text:
# 𝜂-invariant and Chern-Simons current

## Abstract

We show that the $`𝐑/𝐙`$ part of the analytically defined $`\eta `$ invariant of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer for a Dirac operator on an odd dimensional closed spin manifold can be expressed purely geometrically through a stable Chern-Simons current on a higher dimensional sphere. As a preliminary application, we discuss the relation with the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer $`𝐑/𝐙`$ index theorem for unitary flat vector bundles, and prove an $`𝐑`$ refinement in the case where the Dirac operator is replaced by the Signature operator. We also extend the above discussion to the case of $`\eta `$ invariants associated to Hermitian vector bundles with non-unitary connection, which are constructed by using a trick due to Lott.

§1. Introduction

The $`\eta `$ invariant of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer was introduced in \[APS1\] as the correction term on the boundary of the index theorem for Dirac operators on manifolds with boundary. Since then it has appeared in many parts of geometry, topology as well as physics. We first recall the definition of this $`\eta `$ invariant.

Let $`M`$ be an odd dimensional closed oriented spin Riemannian manifold. Let $`S(TM)`$ be the associated bundle of spinors. Let $`E`$ be a Hermitian vector bundle over $`M`$ carrying with a Hermitian connection. Then one can define canonically a Dirac operator $`D^E:\mathrm{\Gamma }(S(TM)E)\mathrm{\Gamma }(S(TM)E)`$. It is a formally self-adjoint first order elliptic differential operator.

Let $`s𝐂`$ with $`\mathrm{Re}(s)>\frac{dimM}{2}`$. Following \[APS1\], one defines the $`\eta `$ function of $`D^E`$ by

$$\eta (D^E,s)=\underset{\lambda \mathrm{Spec}(D^E)\{0\}}{}\frac{\mathrm{sgn}(\lambda )}{|\lambda |^s}.$$
$`(1.1)`$
It is shown in \[APS1\] that $`\eta (D^E,s)`$ is a holomorphic function for $`\mathrm{Re}(s)>\frac{dimM}{2}`$, and can be extended to a meromorphic function on $`𝐂`$. Moreover, it is holomorphic at $`s=0`$. The value of $`\eta (D^E,s)`$ at $`s=0`$ is called the $`\eta `$ invariant of $`D^E`$ and is denoted by $`\eta (D^E)`$. Let $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ be the reduced $`\eta `$ invariant of $`D^E`$ which is also defined in \[APS1\]:

$$\overline{\eta }(D^E)=\frac{dim(\mathrm{ker}D^E)+\eta (D^E)}{2}.$$
$`(1.2)`$
It turns out that this analytically defined invariant may jump by integers as the metrics and connections on $`TM`$ and $`E`$ change. These jumps can be detected by spectral flows introduced in \[APS3\]. On the other hand, the mod $`𝐙`$ component of $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ is smooth with respect to the involved metrics and connections, and its variation can be expressed through Chern-Simons forms. However, whether $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ mod $`𝐙`$ itself can be expressed geometrically, without passing to the spectral set of $`D^E`$, remains a question for long time. Here we only mention that such a formula for $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ mod $`𝐐`$ was proved in \[CS, Theorem 9.1\], expressing the $`𝐑/𝐐`$ component of $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ through the Cheeger-Simons differential characters.

The purpose of this short article is to show that there is indeed a purely geometric formula for $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ mod $`𝐙`$. More precisely, if we embed $`M`$ into a higher odd dimensional sphere, then $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ mod $`𝐙`$ can be expressed through a Chern-Simons current on the sphere. Comparing with Cheeger-Simons’ mod $`𝐐`$ one, such a formula is more of $`K`$-theoretic nature, and should be viewed as an index theorem in some geometric $`K`$-theory (compare with \[AS\] and \[L\]).

In fact, this formula, which will be stated in its precise form in Theorem 2.3, can be obtained as an immediate application of a localization formula for $`\eta `$ invariants proved by Bismut and Zhang in \[BZ\]. Our simple observation is that if one applies the Bismut-Zhang formula to an embedding into a higher dimensional sphere, then a simple application of the Bott periodicity will lead us to a geometric formula for the $`𝐑/𝐙`$ component of $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$.

Thus in the next section we will recall the Bismut-Zhang localization formula for $`\eta `$ invariants and prove the geometric formula for $`\overline{\eta }(D^E)`$ mod $`𝐙`$.

Also recall that the proof given by Bismut-Zhang in \[BZ\] for their localization formula relies heavily on the difficult paper of Bismut-Lebeau \[BL\], and might not be easy to follow. So in Section 3 we will give an alternate proof of this localization formula by making use of the Freed-Melrose index theorem for $`𝐙/k`$ manifolds \[FM\] instead.

In Section 4, we present some preliminary applications of our formula to the case of flat vector bundles. In particular, we show that our formula leads to an intrinsic formulation of the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer $`𝐑/𝐙`$ index theorem for unitary flat vector bundles \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\]. Moreover, we show that when considering the Signature operator instead of the Dirac operator, one can refine the above index theorem to an $`𝐑`$ valued one.

Now note that it is pointed out in \[APS3\] that the above mentioned index theorem for flat vector bundles \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\] indeed holds for all flat connections not necessarily unitary, and that one can extend the definition of the $`\eta `$ invariant for these not necessarily unitary connections.

In Section 5 of this paper, we will propose a definition of the $`\eta `$ invaraint for Dirac operators coupled with Hermitian vector bundles with non-unitary connection, by using a trick of Lott in \[L, Section 5\]. When applying to flat connections, we show that this invariant verifies the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\], which implies that when mod $`𝐙`$, our construction agrees with what indicated in \[APS3\]. We will discuss further applications of this invaraint elsewhere.

§2. A geometric formula for $`\eta `$ invariants

In this section, we recall the localization formula for $`\eta `$ invariants of Bismut-Zhang \[BZ\] and use it to deduce a geometric formula for $`\eta `$ invariants.

This section is organized as follows. In a), we recall the direct image construction of Atiyah-Hirzebruch \[AH\] under real embeddings in a geometrical form. In b), we recall from \[B2\] and \[BZ\] the construction of the Chern-Simons current associated to the geometric direct image constructed in a). In c), we state the localization formula from \[BZ\]. In d), we apply this localization formula to get a geometric formula expressing the $`\eta `$ invariants through Chern-Simons currents on spheres.

a). A geometric construction of direct images

Let $`i:YX`$ be an embedding between two smooth oriented manifolds. We make the assumption that $`dimXdimY`$ is even and that if $`N`$ denotes the normal bundle to $`Y`$ in $`X`$, then $`N`$ is orientable, spin and carries an induced orientation as well as a (fixed) spin structure.

Let $`\mu `$ be a complex vector bundle over $`Y`$.

Atiyah and Hirzebruch have constructed in \[AH\] an element $`i_!\mu \stackrel{~}{K}(X)`$, called the direct image of $`\mu `$ under $`i`$. We here recall this construction in a geometric form.

Let $`g^N`$ be a Euclidean metric on $`N`$ and $`^N`$ a Euclidean connection on $`N`$ preserving $`g^N`$. Let $`S(N)`$ be the vector bundle of spinors associated to $`(N,g^N)`$. Then $`S(N)=S_+(N)S_{}(N)`$ (resp. its dual $`S^{}(N)=S_+^{}(N)S_{}^{}(N)`$) is a $`𝐙_2`$-graded complex vector bundle over $`Y`$ carrying with an induced Hermitian metric $`g^{S(N)}=g^{S_+(N)}g^{S_{}(N)}`$ (resp. $`g^{S^{}(N)}=g^{S_+^{}(N)}g^{S_{}^{}(N)}`$) from $`g^N`$, as well as a Hermitian connection $`^{S(N)}=^{S_+(N)}^{S_{}(N)}`$ (resp. $`^{S^{}(N)}=^{S_+^{}(N)}^{S_{}^{}(N)}`$) induced from $`^N`$.

Let $`g^\mu `$ be a Hermitian metric on $`\mu `$ and $`^\mu `$ a Hermitian connection on $`\mu `$ preserving $`g^\mu `$.

For any $`r>0`$, set $`N_r=\{ZN:|Z|<r\}.`$ We make the assumption that there is $`\epsilon _0>0`$ such that $`N_{2\epsilon _0}`$ is diffeomorphic to an open neighborhood of $`Y`$ in $`X`$. Without confusion we now view directly $`N_{2\epsilon _0}`$ as an open neighborhood of $`Y`$ in $`X`$.

Let $`\pi :NY`$ denote the projection of the normal bundle $`N`$ over $`Y`$.

If $`ZN`$, let $`\stackrel{~}{c}(Z)\mathrm{End}(S^{}(N))`$ be the transpose of $`c(Z)`$ acting on $`S(N)`$. Let $`\tau ^N\mathrm{End}(S^{}(N))`$ be the transpose of $`\tau ^N`$ defining the $`𝐙_2`$-grading of $`S(N)=S_+(N)S_{}(N)`$.

Let $`\pi ^{}(S^{}(N))`$ be the pull back bundle of $`S^{}(N)`$ over $`N`$. For any $`ZN`$ with $`Z0`$, let $`\tau ^N\stackrel{~}{c}(Z):\pi ^{}(S_\pm ^{}(N))|_Z\pi ^{}(S_{}^{}(N))|_Z`$ denote the corresponding pull back isomorphisms at $`Z`$.

Let $`F`$ be a complex vector bundle over $`Y`$ such that $`S_{}(N)\mu F`$ is a trivial complex vector bundle over $`Y`$ (cf. \[A\]). Then

$$\tau ^N\stackrel{~}{c}(Z)\pi ^{}\mathrm{Id}_F:\pi ^{}(S_+^{}(N)\mu F)\pi ^{}(S_{}^{}(N)\mu F)$$
$`(2.1)`$
induces an isomorphism between two trivial vector bundles over $`N_{2\epsilon _0}Y`$.

Let $`F`$ admit a Hermitian metric $`g^F`$ and a Hermitian connection $`^F`$.

