text:
# The planar perfect lens: physical requirements and possible alternative realizations

## 1 Introduction

It is known that using materials with simultaneously negative permittivity and permeability (at a given frequency) focusing of divergent homocentric electromagnetic beams by “planar lenses” becomes possible because of the negative refraction . As it was found in , such lenses are also able to “amplify” evanescent fields carrying information about sub-wavelength details of a source near field. There were also a few experimental papers  demonstrating negative refraction effects in microwave composite materials. These facts received a lot of attention (and criticism) in the recent literature (see, e.g., ). The “amplification” of evanescent waves in a Veselago’s slab lens is a phenomenon that easily contradicts with intuition and common sense, especially for those who are used to associate the word “amplification” with an active device that amplifies the signal power. As it was recently shown in , this “amplification” is simply a resonant excitation of waveguide modes of a slab waveguide filled by the Veselago medium. Misunderstanding of the nature of this phenomenon comes, in our opinion, from a not quite appropriate and clear terminology used in the first papers on this subject. The terms “resonance” or “resonant growth” are probably more appropriate for this phenomenon.

In this paper, we will not discuss problems and difficulties in theoretical interpretation and practical realization of backward-wave materials and the perfect lens based on these media. Only briefly, we note that from our point of view, the physical existence of the negative refraction phenomenon as well as the evanescent field “amplification” phenomenon is beyond any theoretical doubt today. Still, there maybe some questions regarding the accuracy of the experimental approach used in  and the degree of the performance deterioration because of inevitable losses and the finite size of the lens, but at least theoretically the problem may be considered now as well-understood. Indeed, the causality question mentioned in  has been solved in . The negative influence of the medium dispersion and losses discussed in  can, in principle, be overcome by using metamaterials involving active devices .

However, these difficulties call for a study of alternative realizations of a device that can restore near fields. Thus, despite the fact that there is now a direct and in principle well-understood way to realizing new lenses by means of backward-wave materials, we will make a step aside in this paper. Starting from the analysis of an ideal Veselago slab lens, we will formulate a couple of equivalent problems and show that the special electromagnetic property of the material filling, namely, existence of backward waves, is not, in fact, crucial for a planar device operating as a lens or, moreover, as a perfect lens. What makes a Veselago lens to behave as a perfect lens, are the properties of the two slab interfaces. We will show that devices working in a similar manner can be constructed using planar grids or material sheets imposing necessary boundary conditions at two parallel planes in air.

## 2 The ideal Veselago lens and an equivalent problem

Let us start from considering an ideal Veselago slab lens operation. Its well-known structure is depicted in Figure 1. We work in the frequency domain, and the time dependence is of the form $`e^{+j\omega t}`$.

We suppose that the lens is positioned in space with the relative permittivity and permeability equal to $`1`$. The corresponding relative parameters of the slab material both equal to $`1`$ at the working frequency. The boundary conditions at the lens interfaces are the usual Maxwellian boundary conditions (the tangential components of the fields are continuous across the interfaces). The corresponding field equations are also shown in Figure 1 for all three regions.

It is easy to notice that the equations in region 2 differ from that in regions 1 and 3 only by complex conjugation. Substitution

$$𝐄_{(\mathrm{old})},𝐇_{(\mathrm{old})}𝐄_{(\mathrm{new})}^{},𝐇_{(\mathrm{new})}^{}$$
(1)
(here and thereafter  denotes the complex conjugation operation) into the field equations in region 2 results in a new but equivalent problem written for new field vectors, as it is shown in Figure 2.

In the new formulation the field equations are the same in all three regions, and they are simply the Maxwell equations in free space:

$$\times 𝐄=j\omega \mu _0𝐇,\times 𝐇=j\omega ϵ_0𝐄$$
(2)
The boundary conditions on the two interfaces, however, are no more the standard continuity conditions, but they involve complex conjugation:

$$𝐄_{\mathrm{t}_{(1,3)}}=𝐄_{\mathrm{t}_{(2)}}^{},𝐇_{\mathrm{t}_{(1,3)}}=𝐇_{\mathrm{t}_{(2)}}^{}$$
(3)
Let us discuss the physics of these boundary conditions involving complex conjugation a bit later. At this stage we see that an ideal Veselago slab refraction problem is mathematically equivalent to the refraction at two conjugating planes in free space. Hence, for the system of two such planes in free space the field solutions are the same as for a Veselago material slab: propagating plane waves are refracted negatively, and the evanescent modes are “amplified”, which are, obviously, the conditions for a perfect lens.

To understand how these conjugating planes operate consider a plane wave incidence problem for a single conjugating plane. The problem geometry for the TM incidence is shown in Figure 3. The incident wave comes from the left. The magnetic field is orthogonal to the picture plane and is not shown.

Because of the specific nature of the boundary conditions (3), the solution for the transmitted wave must depend on the tangential coordinate $`x`$ as $`e^{+jk_\mathrm{t}x}`$ ($`k_\mathrm{t}`$ denotes the tangential component of the wave vector), if the incident wave phasor is $`e^{jk_\mathrm{t}x}`$, otherwise one cannot satisfy the boundary conditions. We can say that $`k_\mathrm{t}`$ changes sign when a plane wave passes across the interface. In this process, the transmitted field energy in the second region must propagate to the right. This determines the direction of the Poynting vector normal component $`𝐒_\mathrm{n}`$. The second region is now an air region that means the normal component of the wave vector in the second region is along the same direction as $`𝐒_\mathrm{n}`$. A similar relation holds for $`𝐤_\mathrm{t}`$, $`𝐒_\mathrm{t}`$ pair (see the picture). Clearly, negative refraction takes place.

It is possible to write simple equations for the complex field amplitudes of the reflected and transmitted fields. If $`A`$, $`B`$, and $`C`$ denote the amplitudes of the incident, transmitted, and reflected wave electric field tangential components, respectively, then for the considered TM case one can write:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}A+C& =& B^{}\\ (AC)/\eta & =& B^{}/\eta ^{}\end{array}$$
(4)
Here $`\eta =\eta (k_\mathrm{t})`$ is the wave impedance connecting tangential components of electric and magnetic fields of a wave. It is obviously a function of $`k_\mathrm{t}`$. For the propagating modes $`\eta `$ is purely real, for the evanescent ones it is purely imaginary. The solution of (4) is

$$C=\frac{1\eta /\eta ^{}}{1+\eta /\eta ^{}}A,B=\frac{2A^{}}{1+\eta ^{}/\eta }$$
(5)
It is seen that for propagating modes (real wave impedance) the interface is perfectly matched: reflected field amplitude $`C=0`$, and the transmitted field amplitude $`B=A^{}`$. For evanescent modes (imaginary wave impedance) the denominator of (5) is zero, and a surface wave (surface polariton) resonance occurs: $`B,C\mathrm{}`$. As is known , an interface between free space and a backward-wave material with $`ϵ=ϵ_0`$ and $`\mu =\mu _0`$ has similar properties. Another interesting feature of the obtained result is that it is impossible to introduce the usual transmission coefficient because the transmitted field is proportional to $`A^{}`$, but not directly to $`A`$. This is because the boundary conditions (3) are no more linear in the sense of multiplication by a complex number.

An important conclusion from this analysis is that all the phenomena necessary for perfect reconstruction of the entire wave spectrum take place at the two interfaces of the Veselago slab. If one can realize a sheet such that traveling waves refract negatively when crossing this sheet, a system of two such sheets in free space will focus propagating modes of a source just like a Veselago slab. If this sheet also supports surface waves for any $`k_t>k_0=\omega \sqrt{ϵ_0\mu _0}`$, then two such sheets in free space will reconstruct the entire evanescent spectrum as well.

## 3 Physical restrictions

Let us now discuss the physical meaning of the boundary conditions (3) and the restrictions on their physical realization. Complex conjugation in the frequency domain corresponds to time reversal in the time domain. If the boundary conditions (3) were true for every spectral frequency component in the range $`(\mathrm{},+\mathrm{})`$, then this condition would obviously violate the causality principle. Speaking in simple words, one could in this case say that transformation (1) forces the time to go in the opposite directions inside sub-regions of a single physical system. But if we are interested only in steady-state operations at a given frequency, then the complex conjugation becomes possible, at least using nonlinear or active devices, e.g., mixers. Conceptually, if a thin sheet of a nonlinear material is illuminated by a signal plane wave with the harmonic time dependence $`\mathrm{cos}(\omega _0t+\varphi )`$ and a reference plane wave $`\mathrm{cos}(2\omega _0t)`$, among the output harmonics there is a plane wave $`\mathrm{cos}(\omega _0t\varphi )`$, which corresponds to the complex conjugation of the original field.

