following lagrangian with respect to $`\psi ^{}(𝐫^{},t)`$

$$L[\psi ,\psi ^{}]=𝑑𝐫^{}\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\left(\psi ^{}\frac{\psi }{t}\psi \frac{\psi ^{}}{t}\right)E[\psi ,\psi ^{}],$$
(11)
where $`E[\psi ,\psi ^{}]`$ is given by

$`E[\psi ,\psi ^{}]={\displaystyle 𝑑𝐫^{}\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left|\left(\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}\frac{im}{\mathrm{}}𝛀\times 𝐫^{}\right)\psi (𝐫^{},t)\right|^2+Fx|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2+\frac{1}{2}g|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^4\frac{1}{2}m(𝛀\times 𝐫^{})^2|\psi (𝐫^{},t)|^2\right]}.`$ (12)
## III energy of a moving vortex near the surface of the condensate

We consider a vortex with axis parallel to the surface of the condensate, say parallel to the $`z`$-direction. The core of the vortex is located at a distance $`x=x_0`$ from the Thomas-Fermi surface of the condensate and is moving in the positive $`y`$-direction with a speed $`v_0`$. This is depicted in the schematic figure Fig. 1. For simplicity, we consider a vortex with a small core size such that the equilibrium condensate density can be considered constant over distances of the order of the core size.

The wavefunction of the condensate that contains such a vortex can thus be written as the product of the wave functions of the condensate that contains no vortex and the wave function of the vortex with an appropriate phase factor. The phase factor should take into account both the superfluid and the center of mass velocities of the vortex. Specifically, we write the wave function of the vortex as

$$\psi (𝐫^{},t)=\sqrt{n_0(x)}\chi (xx_0,yv_0t)\mathrm{exp}[i\mathrm{\Phi }(xx_0,yv_0t)].$$
(13)
Here, $`n_0(x)=|\psi _0(x)|^2`$ is the density profile of the vortex-free condensate at equilibrium. The equilibrium wavefunction $`\psi _0(x)`$ obeys Eq. (10) after setting $`𝛀`$ and $`\psi /t`$ to zero, namely

$$\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+Fx+g|\psi _0(x)|^2\right]\psi _0(x)=0.$$
(14)
The normalized density profile of the vortex is given by $`\chi ^2(xx_0,yv_0t)`$, where we assume for $`\chi (xx_0,yv_0t)`$ the trial function fetter\_old

$$\chi (xx_0,yv_0t)=\frac{\rho }{\sqrt{2\xi ^2+\rho ^2}},$$
(15)
whith $`\rho =\sqrt{(xx_0)^2+(yv_0t)^2}`$, and $`\xi =1/\sqrt{8\pi an_0(x_0)}`$ is the coherence length of the condensate calculated at $`x_0`$.

The phase of the vortex $`\mathrm{\Phi }(xx_0,yv_0t)`$ must satisfy

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{m}}\mathbf{}_𝐫^{}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{m\rho }}\widehat{\mathit{\varphi }}+v_0\widehat{𝐲}`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{m\rho }}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \widehat{𝐱}+(v_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{m\rho }}\mathrm{sin}\varphi )\widehat{𝐲},`$
where $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$ are the polar coordinates in the $`x`$-$`y`$ plane with the origin being at the core of the vortex as shown in Fig. 1. This equation expresses the fact that the velocity has two components: the superfluid velocity $`\mathrm{}\widehat{\mathit{\varphi }}/m\rho `$ associated with the vortex, and the center-of-mass velocity $`v_0\widehat{𝐲}`$.

In Appendix A, we show that using the trial function Eq. (13) in the energy functional Eq. (12), the energy of the vortex per unit length along the axis of the vortex takes the form

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left((\mathbf{}\chi )^2+\frac{\chi ^2}{\rho ^2}\right)+\frac{1}{2}gn_0(x_0)\chi ^4\right]}`$ (17)
$`+`$ $`n_0(x_0)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}mv_0^2+\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }m\mathrm{\Omega }x_0v_0+Fx_0\right]{\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\chi ^2}.`$
The quantity of interest is the extra energy associated with the presence of the vortex book . Therefore, we have to subtract the vortex energy given by the last equation from the energy of a vortex-free system that contains the same number of atoms as the system with the vortex. The energy density of the vortex-free system is only that of the mean-field interaction, the trapping potential, and the energy associated with the rotation, namely

$$E_{\mathrm{vf}}=\frac{1}{2}gn_0^2(x_0)+Fx_0n_0(x_0)+\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }n_0(x_0),$$
(18)
where the subscript “vf” in $`E_{\mathrm{vf}}`$ denotes vortex free. To fulfil the requirement that the number of atoms $`\nu `$ in both systems must be the same, we calculate the energy of both systems within a cylindrical region of axis normal to the $`x`$-$`y`$ plane and circular cross-section of radius $`b`$. The radius $`b`$ must be, on the one hand, larger than several coherence lengths $`\xi `$ in order to incorporate all density variations associated with the presence of the vortex. On the other hand, $`b`$ must be much smaller than the length over which the density changes significantly in order not to violate the local-density approximation used to derive calculate the energies Eqs. (17) and (18). The number of atoms per unit length of the axis of the cylinder in the system that contains the vortex can be expressed as

$`\nu `$ $`=n_0(x_0)`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^b}2\pi \rho 𝑑\rho \chi ^2`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`\pi b^2n_0(x_0)n_0(x_0){\displaystyle _0^b}2\pi \rho 𝑑\rho \left(1\chi ^2\right).`$
Using this number to calculate the average density as $`n_0(x_0)=\nu ^2/\pi b^2`$, the energy per unit length of the vortex-free system is given by

$$E_{\mathrm{vf}}\frac{1}{2}\pi b^2gn_0^2(x_0)gn_0^2(x_0)_0^b2\pi \rho 𝑑\rho (1\chi ^2)+\left(Fx_0n_0(x_0)+\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }n_0(x_0)\right)2\pi \rho 𝑑\rho \chi ^2.$$
(20)
In this equation we ignore terms that are second order in $`1\chi ^2`$ in the mean-field energy book .

Subtracting Eq. (20) from Eq. (17), we obtain the energy associated with the presence of the vortex per unit length of its axis:

$`E_\mathrm{v}`$ $`=`$ $`n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left((\mathbf{}\chi )^2+\frac{\chi ^2}{\rho ^2}\right)+\frac{1}{2}gn_0(x_0)(\chi ^21)^2\right]}`$ (21)
$`+`$ $`n_0(x_0)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}mv_0^2m\mathrm{\Omega }x_0v_0\right]{\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\chi ^2}+\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆(\chi ^21)}+Fx_0n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆(\chi ^21)}.`$
We recognize the first line of this equation as the internal energy of the vortex book .

## IV Stability analysis

In this section we consider an infinite string of equidistant moving vortices. The string is parallel to the surface of the condensate, say along the $`y`$-axis, and the vortices move in that direction with a constant speed $`v_0`$. The distance between two adjacent vortices $`\lambda `$ is large enough such that the cores do not overlap. In this case, the energy of the string of vortices per unit length of the string is just the energy of one vortex given by Eq. (21) times the number of vortices per unit length. Therefore, it is sufficient to perform the analysis by calculating the energy of a single vortex. This energy will be a function of $`\lambda `$ that corresponds to a certain number of vortices per unit length.

