text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The mathematical theory of calibrations  and certain extensions thereof have proven to be quite useful in classifying the supersymmetric worldvolume solitons  of branes embedded in fixed supersymmetric spacetime backgrounds. Applications include smoothed intersections of branes in flat spacetime ; branes wrapping supersymmetric cycles of Calabi-Yau manifolds ; worldvolume solitons in AdS compactifications ; solitons involving worldvolume gauge fields that describe branes ending on other branes ; and branes in $`p`$-brane spacetime backgrounds .

The calibrated branes in each of these applications have so far been treated as test objects. In this paper we demonstrate that the calibration technology is also useful in understanding the spacetime fields that result from treating these worldvolume solitons as charged, gravitating sources. The reason for this is quite simple. Consider the spacetime geometry generated by a supersymmetric worldvolume soliton. Based on the BPS ‘no force’ properties of branes, it should be possible for a suitably configured test brane embedded in this spacetime to be in equilibrium. The spacetime should therefore carry a calibrating form. Moreover, near infinity, this calibrating form should approach the fixed background form that calibrated the original worldvolume soliton. This situation holds, for example, for the spacetime of a single planar $`M`$-brane 111It was also demonstrated in  that the BPS spike soliton of a test D$`3`$-brane, describing a fundamental string ending on the brane, can also be found when the test D$`3`$-brane is placed in a D$`3`$-brane spacetime background.

Our starting point will be a class of supersymmetric spacetimes constructed by Fayyazuddin and Smith to describe the spacetime fields of M$`5`$-branes intersecting on $`3`$-branes . A central ingredient in these spacetimes is a warped Kahler metric living on the four relative tranverse directions of the intersecting brane configuration. The Kahler metric depends, as well, on the overall transverse coordinates. The exact form of the Kahler metric and the warp factor are related to the M$`5`$-brane sources by a nonlinear field equation. We will see that these spacetimes indeed have calibrating forms of the appropriate type and that, equipped with this understanding, one can construct similar spacetimes corresponding to other calibrated worldvolume solitons. We will refer to these different spacetimes collectively as Fayyazuddin-Smith (FS) spacetimes. We will focus here on Kahler calibrations and correspondingly on FS spacetimes built around Kahler metrics. More generally, FS spacetimes will involve other metrics of reduced holonomy. We conjecture that the spacetime fields of all calibrated worldvolume solitons will be of FS type.

Of course, it has proven to be quite difficult to construct spacetimes corresponding to particular configurations of localized intersections of branes , as opposed to smeared intersections (see  for a complete review). It was argued in  that this situation may reflect interesting underlying physics. The world-volume effective field theory description of the delocalization of certain brane intersections is related to the Coleman-Mermin-Wagner theorem. In these cases, the dimensionality of the intersection is the determining factor as to whether the localisation of the classical world-volume soliton persists in the supergravity solution. FS spacetimes should provide the appropriate supergravity setting to study these effects.

We note that FS spacetimes also provide the spacetime fields of branes wrapping supersymmetric cycles of Calabi-Yau manifolds. To describe intersecting branes in otherwise empty spacetime, the $`4`$ real dimensional Kahler metric in the original FS ansatz  is taken to be asymptotic to $`4`$-dimensional flat space. However, if instead it is taken to be asymptotic to a Calabi-Yau metric, e.g. to a Ricci flat metric on K3, then the FS spacetimes  describe M5-branes wrapping supersymmetric (1,1) cycles of K3222See  for a recent related discussion of branes wrapping cycles of K3.. The spacetime geometry of branes wrapping all of K3 has been shown to reflect very interesting underlying physics . It seems likely that FS spacetimes will provide a rich ground for further study in this context. If we take, for example, M$`2`$-branes wrapping $`2`$-cycles of compact Calabi-Yau $`3`$-folds, then from the $`5`$-dimensional viewpoint these will be black holes. Dimensionally reducing and keeping only the massless Kaluza-Klein modes should give the black holes of . The FS spacetimes should provide the $`11`$-dimensional lifts of these spacetimes, including the nontrivial massive Kaluza-Klein modes as well.

Finally, we note that another extension of the FS class of spacetimes to include branes ending on branes has recently been given in . We expect that these spacetimes may also be usefully organized using calibration technology.

## 2 Calibrations

We start with a brief and basic introduction to calibrations. Consider the action for a $`p`$-brane moving in a $`D+1`$ dimensional spacetime with metric $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`(p+1)`$-form gauge potential $`A_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}`$,

$$S_{p+1}=d^{p+1}\sigma \left\{\sqrt{detg_{ab}}\frac{1}{(p+1)!}\epsilon ^{a_1\mathrm{}a_{p+1}}_{a_1}X^{\mu _1}\mathrm{}_{a_{p+1}}X^{\mu _{p+1}}A_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}\right\},$$
(1)
where $`\sigma ^a`$ with $`a=0,1,\mathrm{},p`$ are world-volume coordinates, $`X^\mu (\sigma )`$ gives the embedding of the brane in the background spacetime and $`g_{ab}=_aX^\mu _bX^\nu G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the induced metric on the world-volume. We will not consider here possible world-volume gauge fields, or couplings to additional spacetime fields. To start, let us assume a flat background, $`G_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, $`A_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}=0`$ and consider static brane configurations. These will minimize the spatial volume of the brane. Calibrations are a mathematical technique for finding classes of such minimal submanifolds. A calibration for a $`p`$-dimensional submanifold is a $`p`$-form $`\varphi `$ on the embedding space that satisfies two properties

1. The calibration $`\varphi `$ is a closed form

$$d\varphi =0.$$
(2)
2. The pullback of $`\varphi `$ onto any $`p`$-dimensional submanifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is always less than, or equal to, the induced volume form on the submanifold,

$${}_{}{}^{}\varphi \epsilon _\mathrm{\Sigma }.$$
(3)

It then follows via a simple argument that, if the inequality (3) is saturated at every point on a $`p`$-dimensional submanifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ minimizes volume within its homology class. Assume $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ saturates the inequality (3) at every point. Pick a closed $`(p1)`$-dimensional surface $`S`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and within $`S`$ continuously deform $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ into a new submanifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$. The following chain of equalities and inequalities then shows that $`Vol(\mathrm{\Sigma })Vol(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})`$,

$$Vol(\mathrm{\Sigma })=_\mathrm{\Sigma }\epsilon _\mathrm{\Sigma }=_\mathrm{\Sigma }{}_{}{}^{}\varphi =_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}{}_{}{}^{}\varphi +_B𝑑\varphi =_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}{}_{}{}^{}\varphi _\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\epsilon _\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}=Vol(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}),$$
(4)
where $`B`$ is the $`p`$-dimensional region bounded by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$.

Kahler Calibrations: The simplest examples of calibrating forms and the ones that will concern us below are the Kahler calibrations. Start with even dimensional flat space, $`D=2n`$, with real Cartesian coordinates $`x^1,\mathrm{},x^{2n}`$. Choose a complex structure, i.e. a pairing of real coordinates into complex coordinates, for example,

$$z^1=x^1+ix^2,\mathrm{},z^n=x^{2n1}+ix^{2n},$$
(5)
then the Kahler form is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \omega =& dx_1dx_2+\mathrm{}+dx_{2n1}dx_{2n}\hfill \\ \hfill =& \frac{i}{2}\left(dz_1d\overline{z}_1+\mathrm{}dz_nd\overline{z}_n\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
The forms $`\varphi _{2k}=\omega ^k/k`$ can then be shown to be calibrations . The corresponding calibrated submanifolds are simply the complex submanifolds of real dimension $`2k`$.

We recall some examples of calibrated surfaces  that will be useful to keep in mind below. Our focus below will be with M2-branes and M5-branes and we frame the examples in this context. First consider a static M2-brane configuration whose world-volume lies entirely in the $`(1,2,3,4)`$ subspace of $`10`$ dimensional flat space. We can then take $`D=4`$ above and the calibrating $`2`$-form $`\varphi =\omega =dx_1dx_2+dx_3dx_4`$. Clearly if the M2-brane to lies either in the $`(1,2)`$ plane, or in the $`(3,4)`$ plane, then the inequality (3) is saturated and these are calibrated surface. A more nontrivial example is the family of complex curves

$$z_1z_2=\alpha ^2,$$
(7)
with $`\alpha `$ an arbitrary constant. These curves interpolate smoothly between the $`(1,2)`$ and $`(3,4)`$ planes and represent a smoothed version of two static M$`2`$-branes intersecting at a point. The singular limit $`\alpha =0`$ gives the pure orthogonal intersection of the two planes. If we added on $`3`$ additional flat spatial directions to the brane, then the curve (7) gives two $`M5`$-branes intersecting on a $`3`$-brane.

Now take $`D=6`$ and consider the $`4`$-form calibration $`\varphi =\frac{1}{2}\omega \omega `$. In terms of the real coordinates this is

$$\varphi =dx_1dx_2dx_3dx_4+dx_1dx_2dx_5dx_6+dx_3dx_4dx_5dx_6.$$
(8)
Clearly the $`(1,2,3,4)`$, $`(1,2,5,6)`$ and $`(3,4,5,6)`$ planes are examples of submanifolds calibrated by $`\varphi `$, and complex surfaces exist that interpolate smoothly between these planes. Adding another spatial direction $`x^7`$ to get $`M5`$-branes, there will then be calibrated surfaces describing the smoothed intersection of three $`5`$-branes in the directions

$$\begin{array}{c}(t,1,2,3,4,x,x,7)\hfill \\ (t,1,2,x,x,5,6,7)\hfill \\ (t,x,x,3,4,5,6,7)\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
where the ‘x’s are placeholders. Note that each pair of M$`5`$-branes intersects on a $`3`$-brane and that altogether they intersect on a string.

Calibrations & Spinors: The calibration technology applies in curved spaces as well. For example, if $`\omega `$ is now the Kahler form for an arbitrary Kahler space, then the forms $`\varphi _{2k}=\omega ^k/k`$ are again calibrations and the calibrated submanifolds are again the set of complex submanifolds. In general the existence of calibrating forms is tied to the property of reduced holonomy (see e.g. ). Reduced holonomy in turn is tied to the existence of spinor fields having special properties.