Another important point is the following. Applying transformation (1) and concluding that the middle region has became a true free-space region we have silently assumed that all electromagnetic quantities and relations have been kept in their original free-space form after such a transformation. Let us consider an illustrative example. A simpler idea of how to transform the field equations of an ideal Veselago slab to free-space equations is changing the sign of the electric (or magnetic) field in the Maxwell equations. The (sourceless) field equations take the necessary form after such transformation, but the problem is that the Poynting vector $`𝐒=Re(𝐄\times 𝐇^{})`$ in the old variables becomes $`𝐒=Re(𝐄\times 𝐇^{})`$ in the new ones. From the other hand, it is easy to see that substitution (1) preserves the Poynting vector expression in the original form. The physical reason of this is, of course, the time reversal invariance of a reciprocal electromagnetic system.

## 4 Possible realizations not involving complex conjugation of the fields

In the previous section we have considered a potential device that is able to ideally imitate the operation of a Veselago slab lens. Now we will concentrate on other possibilities providing additional freedom in realization of sub-wavelength resolution lenses without involving the complex conjugation operator. In this section we will make use of a powerful synthesis method based on so-called transmission matrices, known in the microwave circuit theory. These matrices connect the complex amplitudes of waves traveling in the opposite directions and measured at two reference planes:

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}E_2^{}\\ E_2^+\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}t_{11}& t_{12}\\ t_{21}& t_{22}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}E_1^{}\\ E_1^+\end{array}\right)$$
(6)
Here, $`E_1^\pm `$ and $`E_2^\pm `$ denote the tangential components of the electric field complex amplitudes of waves at the first (input) and the second (output) interfaces of a device, respectively (we restrict ourselves by plane structures and plane waves). The signs ± correspond to the signs in the propagator exponents $`e^{\pm jk_\mathrm{n}z}`$ of these waves, and $`z`$ is the axis orthogonal to the interfaces. It is known that the T-matrix of a serial connection of several devices described by their T-matrices is simply a multiplication of the matrices in the order determined by the connection.

The total transmission matrix from the source plane to the plane where the source field distribution is ideally reconstructed must be the identity matrix

$$T_{\mathrm{total}}=T_{\mathrm{space}\mathrm{after}}T_{\mathrm{device}}T_{\mathrm{space}\mathrm{before}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(7)
for every spatial harmonic of the source field. Here, $`T_{\mathrm{space}\mathrm{before}}`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{space}\mathrm{after}}`$ represent air layers occupying the space between the source plane and the device, and the space between the device and the image plane. $`T_{\mathrm{device}}`$ is the transmission matrix of our device. From this formula it is obvious that a complete reconstruction of the field distribution in the source plane at a distant image plane must involve phase compensation for the propagating space harmonics and “amplification” for the evanescent ones. In other words, we need to synthesize a device that somehow inverts the action of a free space layer.

Condition (7) is a strict condition requiring not only the device one-way transmission to be such that it reconstructs the source field picture at the image plane, but also the matching to be ideal and the device operation to be symmetric (reversible in the optical sense). We will consider some less strict conditions a bit later. The matrices presented in (7) can be written in explicit forms. A space layer of thickness $`d/2`$ has the T-matrix

$$T_{\mathrm{space}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d/2}& 0\\ 0& e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d/2}\end{array}\right)$$
(8)
To compensate the action of two such layers before and after the device, the device T-matrix $`T_{\mathrm{device}}`$ has to be, obviously, the inverse of the transmission matrix of these space layers:

$$T_{\mathrm{device}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}& 0\\ 0& e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}\end{array}\right)$$
(9)
There are at least two solutions known for this idealistic case by now: an ideal Veselago slab lens and a system of two conjugating planes discussed above111Perhaps, it is not easy to see directly why (9) holds for a pair of conjugating planes, since there is only the normal component of the wave vector in (9) which is kept untouched by (3). But considering conjugations at both planes together and taking the inner space partial wave propagators $`e^{\pm jk_\mathrm{n}d}`$ into account, equation (9) can be easily obtained.. Are other solutions possible? Let us consider a device that is a combination of two “field transformers” (e.g., this sheets of certain electromagnetic properties) separated by a layer of free space. In other words, we want to study if we can replace conjugating planes by some other layers, hopefully more easily realizable. This device is modeled by the transmission matrix

$$T_{\mathrm{device}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}& 0\\ 0& e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}e& f\\ g& h\end{array}\right)$$
(10)
Here, the first and the last matrices with yet unknown components describe the two layers forming the device. It is easy to show that if $`a=d=0`$, $`e=h=0`$ and $`bg=cf=1`$ then the total device T-matrix takes form (9), i.e., the necessary matrix of an ideal lens.

The next question is whether there is a way to realize a layer with the transmission matrix of the form

$$T_{\mathrm{trans}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& b\\ c& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(11)
A person with experience in microwave engineering would probably say that such T-matrix can never be achieved in a physical device, because it corresponds to a scattering matrix (well-known S-matrix) having all components being infinite. However, a more careful investigation of this question will lead us to an important result presented in the next section.

## 5 The use of impedance grids

Here, we will show that under certain restrictions devices that “amplify” evanescent fields can be designed using only passive elements, if we do not demand that the same device reconstructs the propagating part of the spectrum. This is possible because the two main phenomena on the two interfaces in a perfect lens (negative refraction, necessary to focus propagating modes, and surface polariton resonance, necessary to reconstruct the evanescent spectrum) are fundamentally different, and the required properties of such sheets are not necessarily combined in a single design.

Let us consider a simple system: a lossless isotropic grid, e.g., a conductive wire mesh. If the grid induced current is only electric current, and there is no effective magnetic current induced in the grid (e.g., when the grid structure is completely planar), then the grid reflection coefficient $`R`$ and transmission coefficient $`T`$ at the grid plane are connected as

$$T=1+R$$
(12)
provided that they are defined through the electric field tangential components. The corresponding T-matrix of such a grid is

$$T_\mathrm{g}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1+2R}{1+R}& \frac{R}{1+R}\\ \frac{R}{1+R}& \frac{1}{1+R}\end{array}\right)$$
(13)
It is possible to make grids supporting propagation of surface modes (also known as slow waves in radio engineering). For wire meshes, for example, this phenomenon was investigated in . If the tangential component of the wave vector of an incident wave coincides with the propagation factor of a surface mode, the surface mode resonance appears. Obviously, the incident wave should be evanescent in this case to match with the propagation constant of the surface mode. At a surface mode resonance $`R\mathrm{}`$ (for evanescent modes $`R`$ is not bounded by $`|R|1`$). Then, the grid T-matrix takes the form

$$T_\mathrm{g}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(14)
It is almost of the necessary form (11). Remembering that conditions (7) and (9) are too strict in many cases, let us calculate the total device matrix using (14) directly. We obtain

$$T_{\mathrm{device}}=T_\mathrm{g}T_{\mathrm{space}}T_\mathrm{g}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}4e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}& 2e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}\\ 2e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}& e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}\end{array}\right)$$
(15)
which seems to be far from the desired, but let us check what is the device S-matrix. After some algebra involving the known relations connecting the elements of T and S matrices:

$$S=\left(\begin{array}{cc}t_{21}/t_{22}& 1/t_{22}\\ t_{11}t_{12}t_{21}/t_{22}& t_{12}/t_{22}\end{array}\right)$$
(16)
we get

$$S_{\mathrm{device}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}\\ e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}& 2\end{array}\right)$$
(17)
Notice pluses in the exponents for $`s_{12}`$, $`s_{21}`$. They mean that the device can “amplify” resonating evanescent modes. This is yet another indication of the fact that Pendry’s amplification  means the resonance growth in a surface mode resonance. The device based on simple grids considered above is not a lens, though. It cannot focus propagating modes, as equation (17) holds only at surface mode resonances ($`R=\mathrm{}`$). Another “imperfectness” of the found realization is that there is no ideal matching in this case. The incident resonant evanescent mode reflects from the device with the coefficient $`2`$.