In the following, we investigate the dependence of the equilibrium position of the vortex on the rotation frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, the distance between two adjacent vortices $`\lambda `$, and the vortex speed $`v_0`$.

For convenience, we rewrite Eq. (21) in terms of scaled quantities as follows:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}=\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_\mathrm{v}+\nu _1\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)(\stackrel{~}{v}_0^22\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\stackrel{~}{x}_0\stackrel{~}{v}_0)+\nu _2\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)(2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}+\stackrel{~}{x}_0),$$
(22)
where $`\nu _1=2\pi _0^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\rho }\chi ^2`$, $`\nu _2=2\pi _0^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\rho }(\chi ^21)`$, and

$$\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_\mathrm{v}=2\pi \stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)_0^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\rho }\left[\left((\mathbf{}\chi )^2+\frac{\chi ^2}{\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)(\chi ^21)^2\right],$$
(23)
is the internal energy of the vortex. Here, the gradient operator is with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{𝝆}`$. Length is scaled to the characteristic length at the surface of the condensate $`\delta `$ defined by $`\mathrm{}^2/2m\delta ^2=F\delta `$. The vortex velocity $`v_0`$ is scaled to $`\mathrm{}/m\delta `$, the angular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is scaled to $`\mathrm{}/m\delta ^2`$, the density $`n_0`$ is scaled to $`8\pi a\delta ^2`$, and the energies $`E_\mathrm{v}`$ and $`ϵ_\mathrm{v}`$ are scaled to $`(\mathrm{}^2/2m\delta ^2)/(8\pi a/\delta )=((2R/a_0)^{1/3}/16\pi )\mathrm{}\omega _0`$. In these dimensionless variables, Eq. (14), takes the form

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{d\stackrel{~}{x}^2}+\stackrel{~}{x}+\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)\right]\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)}=0.$$
(24)
Furthermore, the vortex profile $`\chi `$, defined in Eq. (15), takes the form

$$\chi =\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}{\sqrt{2/\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2}}.$$
(25)
Since the distance between two adjacent vortices is $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$, the upper limit of the integrations in the expressions for $`\nu _1`$, $`\nu _2`$, and Eq. (23) is taken as $`\stackrel{~}{b}=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }/2`$.

We start by minimizing the vortex energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ with respect to the vortex linear speed $`\stackrel{~}{v}_0`$. This gives simply $`\stackrel{~}{v}_0=\stackrel{~}{x}_0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, which is similar to the relation between the center of mass speed and the angular frequency of a rolling rigid wheel of radius $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$. Substituting this value for $`\stackrel{~}{v}_0`$ in Eq. (22), the energy of the vortex becomes

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}=\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_\mathrm{v}\nu _1\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)\stackrel{~}{x}_0^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2+\nu _2\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)(2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}+\stackrel{~}{x}_0).$$
(26)
The equilibrium position of the vortex $`\stackrel{~}{x}_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ is obtained by minimizing the energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ with respect to the vortex distance from the surface $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$, for a given set of the parameters $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$. The main focus will be on the behavior of the equilibrium position $`\stackrel{~}{x}_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ as a function of the parameters $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$. In particular, we are interested in situations when the vortex enters the condensate. The Thomas-Fermi surface, defined by $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0=0`$, is to be taken as the boundary for considering the vortices inside or outside the condensate. Vortices located in the region $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0>0`$ are to be considered out of the condensate, while those in the region $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0<0`$ are considered inside the condensate.

To calculate the vortex energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$, we first need to solve Eq. (24) for $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$. As a first approximation we use the Thomas-Fermi approximation for the condensate density $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$. This is obtained by neglecting the first term in Eq. (24), namely

$$\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{x}_0,& \stackrel{~}{x}_0<0\\ 0,& \stackrel{~}{x}_0>0\end{array}.$$
(27)
The Thomas-Fermi approximation is accurate only in the deep region of the condensate $`\stackrel{~}{x}_00`$. Thus, the results we obtain here using this approximation will be accurate only in that region. From Eq. (25) we see that the core size of the vortex depends on the condensate density. This will complicate the dependence of the energy on the vortex location. For simplicity, we take the size of the core to be constant and is equal to its value at the Thomas-Fermi surface. Substituting for $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$ from Eq. (27) in Eq. (26), the vortex energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ becomes a cubic function in $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$, which can be written as

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}=(\alpha _1+2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\nu _2)\stackrel{~}{x}_0+(\alpha _2\nu _2)\stackrel{~}{x}_0^2+\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2\stackrel{~}{x}_0^3$$
(28)
where

$$\alpha _1=2\pi _0^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\rho }\left((\mathbf{}\chi )^2+\frac{\chi ^2}{\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2}\right),$$
(29)
and

$$\alpha _2=2\pi _0^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\rho }\frac{1}{2}(\chi ^21)^2.$$
(30)
To be able to extract the main features of this energy expression, we point out some properties of the numbers $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ and the parameters $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$. The number $`\nu _1`$ is always positive since it corresponds to the number of atoms within a circle of radius $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ centered at the axis of a vortex that is embedded in a uniform background of density $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0=1`$. The number $`\nu _2`$ is always negative since it is the difference between the number of atoms in the vortex $`\nu _1`$ and the number of atoms in a vortex-free background. The parameter $`\alpha _1`$ corresponds to the kinetic energy due to the gradient of the wavefunction of the vortex. The parameter $`\alpha _2`$ corresponds to the mean-field interaction energy. It should be also noted that Eq. (28) is defined only for negative values of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$.

With this in mind, we conclude from Eq. (28) that $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ starts linearly for small $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ with a slope $`(\alpha _1+2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\nu _2)`$ that, depending on the value of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, can be either positive or negative. For large $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ the energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ behaves as $`\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2\stackrel{~}{x}_0^3`$ which is large and negative. If the initial slope $`(\alpha _1+2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\nu _2)`$ is positive, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ will have only a local maximum at some value of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$. If, on the other hand, the slope is negative, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ may have a local minimum in addition to a local maximum. If the negative value of the slope is large enough, the value of $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ at the local maximum can vanish or even disappear. To be more explicit, we rewrite Eq. (28) as

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}=\stackrel{~}{x}_0\left[(\stackrel{~}{x}_0x_1)(\stackrel{~}{x}_0x_2)\right],$$
(31)
where

$$x_1=\frac{\alpha _2\nu _2}{2\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2}+\frac{1}{2\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2}\sqrt{(\alpha _2\nu _2)^2+4\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2(\alpha _1+2\nu _2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }})},$$
(32)
and

$$x_2=\frac{\alpha _2\nu _2}{2\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2}\frac{1}{2\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2}\sqrt{(\alpha _2\nu _2)^2+4\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2(\alpha _1+2\nu _2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }})},$$
(33)
are two of the three roots of Eq. (31). The value of $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ at the local maximum vanishes when $`x_1=x_2`$. This can be satisfied if

$$(\alpha _2\nu _2)^2+4\nu _1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2(\alpha _1+2\nu _2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }})=0,$$
(34)
which is the condition that gives the critical frequency $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_c`$ at which the height of the energy barrier for vortex nucleation vanishes.