For example, for an $`N`$ complex dimensional Kahler manifold with metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$, the holonomy group is $`U(N)SO(2N)`$. Covariantly constant spinors exist only in the Calabi-Yau case of vanishing Ricci tensor, for which the holonomy group is further reduced to $`SU(N)`$. For a general Kahler metric, though, there exists a pair of spinors $`ϵ_+`$ and $`ϵ_{}`$ transforming as singlets of the holonomy group. These satisfy the relations

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_mϵ_+=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\overline{m}}ϵ_{}=0,$$
(10)
from which follow the projection conditions

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m\overline{n}}ϵ_\pm =\pm g_{m\overline{n}}ϵ_\pm .$$
(11)
If we normalize $`ϵ_\pm ^{}ϵ_\pm =1`$ then the Kahler form can be written as

$$\omega _{ab}=\pm iϵ_\pm ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}ϵ_\pm .$$
(12)
The vanishing of the components $`\omega _{mn}`$ and $`\omega _{\overline{m}\overline{n}}`$ follow from the relations (10), which also imply that only even dimensional forms with equal numbers of holomorphic and anti-holomorphic indices can be built in this way. The covariant derivatives of $`ϵ_\pm `$ are given by

$$_pϵ_\pm =_pϵ_\pm \pm \frac{1}{2}(\overline{E}^1_p\overline{E})ϵ_\pm ,_{\overline{p}}ϵ_\pm =_{\overline{p}}ϵ_\pm \frac{1}{2}(E^1_{\overline{p}}E)ϵ_\pm ,$$
(13)
where $`E`$ and $`\overline{E}`$ are determinants of the complex frame fields $`E_n^{\widehat{m}}`$ and $`E_{\overline{n}}^{\widehat{\overline{m}}}`$ respectively, with hat denoting flat space frame indices. For the Ricci flat case, these second terms vanish identically giving covariantly constant spinors.

Generalized Calibrations: A certain amount of care is neccesary in applying the calibration technology to find static solutions for $`p`$-branes in curved spacetimes , because even for a static $`p`$-brane, the time-time component $`G_{00}`$ of the spacetime metric enters the $`p`$-brane effective action (1). Assume that the embedding spacetime is static with timelike Killing vector $`\xi ^a=(\frac{}{x^0})^a`$. If we fix static gauge $`\sigma ^0=x^0`$ for the coordinates on the brane worldvolume, then the $`\sqrt{detg_{ab}}`$ term in the brane action (1) includes a contribution from $`g_{00}=G_{00}`$, called the redshift factor in . This factor can be absorbed by defining a new effective spatial metric $`\widehat{G}_{\alpha \beta }=(G_{00})^{1/p}G_{\alpha \beta }`$ where $`\alpha ,\beta =1,\mathrm{},D`$ now run over only spatial directions in the embedding space. We then have

$$\sqrt{detg_{ab}}=\sqrt{det\widehat{g}_{kl}}$$
(14)
where $`k,l=1,\mathrm{}p`$ are purely spatial world-volume indices and $`\widehat{g}_{kl}`$ is the spatial metric induced on the brane via embedding in the rescaled metric $`\widehat{G}_{\alpha \beta }`$ defined above. If there are additional spatial symmetry directions of the embedding space that are shared by the $`p`$-brane configuration, then these can be handled in a similar manner  by appropriately modifying the definitions of $`\widehat{G}_{\alpha \beta }`$, $`\widehat{A}`$ and $`\widehat{F}`$.

Finally, if the spacetime has a nonzero $`(p+1)`$-form gauge potential $`A_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}`$, then a static brane configuration will satisfy equations of motion involving the corresponding field strength. An appropriately generalized definition of calibrating forms taking this additional force into account was given in . The modification required is quite simple. Condition (2) becomes

$$d\varphi =\widehat{F}$$
(15)
where $`\widehat{F}=d\widehat{A}`$ and $`\widehat{A}_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _p}=A_{0\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _p}`$. Therefore the calibrating form $`\varphi `$ is equal to the reduced gauge potential $`\widehat{A}`$ up to a gauge transformation. This new condition then yields a chain of equalities and inequalities similar to (4), showing that if a static surface saturates the calibration bound then it minimizes the action (1).

M$`2`$-Brane Spacetime: The planar M$`2`$-brane itself provides a good example of a spacetime with a generalized calibrating form .

$$ds^2=H^{2/3}(dt^2+dx_1^2+dx_2^2)+H^{+1/3}(dx_3^2+\mathrm{}+dx_{10}^2),A_{t12}=cH^1,$$
(16)
where $`c=\pm 1`$. For a static test M2-brane in this background the effective spatial metric and gauge potential defined above are given by

$$d\widehat{s}^2=H^1(dx_1^2+dx_2^2)+dx_3^2+\mathrm{}+dx_{10}^2,\widehat{A}_{12}=cH^1.$$
(17)
As discussed in , test M2-branes will then be calibrated by the form

$$\varphi =cH^1dx_1dx_2+\omega _{},$$
(18)
where $`\omega _{}`$ is an arbitrary Kahler form on the transverse space, equivalent to a choice of complex structure in the transverse space. The calibrating form $`\varphi `$ is then gauge equivalent to the gauge potential $`\widehat{A}`$ and equation (15) is satisfied. The calibrated surfaces are complex surfaces with respect to the associated almost complex structure obtained by raising one index on $`\varphi _{kl}`$ using the rescaled metric (17). Note that the warp factor $`H`$ then drops out.

## 3 Fayyazuddin-Smith Spacetimes

The original FS spacetimes  described M5-branes intersecting on 3-branes. Here we start with the related M$`2`$-brane FS spacetimes studied in . The metric and gauge potential for these are given by

$$\begin{array}{c}ds^2=H^{2/3}\left(dt^2+2g_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}\right)+H^{+1/3}(\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta )\hfill \\ A_{tm\overline{n}}=icH^1g_{m\overline{n}},c=\pm 1\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
Here $`z^m`$ with $`m=1,2`$ are complex coordinates on a 4 real dimensional Kahler manifold $``$ and $`\alpha ,\beta =5,\mathrm{},10`$ are indices for the $`6`$-dimensional transverse space. The Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$ is allowed to depend on the transverse coordinates $`x^\alpha `$ as well as on position in $``$, i.e. it can be written as $`g_{m\overline{n}}=_m_{\overline{n}}K(z^p,\overline{z}^q,x^\alpha )`$ with $`K`$ a Kahler potential depending on the transverse coordinates. The warp factor $`H`$ is also allowed to depend on both position in $``$ and position in the transverse space. Note that the Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ at a fixed transverse position is not required to be Ricci flat.

We present a detailed review of the supersymmetry conditions in order to correct a mistake in the form of the results stated in  that has obstructed a better understanding of this class of spacetimes. The supersymmetry condition for $`D=11`$ supergravity takes the form $`\widehat{}_Aϵ=0`$, where

$$\widehat{}_Aϵ=_Aϵ+\frac{1}{288}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_A^{BCDE}8\delta _A^B\mathrm{\Gamma }^{CDE}\right)F_{BCDE}ϵ,$$
(20)
and $`(A,B,\mathrm{})`$ are $`D=11`$ indices. The supercovariantly constant spinors of the FS spacetimes (19) satisfy the projection conditions

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\widehat{m}\widehat{\overline{n}}}ϵ=a\delta ^{\widehat{m}\widehat{\overline{n}}}ϵ,a=\pm 1,\\ \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\widehat{t}}ϵ=ibϵ,b=\pm 1\end{array}$$
(21)
where hatted indices are frame indices and the signs of the two projections are correlated with the sign of the gauge potential by the relation $`abc=1`$. The first projection condition is just the standard projection (11) onto singlets of the $`U(2)`$ holonomy group of the Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ at fixed transverse position. The combination of the two projections reduces the fraction of supersymmetry preserved to $`1/4`$.

Given the projections (21), the supersymmetry conditions then impose a relation between the warp factor $`H`$ and the complex determinant of the Kahler metric $`g=g_{1\overline{1}}g_{2\overline{2}}g_{1\overline{2}}g_{2\overline{1}}`$. In , and originally in  for the M$`5`$-brane case, this relation is given as $`H=g`$. However, this is not precisely correct, as the following argument shows. The form of the FS ansatz (19) is preserved by holomorphic coordinate transformations on the Kahler manifold that do not depend on the transverse coordinates,

$$z^m=z^m(z^p).$$
(22)
Under these transformations the warp factor $`H`$ is invariant, but the determinant $`g`$ is transformed to $`g^{}=gf\overline{f}`$ where $`f`$ is holomorphic. Hence the condition $`H=g`$ is not covariant under the transformations (22).

In order to determine the correct conditions, we write out the requirements that each of the components of $`\widehat{}_Aϵ=0`$ reduce to after having applied the projection conditions (21)

$$\begin{array}{cc}A=t:\hfill & _\alpha \mathrm{log}H_\alpha \mathrm{log}g=0\\ A=p:\hfill & _pϵ+\left\{\left(\frac{1}{6}+\frac{a}{4}\right)_p\mathrm{log}H\frac{a}{2}_p\mathrm{log}\overline{E}\right\}ϵ=0\\ A=\overline{p}:\hfill & _{\overline{p}}ϵ+\left\{\left(\frac{1}{6}\frac{a}{4}\right)_{\overline{p}}\mathrm{log}H+\frac{a}{2}_{\overline{p}}\mathrm{log}E\right\}ϵ=0\\ A=\alpha :\hfill & _\alpha ϵ+\left\{\frac{1}{6}_\alpha \mathrm{log}H+\frac{a}{4}_\alpha \mathrm{log}E\frac{a}{4}_\alpha \mathrm{log}\overline{E}\right\}ϵ=0.\end{array}$$
(23)
One can check that the whole set of equations can be solved provided that

$$\begin{array}{c}_\alpha \mathrm{log}H=_\alpha \mathrm{log}g\\ _m_{\overline{n}}\mathrm{log}H=_m_{\overline{n}}\mathrm{log}g.\end{array}$$
(24)
It is worth noting that the second condition involves the Kahler metric at fixed transverse position through its Ricci tensor $`_{m\overline{n}}=_m_{\overline{n}}g`$, which transforms as a tensor under the coordinate transformations (22). These new relations are then covariant under the holomorphic coordinate transformations (22). These conditions imply that the general form of the relation between $`H`$ and $`g`$ is given by

$$g=Hf\overline{f},$$
(25)
where $`f(z^m)`$ is a holomorphic function of the complex coordinates and is independent of the transverse coordinates $`x^\alpha `$. We then find using equation (25) that the supercovariantly constant spinors are then given by

$$ϵ=(E/f)^{(\frac{1}{6}+\frac{a}{4})}(\overline{E}/\overline{f})^{(\frac{1}{6}\frac{a}{4})}ϵ_0,$$
(26)
where $`ϵ_0`$ is a constant spinor satisfying the projections (21). The supercovariantly constant spinors are invariant under the coordinate transformations (22).