Clearly, $`\pi ^{}(S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu F)|_{N_{2\epsilon _0}}`$ extend smoothly to two trivial complex vector bundles over $`XN_{2\epsilon _0}`$. Moreover, the isomorphism $`\tau ^N\stackrel{~}{c}(Z)\pi ^{}\mathrm{Id}_F`$ over $`N_{2\epsilon _0}`$ extends smoothly to an isomorphism between these two trivial vector bundles over $`XN_{2\epsilon _0}`$.

In summary, what we get is a $`𝐙_2`$-graded Hermitian vector bundle

$$\xi =\xi _+\xi _{},g^\xi =g^{\xi _+}g^\xi _{}$$
$`(2.2)`$
over $`X`$ such that

$$\xi _\pm |_{N_{\epsilon _0}}=\pi ^{}(S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu F)|_{N_{\epsilon _0}},g^{\xi _\pm |_{N_{\epsilon _0}}}=\pi ^{}(g^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }g^F)|_{N_{\epsilon _0}},$$
$`(2.3)`$
where $`g^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }`$ is the tensor product Hermitian metric on $`S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu `$ induced from $`g^{S_\pm ^{}(N)}`$ and $`g^\mu `$. It is easy to see that there exists an odd self-adjoint automorphism $`V`$ of $`\xi `$ such that

$$V|_{N_{\epsilon _0}}=\tau ^N\stackrel{~}{c}(Z)\pi ^{}\mathrm{Id}_F.$$
$`(2.4)`$
Moreover, there is a $`𝐙_2`$-graded Hermitian connection $`^\xi =^{\xi _+}^\xi _{}`$ on $`\xi =\xi _+\xi _{}`$ over $`X`$ such that

$$^{\xi _\pm }|_{N_{\epsilon _0}}=\pi ^{}(^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }^F),$$
$`(2.5)`$
where $`^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }`$ is the Hermitian connection on $`^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }`$ defined by $`^{S_\pm ^{}(N)\mu }=^{S_\pm ^{}(N)}\mathrm{Id}_\mu +\mathrm{Id}_{S_\pm ^{}(N)}^\mu `$.

Clearly, $`\xi _+\xi _{}\stackrel{~}{K}(X)`$ is exactly the Atiyah-Hirzebruch direct image $`i_!\mu `$ of $`\mu `$ constructed in \[AH\]. We call $`(\xi ,^\xi ,V)`$ constructed above a geometric direct image of ($`\mu `$, $`^\mu `$).

b). A Chern-Simons current associated to a geometric direct image

We make the same assumptions and use the same notations as in a).

If $`E`$ is a real vector bundle carrying with a connection $`^E`$, we denote by $`\widehat{A}(E,^E)`$ the Hirzebruch characteristic form defined by

$$\widehat{A}(E,^E)=\stackrel{1/2}{det}\left(\frac{\frac{\sqrt{1}}{4\pi }R^E}{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{4\pi }R^E\right)}\right),$$
$`(2.6)`$
where $`R^E=^{E,2}`$ is the curvature of $`^E`$. While if $`E^{}`$ is a complex vector bundle carrying with a connection $`^E^{}`$, we denote by $`\mathrm{ch}(E^{},^E^{})`$ the Chern character form associated to $`(E^{},^E^{})`$ (cf. \[Z2, Section 1\]).

Let $`i^{1/2}`$ be a fixed square root of $`i=\sqrt{1}`$. The objects which will be considered in the sequel do not depend on this square root. Let $`\phi `$ be the map $`\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(T^{}X)(2\pi i)^{\frac{\mathrm{deg}\alpha }{2}}\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(T^{}X)`$.

We now use Quillen’s superconnection formalism. For $`T0`$, let $`C_T`$ be the superconnection on the $`𝐙_2`$-graded vector bundle $`\xi `$ defined by

$$C_T=^\xi +\sqrt{T}V.$$
$`(2.7)`$
The curvature $`C_T^2`$ of $`C_T`$ is a smooth section of $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(T^{}M)\widehat{}\mathrm{End}(\xi ))^{\mathrm{even}}`$. By \[Q\], we know that for any $`T>0`$,

$$\frac{}{T}\mathrm{Tr}_s\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(C_T^2\right)\right]=\frac{d}{2\sqrt{T}}\mathrm{Tr}_s\left[V\mathrm{exp}\left(C_T^2\right)\right].$$
$`(2.8)`$
Clearly, the technical assumptions in \[BZ, (1.10)-(1.12)\] hold for our constructions in a). Thus one can proceed as in \[B1\], \[B2\] and \[BZ, Definition 1.3\] to construct the Chern-Simons current $`\gamma ^{\xi ,V}`$ as

$$\gamma ^{\xi ,V}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi i}}_0^+\mathrm{}\phi \mathrm{Tr}_s\left[V\mathrm{exp}\left(C_T^2\right)\right]\frac{dT}{2\sqrt{T}}.$$
$`(2.9)`$
Let $`\delta _Y`$ denote the current of integration over the oriented submanifold $`Y`$ of $`X`$. Then by \[BZ, Theorem 1.4\], we have that

$$d\gamma ^{\xi ,V}=\mathrm{ch}(\xi _+,^{\xi _+})\mathrm{ch}(\xi _{},^\xi _{})\widehat{A}^1(N,^N)\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,^\mu )\delta _Y.$$
$`(2.10)`$
Moreover, as indicated in \[BZ, Remark 1.5\], by proceeding as in \[BGS, Theorem 3.3\], one can prove that $`\gamma ^{\xi ,V}`$ is a locally integrable current.

c). A localization formula for $`\eta `$ invariants

We assume in this subsection that $`i:YX`$ is an embedding between two odd dimensional closed oriented spin manifolds. Then the normal bundle $`N`$ to $`Y`$ in $`X`$ is even dimensional and carries a canonically induced orientation and spin structure. Let $`g^{TX}`$ be a Riemannian metric on $`TX`$. Let $`g^{TY}`$ be the restricted Riemannian metric on $`TY`$. Let $`^{TX}`$ (resp. $`^{TY}`$) denote the Levi-Civita connection associated to $`g^{TX}`$ (resp. $`g^{TY}`$).

Without loss of generality we may and we will make the assumption that the embedding $`(Y,g^{TY})(X,g^{TX})`$ is totally geodesic. Let $`N`$ carry the canonically induced Euclidean metric as well as the Euclidean connection.

Thus, we may and we will make the same construction as in a), b).

Recall that the definition of the reduced $`\eta `$ invariant for a (twisted) Dirac operator on an odd dimensional spin Riemannian manifold has been recalled in Section 1.

Under our assumptions, we see easily that the localization formula for $`\eta `$ invariants proved in \[BZ\] holds in a slightly simplified form. We recall it as follows.

Theorem 2.1 (Bismut-Zhang \[BZ, Theorem 2.2\]) The following identity holds,

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _+})\overline{\eta }(D^\xi _{})\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )+_X\widehat{A}(TX,^{TX})\gamma ^{\xi ,V}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(2.11)`$
Remark 2.2 The extra Chern-Simons form in \[BZ, Theorem 2.2\] disappears here simply because we have made the simplifying assumption that the isometric embedding $`(Y,g^{TY})(X,g^{TX})`$ is totally geodesic.

d). A geometric formula for $`\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )`$

We continue the discussion in c) and assume that $`X=S^{2n1}`$, a higher odd dimensional sphere (but we do not assume that it admits the standard metric, this makes the isometric embedding $`i:(Y,g^{TY})(S^{2n1},g^{TS^{2n1}})`$ to be totally geodesic possible).

Now recall that by the Bott periodicity (cf. ), one has $`\stackrel{~}{K}(S^{2n1})=\{0\}`$. Thus, in our case, we have $`i_!\mu =0`$. This means there is a trivial complex vector bundle $`\theta `$ over $`S^{2n1}`$ such that $`\theta \xi _+`$ is isomorphic to $`\theta \xi _{}`$.

We equip $`\theta `$ with a Hermitian metric as well as a Hermitian connection $`^\theta `$.

Let $`\xi ^{}=\xi _+^{}\xi _{}^{}`$ be the $`𝐙_2`$-graded Hermitian vector bundle over $`S^{2n1}`$ with $`\xi _\pm ^{}=\theta \xi _\pm `$. Then $`\xi _\pm ^{}`$ and $`\xi ^{}`$ carry canonically induced Hermitian connections $`^{\xi _\pm ^{}}`$ and $`^\xi ^{}`$ respectively through direct sums.

Let $`W`$ be an odd self-adjoint automorphism of $`\xi ^{}`$, which clearly exists by the above discussion.

For any $`T0`$, set

$$C_T^{}=^\xi ^{}+\sqrt{T}W.$$
$`(2.12)`$
Similarly as in (2.9), we define the Chern-Simons form $`\gamma ^{\xi ^{},W}`$ as

$$\gamma ^{\xi ^{},W}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi i}}_0^+\mathrm{}\phi \mathrm{Tr}_s\left[W\mathrm{exp}\left(\left(C_T^{}\right)^2\right)\right]\frac{dT}{2\sqrt{T}}.$$
$`(2.13)`$
Since $`W`$ is invertible, one has the following formula due to Bismut-Cheeger \[BC, Theorem 2.28\], which corresponds to the case with $`Y=\mathrm{}`$ in (2.11),

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _+^{}})\overline{\eta }(D^\xi _{}^{})_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\xi ^{},W}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(2.14)`$
On the other hand, one clearly has that

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _\pm ^{}})=\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _\pm })+\overline{\eta }(D^\theta ).$$
$`(2.15)`$
From (2.11), (2.14) and (2.15), one gets

$$\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\xi ^{},W}_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\xi ,V}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(2.16)`$
We can re-formulate (2.16) as follows.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }=\stackrel{~}{\xi }_+\stackrel{~}{\xi }_{}`$ be the $`𝐙_2`$-graded Hermitian vector bundle over $`S^{2n1}`$ defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_+=\xi _+\xi _{}^{},\stackrel{~}{\xi }_{}=\xi _{}\xi _+^{},$$
$`(2.17)`$
carrying the canonically induced Hermitian connection $`^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }}`$ through direct sums. Let $`\stackrel{~}{V}=VW^T`$, where $`W^T`$ is the transpose of $`W`$, be the odd self-adjoint automorphism of $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }`$. Then $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi },^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }},\stackrel{~}{V})`$ forms a geometric direct image of $`\mu `$ in the sense of Section 2a).