The expression for $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ is plotted in Fig. 2 as a function of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ for different values of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ and one value of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$. In addition to the above-mentioned properties of the energy curve, the figure shows that the height of the barrier decreases with increasing $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. At a certain value of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ the height of the barrier vanishes and the vortex can enter the condensate. For the value of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ used in this figure, we find that, at $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}=0.5`$, the height of the barrier vanishes. This critical value of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ is indeed equal to the real root of Eq. (34).

Since the Thomas-Fermi approximation, used here, is not accurate at the surface, we will not attempt to calculate the critical frequency at which the vortex enters the condensate. This is to be investigated next where we use the exact density profile of the condensate.

For a more accurate treatment of the problem, we repeat the above calculation using the numerical solution of Eq. (24) instead of the Thomas-Fermi one. We start by solving numerically Eq. (24) for $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$, and then using this result in Eq. (25) to calculate $`\chi `$, where the coherence length $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }`$ depends on $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$ and is not taken to be constant as in the above calculation. These values of $`\stackrel{~}{n}_0(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)`$ and $`\chi `$ are then used to calculate $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ from Eq. (26). Similar to the above result obtained using the Thomas-Fermi approximation, we find that $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ has a local minimum and a local maximum, and tends to $`\mathrm{}`$ as $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0\mathrm{}`$.

In Fig. 3 we plot the energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{v}`$ as a function of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ for different values of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. This figure is to be compared with Fig. 4 of Ref. james2  and Fig. 5 of Ref. fetter2 . The main feature of Figs. 2 and 3, which is that an energy barrier for vortex nucleation exists and that the height of the barrier decreases with increasing $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, agrees with the above-mentioned two figures. However, a detailed comparison is not possible for the following reasons. In Fig. 4 of Ref. james2  the energy is calculated in the outer region of the condensate, which means that it is accurate only for large distances away from the Thomas-Fermi surface. In Fig. 5 of Ref. fetter2  the energy is calculated using the Thomas-Fermi approximation and therefore is accurate only inside the condensate. The present calculation is valid in the region near the surface of the condensate from both sides. Thus, Fig. 3 presents a calculation of the energy in a region where both calculations of Refs. james2  and fetter2  are not applicable.

In Fig. 4 we plot the position of the local minimum of the energy and the height of the energy barrier as a function of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. Several curves are plotted corresponding to different values of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$. Fig. 4(a) shows that the vortex approaches the surface when $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ is increased. To enter the condensate, the energy barrier has to vanish. Fig. 4(b) shows that the energy barrier does indeed vanish for a certain value of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. This value is to be considered as the critical value $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_c`$ at which the vortex nucleates.

Now, we can compare our predictions for the critical frequency at which the vortex nucleates with those observed experimentally. To that end, we need to express $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_c`$ in terms of the harmonic trap frequency $`\omega _0`$ for a spherical condensate. This is readily obtained by noticing that the characteristic length scale at the surface of the condensate $`\delta `$ is related to the Thomas-Fermi radius of the condensate through $`\delta =(\mathrm{}^2/2mF)^{1/3}=(a_0/2R)^{1/3}a_0`$, where $`a_0=\sqrt{\mathrm{}/m\omega _0}`$. Using this relation, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ can be expressed in terms of $`\omega _0`$ as $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}=(\mathrm{\Omega }/\omega _0)(a_0/2R)^{2/3}`$, which simply leads to $`\mathrm{\Omega }=(2R/a_0)^{2/3}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\omega _0`$.

In the experiment of the ENS group mad , a single vortex was created in about $`1\times 10^5`$ atoms of a <sup>87</sup>Rb condensate at a rotating frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2\pi \times 147`$ Hz. The magnetic trap used was axially symmetric with axial trap frequency $`\omega _z=2\pi \times 11.7`$ Hz and radial trap frequency $`\omega _{}=2\pi \times 219`$ Hz. The scattering length is taken as $`a=5.8`$nm. For these parameters $`R2.1a_0`$ and $`(2R/a_0)^{2/3}2.6`$, where we have used $`a_0=(\mathrm{}/m(\omega _{}^2\omega _z)^{1/3})^{1/2}`$. For a single vortex the value of $`b`$ is half the circumference of the condensate, namely $`b2.1\pi a_010.5\delta `$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=2\stackrel{~}{b}`$, the lowest curve of Fig. 4(a) and the left most curve of Fig. 4(b) correspond to the case of a single vortex. For the latter curve the height of the barrier vanishes at $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_c0.34`$. (Notice that this corresponds to the number obtained above using the Thomas-Fermi approximation, namely $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_c0.5`$). Thus, according to our calculation, the critical frequency for vortex nucleation is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c/\omega _0=0.88`$. This is to be compared with the experimental number $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c/\omega _{}=147/219=0.68`$. Notice that we consider $`\omega _0`$ to correspond to $`\omega _{}`$ since in the experiment the axis of rotation is the $`z`$-axis. Taking into account the approximations that we have used, we consider this agreement to be reasonable. One possible reason for the disagreement is that we have taken the core of the vortex to be small compared to the distance over which the density of the condensate changes significantly. This approximation is accurate only in the deep region of the condensate and not close to the Thomas-Fermi surface or away from it. Furthermore, our criterion for vortex nucleation may be too restrictive since, even with a nonzero barrier height, as shown in Fig. 4(b), the vortex can tunnel through the barrier and thus nucleate at a frequency which is less than that obtained above.

## V conclusion

We have written down the energy functional of a rotating Bose-Einstein condensate in terms of variables local to its surface. Using a variational ansatz, we have calculated the energy of a single vortex moving at the surface of the condensate. This energy was used to investigate the energetic stability of the vortex in terms of the rotation frequency of the confining potential. Upon increasing the rotation frequency, the vortex approaches the surface of the condensate. At a critical rotation frequency, the vortex crosses the surface of the condensate and enters it.

The local-density approximation was used to simplify the calculations and lead to analytical results in the Thomas-Fermi limit. This approximation is accurate only in the interior of the condensate and not near the Thomas-Fermi surface or away from it. The critical frequency obtained using this approximation is thus not expected to be accurate. Therefore, we solve the problem numerically including kinetic energy effects at the surface. This leads to more accurate values for the critical frequency that compare reasonably with experiment. It should be also noted that our criterion for vortex nucleation, which is requiring that the energy barrier vanish, may be too restrictive. When the height of the energy barrier is nonzero but small enough, the vortex can tunnel through it and thus nucleate at a rotation frequency that is less than the one we calculated in the previous section. In this sense, our calculated critical frequency may be regarded as an upper bound to the vortex nucleation frequency.

## Appendix A Details of the energy Calculation

In this Appendix we present details for the derivation of Eq. (17) from the energy functional Eq. (12) using the trial wave function Eq. (13) for a moving vortex.

Since the vortex axis is parallel to the $`z`$-axis and the vortex is moving in the $`y`$-direction, the nontrivial contributions to the energy arise only from integrating over $`x`$ and $`y`$. Therefore, we calculate the energy of the vortex per unit length of the $`z`$-direction, which means that we have to perform only integrals in the $`x`$-$`y`$ plane. It is, thus convenient to shift the origin of $`𝐫^{}`$ from the surface of the condensate to the core of the vortex and to express the integral of energy functional in the polar coordinates $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$. Explicitly, we make the transformation $`𝐫^{}=x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆`$.