The matrix components of (17) can lead to various possible design conditions, less strict than (7) or (9). For example, a direct analogy gives the following form of the device S-matrix

$$S_{\mathrm{device}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}r& e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}\\ e^{+jk_\mathrm{n}d}& r\end{array}\right)$$
(18)
for a symmetric reciprocal device. The corresponding T-matrix for this case reads

$$T_{\mathrm{device}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}r^2e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}& re^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}\\ re^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}& e^{jk_\mathrm{n}d}\end{array}\right)$$
(19)
There are various other possibilities involving asymmetric and nonreciprocal devices.

## 6 Conclusions

In this paper, general requirements and possibilities for realization of planar lenses being able to reconstruct near-field distributions of a source with sub-wavelength resolution (so-called perfect lenses) have been considered. Based on the observation that the phenomena at the two boundary surfaces of a slab lens are more critical for a lens operation than the propagation phenomena inside the lens material, we have arrived to the following main conclusions.

One does not necessarily need a composite medium possessing negative $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ or another kind of backward-wave medium to produce a perfect lens. An analogous device can be constructed using various other possibilities. So far, two general possibilities have been considered. One is based on usage of two parallel artificially made surfaces or sheets imposing boundary conditions of form (3) on fields in free space. The realizability of such a device is not forbidden (at least for single-frequency, or steady-state, operations) by physical laws and we are looking forward for using nonlinear (or active) materials to achieve this purpose. Operating as a planar lens, the device is able to focus propagating modes of a source providing in the same time an “amplification” of the evanescent modes, i.e. it is able to work as a perfect sub-wavelength resolution imaging device.

The second possibility lies in a wide class of planar structures supporting slow waves. The surface mode (polariton) resonance occurs in such structures when the incident field wave vector tangential component coincides with the propagation factor of a slow wave. It happens if the incident wave is an evanescent wave in free space. We have shown that using surface mode resonances in lossless grids placed in air it is possible to achieve “amplification” of evanescent modes, like in the case of Veselago’s slab lens. This phenomenon can be used not only for making optical or electromagnetic imaging devices more precise, but also for applications where the surface mode resonance allows to detect small field irregularities in a near field of an object.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

About integrated invariance, arising at resonance of oscillations in some types non-conservative mechanical systems

A.N. Skripka

KCK Soft, Kiev, Ukraine

skripka@ukrpost.net

For system of two ordinary differential equations of the second order representing autonomous non-conservative holonomic mechanical system, in case of dynamics such as one-frequency periodical oscillations, is found integrated invariant of movement.

Consider a system of two ordinary differential equations of the second order:

$$\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=I(x,y),\frac{d^2y}{dt^2}=J(x,y).$$
$`(1)`$
It can be interpreted as movement of a particle of unit weight in two-dimensional space $`(x,y)`$ under action of an any force field

$$\stackrel{}{F}(x,y)=(I(x,y),J(x,y)).$$

Using the Helmholz theorem \[1,p177\] any vector field is possible to present as the sums of potential and vortical fields

$$\stackrel{}{F}(x,y)=\stackrel{}{F}_1(x,y)+\stackrel{}{F}_2(x,y).$$

The potential field represents a gradient some scalar field $`U=U(x,y):`$

$$\stackrel{}{F}_1=gradU=(\frac{U}{x},\frac{U}{y}).$$
$`(2)`$
For a two-dimensional vortical field $`\stackrel{}{F}_2=(F_{2x}(x,y),F_{2y}(x,y))`$ the expression is fair:

$$div\stackrel{}{F}_2=\frac{F_{2x}}{x}+\frac{F_{2y}}{y},$$

through which this field is possible to define through vortical potential $`\psi (x,y):`$

$$\stackrel{}{F}_2=(\frac{\psi }{y},\frac{\psi }{x}).$$
$`(3)`$
Using expressions (2) and (3) field $`\stackrel{}{F}`$ is possible to present as follows:

$$\stackrel{}{F}(x,y)=(\frac{U}{x}+\frac{\psi }{y},\frac{U}{y}\frac{\psi }{x}).$$

Taking into account above mentioned ratio system (1) is possible to write as:

$$\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=\frac{U}{x}+\frac{\psi }{y},\frac{d^2y}{dt^2}=\frac{U}{y}\frac{\psi }{x}.$$
$`(4)`$
The system (4) represents autonomous non-conservative holonomic mechanical system.

Let enter function $`H(x,y,p,r)=0.5(p^2+r^2)+U(x,y),p=dx/dt,r=dy/dt,`$ representing complete mechanical energy of system (4). Using this function, system (4) is possible to present as:

$$\frac{dx}{dt}=\frac{H}{p},\frac{dp}{dt}=\frac{H}{x}+\frac{\psi }{y},$$

$$\frac{dy}{dt}=\frac{H}{r},\frac{dr}{dt}=\frac{H}{y}\frac{\psi }{x}.$$
$`(5)`$
Multiplying the first equation (5) on $`dp/dt`$, second equation on $`dx/dt`$, third on $`dr/dt`$, fourth on $`dy/dt`$ and having combined together four received equations, we shall receive:

$$\frac{dH}{dt}=\frac{\psi }{y}\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{\psi }{x}\frac{dy}{dt}.$$
$`(6)`$
The expression in the right part (6) is a capacity of non-potential forces, working in system (4).

By the most common case of regular oscillatory dynamics of system (4) are two-frequency quasi-periodical oscillations, when the trajectories everywhere densely fill on a surface 2-torus in phase space $`(x,dx/dt,y,dy/dt).`$ Thus of frequency of oscillations $`T_1`$ and $`T_2`$ are incommensurable, that is them is impossible to present as $`T_1/T_2=m/n,`$ where $`m,n`$ \- natural numbers. However at the certain values of parameters and entry conditions the frequencies of oscillations will be corresponds as natural numbers and then the trajectories of system (4) will represent the closed curve on a surface 2-torus. It is a mode occurrence of a resonance, when the system makes one-frequency oscillations with the period $`T=nT_1=mT_2.`$ Further given case will be is considered more in detail.

Integrate equation (6) on time in interval from 0 up to $`T:`$

$$\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}(\frac{dH}{dt}+\frac{\psi }{x}\frac{dy}{dt}\frac{\psi }{y}\frac{dx}{dt})𝑑t=H(t=T)H(t=0)+\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}(\frac{dH}{dt}+\frac{\psi }{x}\frac{dy}{dt}\frac{\psi }{y}\frac{dx}{dt})𝑑t=0.$$

As the considered oscillations are one-frequency with the period $`T,`$ that $`H(t=0)=H(t=T)`$ and last expression will accept a kind:

$$\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}(\frac{\psi }{x}\frac{dy}{dt}\frac{\psi }{y}\frac{dx}{dt})𝑑t=0.$$
$`(7)`$
It also can be written down as follows

$$\underset{L}{}(\frac{\psi }{x}dy\frac{\psi }{y}dx)=0,$$
$`(8)`$
where contour $`L`$ is meant as the closed trajectory in space $`(x,y),`$ appropriate to trajectories of considered periodic oscillations of systems (4). Using the formula of Green  expression (8) it is possible to transform to a kind:

$$\underset{S}{}(\frac{^2\psi }{x^2}+\frac{^2\psi }{y^2})𝑑x𝑑y=0,$$
$`(9)`$
where $`S`$ \- area on a plane $`(x,y),`$ limited by a curve $`L.`$ The expressions (7), (8) and (9) represent the various forms of recording integrated invariant of system (4).

1.Korn G.A, Korn Th.M. Mathematical handbook for scientists and engineers – Moscow: Nauka, 1974. – 504p. (in russian)


text:
# The Relativistic Linear Singular Oscillator

## 1 Introduction

In the framework of the non-relativistic quantum mechanics Refs. \[1-5\] studied in detail the linear singular oscillator, which is described in the configuration representation by the Hamiltonian

$$H_N=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+\frac{m\omega ^2}{2}x^2+\frac{g}{x^2}.$$
(1.1)
The singular oscillator, being one of the rare exactly solvable problems in the non-relativistic quantum mechanics has been extensively used in many applications. There are a lot of quantum mechanical and quantum field theory problems leading to the solution of the Schrödinger equation with Hamiltonian (1.1). For example, it served as an initial point in constructing exactly solvable models of interacting $`N`$-body systems . It was also used for the modeling of the diatomic  and polyatomic  molecules. The interest to the given Hamiltonian recently has increased in connection with its use for the description of spin chains , quantum Hall effect , fractional statistics and anyons .