Let $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}`$ be the associated Chern-Simons current defined by (2.9). By (2.10) and the construction of $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi },^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }},\stackrel{~}{V})`$, one verifies easily that

$$d\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}=\widehat{A}^1(N,^N)\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,^\mu )\delta _Y.$$
$`(2.18)`$
We can now state the main result of this section as follows, which is simply a re-formulation of (2.16).

Theorem 2.3 The following identity holds,

$$\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(2.19)`$
Remark 2.4 It is remarkable that the right hand side of (2.19) does not involve any spectral information of $`D^\mu `$. It is purely geometric/topological, although the existence of the invertible element $`W`$ is by no means trivial (as we have seen, it follows from the Bott periodicity). It resembles well the $`K`$-theoretic proof of the Atiyah-Singer index theorem \[AS\]. On the other hand, the different choice of $`W`$ may cause the right hand side of (2.19) an integer jump. This partly explains that (2.19) is in general a mod $`𝐙`$ formula. While conversely, one can always find a $`W`$ to make (2.19) a purely equality in $`𝐑`$. This may sound few sense as when $`g^{TM}`$, $`g^\mu `$ and $`^\mu `$ vary, $`dim(\mathrm{ker}D^\mu )`$ may jump. However, if we take $`\mu =S(TY)`$, then $`D^{S(TY)}`$ is the Signature operator of $`(Y,g^{TY})`$ and such an equality in $`𝐑`$ with a suitable choice of $`W`$ will not depend on the variation of $`g^{TY}`$.

Remark 2.5 If $`dimY3\mathrm{mod}8𝐙`$ and $`\mu `$ is a complexification of a Euclidean vector bundle carrying with a Euclidean connection, then one can embed $`Y`$ into a higher $`8l+3`$ dimensional manifold and proceed as in \[Z1, Section 3\] to improve (2.19) to a mod $`2𝐙`$ formula.

Remark 2.6 As have been mentioned in Section 1, the proof of Theorem 2.1 given in \[BZ\] relies heavily on the difficult paper of Bismut-Lebeau \[BL\]. So in the next section, we will give an alternate proof of Theorem 2.1 for the case where $`X`$ is a higher dimensional sphere.

§3. An alternate proof of Theorem 2.1

As in Section 2, let $`Y`$ be an odd dimensional closed oriented spin manifold carrying with a Riemannian metric $`g^{TY}`$ and the associated Levi-Civita connection $`^{TY}`$. Let $`\mu `$ be a complex vector bundle over $`Y`$ carrying with a Hermitian metric $`g^\mu `$ and a Hermitian connection $`^\mu `$.

In case when there will be no confusion, we will use the notations in Section 2 without further explanation.

Since $`dimY`$ is odd, by a well-known result in bordism/cobordism theory, there is a positive integer $`k`$ such that the $`k`$ disjoint copies of $`Y`$ bound a compact oriented spin manifold $`\widehat{Y}`$ of dimension $`dimY+1`$ such that the boundary $`\widehat{Y}`$ does not contain other components. Moreover, there is a complex vector bundle $`\widehat{\mu }`$ over $`\widehat{Y}`$ such that when restricted to boundary, it is just $`\mu `$ on each copy of $`Y`$.

Clearly, $`(\widehat{Y},Y)`$ is a $`𝐙/k`$ manifold in the sense of Sullivan (cf. \[FM\] and \[Z1\]).

Let $`g^{\widehat{Y}}`$ be a Riemannian metric on $`T\widehat{Y}`$ which is of product nature near $`\widehat{Y}`$ and which on $`\widehat{Y}`$ is exactly $`g^{TY}`$ on each copy of the boundary. Let $`^{\widehat{Y}}`$ be the associated Levi-Civita connection. Similarly, let $`g^{\widehat{\mu }}`$ (resp. $`^{\widehat{\mu }}`$) be a Hermitian metric on $`\widehat{\mu }`$ such that it is of product nature near $`\widehat{Y}`$ and that on $`\widehat{Y}`$ it is exactly $`g^\mu `$ (resp. $`^\mu `$) on $`\mu `$ over each copy of $`Y`$.

Let $`S^{2n,k}`$ be the $`𝐙/k`$ manifold obtained by removing $`k`$ balls $`D^{2n}`$ from the $`2n`$-sphere. Then the boundary $`S^{2n,k}`$ consists of $`k`$ disjoint copies of $`S^{2n1}`$. Let $`i:\widehat{Y}S^{2n,k}`$ be a $`𝐙/k`$ embedding (cf. \[FM\], \[Z1\]). The existence of such an embedding is clear when $`n`$ is sufficiently large.

Let $`g^{TS^{2n,k}}`$ be a $`𝐙/k`$ metric on $`TS^{2n,k}`$ which is of product nature near $`S^{2n,k}`$, such that $`g^{TS^{2n,k}}|_{T\widehat{Y}}=g^{T\widehat{Y}}`$ and that the isometric embedding $`i:(\widehat{Y},g^{T\widehat{Y}})(S^{2n,k},g^{TS^{2n,k}})`$ is totally geodesic. Let $`^{TS^{2n,k}}`$ be the associated Levi-Civita connection.

Let $`\widehat{N}`$ denote the normal bundle to $`\widehat{Y}`$ in $`S^{2n,k}`$. Then $`\widehat{N}`$ carries an induced orientation and spin structure, as well as a $`𝐙/k`$ Euclidean metric (resp. connection) $`g^{\widehat{N}}`$ (resp. $`^{\widehat{N}}`$).

We can then apply the constructions in Sections 2a), b) to the embedding $`i:(\widehat{Y},g^{T\widehat{Y}})(S^{2n,k},g^{TS^{2n,k}})`$ in a $`𝐙/k`$ manner (that is, preserving all the $`𝐙/k`$ structures), such that all the metrics, connections and maps involved are of product nature near boundary.

We denote the resulting $`𝐙/k`$ geometric direct image of $`(\widehat{\mu },^{\widehat{\mu }})`$ by $`(\widehat{\xi }=\widehat{\xi }_+\widehat{\xi }_{},^{\widehat{\xi }},\widehat{V})`$. When restrict to each copy of the boundary, we denote the restricted geometric direct image of $`(\mu ,^\mu )`$ by $`(\xi =\xi _+\xi _{},^\xi ,V)`$.

Let $`\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\xi }_\pm })`$, $`\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\mu }})`$ be the mod $`k`$ indices defined by (cf. \[FM, (5.2)\], \[Z1\]),

$$\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\xi }_\pm })_{S^{2n,k}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n,k},^{TS^{2n,k}})\mathrm{ch}(\widehat{\xi }_\pm ,^{\widehat{\xi }_\pm })k\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _\pm })\mathrm{mod}k𝐙,$$
$`(3.1)`$
$$\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\mu }})_{\widehat{Y}}\widehat{A}(T\widehat{Y},^{\widehat{Y}})\mathrm{ch}(\widehat{\mu },^{\widehat{\mu }})k\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )\mathrm{mod}k𝐙.$$
$`(3.2)`$
By the mod $`k`$ index theorem of Freed and Melrose \[FM, (5.5)\], one knows that

$$\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\xi }_+})\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\xi }_{}})=\mathrm{ind}_k(D^{\widehat{\mu }})$$
$`(3.3)`$
in $`𝐙/k𝐙`$.

Now if we denote $`\gamma ^{\widehat{\xi },\widehat{V}}`$ the Chern-Simons current constructed in Section 2b), then its restriction to the boundary consists of $`k`$ copies of the Chern-Simons current $`\gamma ^{\xi ,V}`$.

By applying the transgression formula (2.10) to $`\gamma ^{\widehat{\xi },\widehat{V}}`$ and integrate over $`S^{2n,k}`$, one then gets

$$_{S^{2n,k}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n,k},^{TS^{2n,k}})\mathrm{ch}(\widehat{\xi }_+,^{\widehat{\xi }_+})_{S^{2n,k}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n,k},^{TS^{2n,k}})\mathrm{ch}(\widehat{\xi }_{},^{\widehat{\xi }_{}})$$

$$_{\widehat{Y}}\widehat{A}(T\widehat{Y},^{\widehat{Y}})\mathrm{ch}(\widehat{\mu },^{\widehat{\mu }})=k_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TY,^{TY})\gamma ^{\xi ,V}.$$
$`(3.4)`$
From (3.1)-(3.4), one deduces that

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\xi _+})\overline{\eta }(D^\xi _{})\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )+_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TY,^{TY})\gamma ^{\xi ,V}\mathrm{mod}𝐙,$$
$`(3.5)`$
which is exactly the Bismut-Zhang formula (2.11) in the case where $`X=S^{2n1}`$.

Remark 3.1 The relation between the Bismut-Zhang formula (2.11) and the Freed-Melrose mod $`k`$ index theorem \[FM\] was exploited in \[Z1\] where (2.11) is used to give an alternate proof of a mod $`k`$ equality between the right hand sides of (3.1) and (3.2). Now such an equality can be proved directly by applying the Riemann-Roch property for Dirac operators on manifolds with boundary proved by Dai and Zhang in \[DZ\], without using the results in \[BZ\]. In fact, this can be done by first applying \[DZ, Theorem 1.2 and Lemma 4.6\] to get (3.3). The mod $`k`$ equality between the right hand sides of (3.1) and (3.2) is then an easy consequence of the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem \[APS1\] (This observation grew out of discussions with Xianzhe Dai).

Remark 3.2 One should also note that the proof of (3.5) given in this section holds only for those embeddings which can be obtained through an embedding between $`𝐙/k`$ manifolds, while (2.11) is much more general. Still we hope the simplified proof in this section would be helpful for a good feeling of (2.11). While on the other hand, for many applications, the existence for such an embedding is suffice, as our main result (2.19) holds for it.