The kinetic energy contribution reads

$$E_k=𝑑𝝆\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left|\left(\mathbf{}\frac{im}{\mathrm{}}𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\right)\psi (\rho ,\varphi )\right|^2,$$
(35)
where, here and through out this appendix, the gradient term is with respect to $`𝝆`$. Inserting the trial function Eq. (13) in this equation we obtain

$$E_k\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}n_0(x_0)𝑑𝝆\left|\left(\mathbf{}\frac{im}{\mathrm{}}𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\right)\chi (\rho )\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho )\right)\right|^2.$$
(36)
Here, we have employed the approximation that the condensate equilibrium density $`n_0(x)`$ is constant over distances of the order of the coherence length. For this approximation to be valid, the upper limit of the integration over $`\rho `$ must be much less than the distance over which the condensate density changes significantly. In this case we can approximate $`n_0(x)`$ by its value at $`x_0`$ and take it out of the integration. Furthermore, the last equation can be simplified to

$`E_k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\left|\mathbf{}\chi +i\chi \mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi }\frac{im}{\mathrm{}}𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\chi \right|^2}`$ (37)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\left[(\mathbf{}\chi )^2+(\chi \mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi })^2+\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{}^2}\left(𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\right)^2\chi ^22\frac{m}{\mathrm{}}\left(𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\right)\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]}.`$
Knowing that $`𝛀=\mathrm{\Omega }\widehat{𝐳}`$ and using the expression for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ from Eq. (16), it is straightforward to show that the kinetic energy takes the form

$$E_k=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}n_0(x_0)𝑑𝝆\left[(\mathbf{}\chi )^2+\frac{\chi ^2}{\rho ^2}+\frac{m^2v_0^2}{\mathrm{}^2}\chi ^2+\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Omega }(1\frac{m}{\mathrm{}}x_0v_0)\chi ^2+\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{}^2}\mathrm{\Omega }^2(x_0^2+\rho ^2)\chi ^2\right].$$
(38)
The contribution to the energy from the last term of Eq. (12) is

$`E_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}mn_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\left(𝛀\times (x_0\widehat{𝐱}+𝝆)\right)^2\chi ^2}`$ (39)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m\mathrm{\Omega }^2n_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆(x_0^2+\rho ^2)\chi ^2}.`$
When added to the kinetic energy, this term cancels with the last term of Eq. (38).

The contribution of the external trapping potential is given by

$`E_{\mathrm{ext}}`$ $`=`$ $`Fn_0(x_0){\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆(x_0+\rho \mathrm{sin}\varphi )\chi ^2}`$ (40)
$`=`$ $`Fn_0(x_0)x_0{\displaystyle 𝑑𝝆\chi ^2}.`$
The contribution of the interatomic interaction reads simply

$$E_{\mathrm{int}}=\frac{1}{2}gn_0^2(x_0)𝑑\rho \chi ^4.$$
(41)
Finally, we add all these contributions to obtain Eq. (17).

## Acknowledgments

I would like to thank R.A. Duine, H.T.C. Stoof, H. Smith, C.J. Pethick, and J.O. Andersen for fruitful discussions and helpful suggestions.


format: text

text:
# References

IFUP–TH/2003–42
October 2003

The effects of an extra $`U(1)`$ axial condensate on
the radiative decay $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ at finite temperature

E. Meggiolaro
Dipartimento di Fisica,

Università di Pisa,

Via Buonarroti 2,

I–56127 Pisa, Italy.

Abstract

Supported by recent lattice results, we consider a scenario in which a $`U(1)`$–breaking condensate survives across the chiral transition in QCD. This scenario has important consequences on the pseudoscalar–meson sector, which can be studied using an effective Lagrangian model. In particular, generalizing the results obtained in a previous paper (where the zero–temperature case was considered), we study the effects of this $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate on the radiative decay $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ at finite temperature.

(PACS codes: 12.38.Aw, 12.39.Fe, 11.15.Pg, 11.30.Rd)

1. Introduction

There are evidences from some lattice results  that a new $`U(1)`$–breaking condensate survives across the chiral transition at $`T_{ch}`$, staying different from zero up to a temperature $`T_{U(1)}>T_{ch}`$. $`T_{U(1)}`$ is, therefore, the temperature at which the $`U(1)`$ axial symmetry is (effectively) restored, meaning that, for $`T>T_{U(1)}`$, there are no $`U(1)`$–breaking condensates. This scenario has important consequences on the pseudoscalar–meson sector, which can be studied using an effective Lagrangian model , including also the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate. This one has the form $`C_{U(1)}=𝒪_{U(1)}`$, where, for a theory with $`L`$ light quark flavours, $`𝒪_{U(1)}`$ is a $`2L`$–fermion local operator that has the chiral transformation properties of :***Throughout this paper we use the following notations for the left–handed and right–handed quark fields: $`q_{L,R}\frac{1}{2}(1\pm \gamma _5)q`$, with $`\gamma _5i\gamma ^0\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3`$.

$$𝒪_{U(1)}\underset{st}{det}(\overline{q}_{sR}q_{tL})+\underset{st}{det}(\overline{q}_{sL}q_{tR}),$$
(1.1)
where $`s,t=1,\mathrm{},L`$ are flavour indices; the colour indices \[not explicitly indicated in Eq. (1.1)\] are arranged in such a way that: i) $`𝒪_{U(1)}`$ is a colour singlet, and ii) $`C_{U(1)}=𝒪_{U(1)}`$ is a genuine $`2L`$–fermion condensate, i.e., it has no disconnected part proportional to some power of the quark–antiquark chiral condensate $`\overline{q}q`$ (see Refs. ).

The low–energy dynamics of the pseudoscalar mesons, including the effects due to the anomaly, the $`q\overline{q}`$ chiral condensate and the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate, can be described, in the limit of large number $`N_c`$ of colours, and expanding to the first order in the light quark masses, by an effective Lagrangian written in terms of the topological charge density $`Q`$, the mesonic field $`U_{ij}\overline{q}_{jR}q_{iL}`$ (up to a multiplicative constant) and the new field variable $`Xdet\left(\overline{q}_{sR}q_{tL}\right)`$ (up to a multiplicative constant), associated with the new $`U(1)`$ condensate :

$`(U,U^{},X,X^{},Q)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}(_\mu U^\mu U^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu X^\mu X^{}`$ (1.2)
$`V(U,U^{},X,X^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\omega _1Q\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{ln}U\mathrm{ln}U^{})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}(1\omega _1)Q(\mathrm{ln}X\mathrm{ln}X^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2A}}Q^2,`$
where the potential term $`V(U,U^{},X,X^{})`$ has the form:

$`V(U,U^{},X,X^{})={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _\pi ^2}{4}}\mathrm{Tr}[(U^{}U\rho _\pi 𝐈)^2]+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _X^2}{4}}(X^{}X\rho _X)^2`$ (1.3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{B_m}{2\sqrt{2}}}\mathrm{Tr}(MU+M^{}U^{}){\displaystyle \frac{c_1}{2\sqrt{2}}}[det(U)X^{}+det(U^{})X].`$
$`M=\mathrm{diag}(m_1,\mathrm{},m_L)`$ is the quark mass matrix and $`A`$ is the topological susceptibility in the pure–YM theory. (This Lagrangian generalizes the one originally proposed in Refs. , which included only the effects due to the anomaly and the $`q\overline{q}`$ chiral condensate.) All the parameters appearing in the Lagrangian must be considered as functions of the physical temperature $`T`$. In particular, the parameters $`\rho _\pi `$ and $`\rho _X`$ determine the expectation values $`U`$ and $`X`$ and so they are responsible for the behaviour of the theory respectively across the $`SU(L)SU(L)`$ and the $`U(1)`$ chiral phase transitions, as follows:

$`\rho _\pi |_{T<T_{ch}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_\pi ^2>0,\rho _\pi |_{T>T_{ch}}<0;`$
$`\rho _X|_{T<T_{U(1)}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_X^2>0,\rho _X|_{T>T_{U(1)}}<0.`$ (1.4)
The parameter $`F_\pi `$ is the well–known pion decay constant, while the parameter $`F_X`$ is related to the new $`U(1)`$ axial condensate. Indeed, from Eq. (1.4), $`\rho _X=\frac{1}{2}F_X^2>0`$ for $`T<T_{U(1)}`$, and therefore, from Eq. (1.3), $`X=F_X/\sqrt{2}0`$. Remembering that $`Xdet\left(\overline{q}_{sR}q_{tL}\right)`$, up to a multiplicative constant, we find that $`F_X`$ is proportional to the new $`2L`$–fermion condensate $`C_{U(1)}=𝒪_{U(1)}`$ introduced above.
In the same way, the pion decay constant $`F_\pi `$, which controls the breaking of the $`SU(L)SU(L)`$ symmetry, is related to the $`q\overline{q}`$ chiral condensate by a simple and well–known proportionality relation (see Refs.  and references therein): $`\overline{q}_iq_i_{T<T_{ch}}\frac{1}{2}B_mF_\pi `$. (Moreover, in the simple case of $`L`$ light quarks with the same mass $`m`$, $`m_{NS}^2=mB_m/F_\pi `$ is the squared mass of the non–singlet pseudoscalar mesons and one gets the well–known Gell-Mann–Oakes–Renner relation: $`m_{NS}^2F_\pi ^22m\overline{q}_iq_i_{T<T_{ch}}`$.)
It is not possible to find, in a simple way, the analogous relation between $`F_X`$ and the new condensate $`C_{U(1)}=𝒪_{U(1)}`$.

However, as we have shown in a previous paper , information on the quantity $`F_X`$ (i.e., on the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate, to which it is related) can be derived, in the realistic case of $`L=3`$ light quarks with non–zero masses $`m_u`$, $`m_d`$ and $`m_s`$, from the study of the radiative decays of the pseudoscalar mesons $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ in two photons. In Ref.  only the zero–temperature case ($`T=0`$) has been considered and a first comparison of our results with the experimental data has been performed: the results are encouraging, pointing towards a certain evidence of a non–zero $`U(1)`$ axial condensate.

In this paper, generalizing the results obtained in Ref. , we study the effects of the $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate on the radiative decay $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ at finite temperature ($`T0`$), so opening the possibility of a comparison with future heavy–ion experiments. In Section 2 we first re–discuss the radiative decays of the pseudoscalar mesons at $`T=0`$, considering a more general electromagnetic anomaly interaction term, obtained by adding a new electromagnetic interaction term to the original electromagnetic anomaly term adopted in Ref.  \[see Eqs. (2.8)–(2.10) below\]. As we shall see, the inclusion of this new electromagnetic interaction term does not modify, for $`T=0`$ (or, more generally, for $`T<T_{ch}`$) the decay amplitudes for the processes $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$, $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$: therefore, all the results (both analytical and numerical) obtained in Ref. , concerning these processes, remains unaffected. However, the new electromagnetic interaction term will prove to be crucial in the discussion of the $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ radiative decay at finite temperature (in particular for $`T>T_{ch}`$), which will be studied in detail in Section 3.

2. Radiative decays of the pseudoscalar mesons at $`T=0`$

In order to study the radiative decays of the pseudoscalar mesons in two photons, we have to introduce the electromagnetic interaction in our effective model (1.2). Under local $`U(1)`$ electromagnetic transformations:

$$qq^{}=e^{i\theta e𝐐}q,A_\mu A_\mu ^{}=A_\mu _\mu \theta ,$$
(2.1)
the fields $`U`$ and $`X`$ transform as follows:

$$UU^{}=e^{i\theta e𝐐}Ue^{i\theta e𝐐},XX^{}=X.$$
(2.2)
Therefore, we have to replace the derivative of the fields $`_\mu U`$ and $`_\mu X`$ with the corresponding covariant derivatives:

$$D_\mu U=_\mu U+ieA_\mu [𝐐,U],D_\mu X=_\mu X.$$
(2.3)
Here $`𝐐`$ is the quark charge matrix (in units of $`e`$, the absolute value of the electron charge):

$$𝐐=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{2}{3}& & \\ & \frac{1}{3}& \\ & & \frac{1}{3}\end{array}\right).$$
(2.4)
In addition, we have to reproduce the effects of the electromagnetic anomaly, whose contribution to the four–divergence of the $`U(1)`$ axial current $`J_{5,\mu }=\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q`$ and of the $`SU(3)`$ axial currents $`A_\mu ^a=\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5\frac{\tau _a}{\sqrt{2}}q`$ (the matrices $`\tau _a`$, with $`a=1,\mathrm{},8`$, are the generators of the algebra of $`SU(3)`$ in the fundamental representation, with normalization: $`\mathrm{Tr}(\tau _a\tau _b)=\delta _{ab}`$) is given by:

$$(^\mu J_{5,\mu })_{anomaly}^{e.m.}=2\mathrm{T}\mathrm{r}(𝐐^2)G,(^\mu A_\mu ^a)_{anomaly}^{e.m.}=2\mathrm{T}\mathrm{r}\left(𝐐^2\frac{\tau _a}{\sqrt{2}}\right)G,$$
(2.5)
where $`G\frac{e^2N_c}{32\pi ^2}\epsilon ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\rho \sigma }`$ ($`F_{\mu \nu }`$ being the electromagnetic field–strength tensor), thus breaking the corresponding chiral symmetries. We observe that $`\mathrm{Tr}(𝐐^2\tau _a)0`$ only for $`a=3`$ or $`a=8`$.
We must look for an interaction term $`_I`$ (constructed with the chiral Lagrangian fields and the electromagnetic operator $`G`$) which, under a $`U(1)`$ axial transformation $`qq^{}=e^{i\alpha \gamma _5}q`$, transforms as:

$$U(1)_A:_I_I+2\alpha \mathrm{Tr}(𝐐^2)G,$$
(2.6)
while, under $`SU(3)`$ axial transformations of the type $`qq^{}=e^{i\beta \gamma _5\tau _a/\sqrt{2}}q`$ (with $`a=3,8`$), transforms as:

$$SU(3)_A:_I_I+2\beta \mathrm{Tr}\left(𝐐^2\frac{\tau _a}{\sqrt{2}}\right)G.$$
(2.7)
By virtue of the transformation properties of the fields $`U`$ and $`X`$ under a $`U(3)U(3)`$ chiral transformation ($`q_LV_Lq_L`$, $`q_RV_Rq_R`$ $``$ $`UV_LUV_R^{}`$ and $`Xdet(V_L)det(V_R)^{}X`$, where $`V_L`$ and $`V_R`$ are arbitrary $`3\times 3`$ unitary matrices ), one can see that the most simple term describing the electromagnetic anomaly interaction term is the following one:

$$_I=\frac{i}{2}G\mathrm{Tr}[𝐐^2(\mathrm{ln}U\mathrm{ln}U^{})],$$
(2.8)
which is exactly the one originally proposed in Ref.  and also adopted in Ref. . However, the presence of the new meson field $`X`$ allows us to construct also another electromagnetic interaction term, still proportional to the pseudoscalar operator $`G`$, but totally invariant under $`U(3)U(3)`$ chiral transformations:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_I=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{i}{6}G\mathrm{Tr}(𝐐^2)\left[\mathrm{ln}(XdetU^{})\mathrm{ln}(X^{}detU)\right],$$
(2.9)
where $`f_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is an (up–to–now) arbitrary real parameter (the coefficient $`1/6`$ has been introduced for convenience: see Section 3). We can thus add the two expressions (2.8) and (2.9) to form a new (more general) electromagnetic anomaly interaction term $`\overline{}_I`$, which, of course, satisfies both the transformation properties (2.6) and (2.7), exactly as $`_I`$:

$`\overline{}_I=_I+\mathrm{\Delta }_I={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}G\mathrm{Tr}[𝐐^2(\mathrm{ln}U\mathrm{ln}U^{})]`$ (2.10)
$`+f_\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{6}}G\mathrm{Tr}(𝐐^2)\left[\mathrm{ln}(XdetU^{})\mathrm{ln}(X^{}detU)\right].`$
Therefore, we shall consider the following effective chiral Lagrangian, which includes the new electromagnetic interaction terms described above:

$`(U,U^{},X,X^{},Q,A^\mu )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}(D_\mu UD^\mu U^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu X^\mu X^{}`$ (2.11)
$`V(U,U^{},X,X^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\omega _1Q\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{ln}U\mathrm{ln}U^{})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}(1\omega _1)Q(\mathrm{ln}X\mathrm{ln}X^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2A}}Q^2`$
$`+\overline{}_I{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu },`$
where the potential term $`V(U,U^{},X,X^{})`$ is the one written in Eq. (1.3).
The decay amplitude of the generic process “$`meson\gamma \gamma `$” is entirely due to the electromagnetic anomaly interaction term $`\overline{}_I`$, which can be written more explicitly in terms of the meson fields $`\pi _a`$ ($`a=1,\mathrm{},8`$), $`S_\pi `$ and $`S_X`$, defined as follows :

$`U`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{\sqrt{2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i\sqrt{2}}{F_\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{8}{}}}\pi _a\tau _a+{\displaystyle \frac{S_\pi }{\sqrt{3}}}\text{I}\right)\right],`$
$`X`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_X}{\sqrt{2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\sqrt{2}}{F_X}}S_X\right).`$ (2.12)
The $`\pi _a`$ are the self–hermitian fields describing the octet pseudoscalar mesons; $`S_\pi `$ is the usual “quark–antiquark” $`SU(3)`$–singlet meson field associated with $`U`$, while $`S_X`$ is the “exotic” $`6`$–fermion meson field associated with $`X`$ .
Inserting the expressions (2.12) into Eq. (2.10), one finds that:

$$\overline{}_I=G\frac{1}{3F_\pi }\left[\pi _3+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\pi _8+\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{3}}S_\pi f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3F_X}(\sqrt{3}F_XS_\pi F_\pi S_X)\right].$$
(2.13)
The fields $`\pi _3,\pi _8,S_\pi ,S_X`$ mix together, while the remaining $`\pi _a`$ are already diagonal . However, neglecting the experimentally small mass difference between the quarks *up* and *down* (i.e., neglecting the experimentally small violations of the $`SU(2)`$ isotopic spin), also $`\pi _3`$ becomes diagonal and can be identified with the physical state $`\pi ^0`$. The fields $`(\pi _8,S_\pi ,S_X)`$ can be written in terms of the eigenstates $`(\eta ,\eta ^{},\eta _X)`$ as follows:

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\pi _8\\ S_\pi \\ S_X\end{array}\right)=𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta \\ \eta ^{}\\ \eta _X\end{array}\right),$$
(2.14)
where $`𝐂`$ is the following $`3\times 3`$ orthogonal matrix :

$`𝐂=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha _1& \alpha _2& \alpha _3\\ \beta _1& \beta _2& \beta _3\\ \gamma _1& \gamma _2& \gamma _3\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }& \mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }& 0\\ & & \\ \mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}& \mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}& \frac{\sqrt{3}F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}\\ & & \\ \mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\frac{\sqrt{3}F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}& \mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\frac{\sqrt{3}F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}& \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}\end{array}\right).`$ (2.23)
Here $`F_\eta ^{}`$ is defined as follows :

$$F_\eta ^{}\sqrt{F_\pi ^2+3F_X^2},$$
(2.24)
and can be identified with the $`\eta ^{}`$ decay constant in the chiral limit of zero quark masses. Moreover, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ is a mixing angle, which can be related to the masses of the quarks $`m_u`$, $`m_d`$, $`m_s`$, and therefore to the masses of the octet mesons, by the following relation :

$$\mathrm{tan}\stackrel{~}{\phi }=\frac{F_\pi F_\eta ^{}}{6\sqrt{2}A}(m_\eta ^2m_\pi ^2),$$
(2.25)
where: $`m_\pi ^2=2B\stackrel{~}{m}`$ and $`m_\eta ^2=\frac{2}{3}B(\stackrel{~}{m}+2m_s)`$, with: $`B\frac{B_m}{2F_\pi }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{m}\frac{m_u+m_d}{2}`$.
Concerning the masses of the two singlet states, we remind that  the field $`\eta ^{}`$ has a “light” mass, in the sense of the $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ limit, being, in the chiral limit of zero quark masses:***The expression for the $`\eta ^{}`$ mass, when including the light–quark masses, reads as follows : $`\left(1+3\frac{F_X^2}{F_\pi ^2}\right)m_\eta ^2+m_\eta ^22m_K^2=\frac{6A}{F_\pi ^2}`$, with: $`m_K^2=B(\stackrel{~}{m}+m_s)`$.

$$m_\eta ^{}^2=\frac{6A}{F_\eta ^2}=\frac{6A}{F_\pi ^2+3F_X^2}=𝒪(\frac{1}{N_c}).$$
(2.26)
(If we put $`F_X=0`$, Eq. (2.26), or the corresponding expression including the light–quark masses  reported in the footnote, reduces to the well–known Witten–Veneziano relation for the $`\eta ^{}`$ mass .) On the contrary, the field $`\eta _X`$ has a sort of “heavy hadronic” mass of order $`𝒪(N_c^0)`$ in the large–$`N_c`$ limit. Both the $`\eta ^{}`$ and the $`\eta _X`$ have the same quantum numbers (spin, parity and so on), but they have a different quark content: one is mostly $`S_\pi i(\overline{q}_Lq_R\overline{q}_Rq_L)`$, while the other is mostly $`S_Xi[det(\overline{q}_{sL}q_{tR})det(\overline{q}_{sR}q_{tL})]`$, as one can see from Eqs. (2.14)–(2.23).