In the case of a constant frequency $`\omega `$, a complete set of orthonormalized eigenfunctions of Hamiltonian (1.1) in the interval $`0<x<\mathrm{}`$ can be choosen in the form (see, for example )

$$\psi _n^{nonrel}(x)=\left[2\left(\frac{m\omega }{\mathrm{}}\right)^{d+1}\frac{n!}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(d+n+1)}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}x^{d+\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{m\omega }{2\mathrm{}}x^2}L_n^d\left(\frac{m\omega }{\mathrm{}}x^2\right),$$
(1.2)
where $`d=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{1+\frac{8mg}{\mathrm{}^2}}`$, and $`L_n^d(y)`$ are the associated Laguerre polynomials. The corresponding eigenvalues of $`H_N`$ (1.1) have the form

$$E_n^{nonrel}=\mathrm{}\omega (2n+d+1),n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}.$$
(1.3)
The purpose of this paper is to construct and investigate a relativistic exactly solvable model of the quantum linear singular oscillator (1.1), which can be applied for study relativistic physical systems as well as systems on a lattice.

Our construction is based on the version of the relativistic quantum mechanics, which was developed in several papers and applied for solution of a lot of problems in particle physics \[11-24\]. Although this version of the relativistic quantum mechanics is closely analogous to the non-relativistic quantum mechanics, its essential characteristic is that the relative motion wavefunction satisfies a finite-difference equation with the step equal to the Compton wavelength of the particle, $`\lambda =\mathrm{}/mc`$. For example, in the case of a local quasipotential of interaction $`V\left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)`$ the equation for the wavefunction of two scalar particles with equal masses has the form

$$\left[H_0+V\left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)\right]\psi (\stackrel{}{r})=E\psi (\stackrel{}{r}),$$
(1.4)
where the finite-difference operator $`H_0`$ is a relativistic free Hamiltonian

$$H_0=mc^2\left[\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\lambda _r\right)+\frac{i\lambda }{r}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\lambda _r\right)+\frac{\stackrel{}{L}^2}{2\left(mcr\right)^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\lambda _r\right)\right],$$
(1.5)
and $`\stackrel{}{L}^2`$ is the square of the angular momentum operator and $`_r\frac{}{r}`$. The technique of difference differentiation was developed and analogues of the important functions of the continuous analysis were obtained to fit the relativistic quantum mechanics, based on Eq. (1.4) .

Unlike non-relativistic quantum mechanics, because of presence of the finite-difference operator $`e^{i\lambda _r}`$ in presented relativistic quantum mechanics both the Hamiltonian and the quasipotential contain the imaginary terms. However, they are hermitian operators with the respect to scalar product $`\psi ^{}\phi 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}`$, where $`\psi \left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)`$ and $`\phi \left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)`$ are the square-integrable functions.

We note that, there is a regular method for construction of the quasipotential in the framework of the field-theoretical formalism. However, it can be also introduced phenomenologically.

The space of vectors $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ is called the relativistic configurational space or $`\stackrel{}{r}`$-space. The concept of the $`\stackrel{}{r}`$-space has been introduced for the first time in the context of the quasipotential approach to the relativistic two-body problem .

The quasipotential equations for the relativistic scattering amplitude and the wave function $`\psi \left(\stackrel{}{p}\right)`$ in the momentum space have the form

$`A(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{q})={\displaystyle \frac{m}{4\pi }}V(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{q};E_q)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(2\pi \right)^3}}{\displaystyle V(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{k};E_q)G_q\left(k\right)A(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{q})𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_k},`$ (1.6)
$`\psi \left(\stackrel{}{p}\right)=\left(2\pi \right)^3\delta \left(\stackrel{}{p}()\stackrel{}{q}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(2\pi \right)^3}}G_q\left(p\right){\displaystyle V(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{k};E_q)\psi \left(\stackrel{}{k}\right)𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_k},`$ (1.7)
where

$`G_q\left(p\right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{E_qE_p+i0}},\delta \left(\stackrel{}{p}()\stackrel{}{q}\right)\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}^2}{m^2c^2}}}\delta \left(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{q}\right),`$ (1.8)
$`d\mathrm{\Omega }_k={\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{k}}{\sqrt{1+\frac{\stackrel{}{k}^2}{m^2c^2}}}},E_q=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{q}^2c^2+m^2c^4},`$
and $`V(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{k};E_q)`$ is the quasipotential.

The integration in (1.6) and (1.7) is carried over the mass shell of the particle with mass $`m`$, i.e. over the upper sheet of the hyperboloid $`p_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\stackrel{}{p}^2=m^2c^2`$, which from the geometrical point of view realizes the three-dimensional Lobachevsky space. The group of motions of this space is the Lorentz group $`SO(3,1)`$.

Equations (1.6) and (1.7) have the absolute character with respect to the geometry of the momentum space, i.e., formally they don’t differ from the non-relativistic Lippmann-Schwinger and Schrödinger equations. We can derive Eqs. (1.6) and (1.7) substituting the relativistic (non-Euclidean) expressions for the energy, volume element, and $`\delta `$-function by their non-relativistic (Euclidean) analogues:

$`E_q={\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{2m}}E_q=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{q}^2c^2+m^2c^4},`$
$`d\stackrel{}{k}d\mathrm{\Omega }_k={\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{k}}{\sqrt{1+\frac{\stackrel{}{k}^2}{m^2c^2}}}},`$ (1.9)
$`\delta \left(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{q}\right)\delta \left(\stackrel{}{p}()\stackrel{}{q}\right).`$
As a consequence of this geometrical treatment, the application of the Fourier transformation on the Lorentz group becomes natural instead of usual one. In this case the relativistic configurational $`\stackrel{}{r}`$-space conseption arises.

Transition to relativistic configurational $`\stackrel{}{r}`$-representation

$$\psi \left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)=\frac{1}{\left(2\pi \mathrm{}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}}\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r})\psi \left(\stackrel{}{p}\right)𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_p$$
(1.10)
is performed by the use of expansion on the matrix elements of the principal series of the unitary irreducible representations of the Lorentz group:

$`\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r})=\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{n}}{mc}}\right)^{1ir/\lambda },`$ (1.11)
$`\stackrel{}{r}=r\stackrel{}{n},0r<\mathrm{},`$
$`\stackrel{}{n}=(\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta ),p_0=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{p}^2+m^2c^2}.`$
The quantity $`r`$ is relativistic invariant and is connected with the eigenvalues of the Casimir operator $`\widehat{C}=\stackrel{}{N}^2\stackrel{}{L}^2`$ in the following way

$$C=\lambda ^2+r^2,$$
(1.12)
where $`\stackrel{}{L}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ are the rotation and boost generators.

It is easy to verify that the function (the relativistic ”plane wave”) (1.11) obeys the finite-difference Schrödinger equation

$$\left(H_0E_p\right)\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r})=0.$$
(1.13)
The relativistic plane waves form a complete and orthogonal system of functions in the momentum Lobachevsky space .

If we perform the relativistic Fourier transformation (1.10) in Eq. (1.7), we arrive to the finite-difference Schrödinger equation (1.4) with the local (in general case, non-local) potential in the relativistic $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ space.

In the relativistic $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ space the Euclidean geometry is realized and, in particular, there exist a momentum operator in the relativistic configurational $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ representation

$$\widehat{\stackrel{}{p}}=\stackrel{}{n}\left(e^{i\lambda _r}H_0\right)\stackrel{}{m}\frac{1}{r}e^{i\lambda _r},$$
(1.14)
where a three-dimensional vector $`\stackrel{}{m}`$ has the following components :

$`m_1=i\left(\mathrm{cos}\phi \mathrm{cos}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right),`$
$`m_2=i\left(\mathrm{sin}\phi \mathrm{cos}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right),`$
$`m_3=i\mathrm{sin}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}.`$ (1.15)
The components of (1.14) and free Hamiltonian obey the following commutation relations:

$$[\widehat{p}_i,\widehat{p}_j]=[\widehat{p}_i,H_0]=0,i,j=1,2,3.$$

The relativistic plane wave is the eigenfunction of the operator $`\widehat{\stackrel{}{p}}`$:

$$\widehat{\stackrel{}{p}}\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r})=\stackrel{}{p}\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r}).$$
(1.16)
This means that (1.11) describes the free relativistic motion with definite energy and momentum.

In the non-relativistic limit we come to the usual three-dimensional configurational space and relativistic plane wave (1.11) goes over into the Euclidean plane wave, i.e.

$$\underset{c\mathrm{}}{lim}\xi (\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{r})=e^{i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{r}/\mathrm{}}.$$
(1.17)
Note that all the important exactly solvable cases of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (potential well, Coulomb potential, harmonic oscillator etc.) are exactly solvable for the case of Eq. (1.4), too.