All spacetimes of the form (19) satisfying the relations (24) are supersymmetric. However, we have not yet imposed the gauge field equations of motion. For the FS spacetimes (19), these reduce to the equations

$$2_m_{\overline{n}}H+\delta ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta g_{m\overline{n}}=0,$$
(27)
which are covariant with respect to the holomorphic coordinate transformations (22)333$`D=11`$ supergravity can be coupled to M-brane sources by combining the bulk supergravity action with the M2-brane and M5-brane Born-Infeld actions. For M2-brane sources, the resulting current contribution to the right hand side of (27) is given in .. Combining the gauge field equation of motion (27) with the condition (25) gives a set of coupled nonlinear equations that has proved difficult to solve. Solutions have been given in the M5-brane case in the near horizon limit  and to first order in the far field limit .

The gauge field equation of motion (27) can be rewritten as an equation for the Ricci tensor of the Kahler metric $`_{m\overline{n}}`$ at fixed transverse position, giving

$$_{m\overline{n}}=\frac{(_mH)(_{\overline{n}}H)}{H^2}+\frac{1}{2H}\delta ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta g_{m\overline{n}}.$$
(28)
It is worth noting that given the correct relation (25) between $`g`$ and $`H`$, the standard supersymmetric supergravity vacua now solve the field equations. If $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ is Ricci flat and independent of the transverse coordinates, then one can choose complex coordinates so that $`g=1`$ everywhere. Taking $`H=g=1`$ then clearly gives a solution of equation (28). Performing a holomorphic coordinate transformation as in (22) on this spacetime yields $`g=f\overline{f}`$, with $`f`$ holomorphic, and $`H=1`$, which is still obviously a solution to (28). However, if we instead also change $`H`$, so that as in  $`H=g=f\overline{f}`$, then the spacetime no longer solves equation (28). In this case, by referring to equation (19), we see that the gauge potential has nonzero field strength. These spacetimes correspond to nontrivial configurations of M$`2`$-brane sources. This is consistent because these spacetimes are not related by coordinate transformations to the the original Ricci flat vacuum spacetime.

## 4 Calibrations & New M-Brane Spacetimes

We now want to look at the FS spacetimes from the point of view of calibrations. The perspective we gain will prove useful in finding FS spacetimes for other types of M-brane world-volume solitons. It is straightforward to check that the FS spacetimes (19) discussed above have generalized calibrating forms in the sense defined in . The effective spatial metric and gauge potential seen by a static M$`2`$-brane probe are

$$\begin{array}{c}d\widehat{s}^2=2H^1g_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}+\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta \hfill \\ \widehat{A}_{m\overline{n}}=icH^1g_{m\overline{n}},c=\pm 1\hfill \end{array}$$
(29)
The corresponding generalized calibrating $`2`$-form is given by

$$\varphi =cH^1\omega _{}+\omega _{},$$
(30)
where $`\omega _{}=ig_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}`$ is the Kahler form associated with the metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$, and $`\omega _{}`$ is an arbitrary Kahler form on the transverse space. The calibrated surfaces are complex surfaces with respect to the almost complex structure obtained by raising one index on $`\varphi `$. Note that the warp factor $`H`$ again drops out from the almost complex structure.

What can we learn from this structure that will be useful in constructing FS spacetimes for other types of world-volume solitons? The FS spacetimes (19) arise in two diferent physical contexts. In , the FS spacetimes were considered to be generated by static M2-brane sources lying on a nontrivial holomorphic curves in a $`4`$ dimensional subspace of $`D=10`$ flat space. The Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ was taken to be flat near infinity in the transverse space. A second application is to take the Kahler manifold $``$ to be K3 and letting the Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ approach a Ricci flat K3 metric near infinity. The FS spacetimes then describe M2-branes wrapping $`(1,1)`$ cycles of K3. In each of these cases the original source branes were calibrated by the corresponding Kahler forms of these supersymmetric vacua. The warped Kahler form $`\varphi `$ in (30) approaches the corresponding vacuum Kahler form near infinity, since as we have argued above, $`H`$ must approach unity near infinity.

We conjecture that a similar structure will hold for spacetimes corresponding to other calibrated worldvolume solitons. For Kahler calibrated solitons, we expect to find an FS spacetime built around a Kahler metric, with a gauge potential simply related to the original calibrating form. For another type of calibrated worldvolume soliton, we would expect to find an FS spacetime built around a general curved space that admits this type of calibration. For special Lagrangian solitons, for example, we would expect an FS spacetime built around a Ricci flat Kahler metric. For a soliton calibrated by an exceptional calibration, we expect to find an FS spacetime built by a warped construction around a space with the corresponding reduced holonomy. Below, we give results for Kahler calibrated solitons. We will return to the other cases in future work.

New M2-Brane Spacetimes: The most straightforward generalization of the FS construction is to increase the number of dimensions of the Kahler manifold, maintaining the same basic form of the FS spacetimes (19). For e.g. a $`3`$ complex dimensional space this would correspond to $`1/8`$ supersymmetric, smoothed intersections of $`3`$ M2-branes, or to M2-branes wrapping $`(1,1)`$ cycles of Calabi-Yau $`3`$-folds. Setting the complex dimension to be $`N`$, we make the ansatz

$$\begin{array}{c}ds^2=H^{2A}dt^2+2H^{2B}g_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}+H^{2C}(\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta )\hfill \\ A_{tm\overline{n}}=icH^1g_{m\overline{n}},c=\pm 1\hfill \end{array}$$
(31)
where now the complex coordinates $`m,n=1,\mathrm{},N`$ and the transverse coordinates $`\alpha ,\beta =1,\mathrm{},102N`$. The nontrivial possibilities are $`N=2,3,4,5`$. These spacetimes describe either $`1/2^N`$ supersymmetric smoothed intersections of M2-branes in otherwise empty spacetime, or to M2-branes wrapping $`(1,1)`$ cycles of Calabi-Yau N-folds.

We find that these spacetimes preserve $`1/2^N`$ supersymmetry, if the exponents are given by

$$A=\frac{1}{3}(N1),B=\frac{1}{6}(4N),C=\frac{1}{6}(N1)$$
(32)
and $`H`$, $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ related in general as in equation (25)444Note that for $`N=1`$ the exponents in (32) yield flat Minkowski spacetime. This seems puzzling because the ansatz (31) should cover the original M2-brane spacetime (16). It turns out that the supersymmetry condition (20) can also be satisfied by taking the Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ in (31) to be flat, so that the relations (24) between $`g`$ and $`H`$ no longer hold. The original M2-brane spacetimes are recovered in this way for $`N=1`$. For $`N>1`$ one recovers the intersecting M2-brane spacetimes of  in this way.. The supercovariantly constant spinors are given by

$$ϵ=(E/f)^{(\frac{N1}{6}+\frac{a}{4})}(\overline{E}/\overline{f})^{(\frac{N1}{6}\frac{a}{4})}ϵ_0,$$
(33)
where $`ϵ_0`$ is a constant spinor satisfying the projection conditions (21). The source free equations of motion again reduce to equation (27).

The effective spatial metric and gauge potential for test M2-branes embedded in these spacetimes again have the form given in equation (29). This implies that the warped Kahler forms $`\varphi `$ in equation (30) are again generalized calibrating forms for test M2-branes.

New M5-brane Spacetimes: A more nontrivial application of our strategy is to start with worldvolume solitons calibrated by the square of the Kahler form $`\varphi =\frac{1}{2}\omega \omega `$. Since this requires that the spatial dimension of the brane be at least $`4`$, in the context of M-theory we will be looking at M5-branes. These spacetimes again will have two physical settings. One could start with smoothed intersections of M5-branes that share a common string  in otherwise empty space as in the discussion above equation (9). Alternatively, one can start with M5-branes wrapping a $`(2,2)`$ cycle of a Calabi-Yau manifold, leaving a string in the remaining noncompact directions.

We build an FS ansatz similar to (31) that reflects these new physical settings. In particular, the calibrating form $`\varphi =\frac{1}{2}\omega \omega `$ of the worldvolume soliton is built into the $`6`$-form gauge potential. Consider the $`1/8`$ supersymmetric case, corresponding to a $`3`$ complex dimensional space. Accordingly, let

$$\begin{array}{c}ds^2=H^{2A}\left(dt^2+dy^2\right)+2H^{2B}g_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}+H^{2C}(\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta )\hfill \\ A_{tym\overline{n}r\overline{s}}=cH^1\left(g_{m\overline{n}}g_{r\overline{s}}g_{m\overline{s}}g_{r\overline{n}}\right),c=\pm 1\hfill \end{array}$$
(34)
where $`m,n=1,\mathrm{}3`$ and $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2,3`$. We find that supersymmetry $`(a)`$ requires the projection conditions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{m\overline{n}}ϵ=aH^{2B}g^{m\overline{n}}ϵ,& a=\pm 1\\ \mathrm{\Gamma }^{ty}ϵ=bH^{2A}ϵ,& b=\pm 1\end{array}$$
(35)
with $`bc=1`$; (b) fixes the values of the exponents to be $`A=B=1/6`$ and $`C=1/3`$; and (c) imposes the general relation (25) between $`H`$ and $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$. The source free gauge field equations of motion again reduce to equation (27). We find that the supercovariantly constant spinors are given by

$$ϵ=(E/f)^{(\frac{1}{12}+\frac{a}{4})}(\overline{E}/\overline{f})^{(\frac{1}{12}\frac{a}{4})}ϵ_0,$$
(36)
where $`ϵ_0`$ is a constant spinor satisfying the projection conditions (35).