The interaction Lagrangian (2.13), written in terms of the physical fields $`\pi ^0,\eta ,\eta ^{}`$ and $`\eta _X`$, reads as follows:

$$\overline{}_IG\frac{1}{3F_\pi }\left(\pi ^0+a_1\eta +a_2\eta ^{}+\overline{a}_3\eta _X\right),$$
(2.27)
where $`a_i=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(\alpha _i+2\sqrt{2}\beta _i)`$ $`(\mathrm{for}i=1,2,3)`$, so that:

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}}\left(\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }+2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\right),`$ (2.28)
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}}\left(2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\right),`$ (2.29)
$`a_3`$ $`=`$ $`2\sqrt{2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}}\right),`$ (2.30)
and, moreover:

$$\overline{a}_3=a_3+\mathrm{\Delta }a_3,\mathrm{with}:\mathrm{\Delta }a_3=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{2\sqrt{2}F_\eta ^{}}{3F_X}.$$
(2.31)
The values of the coefficients $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$ are exactly the same which were calculated in Ref. : therefore, the inclusion of the new electromagnetic interaction term (2.9) in the expression for the electromagnetic anomaly interaction term (2.10) only modifies (for $`T=0`$ or, more generally, for $`T<T_{ch}`$: see the discussion in the next section) the decay amplitude for the process $`\eta _X\gamma \gamma `$, while leaving unchanged the other decay amplitudes for the processes $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$, $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$. Indeed, from Eqs. (2.14) and (2.23) we derive that:

$$\eta _X=\frac{1}{F_\eta ^{}}(\sqrt{3}F_XS_\pi F_\pi S_X),$$
(2.32)
and thus we immediately see that the term proportional to $`f_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in Eq. (2.13) is simply equal to

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_I=G\frac{1}{3F_\pi }\left(f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{2\sqrt{2}F_\eta ^{}}{3F_X}\right)\eta _X=G\frac{1}{3F_\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }a_3\eta _X.$$
(2.33)
The expressions for the decay amplitudes are:

$`A(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2N_c}{12\pi ^2F_\pi }}I,`$ (2.34)
$`A(\eta \gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2N_c}{12\pi ^2F_\pi }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}}\left(\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }+2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\right)I,`$ (2.35)
$`A(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2N_c}{12\pi ^2F_\pi }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}}\left(2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\right)I,`$ (2.36)
$`A(\eta _X\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2N_c}{12\pi ^2F_\pi }}2\sqrt{2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}}f_\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\eta ^{}}{3F_X}}\right)I,`$ (2.37)
where $`I\epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }k_1^\mu ϵ_1^\nu k_2^\rho ϵ_2^\sigma `$ ($`k_1`$, $`k_2`$ being the four–momenta of the two final photons and $`ϵ_1`$, $`ϵ_2`$ their polarizations). Consequently, the following decay rates (in the real case $`N_c=3`$) are derived:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2m_\pi ^3}{64\pi ^3F_\pi ^2}},`$ (2.38)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta \gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2m_\eta ^3}{192\pi ^3F_\pi ^2}}\left(\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }+2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\right)^2,`$ (2.39)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2m_\eta ^{}^3}{192\pi ^3F_\pi ^2}}\left(2\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\pi }{F_\eta ^{}}}\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\phi }\right)^2,`$ (2.40)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta _X\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2m_{\eta _X}^3}{8\pi ^3F_\pi ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_X}{F_\eta ^{}}}f_\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{F_\eta ^{}}{3F_X}}\right)^2,`$ (2.41)
where $`\alpha =e^2/4\pi 1/137`$ is the fine–structure constant.
The results (2.38)–(2.40) are exactly the same which were found in Ref. . (If we put $`F_X=0`$, i.e., if we neglect the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate, the expressions written above reduce to the corresponding ones derived in Ref.  using an effective Lagrangian which includes only the usual $`q\overline{q}`$ chiral condensate.) Therefore, also the numerical results obtained in Ref. , concerning the processes $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$, remains unaffected. In particular, using the experimental values for the various quantities which appear in Eqs. (2.39) and (2.40), i.e.,

$`F_\pi =92.4(4)\mathrm{MeV},`$
$`m_\eta =547.30(12)\mathrm{MeV},`$
$`m_\eta ^{}=957.78(14)\mathrm{MeV},`$
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta \gamma \gamma )=0.46(4)\mathrm{KeV},`$
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )=4.26(19)\mathrm{KeV},`$ (2.42)
we can extract the following values for the quantity $`F_X`$ and for the mixing angle $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ :

$$F_X=27(9)\mathrm{MeV},\stackrel{~}{\phi }=16(3)^0,$$
(2.43)
and these values are perfectly consistent with the relation (2.25) for the mixing angle, if we use for the pure–YM topological susceptibility the estimate $`A=(180\pm 5\mathrm{MeV})^4`$, obtained from lattice simulations .

Nevertheless, the new electromagnetic interaction term will play a crucial role in the discussion of the $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ radiative decay at finite temperature, in particular for $`T>T_{ch}`$: this will be studied in detail in the next section.

3. Radiative decays of the pseudoscalar mesons at $`T0`$

We want now to address the finite–temperature case ($`T0`$). As already said in the Introduction, this will be done (using a sort of mean–field approximation) simply by considering all the parameters appearing in the Lagrangian as functions of the physical temperature $`T`$. In such a way, the results obtained in the previous section can be extended to the whole region of temperatures below the chiral transition ($`T<T_{ch}`$), provided that the $`T`$–dependence is included in all the parameters appearing in Eqs. (2.38)–(2.41).

What happens when approaching the chiral transition temperature $`T_{ch}`$ from below ($`TT_{ch}`$)? We know that $`F_\pi (T)0`$ when $`TT_{ch}`$. Let us consider, for simplicity, the chiral limit of zero quark masses. From Eq. (2.26) we see that $`m_\eta ^{}^2\frac{2A(T_{ch})}{F_X^2(T_{ch})}`$ when $`TT_{ch}`$ and, from Eqs. (2.14)–(2.23), we derive:

$$\eta ^{}=\frac{1}{F_\eta ^{}}(F_\pi S_\pi +\sqrt{3}F_XS_X),$$
(3.1)
so that $`\eta ^{}S_X`$ when $`TT_{ch}`$. In this same limit, the $`\eta ^{}`$ decay rate (2.40) tends to the value:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )\underset{TT_{ch}}{}\frac{\alpha ^2m_\eta ^{}^3(T_{ch})}{72\pi ^3F_X^2(T_{ch})}.$$
(3.2)
What happens, instead, in the region of temperatures $`T_{ch}<T<T_{U(1)}`$, above the chiral phase transition (where the $`SU(3)SU(3)`$ chiral symmetry is restored, while the $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate is still present)? First of all, we observe that we have continuity in the mass spectrum of the theory through the chiral phase transition at $`T=T_{ch}`$. In fact, if we study the mass spectrum of the theory in the region of temperatures $`T_{ch}<T<T_{U(1)}`$ , we find that the singlet meson field $`S_X`$, associated with the field $`X`$ in the chiral Lagrangian, according to the second Eq. (2.12) (instead, the first Eq. (2.12) is no more valid in this region of temperatures), has a squared mass given by (in the chiral limit): $`m_{S_X}^2=\frac{2A}{F_X^2}`$. This is nothing but the would–be Goldstone particle coming from the breaking of the $`U(1)`$ chiral symmetry, i.e., the $`\eta ^{}`$, which, for $`T>T_{ch}`$, is a sort of “exotic” matter field of the form $`S_Xi[det(\overline{q}_{sL}q_{tR})det(\overline{q}_{sR}q_{tL})]`$. Its existence could be proved perhaps in the near future by heavy–ion experiments.