§4. Some applications

In this section, we discuss some immediate applications of formula (2.19).

This section is organized as follows. In a), we discuss briefly the relationship between the Chern-Simons current and the Cheeger-Simons differential character \[CS\]. In b), we discuss the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer $`𝐑/𝐙`$ index theorem for unitary flat vector bundles \[APS3\] from the point of view of (2.19). In c), we show that by replacing the Dirac operator by the Signature operator, one may refined the above $`𝐑/𝐙`$ formula to an $`𝐑`$ valued one.

We make the same assumptions and use the same notation as in Section 2.

a). Chern-Simons current and the Cheeger-Simons differential character

As was indicated by Bismut in \[B2\], the Chern-Simons currents constructed in Section 2 are closely related to the differential characters introduced by Cheeger and Simons in \[CS\]. This becomes clearer if we compare the transgression formula (2.18) with the one in \[CS, (4.3)\]. The difference is that in \[CS, (4.3)\], the transgression formula holds on different Stiefel manifolds, while our formula holds universally on a single sphere. Moreover, the differential characters for Chern character forms in \[CS\] were defined mod $`𝐐`$, while our formula is clearly of an $`𝐑/𝐙`$ nature (as the construction of the Chern-Simons current $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}`$ in Section 2d) depends on the choice of an automorphism $`W`$).

More precisely, if we denote by $`\widehat{\widehat{A}}(TY,^{TY})`$ (resp. $`\widehat{\mathrm{ch}}(\mu ,^\mu )`$) the Cheeger-Simons differential character associated to $`\widehat{A}(TY,^{TY})`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,^\mu )`$) constructed in \[CS\], then by \[CS, Theorem 9.1\], one has, in using the product notation as in \[CS\],

$$\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )\widehat{\widehat{A}}(TY,^{TY})\widehat{\mathrm{ch}}(\mu ,^\mu ),[Y]\mathrm{mod}𝐐.$$
$`(4.1)`$
From (2.19) and (4.1), one gets

$$_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}+\widehat{\widehat{A}}(TY,^{TY})\widehat{\mathrm{ch}}(\mu ,^\mu ),[Y]0\mathrm{mod}𝐐.$$
$`(4.2)`$
It would be interesting to give a direct proof of (4.2).

b). The Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem for flat bundles revisited

In this section, we replace the Hermitian vector bundle $`\mu `$ in Section 2 by $`\mu \rho `$, where $`\rho `$ is a unitary flat vector bundle with the flat connection denoted by $`^\rho `$. We equip $`\mu \rho `$ with the induced tensor product Hermitian metric as well as the tensor product Hermitian connection $`^{\mu \rho }=^\mu \mathrm{Id}_\rho +\mathrm{Id}_\mu ^\rho `$.

By \[APS3\],

$$\overline{\eta }_{\mu ,\rho }:=\overline{\eta }(D^{\mu \rho })\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )\mathrm{mod}𝐙$$
$`(4.3)`$
is a smooth invariant with respect to $`(g^{TM},g^\mu ,^\mu )`$. Moreover, \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\] provides a topological interpretation for this invariant.

We now examine this invariant by using (2.19).

Let $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho },\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho )`$ be a geometric direct image of $`(\mu \rho ,^{\mu \rho })`$ constructed similarly as that for $`(\mu ,^\mu )`$ in Section 2d). Let $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }`$ be the associated Chern-Simons current defined in (2.9). By (2.18), $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }`$ verifies the transgression formula

$$d\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }=\widehat{A}^1(N,^N)\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,^\mu )\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\delta _Y,$$
$`(4.4)`$
as $`\rho `$ is a flat bundle.

By (2.19), one also has

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\mu \rho })_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(4.5)`$
From (2.19), (4.3) and (4.5), one gets

$$\overline{\eta }_{\mu ,\rho }_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\left(\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }\right)\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(4.6)`$
On the other hand, from (2.18) and (4.4), one finds

$$d\left(\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }\right)=0.$$
$`(4.7)`$
Thus, $`\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }`$ determines a cohomology class in $`H_{\mathrm{dR}}^{\mathrm{odd}}(S^{2n1},𝐑)`$. One verifies easily that this cohomology class does not depend on the choice of $`^\mu `$. It only depends on the choices of the automorphisms $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ appearing in the construction of the geometric direct images of $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi },^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }},\stackrel{~}{V})`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho },\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho )`$. The different choices of $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ cause a (possible) integer jump in integration term in the right hand side of (4.6).

Thus, (4.6) may be thought of in some sense as an intrinsic version of the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem for flat vector bundles stated in \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\]. Its conceptual novelty is that one need not divide the topological index into two parts (that is, a $`𝐐/𝐙`$ part plus an $`𝐑`$ part.)

Remark 4.1 It is pointed out in \[APS3\] that the index theorem for flat vector bundles stated in \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\] indeed holds also for non-unitary flat vector bundles by suitable extension of the construction of the $`\eta `$ invariants. In the next section, we will extend our intrinsic formula (4.6) to the case of non-unitary flat vector bundles along similar lines.

c). Signature operator and an $`𝐑`$ valued index theorem for flat vector bundles

Now we set $`\mu =S(TY)`$ in the above subsection. In this case, $`D^\mu `$ is the Signature operator associated to $`(TY,g^{TY})`$, denoted by $`D_{\mathrm{Sign}}`$, while $`D^{\mu \rho }`$ is now denoted by $`D_{\mathrm{Sign}}^\rho `$.

Set

$$\overline{\eta }_{\mathrm{Sign},\rho }=\overline{\eta }(D_{\mathrm{Sign}}^\rho )\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\overline{\eta }(D_{\mathrm{Sign}}).$$
$`(4.8)`$
Then $`\overline{\eta }_{\mathrm{Sign},\rho }`$ is a smooth invariant equivalent to what defined in \[APS2, Theorem 2.4\].

On the other hand, as indicated in Remark 2.4, one can choose the automorphisms $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ in the construction of the Chern-Simons current so that

$$\overline{\eta }(D_{\mathrm{Sign}}^\rho )=_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho },$$
$`(4.9)`$
$$\overline{\eta }(D_{\mathrm{Sign}})=_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}.$$
$`(4.10)`$
It is clear that (4.9), (4.10) are actually equalities not depending on the choice of $`g^{TM}`$. Moreover, since $`K^1(S^{2n1})=𝐙`$, one sees that the choice of $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ is canonical (up to stable homotopy).

By (4.7), one also sees that $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}`$ determines canonically an element in $`H_{\mathrm{dR}}^{\mathrm{odd}}(Y,𝐑)`$.

We can state our $`𝐑`$ valued refinement of (4.6) as follows.

Theorem 4.2 The following $`K`$-theoretic formula for $`\overline{\eta }_{\mathrm{Sign},\rho }`$ holds,

$$\overline{\eta }_{\mathrm{Sign},\rho }=_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\left(\mathrm{rk}(\rho )\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }_\rho ,\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho }\right).$$
$`(4.11)`$
Remark 4.3 Theorem 4.2 was proved for unitary flat vector bundles over spin manifolds. It is nature to ask whether there is still such a kind of formulas without the spin condition.

Remark 4.4 If one could find a purely topological way to identify the automorphisms $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ (or the difference element of $`\mathrm{rk}(\rho )W`$ and $`W_\rho `$ in $`K^1(S^{2n1})`$), then one would provide a positive answer to a question of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer stated implicitly in \[APS2, page 406\]. On the other hand, for any choice of $`W`$ and $`W_\rho `$, the right hand side of (4.11) provides a smooth invariant of $`Y`$. So in some sense, $`\overline{\eta }_{\mathrm{Sign},\rho }`$ becomes one example of a series of smooth invariants associated to the unitary flat vector bundle $`\rho `$ over $`Y`$.

§5. Generalizations to Hermitian vector bundles with non-unitary connection

In this section, we generalize the results in the previous sections to the case of non-unitary (i.e., non-Hermitian) connections on the twisted Hermitian vector bundle $`\mu `$.

This section is organized as follows. In a), we propose a definition of the $`\eta `$ invariants of Dirac operators coupled with Hermitian vector bundles with non-unitary connection. In b), we show that the generalized $`\eta `$ invaraints defined in a) can also be expressed as a Chern-Simons current on a higher dimensional sphere, extending Theorem 2.3. In c), we apply the formula obtained in b) to the case of general flat vector bundles.

a). $`\eta `$ invariants for Hermitian vector bundles with non-unitary connection

We make the same assumptions and use the same notation as in Sections 1 and 2, except that we no longer assume that the connection $`^\mu `$ is a Hermitian connection with respect to the Hermitian metric $`g^\mu `$. Then the Dirac operator $`D^\mu `$ need not be self-adjoint. To make clearer the dependence of the Dirac operator with respect to the connection, we will denote the Dirac operator coupled with connection $`^\mu `$ on $`\mu `$ by $`D^^\mu `$.

Let $`^{\mu ,}`$ be the adjoint connection of $`^\mu `$ with respect to $`g^\mu `$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{}^\mu =\frac{1}{2}\left(^\mu +^{\mu ,}\right)$$
$`(5.1)`$
is a Hermitian connection on $`\mu `$, and $`D^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu }`$ is self-adjoint.

Let $`\psi :𝐑𝐑`$ be a smooth function such that $`\psi (x)=1`$ if $`x>10`$, while $`\psi (x)=0`$ if $`x<2`$.

For any $`t0`$, set

$$D(t)=\sqrt{t}\left(\psi (t)D^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu }+(1\psi (t))D^^\mu \right).$$
$`(5.2)`$
First of all, by using Duhamel principle, one knows easily that for any $`t>0`$, the heat operator $`\mathrm{exp}(D(t)^2)`$ is well-defined.

By proceeding similarly as in \[BF, Theorem 2.4\], one knows that as $`t0^+`$,

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\frac{dD(t)}{dt}\mathrm{exp}\left(D(t)^2\right)\right]=O(1).$$
$`(5.3)`$
Thus, one is able to define, by analogous to \[L, (59)\],

$$\eta (D^^\mu ,\psi )=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}_0^+\mathrm{}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\frac{dD(t)}{dt}\mathrm{exp}\left(D(t)^2\right)\right].$$
$`(5.4)`$
By proceeding as in \[L, Lemma 3\], one knows that $`\eta (D^^\mu ,\psi )`$ does not depend on $`\psi `$.