## 2 Relativistic Quantum Mechanics: The One-Dimensional Case

In the one-dimensional case the relativistic plane wave takes a form

$$\xi (p,x)=\left(\frac{p_0p}{mc}\right)^{ix/\lambda }=\left(\frac{p_0+p}{mc}\right)^{ix/\lambda },$$
(2.1)
or, in hyperpolar coordinates

$$p_0=mc\mathrm{cosh}\chi ,p=mc\mathrm{sinh}\chi ,$$
(2.2)
we have

$$\xi (p,x)=e^{ix\chi /\lambda },$$
(2.3)
where $`\chi =\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{p_0+p}{mc}\right)`$ is rapidity.

The one-dimensional plane waves obey the completeness and orthogonality conditions

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\xi (p,x)\xi ^{}(p,x^{})𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\delta \left(xx^{}\right),`$ (2.4a)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\xi (p,x)\xi ^{}(p^{},x)𝑑x=\delta \left(p()p^{}\right)=\delta \left(mc\left(\chi \chi ^{}\right)\right),`$ (2.4b)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_p=mc\frac{dp}{p_0}=mcd\chi `$ is the invariant volume element in the one-dimensional Lobachevsky space, realized on the upper sheet of the hyperbola $`p_0^2p^2=m^2c^2,p_0>0`$.

The free Hamiltonian and momentum operators are finite-difference operators

$$\widehat{H}_0=mc^2\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\lambda _x\right),\widehat{p}=mc\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\lambda _x\right).$$
(2.4e)
Plane wave (2.1) obeys the free relativistic finite-difference Schrödinger equation

$$\left(\widehat{H}_0E_p\right)\xi (p,x)=0,E_p=cp_0=c\sqrt{p^2+m^2c^2},$$
(2.4f)
and

$$\widehat{p}\xi (p,x)=p\xi (p,x).$$

## 3 The Finite-Difference Relativistic Model of the Linear Singular Oscillator

We consider a model of the relativistic linear singular oscillator, which corresponds to the following interaction potential

$$V\left(x\right)=\left[\frac{1}{2}m\omega ^2x\left(x+i\lambda \right)+\frac{g}{x\left(x+i\lambda \right)}\right]e^{i\lambda _x},$$
(2.4a)
where $`g`$ is a real quantity (we will assign a restriction for the values of the parameter $`g`$ below).

For $`g=0`$ it coincides with quasipotential of the relativistic linear oscillator studied in detail in .

Let us note that in contrast to the case of the Coulomb potential , which can be calculated as an input of the one-photon exchange, the relativistic generalization of the oscillator or singular oscillator potential is not uniquely defined. Therefore, for construction of the quasipotential (2.4a) we proceed from the following requirements for the quasipotential: a) exact solubility; b) the correct non-relativistic limit; c) exsistence of the dynamical symmetry.

The operator (2.4a) is hermitian with respect to a scalar product

$$(\psi ,\phi )=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\psi ^{}(x)\phi (x)𝑑x,$$
(2.4b)
i.e. $`(V\psi ,\phi )=(\psi ,V\phi )`$. Here functions $`\psi (x)`$ and $`\phi (x)`$ vanish at $`x=\pm \mathrm{}`$ together with all their derivatives. In this connection, we note that, the hermitian conjugate of operator $`A=f(x)e^{\gamma _x}`$ with the respect to the scalar product (2.4b) has a following form:

$$A^+=e^{\gamma ^{}_x}f^{}(x),$$

where $`f(x)`$ is some complex function.

It is to be emphasized that potential (2.4a) possesses the correct non-relativistic limit, i.e.

$$\underset{c\mathrm{}}{lim}V(x)=\frac{1}{2}m\omega ^2x^2+\frac{g}{x^2}.$$

A relativistic singular oscillator is described by the following finite-difference equation

$$\left[mc^2\mathrm{cosh}i\lambda _x+\frac{1}{2}m\omega ^2x(x+i\lambda )e^{i\lambda _x}+\frac{g}{x\left(x+i\lambda \right)}e^{i\lambda _x}\right]\psi (x)=E\psi (x),$$
(2.4c)
with the boundary conditions for the wavefunction $`\psi (0)=0`$ and $`\psi (\mathrm{})=0`$.

We shall confine ourselves to the interval $`0x<\mathrm{}`$.

In in terms of dimensionless variable $`\rho =\frac{x}{\lambda }`$ and parameters $`\omega _0=\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{mc^2}`$, $`g_0=\frac{mg}{\mathrm{}^2}`$ the equation (2.4c) takes a form:

$$\left[\mathrm{cosh}i_\rho +\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2\rho ^{(2)}e^{i_\rho }+\frac{g_0}{\rho ^{(2)}}e^{i_\rho }\right]\psi (\rho )=\frac{E}{mc^2}\psi (\rho ),$$
(2.4d)
where $`\rho ^{(2)}=\rho (\rho +i)`$.

To solve the equation (2.4d) we choose $`\psi (\rho )`$ as

$$\psi (\rho )=c(\rho )^{(\alpha )}\omega _0^{i\rho }\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\nu +i\rho \right)\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )c(\rho )^{(\alpha )}M(\rho )\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho ),$$
(2.4e)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\nu `$ are arbitrary constant parameters, which will be defined below.

Functions

$$(\rho )^{(\alpha )}=i^\alpha \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(i\rho +\alpha \right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(i\rho \right)}\mathrm{and}M(\rho )=\omega _0^{i\rho }\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\nu +i\rho \right)$$
(2.4f)
are connected with the behaviour of the wavefunction $`\psi (\rho )`$ at points $`\rho =0`$ and $`\rho =\mathrm{}`$, respectively.

Inserting (2.4e) into (2.4d), we obtain:

$$\left[\left(\alpha +i\rho \right)\left(\nu +i\rho \right)e^{i_\rho }\frac{\omega _0^2\left(\rho ^{(2)}\right)^2+\rho ^{(2)}+2g_0}{\omega _0^2\left(\alpha 1+i\rho \right)\left(\nu 1+i\rho \right)}e^{i_\rho }\right]\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )=2iϵ\rho \mathrm{\Omega }(\rho ),$$
(2.4g)
where $`ϵ=E/\mathrm{}\omega `$ is dimensionless energy.

Now we choose constant parameters $`\alpha `$ and $`\nu `$ in such a way, that they satisfy the following relation:

$$\frac{\omega _0^2\left(\rho ^{(2)}\right)^2+\rho ^{(2)}+2g_0}{\omega _0^2\left(\alpha 1+i\rho \right)\left(\nu 1+i\rho \right)}=\left(\alpha i\rho \right)\left(\nu i\rho \right).$$
(2.4h)
Hence we get

$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\omega _0^2}}\left(1\sqrt{18g_0\omega _0^2}\right)},`$ (2.4ia)
$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\omega _0^2}}\left(1+\sqrt{18g_0\omega _0^2}\right)}.`$ (2.4ib)
Then the function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )`$ will satisfy the difference equation

$$\left[\left(\alpha +i\rho \right)\left(\nu +i\rho \right)e^{i_\rho }\left(\alpha i\rho \right)\left(\nu i\rho \right)e^{i_\rho }\right]\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )=2iϵ\rho \mathrm{\Omega }(\rho ).$$
(2.4ij)
By substitution of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )`$ function expansion as following power series

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e_k(i\rho )^k$$
(2.4ik)
into (2.4ij) one finds that the coefficients at odd degrees of $`i\rho `$ become zero (i.e., all $`e_{2k+1}=0,k=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$), but the coefficients at even degrees of $`i\rho `$ satisfy following recurrence relation:

$$\left(ϵ\alpha \nu 2j\right)e_{2j}=\underset{k=j+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left[\alpha \nu C_{2k}^{2j+1}+(\alpha +\nu )C_{2k}^{2j}+C_{2k}^{2j1}\right]e_{2k},$$
(2.4il)
where $`C_n^m`$ are binomial coefficients. From (2.4il) it follows that the power series (2.4ik) will be terminated at the term $`e_{2n}(i\rho )^{2n}`$ if condition $`ϵϵ_n=2n+\alpha +\nu ,n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ holds. This gives following quantization rule for the energy spectrum for relativistic singular oscillator (2.4a):

$$E_n=\mathrm{}\omega ϵ_n=\mathrm{}\omega (2n+\alpha +\nu ),n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}.$$
(2.4im)
Hence in the case of (2.4im) solutions of the equation (2.4ij) coincide with the continuous dual Hahn polynomials

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\rho )\mathrm{\Omega }_n(\rho )=S_n(\rho ^2;\alpha ,\nu ,\frac{1}{2}),$$
(2.4in)
defined with relation

$$S_n(x^2;a,b,c)=\left(a+b\right)_n\left(a+c\right)_n{}_{3}{}^{}F_{2}^{}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\begin{array}{c}n,a+ix,aix\\ a+b,a+c\end{array}& 1\end{array}\right),$$
(2.4io)
where $`(a)_n=a(a+1)\mathrm{}(a+n1)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(a+n)/\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)`$ is Pochhammer symbol.