Following , we introduce a rescaled effective spatial metric $`d\widehat{s}^2`$ for test M5-branes that are both static and translationally invariant in the $`y`$ direction. The appropriate rescaling is $`\widehat{G}_{kl}=(G_{tt}G_{yy})^{1/4}G_{kl}`$, where $`k,l`$ run over all directions except $`t,y`$. The $`1/4`$ power arises because these factors are now shared by the remaining $`4`$ spatial dimensions of the brane. This yields

$$d\widehat{s}^2=2H^{1/2}g_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}+H^{1/2}(dx_8^2+dx_9^2+dx_{10}^2).$$
(37)
The calibrating form is then given by the expression $`\varphi =\frac{1}{2}\omega \omega `$ in terms of the Hermitian form

$$\omega =cH^{1/2}\omega _{}+H^{+1/2}dx_8dx_9.$$
(38)
The resulting form

$$\varphi =\frac{1}{2}H^1\omega _{}\omega _{}+c\omega _{}dx_8dx_9$$
(39)
is gauge equivalent to the effective spatial gauge potential $`\widehat{A}_{ijkl}=A_{tyijkl}`$. This can be seen by using the closure property of the Kahler metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$.

## 5 Conclusion

We have conjectured that the spacetime fields of $`p`$-brane worldvolume solitons are spacetimes of the FS type. We have seen that thinking of FS spacetimes in terms of calibrations is useful both in understanding their structure and in generating new examples. In this paper we have focused on Kahler calibrations. As discussed above, we plan to investigate further examples in future work.

Acknowledgements: We thank Robert Bryant and Don Marolf for helpful conversations.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

Obtaining the Spin of the Proton from the Spins of the Quarks

Y.N. Srivastava and A. Widom

Physics Department, Northeastern University, Boston MA 02115

and

Physics Department & INFN, University of Perugia, Perugia Italy

ABSTRACT

Employing the experimental electro-weak interactions between quarks and leptons, the spin of the proton may easily be understood in terms of the spins of the constituent quarks.

Before considering how one may obtain the spin of the proton from the spin of the constituitive qurks, let us recall a simple fact about total spin zero momentum space wave functions for any two spin one half particles; e.g.

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{spinzero}(𝐤_1,\sigma _1,𝐤_2,\sigma _2)=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐤_1,𝐤_2)\left(\chi _{}(\sigma _1)\chi _{}(\sigma _2)\chi _{}(\sigma _2)\chi _{}(\sigma _1)\right).$$
$`(1)`$
The probability distribution in momentum and spin for one of the particles, for example

$$P_1(𝐤_1,\sigma _1)=\underset{\sigma _2}{}\frac{d^3𝐤_2}{(2\pi )^3}\left|\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐤_1,\sigma _1,𝐤_2,\sigma _2)\right|^2,$$
$`(2)`$
does not at all depend on spin

$$P_1(𝐤_1,)=P_1(𝐤_1,)=\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^3𝐤_2}{(2\pi )^3}\left|\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐤_1,𝐤_2)\right|^2.$$
$`(3)`$
Such an equipartition of spin probability would certainly not hold true for a total spin one polarized wave function; e.g. $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{spinone}(𝐤_1,\sigma _1,𝐤_2,\sigma _2)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{triplet}(𝐤_1,𝐤_2)\chi _{}(\sigma _1)\chi _{}(\sigma _2)`$.

Now, suppose that the proton is made up of three quarks $`(duu)`$, and further suppose the quarks are distributed as a spin zero diquark  and a spin one half quark. Say

$$(p)=(duu)=(du)_{(spinlessdiquark)}+u_{(quark)}$$

tied together by a “string” as in conventional fragmentation models. Under the above hypothesis, the momentum probabilities are independent of spin for the quarks in the diquark, both $`d(du)`$ and $`u(du)`$, and only the isolated quark $`(u)`$ may have a momentum probability which depends on polarization. From lepton-proton scattering polarization measurements of spin,

$$s_{polarized}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\eta ,$$
$`(3)`$
only one third of the constituent quarks would theoretically exhibit the polarization in their momentum distributions,

$$\eta _{theory}=\left(\frac{1}{3}\right)1.$$
$`(4)`$
The experimental number is\[3-7\]

$$\eta _{experiment}=0.31\pm 0.07$$
$`(5)`$
in very reasonable agreement with the physical picture here presented.

REFERENCES

 For a general review on the subject of diquarks, see M. Anselmino, E. Predazzi, S. Ekelin, S. Frederikson and D. B. Lichtenberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 65 (1993) 1199.

 For supersymmetry related to diquarks, see A. B. Balantekin, I. Bars and F. Iachello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47 (1981) 19; Nuc. Phys. A370 (1981) 284.

 R. K. Ellis, W. J. Stirling and B. R. Webber, “QCD and Collider Physics”, chapter 4, page 150 Eq.(4.243), Cambridge Monographs on Particle Physics, Nuclear Physics and Cosmology, Cambridge University Press UK (1996).

 M. Algard et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 1261; G. Baum et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45 (1980) 2000; ibid. 51 (1983) 1135. \[SLAC-E130 collaboration\].

 K. Abe et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 346; ibid. 75 (1995) 25. \[SLAC-E143 collaboration\]

 J. Ashman et al, Nuc. Phys. B328 (1989) 1. \[EMC collaboration\]

 B. Adeva et al, Phys. Lett. B302 (1993) 533; D. Adams et al, Phys. Lett. B329 (1994) 399; ibid. B357 (1995) 248. \[SMC collaboration\]


text:
# The Longitudinal Polarimeter at HERA

## 1 Introduction

In high-energy storage rings, electron (positron) beams can become transversely polarized through the emission of synchrotron radiation . This process involves a small asymmetry in the spin-flip amplitudes, which enhances the population of the spin state antiparallel (parallel) to the magnetic bending field. The polarization develops in time according to

$$P(t)=P_{\mathrm{}}\left(1e^{t/\tau }\right),$$
(1)
where the asymptotic polarization $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ and the time constant $`\tau `$ are characteristics of the ring conditions. In the absence of depolarizing effects, the maximum polarization theoretically achievable is $`P_{\mathrm{th}}=0.924`$, and the rise-time constant, which depends on the bending radius of the storage ring and the beam energy, is $`\tau _{\mathrm{th}}=37`$ min for the HERA storage ring operated at an energy $`E_e=27.5`$ GeV.

Depolarizing effects can however substantially reduce the maximum achievable polarization. These intricate effects cannot generally be precisely controlled, making it necessary to continuously measure the beam polarization. The depolarizing effects also affect the actual rise-time, which scales with $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ according to

$$\tau =P_{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{\tau _{\mathrm{th}}}{P_{\mathrm{th}}}\right).$$
(2)
Thus for a typical beam polarization of 0.55, the rise-time is about 22 min.

This article describes a polarization monitor at the HERA electron ring at DESY, which is based on Compton scattering of circularly polarized photons from an intense pulsed laser beam. This method for measuring the polarization of stored electron beams111electron beams refer to both, electron and positron beams for the remainder of this article was suggested more than 30 years ago , and has been employed at many laboratories  to measure the transverse polarization. Compton scattering has also been employed at linear accelerators  to measure the longitudinal polarization. In recent years, the NIKHEF  and MIT-Bates  laboratories have developed Compton polarimeters to monitor the longitudinal beam polarization in their storage rings. At DESY, a Compton polarimeter  had been constructed in 1992 to measure the transverse polarization of the electron beam in the HERA West section. This Transverse Polarimeter measured the electron beam polarization with an initial fractional systematic uncertainty of 9 %, which has subsequently been improved to 3.4 % .

The Longitudinal Compton Polarimeter was added to obtain an independent and more precise measurement of the beam polarization at HERA, with very different systematic uncertainties and the capability to measure individual bunch polarizations. It was commissioned during fall 1996, and provides a measurement of the longitudinal beam polarization in the East section of HERA between the spin rotators  at the HERMES experiment .

## 2 Polarized Compton Scattering

The cross section for Compton scattering of circularly polarized photons off longitudinally polarized electrons can be written  in the laboratory frame as

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dE_\gamma }=\frac{d\sigma _0}{dE_\gamma }\left[1P_\lambda P_eA_z(E_\gamma )\right],$$
(3)
where $`d\sigma _0/dE_\gamma `$ is the unpolarized cross section, $`E_\gamma `$ is the energy of the back-scattered Compton photons, $`P_\lambda `$ is the circular polarization of the incident photons for the two helicity states $`\lambda =\pm 1`$, $`P_e`$ is the longitudinal polarization of the electron beam, and $`A_z(E_\gamma )`$ is the longitudinal asymmetry function, which is shown in Fig. 1 for a 2.33 eV photon scattered off a 27.5 GeV electron.

The total unpolarized cross section is 377 mb, and the differential cross section is peaked at the maximum energy ($`E_{\gamma ,\mathrm{max}}=13.6`$ GeV) of the back-scattered Compton photons, hereafter called the Compton edge. The longitudinal asymmetry function has a maximum of about 0.60 at the Compton edge. As the energy of the Compton photons decreases, $`A_z`$ decreases rapidly and becomes negative below 9.1 GeV, corresponding to scattering angles smaller than $`90^{}`$ in the electron rest frame, and returns to zero at $`E_\gamma =0`$. Due to the enormous kinematic boost from the electron beam (the Lorentz factor is $`E_e/m_e5.410^4`$), most back-scattered Compton photons are contained in a narrow cone centered around the initial direction of the struck electrons. This is very advantageous to a polarization monitor because it allows the detector to be far away (many tens of meters) from the interaction region. However, the spatial distribution of the Compton photons on the detector surface is given not only by the Compton kinematics but also by the electron beam optics. Therefore, if the interaction point is chosen at a position where the divergence of the electron beam is small, the transverse size of the photon detector can be sufficiently small to accommodate only moderate separations of the Compton photons and the electron beam, and thus meet the spatial constraints given by the HERA electron ring.

## 3 Apparatus

A schematic overview of the Longitudinal Polarimeter arrangement is shown in Fig. 2. A circularly polarized photon beam from a pulsed laser is focused on the HERA electron beam. The laser-electron interaction point is located between the two bending magnets BH39 and BH90 at 39 m and 90 m from the HERMES target, respectively. A calorimeter measures the energy of the back-scattered Compton photons for each laser pulse. If the electron beam is longitudinally polarized, the energy distributions of the Compton photons differ for left-handed and right-handed photon helicities.

### 3.1 Laser and Optics

A frequency-doubled, pulsed Nd:YAG laser  operated at 532 nm, corresponding to a photon energy of $`E_\lambda =2.33`$ eV, is used for the measurements. The laser produces $`3`$ns long pulses of linearly polarized light and can be operated with a continuously variable repetition rate from single shot up to 100 Hz, and pulse energies from 1 to 250 mJ. The laser is synchronized with the electron bunches in the HERA ring, and triggered at close to 100 Hz. The timing and the intensity of each laser pulse are measured by two photo diodes as shown in Fig. 3. To minimize pulse-to-pulse intensity fluctuations, the laser is operated at a fixed energy of 100 mJ per pulse. The intensity of the laser pulses can be controlled by passing the laser beam through a rotatable half wave plate and a fixed Glan-Thompson prism.