Definition 5.1 Let $`\eta (D^^\mu )`$ denote $`\eta (D^^\mu ,\psi )`$ and call it the $`\eta `$ invariant of $`D^^\mu `$. Let $`\overline{\eta }(D^^\mu )`$ be the reduced $`\eta `$ invariant defined by

$$\overline{\eta }(D^^\mu )=\frac{dim(\mathrm{ker}D^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu })+\eta (D^^\mu )}{2}.$$
$`(5.5)`$
Clearly, if $`^\mu `$ preserves $`g^\mu `$, then $`\overline{\eta }(D^^\mu )`$ is exactly the usual reduced $`\eta `$ invariant discussed in Sections 1 and 2.

Let $`CS(^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}^\mu )`$ be the Chern-Simons form verifying (cf. \[Z2, Chapter 1\])

$$dCS(^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}^\mu )=\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,^\mu )\mathrm{ch}(\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}^\mu ).$$
$`(5.6)`$
Proposition 5.2 The following identity holds,

$$\overline{\eta }(D^^\mu )=\overline{\eta }(D^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu })+_Y\widehat{A}(TM,^{TM})CS(^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}^\mu ).$$
$`(5.7)`$
Proof. For any $`u[0,1]`$, set $`D^^\mu (u)=(1u)D^^\mu +uD^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu }`$. By proceeding as in \[BF, Theorem 2.10\], one knows that the $`𝐑/𝐙`$ part of $`\overline{\eta }(D^^\mu (u))`$ verifies the variation formula as usual. This gives the local term in the right hand side of (5.7). On the other hand, it is clear that there is no integer jump in this deformation (Compare with \[L, (65)\]). Q.E.D.

b). A formula through Chern-Simons current

In this subsection, we show that Theorem 2.3 still holds in the current generalized situation. We state the result as follows.

Theorem 5.3 The following identity holds,

$$\overline{\eta }(D^\mu )_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(5.8)`$
Proof. Let $`(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\widehat{}^{\stackrel{~}{\xi }},\stackrel{~}{V})`$ be the geometric direct image constructed in Section 2d) with respect the connection $`\stackrel{~}{}^\mu `$ on $`\mu `$ instead of $`^\mu `$. Let $`\widehat{\gamma }^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}`$ be the associated Chern-Simons current. Then by Theorem 2.3, we know that

$$\overline{\eta }(D^{\stackrel{~}{}^\mu })_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\widehat{\gamma }^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}\mathrm{mod}𝐙.$$
$`(5.9)`$
On the other hand, by the transgression formula (2.18), one deduces that

$$_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\widehat{\gamma }^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}_{S^{2n1}}\widehat{A}(TS^{2n1},^{TS^{2n1}})\gamma ^{\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{V}}$$

$$=_Y\widehat{A}(TM,^{TM})CS(^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}^\mu ).$$
$`(5.10)`$
From (5.7), (5.9) and (5.10), one gets (5.8). Q.E.D.

c). Applications to flat vector bundles

We will only be brief in this subsection as the arguments run parallel to those in Section 4.

Now we replace $`\mu `$ by $`\mu \rho `$ such that $`\mu `$ is a Hermitian vector bundle carrying with a Hermitian connection, while $`\rho `$ is a flat vector bundle carrying with a Hermitian metric. But we no longer assume that the flat connection $`^\rho `$ is unitary.

With the definition given in Section 5a), it is clear that the invariant $`\overline{\eta }_{\mu ,\rho }`$ is still well-defined. Moreover, by Theorem 5.3, one still has a formula of the same form as (4.6), giving a $`𝐂/𝐙`$ valued $`K`$-theoretic formula for this analytically defined invariant. It is easy to check that the right hand side of such a formula is equal to the topological index given in \[APS3, Theorem 5.3\]. This means that, at least on the mod $`𝐙`$ level, our definition of the reduced $`\eta `$ invariant agrees with the one indicated in \[APS3, Sections 5, 6\]. This would be sufficient for many other applications as well.

Certainly one can also extend Theorem 4.2 to the case of non-unitary flat vector bundles.

We leave the details to the interested reader.

Remark 5.4 Clearly, all the results of this paper can be extended to the case of spin<sup>c</sup> manifolds. We also leave this to the interested reader.

Acknowledgement The author is indebted to Professor Jean-Michel Bismut in an obvious way. He would also like to thank Fuquan Fang, Huitao Feng and Xiaonan Ma for helpful discussions.

References

\[A\] M. F. Atiyah, K-theory. Benjamin, New York, 1967.

\[AH\] M. F. Atiyah and F. Hirzebruch, Riemann-Roch theorems for differentiable manifolds. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 65 (1959), 276-281.

\[APS1\] M. F. Atiyah, V. K. Patodi and I. M. Singer, Spectral asymmetry and Riemannian geometry I. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 77 (1975), 43-69.

\[APS1\] M. F. Atiyah, V. K. Patodi and I. M. Singer, Spectral asymmetry and Riemannian geometry II. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 78 (1975), 405-432.

\[APS3\] M. F. Atiyah, V. K. Patodi and I. M. Singer, Spectral asymmetry and Riemannian geometry III. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 79 (1976), 71-99.

\[AS\] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer, The index of elliptic operators I. Ann. of Math. 87 (1968), 484-530.

\[B1\] J.-M. Bismut, Superconnection currents and complex immersions. Invent. Math. 99 (1990), 59-113.

\[B2\] J.-M. Bismut, Eta invariants and complex immersions. Bull. Soc. Math. France 118 (1990), 211-227.

\[BC\] J.-M. Bismut and J. Cheeger, $`\eta `$-invariants and their adiabatic limits. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 2 (1989), 33-70.

\[BF\] J.-M. Bismut and D. S. Freed, The analysis of elliptic families, II. Commun. Math. Phys. 107 (1986), 103-163.

\[BGS\] J.-M. Bismut, H. Gillet and C. Soulé, Bott-Chern currents and complex geometry. Duke Math. J. 60 (1990), 255-284.

\[BL\] J.-M. Bismut and G. Lebeau, Complex immersions and Quillen metrics, Publ. Math. IHES. 74 (1991), 1-297.

\[BZ\] J.-M. Bismut and W. Zhang, Real embeddings and eta invariant. Math. Ann. 295 (1993), 661-684.

\[CS\] J. Cheeger and J. Simons, Differential characters and geometric invariants. in Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 1167, page 50-80. Springer-Verlag, 1985.

\[DZ\] X. Dai and W. Zhang, Real embeddings and the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem for Dirac operators. Asian J. Math. 4 (2000), 775-794.

\[FM\] D. S. Freed and R. B. Melrose, A mod $`k`$ index theorem. Invent. Math. 107 (1992), 283-299.

\[L\] J. Lott, $`𝐑/𝐙`$-index theory. Commun. Anal. Geom. 2 (1994), 279-311.

\[Q\] D. Quillen, Superconnections and the Chern character. Topology 24 (1985), 89-95.

\[Z1\] W. Zhang, On the mod $`k`$ index theorem of Freed and Melrose. J. Diff. Geom. 43 (1996), 198-206.

\[Z2\] W. Zhang, Lectures on Chern-Weil Theory and Witten Deformations. Nankai Tracks in Mathematics Vol. 4, World Scientific, Singapore, 2001.

Nankai Institute of Mathematics, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, P. R. China

E-mail: weiping@nankai.edu.cn


format: text

text:
# Heavy–light decay constants in the continuum limit of quenched lattice QCD

## 1 Introduction

The amount of CP violation occurring in the in the Standard Model depends upon the unitary Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix. This is explored through the so called Unitarity Triangle Analysis  that requires a deep theoretical understanding of the $`B`$ mesons decay properties, given the increasing accuracy of the $`B`$-factory experiments (for a recent review see ). A crucial quantity, the $`B`$ meson decay constant $`f_B`$, has already been calculated by means of different techniques: Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET)  QCD Sum Rules  and lattice QCD (LQCD).

The latter moves from first principles and has to face the problem of properly accounting two largely separated energy scales, i.e. the heavy and light quark masses. This imposes stringent limits on the values of the lattice bare parameters: the lattice spacing has to be small enough to allow a good description of the highly localized heavy quark, and the number of lattice points has to be large enough to accommodate the widely spread light quark. A direct calculation would require lattice sizes of the order $`100^4`$ points. These limits are too much demanding for present supercomputers, even in the quenched approximation, and in the case of full QCD also for the next generation supercomputers. To overcome these difficulties, different strategies have been adopted (see  for recent reviews).

One way consists in working with propagating heavy quarks with masses in the region of the physical charm quark and to extrapolate the results to the $`b`$–quark, using HQET scaling laws . The systematic errors in these calculations are dominated by the uncertainty on the functional form to be used in the extrapolation, depending in turn upon the limits of validity of HQET when applied to the $`c`$–quark. Another method comes from the non–perturbative matching of lattice QCD and HQET in the static limit . Other possibilities are offered by the Non Relativistic approximation (NRQCD), where the heavy quark mass expansion is taken in the operators as well as in the Lagrangian , and by the Fermilab approach , where one expands in the mass of the propagating heavy quark in lattice units. All these methods give results with systematic errors that makes them fully compatible within the error bars .

In a previous publication  we have introduced a new method to perform the determination of $`f_B`$ and, more generally, to face two scales problems in lattice QCD. The so called *step scaling method*  has been applied to give a first numerical result for this quantity at fixed lattice spacing and, in , to perform the first calculation of the $`b`$–quark mass in the continuum limit of quenched lattice QCD. The idea behind the method consists in using a QCD propagating $`b`$–quark on a small volume, calculating the *finite volume effects* on the heavy–light decay constants and, finally, using the very mild dependence of these effects upon the heavy quark mass, to obtain a final result in a large volume.