Continuous dual Hahn polynomials (2.4io) satisfy the three-term recurrence relation

$$\left(A_n+C_na^2x^2\right)\stackrel{~}{S}_n\left(x^2\right)=A_n\stackrel{~}{S}_{n+1}\left(x^2\right)+C_n\stackrel{~}{S}_{n1}\left(x^2\right),$$
(2.4ip)
where $`A_n=(n+a+b)(n+a+c),C_n=n(n+b+c1)`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_n\left(x^2\right)=\frac{S_n(x^2;a,b,c)}{(a+b)_n(a+c)_n}.$$

Hence normalized wavefunctions for the stationary states of the relativistic singular linear oscillator have the following form:

$`\psi _n(\rho )=c_n(\rho )^{\left(\alpha \right)}\omega _0^{i\rho }\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\nu +i\rho \right)S_n(\rho ^2;\alpha ,\nu ,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}),`$ (2.4iq)
$`c_n=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+\alpha +\nu \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+\alpha +\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+\nu +\frac{1}{2}\right)n!}}}.`$
Wavefunctions (2.4iq) are orthonormalized as follows:

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\psi _n(\rho )\psi _m^{}(\rho )𝑑\rho =\delta _{nm}.$$

One can verify that the difference Hamiltonian of equation (2.4c)

$$H=mc^2\left[a^+a^{}+\omega _0\left(\alpha +\nu \right)\right]$$
(2.4ir)
may be factorized in terms of the operators, having the form

$`a^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left[e^{\frac{i}{2}_\rho }\omega _0e^{\frac{i}{2}_\rho }\left(\nu +i\rho \right)(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{i\rho }})\right],`$ (2.4isa)
$`a^+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left[e^{\frac{i}{2}_\rho }\omega _0\left(\nu i\rho \right)(1{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{i\rho }})e^{\frac{i}{2}_\rho }\right].`$ (2.4isb)
They are the pair of hermitian conjugate operators. Using $`a^{}`$ and $`a^+`$, one can construct a dynamical symmetry algebra of the relativistic linear oscillator (2.4c).

We note that, hermiticity condition of Hamiltonian $`H`$ imposes a restriction to the values of the quantity $`g`$. Indeed, from expression (2.4ir) it follows that $`H`$ is hermitian operator and its eigenvalues $`E_n`$ (2.4im) are real only in the case, when $`\alpha `$ and $`\nu `$ are real or complex-conjugate quantities. Therefore, $`g`$ must satisfy the condition $`g>\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8m}\frac{\mathrm{}^2\omega _0^2}{32m}`$. The case $`g<\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8m}\frac{\mathrm{}^2\omega _0^2}{32m}`$ (”collapse”) will be considered separately.

Since the parameter $`\mu =\frac{mc^2}{\mathrm{}\omega }\mathrm{}`$ when $`c\mathrm{}`$, by using (2.4isa) in Appendix A it is easy to show that in the limit case, when the velocity of the light approaches $`\mathrm{}`$, wavefunctions (2.4iq) coincide with wavefunctions (1.2) of the non-relativistic linear singular oscillator.

Energy spectrum (2.4im) also has a correct non-relativistic limit, i.e.

$$E_nmc^2E_n^{nonrel}=\mathrm{}\omega (2n+d+1).$$

By the use of (2.4isb) it can be shown that, in the $`g0`$ limit, the eigenfunctions (2.4iq) and the eigenvalues (2.4im) transform into the ”antisymmetrical” eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of the relativistic linear harmonic oscillator, considered in :

$`\psi _n^{relosc}(\rho )=c_n^{}\left[\nu ^{}(\nu ^{}1)\right]^{i\rho /2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\rho +i\nu ^{})P_{2n+1}^\nu ^{}(\rho ;{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}),`$
$`E_n^{relosc}=\mathrm{}\omega \left(2n+1+\nu ^{}\right),n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}.`$
Here $`P_n^\nu ^{}(\rho ;\phi )`$ are the Meixner-Pollaczek polynomials and

$$c_n^{}=2^\nu ^{}\sqrt{\frac{(2n+1)!}{2\pi \lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }(2n+1+\nu ^{})}},\nu ^{}=\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{\omega _0^2}}.$$

In Figure 1 we show the behaviour of the ground state wave function $`\psi _0(x)`$ (2.4iq) in dependence of the $`x`$ and $`g`$ for various values of the speed of light $`c`$. We see that except for the non-relativistic case, where $`\psi _0(x)`$ is real for $`g\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8m}`$, in the relativistic case ground state wavefunction is complex and has a lot of number of zeros. Similarly, in Figure 2 we show the behaviour of the ground state energy-level (2.4im) in dependence of the $`g`$ for various values of the speed of light $`c`$. From these plots we see that decreasing of $`c`$ changes appearance point of imaginary part (”collapse” point $`g<\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8m}\frac{\mathrm{}^2\omega _0^2}{32m}`$).

## 4 Conclusion

The application of the finite-difference relativistic quantum mechanics to a large class of physical problems requires relativistic generalizations of the exactly solvable problems of non-relativistic quantum mechanics.

In this paper we construct a relativistic model of the linear singular oscillator and explicitly solve the corresponding finite-difference equation. We determine eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the problem. They have correct non-relativistic limits. As in the non-relativistic case , the simplicity of the obtained energy spectrum suggests that a solution by group-theoretical methods should also be possible. Furthermore, we study some properties of the continuous dual Hahn polynomials.

We hope that, the model of the relativistic linear oscillator proposed in this paper will be applied in future in various fields of quantum physics likewise the non-relativistic singular oscillator.

## Appendix A

Here we present some formulas for the continuous dual Hahn polynomials (2.4io) used in the text.

1. From the recurrence relation for the continuous dual Hahn polynomials (2.4ip), it can be shown that the following limit to the Laguerre polynomials holds:

$$\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{n!\mu ^n}S_n(z\mu ;a,b,\frac{1}{2})=L_n^{a_0\frac{1}{2}}(z),$$
(2.4isa)
where $`a_0=\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}a`$ and $`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\left(b\mu \right)=const`$.

2. It can be shown that, in some particular cases continuous dual Hahn polynomials coincide with the Meixner-Pollaczek polynomials, i.e.

$$P_{2n+1}^b(x;\frac{\pi }{2})=(1)^n\frac{2^{2n+1}}{(2n+1)!}xS_n(x^2;1,b,\frac{1}{2})$$
(2.4isb)
and

$$P_{2n}^b(x;\frac{\pi }{2})=(1)^n\frac{2^{2n}}{(2n)!}S_n(x^2;1,b,\frac{1}{2}).$$
(2.4isc)
To prove formulas (2.4isb) and (2.4isc) let’s compare equations

$$\left[e^{i\phi }\left(b+ix\right)e^{i_x}e^{i\phi }\left(bix\right)e^{i_x}\right]y_1\left(x\right)=2i\left[x\mathrm{cos}\phi \left(k+b\right)\mathrm{sin}\phi \right]y_1\left(x\right)$$
(2.4isd)
and

$$\left[\left(a+ix\right)\left(b+ix\right)e^{i_x}\left(aix\right)\left(bix\right)e^{i_x}\right]y_2\left(x\right)=2ix\left(2n+a+b\right)y_2\left(x\right)$$
(2.4ise)
where $`y_1(x)=P_k^b(x,\phi )`$ are the Meixner-Pollaczek polynomials and $`y_2(x)=S_n(x^2;a,b,\frac{1}{2})`$ are the continuous dual Hahn polynomials. It is easy to verify that, when $`\phi =\frac{\pi }{2}`$ and $`k=2n+1`$, Eq. (2.4isd) coincides with Eq. (2.4ise) for $`a=1`$. It means

$$P_{2n+1}^b(x;\frac{\pi }{2})=N_nxS_n(x^2;1,b,\frac{1}{2}).$$
(2.4isf)
Comparing coefficients, for example, for $`x^{2n+1}`$ in the left-hand and right-hand sides of (2.4isf) we find that,

$$N_n=(1)^n\frac{2^{2n+1}}{(2n+1)!}.$$

One can prove relation (2.4isc) in same way.