The linearly polarized laser light is converted to a circularly polarized beam by passing it through an electrically reversible birefringent cell, known as a Pockels cell. The voltage on the Pockels cell  is adjusted to produce a quarter wave phase shift which is reversed each pulse. The degree of circular polarization $`|P_\lambda |`$ of the laser beam is larger than 0.999 for each of the two helicity states $`\lambda =\pm 1`$, and is checked regularly with a polarization analyzer  consisting of a rotatable half wave plate, a Glan-Thompson prism, and a photo diode. Before entering the laser transport system, the beam diameter is expanded by a factor of four by a set of plano-concave and plano-convex lenses . This beam expander reduces the divergence of the laser beam to allow it to traverse the $`80`$m long light path to the laser-electron interaction region and also to reduce the resulting waist at the interaction point. In addition, it minimizes the sensitivity to variations in the laser beam divergence, and it reduces the energy density of the laser beam to prevent damage to the optical components in the light path.

The laser beam is guided by six remotely controlled mirrors  through a total of $`72`$m of stainless steel vacuum pipe, and focused with a lens doublet  on the HERA electron beam, as shown in Fig. 4. The mirrors are arranged in three phase-compensated pairs to maintain the polarization of the photon beam close to 100 %. Behind each mirror, a video camera is installed to monitor the laser beam position. The laser beam enters the storage ring vacuum through a $`1`$cm thick fused silica window  and is brought into collision with the electron beam at a vertical angle of 8.7 mrad. The window was mounted with Helicoflex gaskets  to minimize stress such that it has negligible optical retardation.

At the interaction point, the laser spot has a diameter of approximately 0.5 mm, and the transverse size of the electron beam is $`\sigma _x`$ 0.6 mm horizontally and $`\sigma _y`$ 0.2 mm vertically. Each electron bunch is approximately $`11`$mm long (corresponding to 37 ps), i.e. about one hundred times shorter than the laser pulse. After passing through the interaction point, the laser beam exits the storage ring vacuum system through an identical vacuum window and enters a second polarization analyzer which also monitors the position and the intensity of the laser light.

### 3.2 Laser$``$Electron Interaction Region

The location of the laser-electron interaction region was chosen to optimize the rate of the back-scattered Compton photons versus the background rate, and to minimize changes to the electron ring vacuum system. Maximizing the Compton rate means that the crossing angle between the laser beam and the electron beam should be as small as possible, and the horizontal widths of the electron and laser beams should both be small. In addition, the transverse spatial distribution of the back-scattered Compton photons due to the size and divergence of the electron beam had to be minimized, since the back-scattered photons have to travel about 54 m to the calorimeter.

The laser-electron interaction point is located in the East Right HERA tunnel section, 13 m downstream of the first dipole magnet BH39, which bends the beam by 0.54 mrad (Fig. 2). This is enough to prevent a large fraction of the bremsstrahlung generated by the residual gas in the long straight vacuum section upstream of BH39, and by the HERMES gas target in particular, from reaching the calorimeter. On the other hand, it is little enough that it rotates the spin by only 1.9. The corresponding reduction of the measured longitudinal beam polarization is negligible (0.06 %).

The scattered electrons and photons travel with the unscattered electron beam until the electrons are deflected by the dipole magnet BH90, which has a bending radius of 1262 m and deflects the beam by 2.7 mrad. A collimator is installed in the beam line 6 m downstream of BH90 to further reduce possible bremsstrahlung contributions from the HERMES target. In order to minimize changes to the electron ring vacuum system, the calorimeter position was chosen 16 m downstream of BH90. This puts strict constraints on the transverse size of the calorimeter, since the electron beam and the center of the back-scattered Compton photon distribution are separated by only 42 mm at the chosen position.

### 3.3 The Compton Photon Detector

The detector assembly is mounted on a remotely controlled table that can be moved vertically and horizontally. A light tight aluminum box contains the electromagnetic shower detector shown schematically in Fig. 5. The detector is positioned very close to the electron beam pipe during normal operation. Therefore, the lateral face of the box near the beam pipe is made of a $`3`$mm thick tungsten plate to protect the detector against soft synchrotron radiation emerging from the beam pipe.

The front of the detector is positioned 21 mm downstream of a copper vacuum window in the HERA beam tube. This window is 2 mm thick and 34 mm in diameter. The Compton photons enter the detector through a set of two $`6`$mm ($`2\times 1.1`$ radiation lengths) thick lead plates, which serves as an effective shield against the intense synchrotron radiation generated by the dipole magnet BH90. The electromagnetic calorimeter consists of four optically isolated NaBi(WO4)2 crystals. Each crystal is 20 cm long (19 radiation lengths), 22 mm wide and 22 mm high, arranged in a $`2\times 2`$ array, as displayed in Fig. 5. The crystal material has a high index of refraction ($`n=2.15`$), and is very radiation-hard ($`710^7`$ rad)  and compact (Molière radius 2.38 cm). The Compton photons generate an electromagnetic shower in the lead preshower and the crystals. The charged particles of the electromagnetic shower produce Čerenkov light, which is detected by one photomultiplier tube  for each crystal. The sharing of the shower between the four calorimeter blocks allows a sub-millimeter alignment of the NaBi(WO4)2 array with respect to the Compton photon beam.

### 3.4 Trigger and Electronics

The event trigger is provided by a pulser at a rate of approximately 200 Hz. The laser is fired by only every second pulse, allowing a background event to be recorded following each Compton event. Each laser pulse is synchronized with the HERA bunch clock, which is provided by a bunch trigger module (BTM) . The BTM is also used to select a specific electron bunch in a sequence determined by a programmable Digital Signal Processor (DSP) . Four consecutive events are recorded for each selected bunch: for each of the two light helicity states, one background event and one event where the laser was fired. The program of the DSP further provides the option of scanning any subset of the beam bunches in any sequence. From the recorded single bunch data, one can extract the polarization of a single bunch, the average beam polarization of all the bunches, or the polarization of any set of bunches, e.g. only colliding or non-colliding bunches. The trigger also allows for pedestal or gain monitoring events during empty HERA beam bunches. The HERMES gain monitoring system  monitors the response of the Compton photon detector by sending laser light pulses through glass fibers that are coupled to the front faces of the NaBi(WO4)2 crystals.

The signals from the four photomultiplier tubes are digitized by a charge sensitive ADC , and transferred by the DSP to the HERMES data acquisition system, which is described in detail elsewhere . Also the signals from the various photodiodes are recorded. For each Compton event, the timing of the laser pulse measured by the “laser timing” PIN diode (see Fig. 3) is recorded relative to the bunch timing by a TDC .

## 4 Polarimeter Operation

Normal operation of the Longitudinal Polarimeter requires an optimum overlap of the laser and electron beams in both space and time to maximize the back-scattered Compton rate. The spatial overlap is achieved by steering the laser beam horizontally through the interaction point with mirror M4 (see Fig. 4). The timing of the laser pulse is set with respect to the electron bunches by adjusting the laser trigger delay for maximum luminosity.

The luminosity is monitored continuously by the polarimeter control system . If the luminosity drops below a specified value, the procedures described above are executed automatically to re-optimize it. This online feedback system also ensures that the calorimeter remains centered on the back-scattered Compton photon distribution, and that the startup and shutdown of the laser system are executed automatically. Therefore, under normal conditions, polarization measurements are performed without intervention during HERA operation.

The detector can be operated in two different modes, the single-photon and the multi-photon mode. In contrast to the single-photon mode, in which the energy of each individual Compton photon is analyzed, in the multi-photon mode one measures the total energy deposited in the detector by many Compton photons per laser pulse interaction with an electron bunch. The multi-photon mode was chosen as the standard mode of operation to provide high statistics single bunch measurements in real time, and to overwhelm the bremsstrahlung backgrounds originating from the residual vacuum pressure in the straight section between the two dipole magnets BH39 and BH90. The single-photon mode is used for test and diagnosis purposes only.

### 4.1 Single-Photon Mode

The advantages of running in single-photon mode would be twofold. The asymmetries are large, up to 0.60 at the Compton edge (see Fig. 1), and the energy spectra can be compared to the Compton cross sections. Operation of the Longitudinal Polarimeter in this mode is possible if the laser pulse intensity is drastically reduced. However, the resolution for single-photon events is rather poor, as shown in Fig. 6, because most of the generated Čerenkov light is trapped in the crystals and does not reach the photomultiplier tubes due to the high index of refraction of the crystals and the $`3`$mm air gap between the crystals and the photomultiplier tubes. While Compton spectra can be produced, and the beam polarization can be extracted, this is not a feasible mode of operation with the 100 Hz laser, since a measurement of the beam polarization with an absolute statistical accuracy of 0.01 takes about 2.5 hours. In comparison, such a measurement takes only one minute in the multi-photon mode.

In the single-photon mode, the asymmetry can be written as

$$A_s(E_\gamma )=\frac{(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_{\frac{1}{2}}(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_{\frac{3}{2}}}{(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_{\frac{1}{2}}+(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_{\frac{3}{2}}}=P_cP_eA_z(E_\gamma ),$$
(4)
where $`(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ and $`(d\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_\gamma )_{\frac{3}{2}}`$ are the cross sections for the electron-photon configurations where the incident spins are antiparallel and parallel, respectively, and $`P_c=\frac{1}{2}(|P_{+1}|+|P_1|)`$ is the average circular light polarization.

The electron beam polarization is determined by fitting the energy spectra for the two spin configurations using a simulation (solid line in Fig. 6) that includes the response function and resolution of the detector, and realistic background conditions  above a Compton photon energy of 4 GeV. Whereas the simulation represents the data well above 4 GeV, it considerably underestimates the background at lower energies.