In this paper we extrapolate our results to the continuum by repeating the various steps of the previous calculation at different lattice spacings and fixed physical quantities. The major assumption undergoing our method, i.e. that the finite size effects on an heavy–light observable have a milder dependence upon the heavy quark mass than the quantity itself, is shown to hold in the continuum limit.

The general features of the method are described in sec. 2, in sec. 3 we set the notations, the numerical results are presented in sec. 4. Conclusions are drawn in sec. 6.

## 2 Overview of the method

A detailed explanation of the method can be found in ; here we shortly review the basic features in order to set the notations.

A non–perturbative determination of the heavy–light decay constants from lattice QCD should take into account the masses of a heavy and a light propagating quark. The step scaling method faces the challenging requirements discussed above by adopting a two–step strategy. As a first step, the decay constant is computed on a small volume, where the light quark is squeezed, and the heavy quark propagates with a high resolution. At this stage, the mass of the heavy quark can be raised up to very large values, with controlled discretization errors, and the decay constant can be directly simulated at the physical heavy quark mass. As a second step, the finite size effects of this calculation are removed by evolving the decay constant toward large volumes. The evolution is realized according to the identity

$$f_h\mathrm{}(L_{\mathrm{}})=f_h\mathrm{}(L_0)\frac{f_h\mathrm{}(L_1)}{f_h\mathrm{}(L_0)}\frac{f_h\mathrm{}(L_2)}{f_h\mathrm{}(L_1)}\mathrm{},L_0<L_1<L_2\mathrm{}$$
(1)
where the basic ingredient is the ratio of the decay constants computed on two different volumes at the same values of the mass parameters

$$\sigma (m_{\mathrm{}},m_h,L_{k1})=\frac{f_h\mathrm{}(m_{\mathrm{}},m_h,L_k)}{f_h\mathrm{}(m_{\mathrm{}},m_h,L_{k1})}|_{L_k=sL_{k1}}$$
(2)
Throughout the paper we refer to the step scaling function in the continuum limit as $`\sigma `$ (greek lowercase) and to the step scaling function at finite lattice spacing as $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (greek uppercase).

This quantity represents a non–perturbative calculation of the finite volume effects. In principle, its dependence on the quark masses can be very different from the one of the decay constants themselves. In effects, it has been shown  that the $`\sigma `$–ratio’s are characterized by a very slight linear dependence upon the inverse of $`m_h`$, due to cancellations of additional heavy quark mass dependences between the numerator and the denominator of eq. (2). This suggests a concrete way to connect the finite volume decay constant to physical volumes:

* given a couple of physical volumes $`(L_{k1},L_k)`$ and a finite lattice spacing $`a`$, the step scaling function is simulated on the lattice for a set of heavy and light quark masses. In order to identify the quark mass on a finite volume, a RGI quark mass scheme is adopted  and units are fixed through the $`r_0`$ scale . Throughout the paper we fix $`r_0=0.5`$ fm. The light quark masses are kept around the strange mass throughout the whole procedure.
* A set of different simulations are done at fixed physical volumes $`(L_{k1},L_k)`$ but with different lattice spacings, in order to perform the continuum extrapolation of the step scaling function at given heavy and light RGI quark masses. The ratio $`s`$ between the two volumes should be chosen small enough to cope with the increase of lattice sites without exceeding computational resources. On the other hand, it should be large enough to reach large volumes in few steps. A value $`s=2`$ is a good compromise. The continuum step scaling functions are then linearly extrapolated in the inverse of the RGI heavy quark masses up to $`m_c^{RGI}`$ or $`m_b^{RGI}`$, according to the heavy flavors of the meson.
* As a starting value for the finite volume, we chose to set $`L_0=0.4`$ fm. This allows to reach a volume $`L_2=1.6`$ fm, after just two evolution steps, which is adequate to accommodate the heavy–light mesons at the physical values of the light quark masses.

In order to match subsequent steps, the knowledge of the bare coupling $`g_0(a)`$ as a function of the lattice spacing is required at very small couplings. The problem has been recently addressed in  and solved by a renormalization group analysis.

## 3 Observables

The step scaling function is calculated within the SF , which has already been applied to a number of different finite size problems . The lattice topology is $`T\times L^3`$ with periodic boundary conditions on the space directions and Dirichlet boundary conditions along time. We use the following set of parameters

$$T=2L,C=C^{}=0,\theta =0$$
(3)
where $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ represent the boundary gauge fields and $`\theta `$ is a topological phase which affects the periodicity of the fermion in the space directions. Lattice discretization is performed using non–perturbative $`O(a)`$ improved clover action  and operators. In order to set the notation, let

$`A_\mu (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }_i(x)\gamma _\mu \gamma _5\psi _j(x)`$
$`P(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }_i(x)\gamma _5\psi _j(x)`$ (4)
be the axial current and the pseudoscalar density ($`i`$ and $`j`$ are flavor indices). The improvement of the axial current is obtained through the relations

$$A_\mu ^I(x)=A_\mu (x)+ac_A\stackrel{~}{}_\mu P(x)$$
(5)
where $`\stackrel{~}{}_\mu =(_\mu +_\mu ^{})/2`$ and $`_\mu `$, $`_\mu ^{}`$ are the usual forward and backward lattice derivatives respectively. For what concerns the improvement coefficients $`c_A`$, we use the non–perturbative results of . The correlation functions used to compute the meson decay constants are defined by probing the previous operators with appropriate boundary quark sources

$`_A^I(x_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{a^6}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐲,𝐳}{}}\overline{\zeta }_j(𝐲)\gamma _5\zeta _i(𝐳)A_0^I(x)`$
$`_P(x_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{a^6}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐲,𝐳}{}}\overline{\zeta }_j(𝐲)\gamma _5\zeta _i(𝐳)P(x)`$ (6)
where $`\zeta _i(𝐲)`$ and $`\overline{\zeta }_i(𝐲)`$ can be considered as quark and anti–quark boundary states.

The renormalization of the axial current is realized according to the following relation

$$A_\mu ^R(x_0)=Z_A(1+b_Aam)A_\mu ^I(x_0)$$
(7)
here $`am`$ is the bare quark mass defined as

$$am_i=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{1}{k_i}\frac{1}{k_c}\right]$$
(8)
The renormalization constant $`Z_A`$ has been computed non perturbatively in . For the improvement coefficient $`b_A`$ we use the perturbative results quoted in  (at the values of the bare coupling, $`\beta 7.0`$, used in the numerical simulations the one–loop contribution to $`b_A`$ differs from the tree–level of $`10`$%).

The so–called bare current quark masses are defined through the lattice version of the PCAC relation

$$m_{ij}^{WI}=\frac{\stackrel{~}{_0}_A(x_0)+ac_A_0^{}_0_P(x_0)}{2_P(x_0)}$$
(9)
These masses are connected to the renormalization group invariant (RGI) quark masses, according to the definitions given in , through a renormalization factor which has been computed non–perturbatively in :

$$m_{ij}^{RGI}=Z_M(g_0)\left[1+(b_Ab_P)\frac{am_i+am_j}{2}\right]m_{ij}^{WI}(g_0)$$
(10)
where $`am_i`$ is defined in eq. (8).

The combination $`b_Ab_P`$ of the improvement coefficients of the axial current and pseudoscalar density has been non–perturbatively computed in . The factor $`Z_M(g_0)`$ is known with very high precision in a range of inverse bare couplings that does not cover all the values of $`\beta `$ used in our simulations. We have used the results reported in table (6) of ref.  to parametrize $`Z_M(g_0)`$ in the enlarged range of $`\beta `$ values $`(5.9,7.6)`$.

The RGI mass of a given quark is obtained from eq. (10) using the diagonal correlations

$$m_i^{RGI}=m_{ii}^{RGI}$$
(11)
From non–diagonal correlations in eq. (10) one obtains different $`O(a)`$ improved definitions of the RGI $`i`$–quark mass for different choices of the $`j`$–flavor:

$$m_{i_{\{j\}}}^{RGI}=2m_{ij}^{RGI}m_{jj}^{RGI}$$
(12)
All these definitions must have the same continuum limit because the dependence upon the $`j`$–flavor is only a lattice artifact. Further, for each definition we use in eq. (9) either standard lattice time derivatives as well as improved ones .

Another non–perturbative $`O(a)`$ improved definition of the RGI quark masses can be obtained starting from the bare quark mass

$$\widehat{m}_i^{RGI}=Z_M(g_0)Z(g_0)\left[1+b_mam_i\right]m_i$$
(13)
where the improvement coefficient $`b_m`$ and the renormalization constant

$$Z(g_0)=\frac{Z_mZ_P}{Z_A}$$
(14)
have been non-perturbatively computed in ref. .

Equations (11), (12) and (13) give us different possibilities to identify the valence quarks inside a given meson (fixed by the values of the bare quark masses). The procedure is well defined on small volumes because the RGI quark mass is a physical quantity that does not depend upon the scale, given in the SF scheme by the volume, and is defined in terms of local correlations that do not suffer finite volume effects. Each pair $`(m_i^{RGI},m_j^{RGI})`$ fixed a priori is matched, changing the values of the hopping parameters, by the different definitions of equations (11), (12) and (13), and leads to values of the corresponding decay constants differing by $`O(a^2)`$ lattice artifacts. We take advantage of this plethora of definitions by constraining in a single fit the continuum extrapolations (see Figure ).

The meson masses are extracted from the so–called *effective mass*

$$aM_X(x_0)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left[_X(x_0a)/_X(x_0+a)\right]$$
(15)
where $`_X`$ is one of the correlations defined in (6). Correspondingly, the meson decay constants are defined as

$$f_h\mathrm{}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{L^3M_A(T/2)}}\frac{_A^R(T/2)}{\sqrt{_1}}$$
(16)
where $`_1`$ is the boundary–to–boundary correlation needed in order to cancel, in the ratio, the renormalization constants of the boundary quark fields:

$$_1=\frac{a^{12}}{3L^6}\underset{𝐲,𝐳,𝐮,𝐰}{}\overline{\zeta }_j(𝐲)\gamma _5\zeta _i(𝐳)\overline{\zeta ^{}}_i(𝐮)\gamma _5\zeta _j^{}(𝐰)$$
(17)
We want to stress that our choice of defining the decay constant in the middle of the lattice, $`x_0=T/2`$, does not introduces other length scales than $`L`$ into the calculation. Indeed we take $`T=2L`$ and the step scaling technique (see eq.(1)) connects $`x_0=L_{min}`$, where the decay constant has been defined on the smallest volume, with $`x_0=L_{max}`$, where one expects to be free from finite volume effects.