3. In the non-relativistic limit, when $`\mu =\frac{mc^2}{\mathrm{}\omega }\mathrm{}`$ we have

$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\alpha =d+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$
$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\nu \mu \right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$
$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\rho \right)^{\left(\alpha \right)}=e^{\frac{1}{2}\left(d+\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{ln}\mu }\left(\xi \right)^{d+\frac{1}{2}},`$ (2.4isg)
$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}M\left(\rho \right)=\sqrt{2\pi }e^{\mu \mathrm{ln}\mu \mu \frac{\xi ^2}{2}},`$
$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}c_n={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{n!\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+d+1\right)}}}e^{\mu \left(\mu +n+\frac{d}{2}\right)\mathrm{ln}\mu },`$
where $`\xi =\sqrt{\frac{m\omega }{\mathrm{}}}x`$. To obtain these formulas we used the representation

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{z}}}e^{z\mathrm{ln}zz},`$
$`|z|\mathrm{},`$
for the gamma function.

4. In the non-relativistic limit we have following limit relations for operators (2.4isa) and (2.4isb)

$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\sqrt{\mu }a^{}=c^{}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(_\xi +\xi {\displaystyle \frac{d+\frac{1}{2}}{\xi }}\right),`$
$`\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}\sqrt{\mu }a^+=c^+={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(_\xi +\xi {\displaystyle \frac{d+\frac{1}{2}}{\xi }}\right).`$
Hamiltonian (2.4ir) in this limit coincides with Hamiltonian of the non-relativistic singular oscillator (1.1):

$$\underset{\mu \mathrm{}}{lim}H=H_N=\mathrm{}\omega \left(c^+c^{}+d+1\right)=\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}\left(_{\xi }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\xi ^2+\frac{d^2\frac{1}{4}}{\xi ^2}\right).$$

## References


text:
# Guided Vortex Motion in Superconductors with a Square Antidot Array

\[

## Abstract

We have measured the in-plane anisotropy of the vortex mobility in a thin Pb film with a square array of antidots. The Lorentz force, acting on the vortices, was rotated by adding two perpendicular currents and keeping the amplitude of the net current constant. One set of voltage probes was used to detect the vortex motion. We show that the pinning landscape provided by the square antidot lattice influences the vortex motion in two different ways. First, the modulus of the vortex velocity becomes angular dependent with a lower mobility along the diagonals of the pinning array. Second, the vortex displacement is preferentially parallel to the principal axes of the underlying pinning lattice, giving rise to a misalignment between the vortex velocity and the applied Lorentz force. We show that this anisotropic vortex motion is temperature dependent and progressively fades out when approaching the normal state.

\]

The interaction of a moving elastic medium with an array of obstacles has received much attention during the last years, in part due to a variety of condensed matter systems that can be described within this model. In general, the symmetry of the substrate over which the elastic medium moves, should also be reflected in the dynamic properties of the system.

Particular interest has gone to the study of the flux line lattice (FLL) in superconductors with an artificial pinning potential, such as randomly distributed columnar tracks, arrays of submicron holes (“antidots”) or magnetic dots.

In a superconductor with a random distribution of pinning centers, an isotropic vortex mobility is expected with a vortex motion parallel to the Lorentz force. On the other hand, if the rotational symmetry of the pinning potential is broken, the response will be anisotropic, and guided vortex motion may appear.

Recent experiments have shown that the presence of twin boundaries in high temperature superconductors leads to a preferential motion of the FLL along the twinning planes. Guided vortex motion has also been found in systems with a four-fold symmetry, like square arrays of Josephson junctions. Theoretical work on vortex motion in a square array of pinning centers has forecasted guided vortex motion or channeling along the principal axes of the array, and along its diagonals. In these systems, the vortex velocity $`𝐯`$ preferentially snaps to the symmetry axes of the pinning array, leading to a misalignment between vortex velocity and the applied driving force $`𝐟`$. Even though this lock-in transition has been predicted in many numerical simulations for a square array of pinning centers, it had not yet been observed experimentally.

In this work, we report on electro-transport measurements on a Pb thin film with a square array of antidots, for the whole $`360^{}`$ range of in-plane current orientations. This allows us to determine the misalignment between the applied current and the electric field generated by the vortex movement. We show clear evidence of guided vortex motion along the principal axes of the antidot array, and determine the trapping angle in the studied structure.

The used sample is a 50-nm-thick Pb film, with a square antidot lattice (antidot size $`b^2=0.6\times 0.6\mu m^2`$) of period $`d=1.5\mu m`$, which corresponds to the first matching field $`H_1=\mathrm{\Phi }_0/d^2=`$9.2 G, with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ the superconducting flux quantum. We patterned the Pb film in a cross-shaped geometry (see Fig. 1) to allow electrical transport measurements at any in-plane orientation of the applied current. The cross consists of two 300 $`\mu `$m wide strips containing the square array of antidots aligned with the principal axes of the cross.

This pattern was prepared by electron-beam lithography in a polymethyl metacrylate/methyl metacrylate (PMMA/MMA) resist bilayer covering the SiO2 substrate. A Ge(20 Å)/Pb(500 Å)/Ge(200 Å) film was then electron-beam evaporated onto this mask while keeping the substrate at 77 K. Finally, the resist was removed in a liftoff procedure in warm acetone. The sample has a Tc=7.220 K with a transition width of 7 mK for $`H`$=0.

The transport measurements were performed in a 3He cryostat using two independent dc currents, $`J_X`$ and $`J_Y`$, applied at the extremes of the cross legs, allowing to control the orientation ($`\varphi `$) of the total current $`𝐉_𝐓=J_X\mathrm{cos}\varphi \widehat{𝐱}+J_Y\mathrm{sin}\varphi \widehat{𝐲}`$, with respect to the principal axes of the square pinning array. The voltage contacts were aligned with the $`\widehat{𝐱}`$ direction (see Fig. 1, right panel). In the $`V_X(\varphi )`$ measurements, we sweep the angle $`\varphi `$ of the total current $`𝐉_𝐓`$ while keeping its amplitude $`J_T=\sqrt{J_X^2+J_Y^2}`$ constant. The magnetic field $`𝐇`$ was applied perpendicular to the film surface.

It is worth to notice that in previous works, in order to determine the direction of the vortex movement, two sets of voltage probes arranged perpendicularly (aligned with each of the current directions), have been used. The simultaneous acquisition of the independent components of the electrical field $`𝐄=𝐯\times 𝐇`$, allows one to determine the modulus and direction of the average vortex velocity $`𝐯`$ and therefore the misalignment between $`𝐯`$ and the applied Lorentz force $`𝐟=𝐉_𝐓\times 𝚽_\mathrm{𝟎}`$. Although this procedure is strictly necessary for uniaxial systems, simple symmetry considerations associated with the periodic pinning landscape show that for higher degree of symmetry, it is possible to obtain the same information with a single pair of voltage contacts. Indeed, in our experiment, the intrinsic four-fold symmetry imposed by the pinning potential implies that $`V_Y(\varphi )=V_X(\varphi +90^{})`$, and therefore by measuring $`V_X(\varphi )`$ in the whole angular range, we can deduce $`V_Y(\varphi )`$.

In Fig. 2(a) we show the field dependence of the resistance $`R(H)`$ for $`J_T`$= $`3kA/cm^2`$ and $`T=`$7.20 K, for several angles $`\varphi `$ of the total current. The most obvious features of this figure are the well defined dips at $`1/2H_1`$ and $`H_1`$, as a consequence of the reduction of the FLL mobility, reminiscence of the vortex configurations energetically stable in the equilibrium state. For low vortex density ($`H<0.4H_1`$), a linear field dependence characteristic of a flux flow regime $`\rho _{FF}=\rho _nH/H_{c2}`$, with $`\rho _n`$ the normal state resistivity and $`H_{c2}`$ the upper critical field, is observed.