### 4.2 Multi-Photon Mode

The operation of the Longitudinal Polarimeter in multi-photon mode has the advantage of being effectively independent of bremsstrahlung background in the HERA storage ring. A large number of Compton photons is produced each time a laser pulse interacts with an electron bunch. These photons are detected together by the calorimeter, which measures their energy sums $`I_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ and $`I_{\frac{3}{2}}`$ for the spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ and spin-$`\frac{3}{2}`$ electron-photon configurations, respectively. In the multi-photon mode, an energy asymmetry is formed as

$$A_m=\frac{I_{\frac{1}{2}}I_{\frac{3}{2}}}{I_{\frac{1}{2}}+I_{\frac{3}{2}}}=P_cP_eA_p,$$
(5)
where $`A_p`$ is the analyzing power of the process. Under the assumption that the photomultiplier signals are linear over the full single-photon to multi-photon operating range, $`A_p`$ is given by the integrals over the energy weighted cross sections for the spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ and spin-$`\frac{3}{2}`$ configurations and $`P_cP_e=1`$, multiplied by the single-photon relative response function $`r(E_\gamma )=S(E_\gamma )/E_\gamma `$ (where $`S`$ is the digitized ADC signal) of the detector. The analyzing can be written as

$`A_p`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{3}{2}}}{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{1}{2}}+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{3}{2}}}},`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{with}\mathrm{\Sigma }_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{E_{\gamma ,\mathrm{min}}}^{E_{\gamma ,\mathrm{max}}}}(d\sigma /dE_\gamma )_iE_\gamma r(E_\gamma )𝑑E_\gamma ,i=\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{2}.`$
Assuming a linear energy response of the detector, the analyzing power has a value of 0.1838 for $`E_\lambda =2.33`$eV and $`E_e=27.5`$GeV. The energy-weighted Compton cross sections for the two spin configurations are shown in Fig. 7. Their asymmetry is largest for photon energies close to the Compton edge ($`E_{\gamma ,\mathrm{max}}`$). For small photon energies the two distributions are nearly identical. This has the advantage that the analyzing power is not very sensitive to the detector energy threshold $`E_{\gamma ,\mathrm{min}}`$.

### 4.3 Polarization Determination

In order to determine the single-photon relative response function $`r(E_\gamma )`$ of the $`\mathrm{NaBi}(\mathrm{WO}_4)_2`$ calorimeter, test beam measurements were performed at DESY and CERN, covering the entire energy range of the back-scattered Compton photons, as shown in Fig. 8. The resulting analyzing power was found to be $`0.1929\pm 0.0017`$. Note that only the precision of the measurement of the calorimeter response is important, and not its deviation from linearity.

However, to apply the result for the relative response function obtained from the test beam measurements to Eq. (6), it was necessary to show that the photomultiplier response is linear over the full single-photon to multi-photon operating range. This was verified using the gain monitoring system. The ultimate test was then to show that the measurement of the beam polarization was not affected by changing from single-photon to multi-photon mode. This was demonstrated by attenuating the laser beam intensity over three orders of magnitude using a rotatable half wave plate and a fixed Glan-Thompson prism while increasing the photomultiplier high-voltage such that the digitized signal of the photomultiplier remained constant. The test was performed during stable electron beam conditions while monitoring the beam polarization with the Transverse Polarimeter by observing the ratio of the polarization of the two polarimeters. As shown in Fig. 9, the ratio was constant over the entire range.

Once the calorimeter response was understood in the single-photon and multi-photon modes, the longitudinal beam polarization was determined by evaluating the calorimeter signals for every bunch individually. Although the laser is triggered by a precise electronic signal that is synchronized with the HERA bunch timing, the time of the resulting light pulse fluctuates within $`\pm 1.5`$ns. Because of this fluctuation and the finite crossing angle, the $`37`$ps long electron bunches interact with varying parts of the $`3`$ns long laser pulses. As mentioned earlier, the timing of each laser pulse is recorded relative to the trigger signal. The calorimeter signal reflects the temporal profile of the laser pulses if it is plotted versus the relative trigger time, as shown in Fig. 10. With a fit to this distribution, the calorimeter response is corrected for this variation.

Switching between the two light helicity states results in the two energy distributions for the corrected calorimeter signals $`I_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ and $`I_{\frac{3}{2}}`$, displayed in Fig. 11 for an individual bunch. The longitudinal polarization of each electron bunch is determined from the asymmetry of the means of these two energy distributions divided by the analyzing power and the measured circular light polarization (Eq. (5)). This calculation is provided every minute. The longitudinal beam polarization is finally computed as the mean of the individual bunch polarizations weighted by the corresponding time-averaged bunch currents.

### 4.4 Čerenkov Light Attenuation

A large number of Compton photons can be produced per laser pulse when the polarimeter is operated in the multi-photon mode, ranging from a few photons to many thousand. During normal operating mode in which about 1000 back-scattered Compton photons are produced at the beginning of a fill, approximately 250 times more energy is deposited in the calorimeter than the highest energies (bremsstrahlung) deposited in the single-photon mode, since the average energy deposited per Compton photon is 6.8 GeV. In order to attenuate the Čerenkov light to protect the photomultiplier tubes from saturation, a remotely controlled movable, perforated nickel foil could be inserted into the 3 mm air gap between the NaBi(WO4)2 crystals and the photomultiplier tubes. This was initially the standard mode of operation.

Even though the NaBi(WO4)2 crystals are 19 radiation lengths long, there is a small amount of longitudinal shower leakage into the photomultiplier tubes. Unfortunately, the corresponding shower particles generate a large signal in the photomultiplier tubes, which introduces a substantial non-linearity in the energy response. The longitudinal shower leakage signal derives mostly from the highest energy Compton photons and hence has a large analyzing power. When the Čerenkov light produced in the NaBi(WO4)2 crystals was attenuated by the nickel foil, the shower leakage signal dominated the signal in the photomultiplier tubes. This altered the response function and increased the analyzing power of the detector by about 25 %.

The polarimeter has been operated without any light attenuators since early 1999. This was also the case for the test beam calibrations. The gain in the photomultiplier tubes has to be reduced in the multi-photon mode by about a factor of 200. As described in Section 4.3, it was verified that the photomultiplier tubes are linear over this large range in gain. To address concerns about long-term stability, linearity, and radiation damage, a tungsten/scintillator sampling calorimeter, similar to the one employed in the Transverse Polarimeter  but without position sensitivity, is moved in the Compton photon beam periodically. It acts as an independent device to check the beam polarization measurement and is otherwise not exposed to bremsstrahlung and direct synchrotron radiation.

## 5 Polarimeter Performance

Since early 1997 the Longitudinal Polarimeter has routinely measured the HERA electron beam polarization for the HERMES experiment. Typical electron beam fills last from eight to twelve hours, starting with a ramped injection current of 40 to 45 mA and ending usually with a controlled beam dump when the current reaches about 10 mA. Fig. 12 shows an example of polarization measurements as a function of time for three consecutive fills. Each data point represents a one minute measurement of the longitudinal polarization with an absolute statistical accuracy of 0.01. The time structure in the first fill displayed in Fig. 12 is the result of tuning efforts by the HERA operators. In the 1997 and 1998 running periods the electron beam helicity was reversed every few months; since then it has been reversed once a month.

### 5.1 Single Bunch Measurements

The Longitudinal Polarimeter measures the polarization of individual bunches, as shown in Fig. 13. Each data point represents a measurement lasting twenty minutes with an absolute statistical accuracy of 0.03. Not all electron bunches collide with proton bunches in HERA, and it was found that the colliding and non-colliding electron bunches can have different polarization values. This is believed to be caused by beam-beam interactions between the electron and proton beams and the associated tune shifts. Comparison of the polarization of the 174 colliding and the 15 non-colliding bunches is a useful tool for tuning the accelerator to optimize polarization. This information is shown in Fig. 14 and is provided in real time to the HERA control room every minute, with an absolute statistical precision of 0.01 (0.04) for the colliding (non-colliding) bunches.

Analyzing individual electron bunches is as of yet unique to the Longitudinal Polarimeter. An upgrade of the data acquisition system  of the Transverse Polarimeter at HERA, which is in progress, will also have this important feature. This detailed polarization information about the electron beam will be crucial for the collider experiments H1 and ZEUS since they are preparing to measure spin observables after the luminosity upgrade in 2001. Whereas the HERMES experiment is sensitive to the average beam polarization of all the bunches, the collider experiments are sensitive to the colliding bunches only.

### 5.2 Systematic Uncertainties

Various studies have been performed to investigate the systematic uncertainty associated with the polarization measurements by the Longitudinal Polarimeter operated in the multi-photon mode. Since the polarization of the electron beam is obtained from a measurement of an asymmetry $`A_m`$ (see Eq. (5)), potential sources of false asymmetries were investigated. Other studies quantified the precision with which the analyzing power $`A_p`$ and the circular light polarization $`P_c`$ at the interaction point are determined. The various contributions to the total systematic uncertainty are summarized in Table 1, and apply to the polarimeter operating conditions without optical filters in the calorimeter, i.e. since early 1999.

The largest contribution to the overall systematic uncertainty originates from the determination of the analyzing power, which depends strongly on the exact shape of the relative detector response function $`r(E_\gamma )`$ (see Fig. 8). The energy calibration of the detector in the test beams takes into account most sources that can lead to a non-linear response of the detector including the crystals, and the signal generated in the photomultiplier tubes by the longitudinal shower leakage (see section 4.4). It does not account for the response of the photomultiplier tubes in the multi-photon mode, but it accounts for the low-energy cut-off from the lead absorber, and the limited size of the calorimeter. The analyzing power was determined to a precision of $`1.2\%`$ that was calculated by propagating the systematic uncertainty of the relative response function ($`0.9\%`$) shown in Fig. 8, and by including the uncertainty of the transition from single-photon to multi-photon mode ($`0.8\%`$) shown in Fig. 9.

The long-term stability of the detector response function is checked by monitoring the sources that can produce a time-dependent non-linear detector response. The linearity of the photomultiplier tubes is checked continuously with the gain monitoring system over the full multi-photon operating range and is found to deviate by less than $`0.4\%`$ over the annual running period. The effect on the analyzing power is of the same size. The annual radiation dose deposited in the crystals was determined to be about ten times below the level of damage. Instead of considering all contributions separately, the overall systematic uncertainty can also be estimated by periodically performing measurements with the sampling calorimeter to compare the polarization measurements of the two detectors. Based on this comparison, the systematic uncertainty associated with the long-term instability of the analyzing power is $`0.5\%`$.