## 4 Numerical simulations

In this section we report, step by step, the results of the calculations.

### 4.1 Small volume decay constants ($`L_0=0.4`$ fm)

Simulations of the decay constants on the smallest volume ($`L_0=0.4`$ fm) have been performed at five different lattice spacings using the geometries $`24\times 12^3`$, $`32\times 16^3`$, $`40\times 20^3`$, $`48\times 24^3`$ and $`64\times 32^3`$. For each discretization, a set of eight quark masses have been simulated. Two of the heavy masses have been chosen around the bottom quark $`m_b^{RGI}=6.73(16)`$ GeV . Other two have been chosen in the region of the charm quark $`m_c^{RGI}=1.681(36)`$ . An additional heavy quark has been simulated with mass $`4.00`$ GeV. Three light quark have been simulated with RGI masses of $`0.14`$ GeV, $`0.10`$ GeV and $`0.06`$ GeV. Using the accurate determination of the RGI strange quark mass given in  we have fixed one of the simulated light quarks to be the physical $`s`$. We will combine this finite volume calculations with the ones of the step scaling functions to provide results for the heavy–light decay constants with light quarks around the the strange in the continuum and on the large volume. All the parameters of the five different simulations are summarized in Table .

We have obtained different set of data by using the different definitions of the RGI quark masses given in the equations (11), (12) and (13). The continuum results are thus obtained trough a combined fit of all the set of data, linear in $`(a/r_0)^2`$, as shown in Figure  in the case of the $`\overline{b}s`$ meson. For each set of data we have included in the fit the three points nearest to the continuum obtaining a global $`\chi ^2/dof=0.89`$ to be compared with the $`\chi ^2`$s of each individual definition listed in the figure. At this small volume, we are in a region of small bare couplings ($`g_0^20.85`$) where it is legitimate to use perturbative values for the improvement coefficient $`b_A`$. The systematics introduced in the calculation by the continuum extrapolations have been estimated repeating the fits linear in $`(a/r_0)^2`$ including, for each set of data, only the two points nearest to the continuum. We find a deviation leading to a corresponding systematic error of the order of $`1`$% that will be given to the results on the large volume added in quadrature with an error of about $`2`$% coming from the uncertainties on the lattice spacing and on the renormalization factors. The latter have been evaluated by moving the points as a consequence of the change, within the errors, of the lattice spacings and of the renormalization constants and by repeating the whole analysis.

The numbers we obtain are:

$$f_{B_s}(L_0)=475(2)MeVf_{D_s}(L_0)=644(3)MeV$$
(18)
The errors quoted at this stage are statistical only, evaluated by a jackknife procedure.
Due to the compression of the low energy scale, these results are higher than the large volume ones obtained after the step scaling functions multiplication chain (see eqs. (21), (22) and (23)).

### 4.2 First evolution step ($`L_0L_1`$)

The finite volume effects on the decay constants calculated on $`L_0`$, are measured by doubling the volume, $`L_1=0.8`$ fm, and by using the step scaling function of eq (2).

The continuum extrapolations have been obtained by simulating the step scaling functions with three different discretizations of $`L_0`$, i.e $`16\times 8^3`$, $`24\times 12^3`$ and $`32\times 16^3`$. The volume $`L_1`$ has been simulated starting from the discretizations of $`L_0`$, fixing the value of the bare coupling and doubling the number of lattice points in each direction.

The simulated quark masses have been halved with respect to the masses simulated on the small volume in order to have the same amount of the discretization effects proportional to $`am`$. The set of parameters for the simulations of this evolution step is reported in Table .
The step scaling functions at $`\beta =6.963`$ are plotted, at fixed $`m_2^{RGI}`$, as functions of $`m_1^{RGI}`$ in Figure . As can be seen, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(L_0)`$ is almost flat in a region of heavy quark masses starting around the charm mass. The hypothesis of low sensitivity upon the high–energy scale is thus verified. The value of the step scaling functions for the $`s`$ quark are obtained trough linear interpolation.
In Figure  are reported the results of the continuum extrapolation of the step scaling function, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(L_0)`$, of the pseudoscalar $`\overline{h}s`$ meson corresponding to the heaviest quark simulated in this step ($`m_h^{RGI}=3.55`$ GeV).
The residual heavy mass dependence of the continuum extrapolated step scaling functions is very mild, as shown in Figure  in the plot of $`\sigma _{B_s}`$ as a function of the inverse quark mass. The continuum results are linearly extrapolated at the values of the heavy quark masses used in the small volume simulations.

The numbers we get at this step are:

$$\sigma _{B_s}(L_0)=0.417(3)\sigma _{D_s}(L_0)=0.414(3)$$
(19)
The step scaling functions are free from the systematic errors coming from uncertainties on $`Z_A`$ and $`b_A`$ since the multiplicative improvement and renormalization factors cancel exactly in the ratio, being the numerator and the denominator evaluated at the same lattice spacing.

### 4.3 Second evolution step ($`L_1L_2`$)

In order to have the results on a physical volume, $`L_2=1.6`$ fm, a second evolution step is necessary. This is done computing the step scaling functions of eq. (2) at $`L=L_1`$, by the procedure outlined in the previous section. The parameters of the simulations are given in Table .

Also in this case, the values of the simulated quark masses have been halved with respect to the previous step, owing to the lower values of the simulation cutoffs. Even if we are lowering again the values of the quark masses, the linear extrapolations at the values of the heavy quark masses used on the small volume appears to be still valid and under control; see Figure .
The value of the step scaling functions for the $`s`$ quark are obtained trough linear interpolation.
Figure  shows the continuum extrapolation of the step scaling function, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(L_1)`$, of the $`\overline{h}s`$ meson corresponding to the heaviest quark simulated in this step ($`m_h^{RGI}=2.00`$ GeV).

The numbers for this step are:

$$\sigma _{B_s}(L_1)=0.97(3)\sigma _{D_s}(L_1)=0.90(2)$$
(20)
## 5 Physical results

In this section we combine the results of the small volume with the results of the step scaling functions to obtain, according to eq. (1), the physical numbers. In the end, we get:

$$f_{B_s}=192(6)(4)\text{MeV}f_{D_s}=240(5)(5)\text{MeV}$$
(21)
The first error is statistical while the second one is our estimate of the systematics due to the uncertainties on the continuum extrapolations, on the scale and on the renormalization factors, as already discussed in sec. 4.1.
Note that our value for $`f_{D_s}`$ agrees with the average of dedicated calculations performed on large volumes . This validates our choice of stopping at $`L=1.6`$ fm that, of course, can be explicitly checked to be safe by performing further evolution steps.
Using the strategy outlined in the previous sections, we have calculated also the decay constant of the $`B_c`$ meson. The result we obtain is

$$f_{B_c}=347(5)(8)\text{MeV}$$
(22)
that represents the first determination of this quantity from quenched lattice QCD.

The chiral behavior of heavy–light pseudoscalar decay constants has been shown  to contain logarithmic terms ($`\chi `$–logs) that are diverging in the chiral limit, at variance with the unquenched case where these terms only affect the form of the extrapolation.
In Figure  we show the chiral extrapolations for the continuum heavy–light pseudoscalar decay constants. The data corresponding to the different values of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ have been extrapolated using the parametrization suggested in . As can be seen from the figure, the presence of the unphysical quenched $`\chi `$–logs make the extrapolations unreliable down to the $`u`$–quark mass while the strange region seems to be dominated by a linear behavior. Nevertheless, in the literature values extrapolated linearly in the light quark mass have been quoted.
For a *historical* comparison we can quote our own:

$`f_B^{linear}=171(8)(4)\text{MeV}f_D^{linear}=221(7)(5)\text{MeV}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f_{B_s}}{f_B^{linear}}}=1.12(2)(1){\displaystyle \frac{f_{D_s}}{f_D^{linear}}}=1.09(1)(1)`$ (23)
that differ by a large factor from the unreliable values obtained from the fits shown in Figure  because of the diverging $`\chi `$–logs. The numbers quoted above should then be retained for an *historical* comparison only and should *not* be quoted as the results of the quenched approximation.

## 6 Conclusions

In this work we have calculated the $`B_s`$–meson decay constant in the continuum limit of quenched lattice QCD. The results are obtained through a finite volume recursive procedure where the heavy quark masses have been obtained, using the same method, in a previous work.

The main achievement of this computation with respect to our previous determination of the same quantities are the extrapolations to the continuum limit. Our systematic errors are due to the extrapolations to the continuum and to the physical heavy quark masses. An additional unknown systematics comes from the quenched approximation that is believed to produce visible effects on the meson decay constants. The known pathological behavior of quenched $`\chi `$–QCD does not allow us to quote a quenched value for $`f_B`$.

Upcoming new powerful super-computers will make affordable straight calculations of lattice $`b`$–physics without recursive methods but *still* in the quenched approximation. In this scenario our method could provide the opportunity of studying *un*quenched $`b`$–physics and/or to deal with other demanding two–scales problems.

We want to warmly thank R. Sommer for a critical reading of the manuscript and for useful discussions. This work has been partially supported by the European Community under the grant HPRN–CT–2000–00145 Hadrons/Lattice QCD.


text:
# Surface instabilities on liquid oxygen in an inhomogeneous magnetic field

## Abstract

Liquid oxygen exhibits surface instabilities when subjected to a sufficiently strong magnetic field. A vertically oriented magnetic field gradient both increases the magnetic field value at which the pattern forms and shrinks the length scale of the surface patterning. We show that these effects of the field gradient may be described in terms of an “effective gravity”, which in our experiments may be varied from 1g to 360g.