It should be noted that, since the experiments were carried out very close to $`T_c`$, temperature stability plays a crucial role. For instance, the curve at $`\varphi =50^{}`$ in Fig. 2(a) exhibits a small asymmetry between the positive and negative branches of the magnetoresistance ($`R(H)R(H)`$) because of a temperature drift of only $`0.2`$mK.

Due to the misalignment between the wire bounded voltage probes and the lithographically defined current contacts, the resistance in the normal state reaches the condition $`R=0`$ (i.e. $`V_X=0`$) at $`\varphi =77^{}`$ rather than at $`\varphi =90^{}`$. Remarkably, a finite resistance appears when penetrating in the superconducting phase, $`\left|H\right|15`$ G $`1.6H_1`$ (open cicrcles in Fig. 2(a)). Since the $`R(H)`$ curve at $`\varphi =77^{}`$ is symmetric around $`H=0`$, we rule out the possibility to attribute this dissipation to the Hall effect. We have also checked that thermoelectric voltages, generated by thermal gradients, have a negligible contribution to the total voltage. This “even Hall effect” might be attributed to guided vortex motion, however we have observed that this effect persists in plain films without any periodic structure, where transport properties should be isotropic. Similar anomalies have also been reported in the transverse voltage in Josephson Junction arrays and in the longitudinal voltage in plain films. Although there is no general consensus about the origin of this effect, a possible explanation involves proximity effects due to the N/S boundary in the voltage contacts.

Fig. 2(b) shows $`R(H)`$ for $`\varphi =0^{}`$ and $`J_T=3kA/cm^2`$ at $`T=`$7.17 K. For fields $`\left|H\right|<H_1`$, where vortices are strongly pinned at the antidots, the dissipation lies below our experimental resolution. At this temperature, the maximum number $`n_s`$ of flux quanta that an antidot can hold is $`n_sb/4\xi (T)0.31`$, where $`\xi (T)`$ is the superconducting coherence length. Under these circumstances, interstitial vortices appear in the sample for magnetic fields $`H>H_1`$. They are weakly pinned (“caged”) at the interstitial positions between the repulsive saturated antidots. The matching features at $`\frac{3}{2}H_1`$ and $`2H_1`$ are a result of their stable vortex configurations. In this scenario, where two species of vortices coexist, the motion of interstitial vortices should be strongly affected by the presence of those vortices which remain pinned. As field progressively increases, vortex-vortex interaction becomes more relevant in comparison with the vortex-pinning energy and eventually, close to the upper critical field $`H_{c2}`$, a vortex liquid phase appears. In order to study the role of the periodic pinning array on the vortex dynamics in each of these regimes, we have measured the in-plane angular dependence of the voltage $`V_X(\varphi )`$ for the same conditions of Fig. 2(b) ($`J_T=3kA/cm^2`$ and $`T=`$7.17 K) at $`H=`$10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20 and 22 G. The curves $`V_X(\varphi )`$ for some of them are presented in Fig. 3.

The upper panel of Fig. 3 shows $`V_X(\varphi )`$ close to the normal state ($`H_{c2}(7.17K)25`$ G). The recorded signal follows a smooth sine function dependency characteristic of an isotropic regime with a constant vortex velocity independent of the current orientation. At $`H=`$18 G, near to the second matching field, the response is quite different. Now, a sawtooth like curve clearly manifests the existence of an in-plane anisotropy in the vortex movement. This anisotropy becomes even more evident as $`H`$ approaches to the first matching condition (lower panel). As we will show below, the characteristic shape of $`V_X(\varphi )`$, alternating well pronounced peaks and plateaus, is a fingerprint of guided vortex motion.

As we pointed out previously, knowing the longitudinal component of the voltage $`V_X(\varphi )`$, we can deduce the transversal component $`V_Y(\varphi )=V_X(\varphi +90^{})`$. This allows us to build a polar graph $`V_X\times V_Y`$, as shown in the inset of Fig. 4 for $`H=`$10, 14, 16 and 22 G, where the curves have been scaled for the sake of clarity. The circular shape of the outer curve ($`H=`$22 G) reflects the rotational invariance of an isotropic conductor. As field decreases, the shape of the polar plot smoothly evolves from a circle, through a rhombus (not shown) and eventually data lies along an astroid for $`\left|H\right|<`$ 20 G, indicating that vortices move faster along the principal axes $`[\pm 1,0],[0,\pm 1]`$ (easy direction) of the pinning structure than along the diagonals (hard direction).

The degree of anisotropy of the vortex velocity is given by the eccentricity factor $`\epsilon =V(\varphi =45^{})/V(\varphi =0^{})`$. In case of a circular shape, $`\epsilon =1`$, whereas for a rhombus $`\epsilon =1/\sqrt{2}`$. In Fig. 2(b) we show the anisotropy $`\epsilon `$ from the analysis of the data at T=7.17 K, as a function of field. We clearly observe that $`\epsilon (H)`$ reproduces the behavior of the magnetoresistance $`R(H)`$. According to the theory, the vortex dynamics should become more anisotropic as $`J_T`$ decreases towards the depinning current $`J_{dp}`$. On the other hand, at constant $`J_T`$, a higher $`J_{dp}`$ yields a lower dissipation. Therefore, a stronger anisotropy should be detected where $`R(H)`$ has local minima, in agreement with our observations. A similar $`\epsilon (H)`$ behavior, but somewhat less pronounced was found at higher temperatures for all fields $`\left|H\right|<H_{c2}`$. This result indicates that the anisotropic vortex motion is present regardless of the dynamic regime.

Once the polar graph is built, it is possible to extract the angle of the electric field $`\theta _E=Atan(V_Y/V_X)`$ and hence the angle of the vortex velocity $`\theta =\theta _E+90^{}`$ as a function of the Lorentz force orientation $`\alpha =\varphi 90^{}`$. In the main panel of Fig. 4 we show $`\theta (\alpha )`$ so obtained for $`H=`$10 G, folded to the fourth and first quadrant. For an isotropic conductor, $`\theta =\alpha `$ and a straight line should be observed. In contrast, a highly non-linear response is found.

Starting from $`\alpha =0`$ and rotating the current in counter-clockwise direction, i.e. increasing the angle $`\varphi `$, we observe that for low values of $`\alpha `$, the force $`𝐟`$ lies ahead of $`𝐯`$, which remains close to the $`[1,0]`$ axis ($`\theta 0^{}`$). The misalignment $`\left|\alpha \theta \right|`$ reaches its maximum value at the lock-in angle $`\alpha _L15^{}`$, beyond which the vortex movement is no longer restricted to follow the $`[1,0]`$ direction and a fast increase in $`\theta `$ is observed. At the $`[1,1]`$ orientation, force and velocity are aligned due to the four-fold symmetry of the underlying pinning potential. Above $`[1,1]`$, the Lorentz force lags behind the velocity vector which rapidly approaches to the $`[0,1]`$ axis. This is the central result of the paper which clearly indicates the role played by the periodic pinning potential in the vortex dynamics.

Recent simulations for a moving FLL in a superconducting films with square pinning array show that minor lock-in phases should also be present at $`\pm 45^{}`$ orientations. Further features might be present near the driving angles along the symmetry directions of the pinning array other than the principal axes. However, no evidence of such phases were found in our experiments. The absence of these regimes may be attributed to the relatively large size of the antidots. Indeed, since the pinning potential is averaged in the direction of motion, it is expected that the movement at $`\pm 45^{}`$ (diagonals of the square antidots) be progressively washed out as the size of the antidots increases. Well defined channels will exist only if $`d/4b>1`$. In our experimental conditions $`d/4b=0.625`$ and thus channeling effects should be suppressed. This assumption is confirmed in the weakly coupled superconducting wire network limit by simulations for square Josephson Junction arrays by Marconi et al. where no particular effects appear at $`\pm 45^{}`$.

In summary, using dc-transport measurements we have demonstrated that the interaction of a moving flux line lattice with a periodic pinning potential, breaks the rotational symmetry and induces a guided vortex motion along the principal symmetry orientations of the pinning array. As a consequence, we found that for orientations different than the symmetry directions, the vortex velocity is not aligned with the Lorentz force. This effect vanishes approaching to the normal state as the vortex movement becomes insensitive to the pinning symmetry.

We would like to thank Clecio C. de Souza Silva for helpful discussions. This work was supported by the ESF “Vortex” Program, the Belgian Interuniversity Attraction Poles (IUAP), the Flemish GOA and FWO Programs.