Possible false asymmetries introduced by gain-mismatched photomultiplier tubes have been considered. An iterative method based on data from scanning the Compton photon beam across the detector front face is used to gain-match the detector elements within an accuracy of about 5%. The gains of the photomultiplier tubes are monitored continuously and found to change by approximately $`2030\%`$ during a beam fill, returning to their initial values between fills. These short-term drifts differ by only a few percent for the four photomultiplier tubes and therefore have no net effect on the polarization measurement, since the Longitudinal Polarimeter does not depend on an absolute energy calibration. Long-term deviations of the relative gains during the annual running were found to affect the beam polarization measurement by less than $`0.3\%`$.

The circular polarization of the laser light can be determined very precisely  immediately following the Pockels cell in the laser room. However, it can in principle be different at the interaction point, given the fact that the laser beam has to be passed through windows and lenses and be reflected from mirrors before it interacts with the electron beam. To estimate this uncertainty, the laser beam polarization was measured after the storage ring vacuum window with the identical analyzer that is normally mounted in the laser room. The two vacuum windows were removed, then each window was mounted separately, and finally the ring vacuum was re-established, while measuring the laser beam polarization after each step. Based on these measurements, a systematic uncertainty of $`0.2\%`$ was assigned to the circular polarization of the laser light at the interaction point.

The measurement may also be affected by changes in the phase space of the laser beam at the interaction point due to an imperfectly aligned Pockels cell. Horizontal or vertical shifts of the laser beam can occur when the voltage across the cell is changed, resulting in a helicity-dependent luminosity and hence a false energy asymmetry. To quantify extraneous helicity-dependent beam shift effects in the system, we performed two tests. First, a half wave plate was temporarily mounted immediately following the Pockels cell. Except for the expected change of sign in the measurement of the electron beam polarization, no change in the magnitude was observed within the $`0.3\%`$ precision of the test. However, this test does not account for non-optimal laser and electron beam overlap. This is important since the sensitivity to a helicity-dependent laser beam shift increases with decreasing overlap. Therefore a second test was performed by changing the overlap of the two beams within the limits of the normal operating conditions. This showed that the impact on the energy asymmetry is at most $`0.3\%`$. Combining the two values leads to a total contribution of $`0.4\%`$.

The position and size of the Compton photon beam incident on the calorimeter is determined by the electron beam orbit conditions at the interaction point. During normal HERA luminosity operation, variations of the size and divergence of the electron beam are so small that the impact on the calorimeter response is negligible. However, a change of the position or slope of the electron beam at the interaction point can result in a shift of the Compton photon distribution away from the center of the calorimeter. In these cases, the online feedback system of the polarimeter automatically repositions the calorimeter center on the Compton photon beam to better than 1 mm precision. By scanning the Compton photon beam across the calorimeter front face, it has been determined that within the relevant operating range, the effect on the measurement of the beam polarization is less than $`0.6\%`$. To estimate the effect of slow beam drifts during a fill, the slope of the electron beam was moved over the maximal observed range while keeping the Compton photon distribution centered on the calorimeter. No influence on the polarization measurement was observed within the $`0.5\%`$ accuracy of the study. Combining the uncertainties of the two tests leads to a total contribution of at most $`0.8\%`$.

The various contributions to the systematic uncertainties of the Longitudinal Polarimeter have been considered separately and added in quadrature to a total uncertainty of $`1.6\%`$ (see Table 1). Those systematic uncertainties of the two HERA electron beam polarimeters that relate to stability and reproducibility (not absolute scale) can be further studied by comparing their performances over an extended period of time. Non-statistical fluctuations in the ratio of their results over the 1999-2000 running periods correspond to a relative systematic stability of $`\sigma =1.6\%`$, which is compatible with the quadratic sum of contributions estimated from the two instruments.

## 6 Summary

We have designed and constructed a Compton back-scattering laser polarimeter which routinely measures the longitudinal polarization of the HERA electron beam for the HERMES experiment. The Longitudinal Polarimeter determines the beam polarization with an absolute statistical precision of 0.01 per minute and a fractional systematic uncertainty of $`1.6\%`$. The polarimeter also measures the polarization of individual electron bunches, a feature that is currently not available to the Transverse Polarimeter. It was found that the individual bunches can each have a significantly different polarization. This observation can be further analyzed if one groups the bunches into colliding and non-colliding bunches. The variation and the time evolution of the polarization of the individual bunches and of classes of bunches provide important additional information for achieving high beam polarization at HERA.

## 7 Acknowledgments

We would like to thank R. Fastner and the crew of the machine shop from the University of Freiburg for the design and construction of the optical transport system, and G. Braun for his help in designing some of the electronic components. We thank M. Spengos and E. Steffens for their help in the initial planning of the project, N. Meyners for his design of the safety interlock system, and H.D. Bremer for his help in the design and construction of the calorimeter and the calorimeter table. We also thank T. Behnke, A. Miller, and P. Schüler for many useful discussions and their comments to this article. We are grateful to E. Belz, O. Häusser, R. Henderson, M. Ruh, M. Woods, and R. Zurmühle for their help and advice. We acknowledge the DESY management for its support, and the DESY staff for the significant effort in the planning, design, and construction of the Longitudinal Polarimeter. We especially acknowledge the efforts of the HERA machine group to deliver high beam polarization. This work was supported by the German Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, and the US National Science Foundation.


text:
# QCD at Photon Colliders 11footnote 1Introductory talk given at the International Workshop on High Energy Photon Colliders, 14th - 17th June 2000, DESY, Hamburg, Germany

## 1 Introduction

The photon colliders offer unique possibility to probe QCD in a new and hitherto unexplored regime. Very high luminosity and relatively sharp spectrum of the backscattered laser photons are the enormous advantages of the photon colliders making it possible to measure very precisely various quantities as well as to have an access to rare QCD processes. The aim of this introductory talk is to elaborate the following two broad subjects for which the possible measurements at photon colliders may be particularily relevant:

1. The photon structure.
2. High energy QCD.

The content of our talk is as follows: in the next section we discuss the deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering as the tool for probing the quark content of the photon while in Section 3 we consider the measurements which may probe the gluon distributions in the photon. In Section 4 we very briefly summarise the theoretical expectations concerning the high energy behaviour of QCD (i.e. the QCD pomeron and odderon) and discuss the possibilities of the photon colliders to probe these expectations. We shall in particular consider production of vector mesons in $`\gamma \gamma `$ and $`\gamma ^{}\gamma `$ collisions and forward jet measurement in $`\gamma ^{}\gamma `$ collisions. as a probe of the QCD pomeron. In Section 5 we discuss the spin dependent structure function $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ of the photon . Finally in Section 6 we present a brief summary of our talk.

## 2 Deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering

The deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering, i.e. the process:

$$e(p_e)+\gamma (p_\gamma )e(p_e^{})+X$$

is characterised by the following kinematical variables:

$$s=(p_e+p_\gamma )^2,q=p_ep_e^{},Q^2=q^2,W^2=(q+p_\gamma )^2$$

$$y=\frac{p_\gamma q}{p_ep_\gamma },x=\frac{Q^2}{2p_\gamma q}$$
(1)
Possibility of precise measurement of the kinematical variables $`x,Q^2`$ in $`e\gamma `$ DIS is an enormous advantage of photon colliders. It is linked with the form of the spectrum of the backscattered laser photons which is more advantageus than the Weizsäker - Williams spectrum of the (quasi) real photons exchanged in single tagged $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions. This in particular allows precise measurement of the photon structure function(s) with much better accuracy than in the single tagged $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions.

The deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering is related in the following way to the photon structure functions $`F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ and $`F_L^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$:

$$\frac{d\sigma (e\gamma eX)}{dE_{tag}dcos\theta _{tag}}=$$

$$\frac{4\pi ^2E_{tag}}{Q^4y}\left[\left(1+(1y)^2\right)F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2)y^2F_L^\gamma (x,Q^2)\right]$$
(2)
where $`E_{tag}`$ and $`\theta _{tag}`$ denote the energy and the scattering angle of the tagged electron.

In the leading logarithmic approximation (LLA) of perturbative QCD the structure function $`F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ is derictly related to the quark distributions in the photon:

$$F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2)=2x\underset{i}{}e_i^2q_i^\gamma (x,Q^2)$$
(3)
where $`e_i`$ are the quark charges. Evolution of parton densities is governed by the Altarelli-Parisi equations which in the leading order take the following form :

$$Q^2\frac{dq_i^\gamma (x,Q^2)}{dQ^2}=\frac{\alpha _{em}N_c}{2\pi }e_i^2k_q^\gamma (x)+\frac{\alpha _s(Q^2)}{2\pi }\left(P_{qq}q_i^\gamma +P_{qg}g^\gamma \right)$$

$$Q^2\frac{dg^\gamma (x,Q^2)}{dQ^2}=\frac{\alpha _s(Q^2)}{2\pi }\left(P_{gq}\underset{i}{}q_i^\gamma +P_{gg}g^\gamma \right)$$
(4)
where

$$k_q^\gamma (x)=x^2+(1x)^2$$
(5)
and

$$P_{ij}f=_x^1\frac{dz}{z}P_{ij}\left(z\right)f(\frac{x}{z},Q^2)$$
(6)
The evolution equations (4) involve, besides the quark distributions also the gluon distribution $`g^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ in the photon.

The novel feature of the evolution equations for the parton distributions in the photons is the presence of the inhomogeneous term proportional to $`k_q^\gamma (x)`$ which corresponds to the point-like coupling of the photon to quarks (antiquarks). The solution of equations (4) for the parton distributions $`f^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ in the photon ($`f^\gamma =q_i^\gamma ,g^\gamma `$) can be written in the following form:

$$f^\gamma (x,Q^2)=f_{pl}^\gamma (x,Q^2)+f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q^2)$$
(7)
In this equation the distributions $`f_{pl}^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ are exactly calculable (modulo dependence upon the scale $`Q_0^2`$ where $`f_{pl}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2)=0`$ ). The hadronic component $`f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$, which corresponds to the general solution of the homogeneous evolution equatioms depends upon the non-calculable starting distributions at the input scale $`Q_0^2`$. Existing QCD analyses use NLO approximation in $`\overline{M}S`$ or $`DIS_\gamma `$ scheme(s) .