During the course of levitation and magnetic flotation experiments, the surface of liquid oxygen has been observed to exhibit an instability towards corrugation when subjected to a sufficiently strong perpendicular magnetic field Catherall . Liquid oxygen (LOX) is strongly paramagnetic, a fact that is simply explained by Hund’s rule which dictates that the two electrons in the anti-bonding $`2\pi _g`$ orbitals of the $`O_2`$ molecule form a spin triplet. This strong paramagnetism leads to a number of interesting properties of LOX when subjected to magnetic fields, such as: magnetic flotation Catherall ; the magneto-volume effectUyeda1 , in which the volume of the liquid changes under an applied field; field-induced transparency Uyeda2 , in which the liquid loses its blue colour.

For levitation and magnetic flotation, a large inhomogeneous magnetic field is required Geim  and we observe that the presence of a vertical magnetic field gradient strongly influences both the magnitude of the fields required for the onset of this surface instability and also the characteristic length scale of the patterns observed. It is the influence of the field gradient which is the subject of this report.

Surface instabilities were first investigated in ferrofluids Rosensweig ; Rosensweig2  which consist of colloidal suspensions of ferromagnetic particles (such as magnetite or cobalt) in organic liquids (such as oil or kerosene) to which are added surfactants which coat the particles in order to inhibit cohesion and prevent field-induced flocculation.

If a sufficiently strong magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the surface of a layer of magnetic fluid, that surface will develop static corrugations Rosensweig ; Rosensweig2 . The appearance of these surface corrugations lowers the magnetic energy of the liquid because of the focussing of the magnetic flux toward the peaks in the surface pattern. Such corrugations, however, cost gravitational energy (in moving fluid from the troughs to the peaks) and surface free energy (by increasing the total area of the surface). Only when the gain in magnetic energy exceeds the cost in gravitational and surface free energies will the surface spontaneously corrugate. Above a lower critical field, the surface corrugations form a triangular lattice. Figure 1

shows our own observation of such a pattern on LOX. At higher fields, however, a square lattice is observed. For our own observations of this on LOX see figure 2.

Rosensweig Rosensweig  carried out a linear stability analysis to determine the critical field for the onset of the instability and the wavelength of the corrugations at the onset, for the case of a ferrofluid subject to a uniform field. This work was extended by Gailitis Gailitis ; Gailitis2  (see Friedrichs  and references therein for more recent work) to include the first nonlinear corrections in order to examine the criteria for pattern selection. The theory of surface instabilities in the presence on inhomogeneous fields was developed by Zelazo and Melcher Zelazo  and the principal effect of the field gradient can be regarded as a renormalization of the acceleration due to gravity, $`g\stackrel{~}{g}=g+f_p`$ where $`f_p`$ is the force driving unit mass of paramagnetic fluid towards the higher field region.

In this report we test the supposition that this is the principal effect of the field gradient. Following a brief description of our experimental arrangement we give a brief outline of the results of Zelazo and Melcher Zelazo  as they apply to our system, along with specific predictions for the critical applied field for surface corrugation and the wavelength of the surface pattern at the onset of the instability. Finally we compare these predictions with our experimental observations testing the validity of the theory.

The experiments were conducted using a specially constructed $`17T`$ superconducting Bitter-solenoid magnet having a $`50mm`$ diameter vertical bore. For this magnet, the maximum value of $`B_0dB_0/dz`$ is $`1470T^2m^1`$ offering an “effective gravity” of up to $`360g`$ for LOX. A pool of LOX $`1.5cm`$ deep was contained in a glass Dewar vessel (see figure 3).

The liquid was held at its boiling point at atmospheric pressure. It was slowly lowered into the bore of the magnet, until a pattern of peaks was observed. The magnet is designed to enhance radial variations in the vertical field, so that the corrugation pattern first appears with perfect triangular symmetry in the centre of the fluid surface. At higher fields the pattern covers the entire surface but the circular container walls force dislocations to appear in the regular lattice. The magnetic field and the magnetic field gradient could be adjusted by the use of various magnet currents and liquid surface positions.

A CCD camera was used to display a magnified image of the surface of the LOX on a television screen, aiding the observation of the onset of surface instabilities and facilitating more accurate measurements of the spatial separation of the peaks.

The instability to surface corrugation only depends on the local properties of the field profile at the surface of the liquid oxygen which can be characterized by the field at the surface, $`B_0`$ and the length scale for field variations, $`\zeta `$, defined by (recall that the field decreases with $`z`$ the distance from the centre of the magnet)

$$\zeta ^1=\left(\frac{1}{B\left(z\right)}\frac{B\left(z\right)}{z}\right)_{\text{surface}}.$$
(1)
The relevant material parameters are the density, $`\rho `$, the surface tension, $`\sigma `$ and the susceptibility, $`\chi `$ of the oxygen. We take these to have the following values at $`90K`$, $`\rho =1149kgm^3`$, $`\sigma =1.32\times 10^2Nm^1`$ and $`\chi =3.47\times 10^3`$CRC .

Zelazo and Melcher Zelazo  carried out an analysis of the dynamical behaviour of a ferrofluid surface subject to an inhomogeneous applied field. The coupled equations for the magnetic field and the fluid were solved to lowest order in the distortion of the surface to arrive at the dispersion relation for surface modes. The situation in our experiments is simpler in several respects than the general case considered in Zelazo . Firstly, the depth of the LOX layer and the height of the air space above it are both much larger than the typical length scales for the observed corrugations so that the fluid and the air above it may be considered to occupy infinite half-spaces. Secondly, the magnetic response of the oxygen is essentially linear over the whole range of fields that we consider, so that the difference between $`B/H`$ and $`B/H`$ can be neglected. With these simplifications the prediction of Zelazo  for the frequency of the surface mode with wave number, $`k`$, is given by

$$\rho \omega _k^2=\sigma k^3\lambda \frac{B_0^2}{\mu _0}k^2+\rho G(B_0,\zeta )k$$
(2)
where the coefficient

$$\lambda =\frac{\chi ^2}{2\left(2+\chi \right)\left(1+\chi \right)}\frac{\chi ^2}{4}\chi 1$$
(3)
accounts for the energy gain (and the hence decrease in the restoring force) due to the focusing of field lines through peaks in the surface and

$$G(B_0,\zeta )=g\left(1+\frac{\chi }{\rho g\left(1+\chi \right)\zeta }\frac{B_0^2}{\mu _0}\right)$$
(4)
is the effective acceleration due to gravity, including the attractive force on the diamagnetic oxygen towards the centre of the magnet.

Hence, a static distortion will appear with wavenumber

$$k=\frac{\lambda B_0^2\pm \sqrt{\lambda ^2B_0^44\mu _0^2\rho \sigma G(B_0,\zeta )}}{2\mu _0\sigma }$$
(5)
provided the argument of the square root is positive. In consequence there is a critical value of the field below which no such static distortion exists

$$B_c\left(\zeta \right)\frac{8}{\chi }\sqrt{\frac{\mu _0\sigma }{\chi \zeta }}\chi 1.$$
(6)
For comparison with the experiment it is useful to define $`\stackrel{~}{g}\left(\zeta \right)=G(B_c\left(\zeta \right),\zeta )`$, the value of the effective gravity at the onset field for a given field gradient. The following relation should then hold

$$B_c^4=\frac{4\rho \sigma g}{\lambda ^2}\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{g}_c}{g}\right)$$
(7)
The wavenumber of the static mode at the critical field is then

$$k_c=\frac{\lambda B_c^2}{2\mu _0\sigma }=\sqrt{\frac{\rho g}{\sigma }}\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{g}\left(\zeta \right)}{g}\right)^{1/2}\frac{8}{\chi \zeta }.$$
(8)
The spacing between the peaks, in the triangular lattice observed, should then be

$$L=\frac{4\pi }{\sqrt{3}k_c}=4\pi \sqrt{\frac{\sigma }{3\rho g}}\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{g}\left(\zeta \right)}{g}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(9)
In order to test equation 7 figure 4

shows the experimental data presented as $`B_c^4`$ plotted against effective gravity, $`\stackrel{~}{g}/g`$. An estimate of the experimental accuracy of each datum point is shown. The data are well fitted by a straight line passing close to $`\stackrel{~}{g}/g=1`$ at $`B_c=0`$ and having a slope of $`\left(23.7\pm 0.8\right)\left(\text{Tesla}^4\right)`$confirming the expected dependence of $`B_c`$ upon $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$. The dominant error arises from the determination of the point of instability. Using the values quoted above, equation 7 predicts

$$B_c^4\frac{\stackrel{~}{g}}{g}\times 26.4\left(\text{Tesla}^4\right).$$
(10)
The discrepancy between theory and experiment is marginally significant and will be the subject of further investigations.

The measured peak separation at onset, $`L`$, is plotted against $`\stackrel{~}{g}/g`$ in figure 5,

together with the prediction of equation 9 that $`L^2\stackrel{~}{g}/g=6.05\times 10^4m^2`$ based on the values of $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ given above. The prediction fits the data very well, a best fit to the data corresponding to $`L^2\stackrel{~}{g}/g=(6.2\pm 0.3)\times 10^4m^2`$.

We have observed the corrugation instability Rosensweig  in the surface of liquid oxygen and examined the dependence of the critical field and wavelength of the pattern on the field gradient. We have found that, in agreement with the theory developed for ferrofluids, the principal effect of a field gradient is to renormalize the gravitational acceleration in the manner described by equation 4, the experimental observations offering satisfactory agreement with the theoretical predictions for the onset field and the wavelength over the wide range of effective gravities which we have examined. Liquid oxygen is not only a homogeneous elemental magnetic liquid suitable for the study of fluid and lattice dynamics over a very wide range of effective gravities, but also offers a low cost environmentally friendly fluid for a range of technological applications such as the separation of precious minerals.

###### Acknowledgements.

The closed-cycle superconducting Bitter-Solenoid used in these experiments was developed jointly by the School of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Nottingham and Oxford Instruments with funding from EPSRC under the JREI scheme. ATC is jointly funded by the EPSRC(UK) and Oxford Instruments.