And what about the $`\eta ^{}`$ radiative decay rate in the region of temperatures $`T_{ch}<T<T_{U(1)}`$? Since $`\eta ^{}=S_X`$ above $`T_{ch}`$, the electromagnetic anomaly interaction term describing the process $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ for $`T>T_{ch}`$ is only the part of $`\overline{}_I`$, written in Eq. (2.10), which depends on the field $`X`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{S_X\gamma \gamma }=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{i}{6}G\mathrm{Tr}(𝐐^2)(\mathrm{ln}X\mathrm{ln}X^{})=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{9F_X}GS_X.$$
(3.3)
Form this equation we easily derive the following expression for the $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ decay amplitude above $`T_{ch}`$:

$$A(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T>T_{ch}}=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{e^2N_c\sqrt{2}}{18\pi ^2F_X}I,$$
(3.4)
and, consequently, the following expression for the $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ decay rate (in the real case $`N_c=3`$) above $`T_{ch}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T>T_{ch}}=f_\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{\alpha ^2m_\eta ^{}^3}{72\pi ^3F_X^2}.$$
(3.5)
If we require that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )`$ is a continuous function of $`T`$ across the chiral transition at $`T_{ch}`$, then from Eqs. (3.2) and (3.5) we obtain the following condition for $`f_\mathrm{\Delta }`$:

$$f_\mathrm{\Delta }(T_{ch})=1.$$
(3.6)
This means that:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T=T_{ch}}=\frac{\alpha ^2m_\eta ^{}^3(T_{ch})}{72\pi ^3F_X^2(T_{ch})}.$$
(3.7)
The decay rates and the masses at finite temperature could be determined in the near–future heavy–ion experiments and then Eq. (3.7) will provide an estimate for the value of $`F_X`$ at $`T=T_{ch}`$. Viceversa, if we were able to determine the value of $`F_X`$ in some other independent way (e.g., by lattice simulations: see Ref. ), then Eq. (3.7) would give a theoretical estimate of the ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )/m_\eta ^{}^3`$ at $`T=T_{ch}`$, which could be compared with the experimental results. For example, if we make the (very plausible, indeed!) assumption that the value of $`F_X`$ does not change very much going from $`T=0`$ up to $`T=T_{ch}`$ (it will vanish at a temperature $`T_{U(1)}`$ above $`T_{ch}`$), i.e., $`F_X(T_{ch})F_X(0)`$, and if we take for $`F_X(0)`$ the value reported in Eq. (2.43), then Eq. (3.7) furnishes the following estimate:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T=T_{ch}}/m_\eta ^{}^3(T_{ch})=\frac{\alpha ^2}{72\pi ^3F_X^2(T_{ch})}(3.3_{1.4}^{+4.1})\times 10^{11}\mathrm{MeV}^2.$$
(3.8)
In other words, comparing with the corresponding quantities at $`T=0`$, reported in Eq. (2.42), one gets that:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T=T_{ch}}/m_\eta ^{}^3(T_{ch})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )|_{T=0}/m_\eta ^{}^3(0)}7_3^{+8}.$$
(3.9)
Thus, even with very large errors, due to our poor knowledge of the value of $`F_X`$, there is a quite definite prediction that the ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )/m_\eta ^{}^3`$ should have a sharp increase approaching the chiral transition temperature $`T_{ch}`$. (Of course, a smaller value of $`F_X`$ would result in a larger value for the ratio in Eq. (3.9), and this case seems indeed to be favoured from the upper limit $`F_X20`$ MeV obtained from the generalized Witten–Veneziano formula for the $`\eta ^{}`$ mass .) One could also argue that it is physically plausible that the $`\eta ^{}`$ mass (of the order of $`1`$ GeV) remains practically unchanged when going from $`T=0`$ up to $`T_{ch}`$ (which, from lattice simulations, is known to be of the order of $`170`$ MeV: see, e.g., Ref. ): in that case, Eq. (3.9) would give an estimate for the ratio between the $`\eta ^{}`$ decay rates at $`T=T_{ch}`$ and $`T=0`$. However, we want to stress that our result (3.9) is more general and does not rely on any given assumption on the behaviour of $`m_\eta ^{}(T)`$ with the temperature $`T`$.

4. Conclusions

There are evidences from some lattice results that a new $`U(1)`$–breaking condensate survives across the chiral transition at $`T_{ch}`$, staying different from zero up to $`T_{U(1)}>T_{ch}`$. This fact has important consequences on the pseudoscalar–meson sector, which can be studied using an effective Lagrangian model, including also the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate. This model could perhaps be verified in the near future by heavy–ion experiments, by analysing the pseudoscalar–meson spectrum in the singlet sector.

In Ref.  we have also investigated the effects of the new $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate on the radiative decays, at $`T=0`$, of the pseudoscalar mesons $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ in two photons. A first comparison of our results with the experimental data has been performed: the results are encouraging, pointing towards a certain evidence of a non–zero $`U(1)`$ axial condensate. In this paper, generalizing the results obtained in Ref. , we have studied the effects of the $`U(1)`$ chiral condensate on the radiative decay $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ at finite temperature ($`T0`$). In particular, we have been able to get a quite definite theoretical prediction \[see Eq. (3.9)\] for the ratio between the $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ decay rate and the third power of the $`\eta ^{}`$ mass in the proximity of the chiral transition temperature $`T_{ch}`$ (which, from lattice simulations, is expected to be of the order of $`170`$ MeV): this prediction could in principle be tested in future heavy–ion experiments.

However, as we have already stressed in the conclusions of Ref. , one should keep in mind that our results have been derived from a very simplified model, obtained doing a first–order expansion in $`1/N_c`$ and in the quark masses. We expect that such a model can furnish only qualitative or, at most, “semi–quantitative” predictions. When going beyond the leading order in $`1/N_c`$, it becomes necessary to take into account questions of renormalization–group behaviour of the various quantities and operators involved in our theoretical analysis. This issue has been widely discussed in the literature, both in relation to the proton–spin crisis problem , and also in relation to the study of the $`\eta ,\eta ^{}`$ radiative decays . Further studies are therefore necessary in order to continue this analysis from a more quantitative point of view. We expect that some progress will be done along this line in the near future.