In Fig. 1 we show acceptance regions and event rates which are expected to be reached at $`e\gamma `$ DIS for the backscattered-laser $`e\gamma `$ mode of a 500 GeV linear collider . It can be seen from this Figure that the $`e\gamma `$ collider can offer opportunity to probe the very low values of $`x`$ ($`x10^4`$ for reasonably large values of $`Q^210GeV^2`$). At NLO low $`x`$ behaviour of parton distributions in the photon is dominated by a hadronic component. On the other hand at large values of $`x`$ the quark distributions are dominated by the point-like term.
At low $`x`$ one has also to include the low $`x`$ resummation effects in the spltting and coefficient functions which are generated by the small $`x`$ (i.e. BFKL) dynamics (see Sec. 5) . These small $`x`$ effects can significantly enhance the magnitude of the parton distributions in the photon and the photon structure function(s) at low values of $`x`$. The hadronic component remains to be the dominant contribution in this region yet the magnitude of the point like contribution is also enhanced.

At very large values of $`Q^2`$ the deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering can also acquire significant contribution from the $`Z_0`$ exchange. It modifies formula (2) which corresponds to the (virtual) photon exchange. Moreover at very large values of $`Q^2`$ one can have access to the charge current effects in the deep inelastic process $`e+\gamma \nu +X`$ which is mediated by the $`W`$ exchange. The study of this process can in particular give information about the flavour decomposition of the quark distributions in the photon .

## 3 Gluon distribution in the photon

The gluon distribution in the photon is a poorly known quantity. In principle it can be determined from the analysis of the scaling violation of $`F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ generated by the evolution equations (4), but this constraint turns out to be rather weak. In order to obtain the gluon distribution it is therefore much better to study the measurements which are predominantly sensitive to the gluon content of the photon. Thus at low $`x`$ the measurement of the longitudinal structure function $`F_L^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ might provide a ueful constraint on the gluon distributions in the photon. The complementary and presumably much more feasible are the dedicated measurements of the hadronic final states in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions. The following two processes are of particular interest:

1. Dijet production, which contains the process

$$\gamma gq\overline{q}$$
2. Charm production, which is sensitive to the mechanism

$$\gamma gc\overline{c}$$

Since both these processes are, at least in certain kinematical regions dominated by the photon - gluon fusion mechanism as indicated above, they are sensitive to the gluon distribution in the photon. The detailed discussion of these processes is presented in this Workshop in the talks by Thorsten Wengler and Albert De Roeck .

## 4 QCD at high energies

Important class of hard processes are the so called semi-hard processes in which the (large) scale $`Q^2`$ characterising the ”hardness” is much smaller than the very large energy squared $`W^2`$, i.e. $`W^2/Q^2>>1`$. These processes are sensitive to the resummation of the powers of the new class of large logarithm $`ln(W^2/Q^2)`$ in perturbative QCD calculations, i.e. they do probe the high energy limit of perturbative QCD.

The high energy limit of perturbative QCD is at present fairly well understood. The dominant contribution is given by the QCD pomeron singularity which is generated by the ladder diagrams with the (reggeised) gluon exchange along the ladder . Two gluon exchange gives the energy independent cross-sections while exchange of the gluon ladder with interacting gluons generates increase of cross-sections with energy.

The sum of ladder diagrams generates the Balitzkij, Fadin, Kuraev, Lipatov (BFKL) equation:

$$f(x,\widehat{k}^2)=f^0(x,\widehat{k}^2)+\frac{3\alpha _s}{2\pi }Kf$$
(8)
where $`f(x,\widehat{k}^2)`$ denotes the unintegrated gluon distribution with $`x`$ and $`k^2`$ denoting the longitudinal momentum fraction of the parent photon carried by the gluon and $`k^2`$ is the transverse momentum squared of the gluon. $`f^0(x,\widehat{k}^2)`$ is the suitably defined inhomogeneous term.

In leading order (i.e. in the leading $`ln(1/x)`$ approximation) we have:

$$Kf=_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\frac{d^2\widehat{q}}{\pi \widehat{q}^2}[f(z,(\widehat{k}+\widehat{q})^2)\mathrm{\Theta }(\widehat{k}^2\widehat{q}^2)f(z,\widehat{k})]$$
(9)
The following properties of the BFKL dynamics embodied in the BFKL equation should be emphasised.

1.Diffusion of transverse momentum along the chain which should reflect itself in the hadronic final state

2. Characteristic rise with decreasing $`x`$. In LO $`fx^\lambda ,\lambda =4ln(2)3\alpha _s/\pi `$

3. Large subleading effects . Their major part is however understood and is under control .

Besides the pomeron QCD does also predict existence of the so called QCD odderon . The QCD odderon corresponds to the (interacting) three gluons exchange with the three gluons coupled to the odd C, i.e. to non-vacuum quantum numbers. The intercept of the odderon is close to $`1`$. The cross-sections generated by the odderon exchange should then be approximately independent of the incident energy.

The high energy photon colliders offer interesting opportunities to probe the QCD pomeron. It may also appear possible that the photon colliders, thanks to their very high luminosity will allow to measure rare processes generated by the odderon exchange.

The following processes are very useful tools for probing the QCD pomeron in high energy $`e\gamma `$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions :

1. Deep inelastic $`e\gamma `$ scattering accompanied by a jet moving close to the direction of the photon ($`x_j>>x`$, where $`x_j`$ is the momentum fraction of the parent photon carried by a jet) and with $`k_{Tj}^2Q^2`$ .
2. Diffractive production of Vector Mesons in $`e\gamma `$ DIS, i.e.
$`\gamma ^{}\gamma VV`$
$`\gamma ^{}\gamma VX`$
3. Diffractive production of heavy vector mesons in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions
$`\gamma \gamma VV`$
$`\gamma \gamma VX`$

In Fig. 2 we show theoretical expectations for the cross-section of the diffractive $`J/\psi `$ production in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions, i.e. of the process $`\gamma \gamma J/\psi J/\psi `$ . Expected magnitude of this cross-section suggests that the measurement of the reaction $`\gamma \gamma J/\psi J/\psi `$ at the photon colliders should certainly be feasible.

The following processes might probe the QCD odderon :

1. Quasidiffractive production of pseudoscalar mesons in $`e\gamma `$ DIS.

$`\gamma ^{}\gamma PP`$
$`\gamma ^{}\gamma PX`$
2. Quasidiffractive production of (heavy) pseudoscalar mesons in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions

$`\gamma \gamma PP`$

$`\gamma \gamma PX`$

## 5 Spin dependent structure function $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$

Thanks to the possibiliity of having polarised beams the photon colliders offer an opportunity to measure the spin dependent structure function $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ of the photon . This is completely unknown quantity and its measurement in polarised $`e\gamma `$ DIS would be extremely useful for testing QCD predictions in the broad region of $`x`$ and $`Q^2`$.

The spin dependent parton distributions in the photon $`\mathrm{\Delta }f^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ satisfy in LO Altarelli - Parisi equations similar to equations (4) with the term $`k_q^\gamma (x)`$ and the splitting functions $`P_{ij}(z)`$ being replaced by their spin dependent counterparts $`\mathrm{\Delta }k_q^\gamma (x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }P_{ij}(z)`$. The NLO formalism is also available. In Fig. 3 we show theoretical expectations for $`\mathrm{\Delta }u^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }g^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ and for $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ . We show results for the two model assumptions concerning the input hadronic component $`\mathrm{\Delta }f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2)`$ at the reference scale $`Q_0^2`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2)=f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2),$$
(10)
where $`f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2)`$ denotes hadronic component of spin independent parton distributions, and for

$$\mathrm{\Delta }f_{had}^\gamma (x,Q_0^2)=0$$
(11)
It should be observed that the high energy photon colliders would make it possible to probe the spin dependent structure function of the photon $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ for the very small values of $`x`$ where it is sensitive to the novel effects of the double $`ln^2(1/x)`$ resummation . Study of some dedicated measurements, like dijet or charm production in polarised $`\gamma \gamma `$ scattering might also give access to the spin dependent gluon distribution $`\mathrm{\Delta }g^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ in the photon.

## 6 Summary and conclusions

In this talk we have confined ourselves to a brief survey of the possible measurements at photon colliders which could probe photon structure and high energy limit of perturbative QCD. We have in particular emphasised the following points:

1. Photon colliders permit precise determination of kinematical variables in $`\gamma \gamma `$ or $`e\gamma `$ scattering that will allow precise measurement of quantities relevant for understanding the structure of the photon ($`F_2^\gamma (x,Q^2),g^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$).
2. Photon colliders will give access to the (very) small $`x`$ region in $`e\gamma `$ DIS.
3. Photon colliders will be a unique probe of the high energy limit of QCD testing effects of the QCD pomeron and possibly also the odderon exchanges. The diffractive production of $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ mesons in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions is one of the very promising processes for probing the QCD pomeron at photon colliders.
4. Photon colliders offer a unique possibility to measure the spin dependent structure function $`g_1^\gamma (x,Q^2)`$ of the photon.

## Acknowledgments

I thank Valery Telnov for his kind invitation to the Workshop. I would like to congratulate him and other organisers for preparing an excellent meeting. I thank Ilya Ginzburg, Maria Krawczyk, Leszek Motyka, Albert De Roeck, Marco Stratmann, Thorsten Wengler, Andreas Vogt and Peter Zerwas for useful discussions. This research has been supported in part by the European Community grant ’Training and Mobility of Researchers’, Network ’Quantum Chromodynamics and the Deep Structure of Elementary Particles’ FMRX-CT98-0194.

## Figure captions

1. Expected event numbers of electron-photon DIS for the backscattered-laser $`e\gamma `$ mode of a 500 GeV linear collider. It is assumed that 10% of the $`e^+e^{}`$ luminosity can be reached in this mode for a rather monochromatic photon beam. (From ref. .)
2. Energy dependence of the cross-section for the process $`\gamma \gamma J/\psi J/\psi `$. The two lower curves correspond to the calculations based on the BFKL equation with kinematical constraint generating the dominant subleading effects and the values of $`s_0`$ equal to $`0.04\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (the continuous line) and to $`0.16\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (dashed line). The two upper curves correspond to the BFKL equation in the leading logarithmic approximation with $`s_0=0.04\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (dash-dotted line) and $`s_0=0.16\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (short-dashed line). The parameter $`s_0`$ controlls the contribution from the infrared i.e. confinement region. (From ref. .)
3. $`x\mathrm{\Delta }u^\gamma /\alpha `$ and $`x\mathrm{\Delta }g^\gamma /\alpha `$ evolved to $`Q^2=10`$ and $`1000\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ in LO using the two extreme inputs (10) and (11). Also shown is the structure function $`g_1^\gamma `$ in LO. (From ref. .)